Image by Willgard Krause from Pixabay
By Jo Nova
What did I say? After the near collapse of climate talks, global leaders “rescued” COP28 at the last minute, scoring top marks in Climate Bingo: the talks are “historic“, “landmark“, “unprecedented” and use the actual phrase “transition away from fossil fuels” for the first time ever. Be still my beating heart.
A hundred billionaires met with 70,000 groupies, using millions of dollars mostly taken from other people, and have decided they need to do it all again.
The point of these meetings is to issue more press releases, reward the faithful underlings, arrange golden handshakes behind the scenes, and transfer billions of dollars from the riff raff to the Private-Jet-Class. This glorious goal is achieved when the Grand UN Performance of vague non-binding Hopium is used to fool investors and voters in domestic theatres.
And so it comes to pass that all nations have finally agreed to do what they were doing anyway. But UN-speak translates the nothingness into hyperbole:
“The agreement marks “the beginning of the end of fossil fuels” — UNFCCC
The president of the European Commission has welcomed the COP28 agreement, hailing it a “global turning point”. –more Sky News.
Despite that — the world continues on the transition to fossil fuels and away from wood and donkeys, while everyone — except the patsies — plays the game and pretends to power themselves with sunshine and breezes.
Oblivious to the trillions of dollars being spent, 82% of the world’s energy still comes from fossil fuels, and the new annual growth in fossil fuels is so fast that all the additional unreliable energy sources added this year cannot even keep up with it.
The theater of the absurd
The spokeswoman for a bunch of small islands told the world the deal was nothing much and got a two minute long standing ovation anyway:
The lead negotiator for the Alliance of Small Island States, Anne Rasmussen, criticised the deal as unambitious.
“We have made an incremental advancement over business as usual, when what we really need is an exponential step change in our actions,” she said.
But she did not formally object to the pact, and her speech drew a standing ovation that lasted nearly two minutes. — Reuters
It doesn’t matter what she said, just like it doesn’t matter that 90% of their islands are not sinking either. The islands are the token mascots and must be cheered. It’s a performance religion.
It’s the empty UN landmark deal that almost no one will achieve
Even the propaganda machine in Geneva has to admit that the “central outcome” is just a stocktake, which shows emissions *need* to be cut by an impossible amount and people are not achieving it. This is as good as it gets:
The global stocktake is considered the central outcome of COP28 – as it contains every element that was under negotiation and can now be used by countries to develop stronger climate action plans due by 2025.
The stocktake recognizes the science that indicates global greenhouse gas emissions need to be cut 43% by 2030, compared to 2019 levels, to limit global warming to 1.5°C. But it notes Parties are off track when it comes to meeting their Paris Agreement goals. — UNFCCC
Only last month the UN admitted that the world was going to crash through the Paris agreement and miss, not just by a little bit but by a factor of two.
The UNFCCC hopes everyone will turn up with better plans next year:
In the short-term, Parties are encouraged to come forward with ambitious, economy-wide emission reduction targets, covering all greenhouse gases, sectors and categories and aligned with the 1.5°C limit in their next round of climate action plans (known as nationally determined contributions) by 2025.
If your government is one of the ones sincerely trying to meet impossible, stupid targets, you know you live in The Patsy State.
__________
Related Posts:
- China promised to strictly control coal then started 182 coal power plants instead
- UN admits World will crash through Paris Agreement goals by a factor of two for 2030
- Despite the green revolution, and record energy use, the world still runs on 82% fossil fuels
Green measures are just a mechanism to transfer large amounts of money from the riff-raff to the new elite.
What always amazes me is that many who consider themselves ‘socialists’ somehow fail to recognise an aristocrat enrichment scheme when it stares them in the face.
Or has it to do with intelligence?
570
Thats what PIK Edenhofer promised years ago, thats only a big money transfer from North to South, nature / climate isn’t involved at all.
And:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/12/13/african-energy-chamber-to-cop28-we-want-fossil-fuels/
290
Recall that idiot globalist PM we once had, Malcolm Fraser, he was big into so-called “North South” issues, forgetting of course that he was lumping the advanced economies of Australia, NZ and (at the time) South Africa, into the mix of under-developed economies.
It was just a stupid buzz-phrase he picked up somewhere.
291
Malcolm, on conceding the March 1983 election started to blubber about the travails that will befall Australians when Labor comes for peoples savings. Post 2024 the swine will be plundering superannuation funds to give to union masters and to invest in Bowens renewable dream.
161
Seems like wealth transfer is so yesterday.
The raff are near soaked dry.
They are moving to post Orwellian thought control and cultural purification.
Unhinged from reality in a diabolical way.
We saw societal purification madness consume societies three times or more in the last century.
Since Floyd, TDS, and Pandemic, hysteria has crossed borders and gone global. (The true contagion threat.)
I see continuing attempts by elite elements to incite hysteria for purpose of political manipulation.
(My opinions are strictly recreational and are expressed for entertainment purposes only, since the last hysteria curtailed most of my extra curricular diversions.)
400
Seek out a book called; “Scared to Death”.
It is a systematic expose of a long line of “engineered” health and safety scare campaigns.
Here in Oz we have just been “saved”, again, this time from the horrors of “engineered stone”
What is the CFMEU and its tame pollie-muppets REALLY up to.
ANY particulate matter is not “good” for the lungs. Virtually ALL “natural “stone’ id full of silica. Many timber products contain all manner of interesting chemicals because they are made from TREES, ALL of which have some degree of NATURAL toxins in them, to protect from other MATURAL bugs and parasites.This is why WOODEN kitchen cutting boards are “safer” than nylon. Nylon is “inert”. every fine incision made by your razor-sharp, soon to be banned, knives, leaves somewhere for nasty bugs to hide. In a nylon board, the defensive chemicals of the tree help to slow any “flourishing”. Inert / sterile nylon? Not so much. The more observant will have noticed steady discolouration od white nylon cutting boards.
Regular sustained d soaking in concentrated BLEACH brings back the “snowy” look. After thorough rinsing and sun-drying, a gentle once-over with a kitchen (or workshop) blowtorch seals over the assorted incisions.
DARK-coloured cutting boards seem to be NOT a good idea, no matter how “stylish” they appear.
NOBODY in their right mind uses power tools on ANY stone without comprehensive PPE.
40
Socialists are detached from reality or they wouldn’t be supporting an ideology that has been shown to fail for a century.
70
Taking money from poor people in rich countries and donating it to rich people in poor countries.
70
The amount of money being sucked out of Western world economies to be wasted on wind, solar and related madness is simply staggering. Both through direct and indirect subsidies and the high cost of “green” energy.
This money is going into the pockets of the billionaire subsidy-harvesters and otherwise used to reduce the standard of living of non-Elites because Leftists think Western lifestyles are “unsustainable” and we should become insect-eating serfs/slaves living in the free-range prisons known as “15 minute cities”. All of this supported by a slave army of useless idiots, many or most of whom couldn’t even tell you how much CO2 in the atmosphere or where food comes from.
Had this money not been so shockingly wasted and misappropriated it could have been used for the advancement of mankind including science rather than anti-science.
612
“Parties are encouraged to come forward with ambitious, economy-wide emission reduction targets”
Gee, perhaps this will take off. I can show my ambitious mortgage payment plans to my bank and they’ll be happy. I’ll continue to do whatever I’m doing but it’s the planning that’s important. Then again, perhaps bosses can make ambitious plans to give pay increases to staff but continue with what they are doing. The staff should be impressed.
The world of seeming ….the world of window dressing…..the world of influencers…… the woke world sliding into fantasy land paid for by us.
361
All that high-blown languaga (and private jet contrails) at the COP28
un-elected elites climate festival and the world still gets roughly 80% of its primary energy
from three fossil fuels – coal,oil and gas.
190
Absolutely the perfect word Jo, exactly what it is all about!!
290
And the No.1 Christmas hit for 2023 is:
HOPIUM by The One-Point-Fivers! Yay…
Listen to the hysterical fans applaud… and then it was over. See you all in Azerbaijan next year… hip hop hopium rules.
180
I think we all know that this is BS. Unfortunately there will be a few, our own Chris Bowen for example, who will think this call by the UN is the same as Moses coming down from the mountain with a stone tablet written by God. We are truly screwed when blackout Bowen is in charge.
It’s nearly time to send chocolate again for Christmas. Jo’s opening paragraphs are getting better each time and it is sad that she doesn’t get a run in a major newspaper.
410
You are correct about sending Jo and family Christmas chocolats. Sent her some a couple of weeks ago to beat the rush. Come on, fellow bloggers, she deserves it, it has been a bumper year from Jo.
210
Small ping!
But the till rattled.
10
My understanding is that “fossil” fuels are really mineral oil. Love to get some research on how mineral oils are really made! Is there really finite resources?
Can’t get much out of GOOGLE anymore!
140
Use Google Scholar.
Quite a choice there of useful (!) Journals, papers etc. Read a variety before deciding where reality is located, although this will give you the best chance.
“Oil, gas” is an MSM terminology for fluid (ie. gaseous or liquid) hydrocarbons – and these are most certainly NOT fossils. Nonetheless, the MSM has deliberately entrenched the term “fossil fuels” so well that oil and gas are now automatically allocated with the dinosaurs.
While coal is remnant vegetation, it most certainly is NOT a fossil in the petrified wood category, or ancient skeletal bones with the cell contents replaced by silicates. That is, while the cellular plant structure, pollen and so on is easily visible under a polarised light microscope, the cell contents have not been replaced with siliceous minerals such as silica (quartz). It, coal, has mineral equivalents called macerals formed during lithification with a maceral content ratio dependent on initial vegetation species amongst other criteria.
150
“Fossil fuels” is legitimate descriptive terminology. People know what it means.
These fossil fuels are formed by various biological processes which use energy from sunlight to isolate carbon from carbon dioxide, and which store some of that energy from the sun in their products. Coal, oil, gas.
These processes took place over a very long period a long time ago. Now move forward to today.
I used to be a farmer. On our farms there were a river (very small by world standards), a couple of little creeks and a small area of swamp.
In wet areas where there was little or no flow two things were noticeable as time went by between floods. A thin film of something floating on the water, and streaks of black material in the mud. There were also the tiny bubbles that are seen in still water, which so far as I know are methane.
I never got around to researching the matter, but wonder if this is an ongoing example of the same processes which formed those fossil fuel deposits.
Floods scoured this stuff away, sending the process back to square one.
00
Not being a geologist, my understanding of fossils is that they look and feel like rocks. I think the “peak oil” theory needs to be fully explained to me again. The last 50 years of frequent explanation still makes no sense.
That chart up the top has no part that looks like the peak oil theory at all.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubbert_peak_theory
70
ready for a new understanding?
417
Yes Yes Gee Aye. Please explain why we need to ban something that would by now be too expensive to use anyway if it had been really running out.
141
Why should I explain that? Thanks for the offer though.
23
“Why should I explain that? ”
Needless to say?
00
The first concerns of “peak oil” were raised in 1929.
130
“That chart up the top has no part that looks like the peak oil theory at all.“.
Actually, it does. Look at the sector that is Oil, and see how it has stalled in recent years. Now some of that is because of the coronavirus, and maybe the rate of oil production will rapidly increase again, but there’s nothing in the chart that says that it will. The rate of annual increase in oil production was slowing before the coronavirus hit, and that is exactly what one would expect if peak oil was a decade or three away. Bear in mind that peak oil isn’t a precipice, it’s more like a plateau for a while. None of this is proof, but if you accept that oil is a finite resource, no matter how much of it there is then straightforward maths says that production must peak at some time.
37
It has not stalled. Look again. The stall is carried up from coal. To me it looks like the use of oil has increased at a rate that indicates it might burst forth from the ground and flood the planet if we were to stop safely disposing of it.
40
2022 global oil production (50,762 TWh) is about where it was in 2015 (51,256 TWh). That’s 4 years before Covid-19 hit. Among major producers, only the USA has been increasing production (catching up on falling production from 1970 to 2010??), plus a little bit of an increase from Canada. I agree that it doesn’t prove anything, and only time will tell. But IMHO it would be foolish to ignore the fact that increases in global oil production are getting harder. I would like to see us burning less oil so that we can reserve more of it for better uses.
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/oil-production-by-country?country=OWID_WRL~USA~OPEC+%28EI%29~RUS~CAN~CHN
60
Here is the “ourworldindata” chart for just oil use. The rate of increase from 2014 to 2019 is greater than any other five year period back to the “energy crisis” of 1979. Covid explains the next three years.
Click here.
10
Peak oil.
My father had an uncle who lived at Roma in the Queensland Darling Downs.
He said there was plenty of oil at Roma, but there was nobody honest enough to find it.
Australia’s first commercial oil field was later established just up the road at Moonie.
00
The oil production figures look quite different on a barrels per person basis.
Are we going to assume the 6billion people who don’t have a Western appetite for oil yet will never have one? Do we limit their oil consumption to less than ours? Shall we let economics dictate who gets the oil, both by country and class within?? Eventually demand & supply will see oil too expensive for the peasants in the West, never mind the 3rd world.
I find this a more compelling argument for renewable electricity than global warming, but maybe one is the disguise for the other.
00
“The stocktake recognizes the science that indicates global greenhouse gas emissions need to be cut 43% by 2030, compared to 2019 levels, to limit global warming to 1.5°C.”
What “The Science”? There is no scientific analysis that shows CO2 emissions are effecting temperature. There is valid analysis that emission barely effect atmospheric CO2 concentration. There are several papers that look for the relationship between emissions and temperature and they all fail to find one.
241
The science is clear and unequivocal: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/
738
Anyone who writes this is having a lend of you or just an uneducated moron:
The essence of science is that it is NEVER settled.
The notion that trace amounts of CO2 can alter Earth’s energy balance is not scientific. It is a religious belief.
The true climate deniers are climate modellers of the current breed. To think that Earth was in a static energy balance in 1850 is so naive it is ridiculous. Numpties that believe that probably still think Santa Clause is real.
341
“It is a religious belief.” Or a scam.
81
Simon I had a quick browse looking for the science and found this fib.
‘The likelihood of abrupt and/or irreversible changes increases with higher global warming levels. Similarly, the probability of low-likelihood outcomes associated with potentially very large adverse impacts increases with higher global warming levels. (high confidence).’ (IPCC)
It can also be argued that global warming is beneficial, for example tropical cyclones and hurricanes will become rare and relatively benign.
130
So do tell us all: When, even once, in the last 100 years, have ANY of the climate doom predictions ever happened?
Batting O isn’t a good look.
130
Simon: Sea surface temperatures are running a fever. Is this happening because of CO2?
https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/sst_daily/
20
Yawn…… Zzzz….
Simon you couldn’t address the article which is about making policy to address something….. something YOU couldn’t talk about.
Epic Fail!
80
Phew! For a moment then I thought you were going to say:
The science is settled.
The amount of damage down by the Left to the scientific method and the reputation of science itself by falsely claiming there is such a thing as “settled science” verges on civilisation-destroying because it obliterates the basic scientific foundation of Western Civilisation.
101
Atmospheric CO2 levels have always been a lagging indicator of “global warming” and not a leading indicator.
311
So true. Not accepted at the moment, but science- as it has been said , advances one death at a time.
130
How do you know if you’re riff or raff? Something I’ve always wondered.
40
Wasn’t he in The Rocky Horror Picture Show?
30
The essential and undeniable truth is that the claimed “Problem’ of atmospheric heating via CO2 is absolutely and unequivocally
Not True.
The concept fails in every direction of analysis and it is alarming that these Klimate Scientists pushing the barrow don’t even understand the difference between an electron and a photon.
270
AGAIN the TOTAL Primary energy by SOURCE from OWI Data shows the following for 2022.
Fossil fuels Coal, Oil Gas = 85.37%
Traditional Biomass = 6.91%
Modern Bio fuel = 0.75%
Total = 93%.
TOXIC, UNRELIABLE W & S = 2.13% for 2022, after GLOBALLY WASTING TRILLIONS of $ for a ZERO return on the so called W & S investment.
See Nuclear, Hydro etc for the rest.
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/global-primary-energy-share-inc-biomass
140
BTW you can read this below the TOTAL GLOBAL energy by source graphs…..
“Data source: Energy Institute Statistical Review of World Energy (2023); Vaclav Smil”
(2017)
Thankfully Vaclav Smil’s intellect and hard work is still used to this day.
150
So, in essence, COP28 ended exactly as did COPs1-27. We’re all gonna die tomorrow, good people ought to help the process and kill themselves off today, but send us your money first.
It’s like watching “professional wrestling”, and knowing that many of your supposedly smart friends still believe it’s real.
220
With good doctors and good luck, I expect to be around for the highlights of COP40. I’m sure the news will be the COP40 agreement is a “global turning point” and the “beginning of the end of fossil fuels.”
170
And lest we forget: ™unprecedented™!
60
Two stories both on the front page of ABC News right now.
Earlier:
An article telling us “the Middle Ages gets an unduly bad rap” and were “so much more vibrant – a complex and dynamic 1,000-year period that’s still very relevant today”.
Later:
An article telling us more Middle-Ages style power sources are to be built.
Just a totally random co-incidence, I’m sure!
160
How do you do blue text?
10
Use the quote button, then the /quote button
40
Double or single quotes?
10
Above the reply box you will see commands for “b”, “I’, “link” and “quote”
The “quote” command produces the standard hypertext command for quoted text
A quote starts with the word blockquote sandwiched between less than and greater than symbols
And ends with /blockquote also sandwiched between less than and greater than symbols
So if you highlight the text you want blue, and then click over the quote button you get:
blockquote the text you want blue /blockquote
becomes
Once you include the less than greater than symbols on blockquote and /blockquote
This pdf file gives details on HTML commands:
https://websitesetup.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/WSU-HTML-Cheat-Sheet.pdf
You can create HTML files in a basic text file then change the extension to .html and use your browser to view it.
30
So Bowen will return (unfortunately) and claim a win. He will double down on his economy wrecking proposals.
What an idiot.
180
I agree that the 1.5C goal is dead, but that is because emissions reduction should have started decades ago but it never happened.
So, what is the maximum warming we are prepared to accept? We have had a taste-teaser of life at +1.5C this year. Assuming historical probabilities of extreme events is foolish, it’s a whole new climate now. Time to adapt because mitigation hasn’t worked.
435
So Simon after years of your silly delusional BS and FRAUD you finally agree with Lomborg, Shellenberger, Koonin, Christy, Spencer, Lindzen, Happer and all of the Clintel Group and the co2 Coalition group of scientists, the GWPF etc?
Let’s save endless TRILLIONS of $ and just ADAPT to any changes in the future. Same old, same old.
331
You do realise that the 1.5C figure is just something that was dreamed up and has no scientific basis?
312
I remember when it was 2.0 degrees C. Why was it changed to 1.5 *C? It’s just a made up number that requires more onerous levels of sacrifice by the deluded. That’s why. It’s not about the ends, it’s about the means.
140
I’ve put an order in for a one degree rise. Spread the tropics! Buffer the ice age! Create more corals! What’s not to like? More habitat for humans. More crops. More food. Less deaths from the cold.
Give me back the Holocene optimum.
And even though CO2 has very little to do with that, I want more CO2 in the air. Burn oil, green the world.
280
Simon, you obviously live in a lucky place to get an increase of 1.5c.
I’d love to live somewhere like that. Here in East Gippsland each year over the past few has been colder than the previous one. This is the first week since March that we haven’t, so far, used our heaters at some part of the day..
180
We are all being pretty stupid about the 1.5C target. Instead of worrying about whether we can meet it by 2030, or 2040, or whenever, why don’t we just redefine it to start earlier instead of just at the start of the industrial revolution. 1700, say, or even better, 1685. Then we can congratulate ourselves and relax because we will have easily met and beaten the target by a large margin already.
100
AH! But we went backwards into cooling in 1815 (Mt. Tamboa) & 1883 (Krakatoa yet again) so look forward to Greenies chanting STOP VOLCANOS or possibly START MORE VOLCANOS NOW!
And how would they deal with the sudden drop in 1740/41 in Europe at least when a greater percentage of Irish perished from hunger than in the late 1840s? (to save searches Ireland had about 2 million in 1740 and about 8 million in 1745, but that might cause some skeptics pointing out that warming is beneficial to the poor).
60
That question displays the ignorance of the situation for everyone to see.
Mother nature will decide how much the planet warms or cools, nothing to do with humans.
161
‘ … it’s a whole new climate now.’
Not so fast, climate changes slowly, the spike was clearly caused by the Hunga Tonga-Hunga eruption and temps should settle down directly.
https://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/UAH_LT_1979_thru_November_2023_v6_20x9.jpg
50
Simon,
It is all baloney because we have reached the 2.0C increase already which means those mythical “tipping points” will not happen.
From Watts Up With That?
(Berkeley Temperature Chart showing the 2.0C increase since 1820)
LINK
You need to keep up kid.
90
“We have had a taste-teaser of life at +1.5C this year.”
If anything, this year has been 1.5deg cooler except for the past week which is summer.
00
“The stocktake recognizes the science that indicates global greenhouse gas emissions need to be cut 43% by 2030, compared to 2019 levels, to limit global warming to 1.5°C.”
Even if man-made CO2 emissions were causing global warming (sorry “global boiling”) it will take 300 years at current ACTUAL warming rates (as opposed to computer model extrapolations) without factoring in any “litte ice ages” (as predicted to occur starting from 2030).
So why the panic over the need for “urgent action”?
In any event the earth has been warmer in the past and warm periods have been periods of abundance (for example allowing the Vikings to inhabit Greenland).
It is periods of cooling that cause crop failures that are causes for alarm.
Scientists call it the Little Ice Age but its impact was anything but small. From 1300 to 1850, a period of cataclysmic cold caused havoc. It froze Viking colonists in Greenland, accelerated the Black Death in Europe, decimated the Spanish Armada, and helped trigger the French Revolution.
170
It is more likely to see a global temp reduction performed for us by a stray asteroid or a sequence of volcanic eruptions, so we should just settle down and stop worrying.
00
Lomborg called COP 28 and their delusional NET ZERO an atrocious WASTE of money.
He called them out on the 30th of November and he was correct.
https://nationalpost.com/opinion/bjorn-lomborg-cop28-will-ignore-net-zeros-atrocious-waste-of-money
150
These quotes from Lomborg’s article are spot on.
“Underpinning the climate summit farce is one big lie repeated over and over: that green energy is on the precipice of replacing fossil fuels in every aspect of our lives. This exaggeration is today championed by the International Energy Agency, which has turned from an impartial arbiter of energy data to the proponent of the far-fetched prediction that fossil fuels will peak within just seven years”.
“The claim ignores the fact that any transition away from fossil fuels is occurring only with enormous taxpayer-funded subsidies. And while major energy players like Exxon and Chevron are moving back to investment in fossil fuel, big bets on green energy have failed spectacularly. Over the past 15 years, alternative energy stocks have plummeted in value, thus sending the pensions of ordinary workers tumbling due to virtue signalling pension companies while general stocks have increased more than four-fold”.
140
“Fossil Fuels” are used for the production of many things apart from energy – eg plastics and fertilisers.
Our roads are paved with a residue of crude oil distillation – bitumen.
Our we going to replace bitumen with concrete? I forgot there will be no cars only 15 minute cities!!!
Banning coal fired power station is only a token sacrifice to the Climate Gods.
110
Cyclone Jasper is a reminder of the Bradfield Scheme
The Bradfield Scheme, a proposed Australian water diversion scheme, is an inland irrigation project that was designed to irrigate and drought-proof much of the western Queensland interior, as well as large areas of South Australia. It was devised by Dr John Bradfield (1867–1943), a Queensland born civil engineer, who also designed the Sydney Harbour Bridge and Brisbane’s Story Bridge.
Instead of wasting $20 Billion on Snowy 2.0 this money could have been much better spent on a new Bradfield Scheme that would turn much of inland Australia into a giant “Carbon Sink” with vegitation “capturing CO2” as well as providing food for a growing world population.
Blackout Bowen is not the only idiot politician in Canberra
180
Global Warminng – the Good News
The Sahara Desert is not expanding
However in sharp contrast to this gloomy outlook, it seems that global
warming has exactly the opposite effect on the Sahara and the Sahel. The
Sahara is actually shrinking, with vegetation arising on land where there was
nothing but sand and rocks before The southern border of the Sahara has
been retreating since the early 1980s, making farming viable again in what
were some of the most arid parts of Africa. There has been a spectacular
regeneration of vegetation in northern Burkina Faso, which was devastated
by drought and advancing deserts 20 years ago. It is now growing so much
greener that families who fled to wetter coastal regions are starting to come
back. There are now more trees, more grassland for livestock and a 70%
increase in yields of local cereals such sorghum and millet in recent years.
Vegetation has also increased significantly in the past 15 years in southern
Mauritania, north-western Niger, central Chad, much of Sudan and parts of
Eritrea.
Also see my post below on the Bradfield Scheme to achieve a similar outcome in Australia
110
Trees beget trees. They hold vital moisture that becomes available to the atmosphere when the trees warm up. If sufficient water is retained, then the land will always reach convective instability before the oceans so will draw in mid level moisture.
The atmosphere needs 30mm of precipitable water to create weak convective instability, Above 45mm, the instability will produce rain. This year, there have so far been bands of moisture reaching that level; creating thunderstorms and rain across central Australia.
The overall trend in vegetation in Australia is positive:
https://www.wenfo.org/aer/vegetation/
My understanding is that pastoral practices are a component of the Southern Sahara greening. I believe Ausatralians like Bill Mollison are leaders in that field. As in this story:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-07-24/tony-rinaudo-forest-maker-fmnr-land-regeneration-africa/101189330
No doubt extra CO2 contributed to the good result. Also they may not realise how important moisture retention is for atmospheric conditions. Convective instability is not researched for its climate impact. Most of it is to do with air safety. All of the BoMs radiosonde sites are in the vicinity of airports.
http://www.bom.gov.au/aviation/observations/aerological-diagrams/
Certainly enough moisture over Mt Isa today to produce convective potential:
http://www.bom.gov.au/fwo/aviation/IDS65024/IDS65024.94332.png
The Amazon is a great example of trees begetting trees. But humans have proven capable of denuding large regions and desertifying them. Amazon could be in a delicate balance. This year, the ITCZ was pulled further north.
Any effort to improve water availability in Australia is worth considering. But there are alternatives to the Bradfield scheme.
It is not easy to establish permanent lakes north of 37S below sea level. But I know it is not impossible. There are likely to be ways to create self-sustaining oases in central Australia in the region of Lake Eyre. To me that would be an interesting project.
60
“The Amazon is a great example of trees begetting trees. But humans have proven capable of denuding large regions and desertifying them. Amazon could be in a delicate balance. This year, the ITCZ was pulled further north.”
If the UN wanted to hang its hat on a successful project, stopping the rainforest clearing in the Amazon would be the one.
00
Your post on the Bradfield scheme? Why?
20
Where?
Sorry, was distracted as lost time to Edit.
Anyway, Lake Eyre is only 4-6 metres (mostly) below sea level.
And what of the Hartnett Scheme to bring water from Spencer Gulf to Lake Torrens, with some overflow to Lake Eyre?
He wanted to use left over munitions from WW2 but the military got to blow a big hole in the Qld. forest without even building a wind farm. Hartnett went back to building the new Holden and, later, importing Toyota vehicles to Australia,
40
A good question.
Retaining water in any location between 36N and 38S comes with challenges because evaporation inevitably is greater than precipitation. So the location needs to have a large collection area and then means of controlling avapoarion and seepage..
So Lake Eyre satisfies the collection area but evaporation and maybe seepage would be problems.
My thoughts would be to excavate when dry to make at least 20m deeper and use excavated material to build ridges that would slow windspeed over the water. Aim to quarantine the excavated salt. Locations would need to be assessed for their seepage. Start small as proof of concept then expand on economic ground to the scale where it can have a climate impact.
The Century Mine pit is making water but it is further north where there is annual rain and quite deep so intercepts ground water about 150m deep. The mine overflow dam still shows water on Google map.
Flooding with ocean water would likely create salt pans because evaporation would overtake inflow.
10
Interesting to test our short period of 28 years since the first COP 1 in Berlin in 1995.
Global life expectancy then was 65 years and today 71 to 73 years, your choice.
But infant mortality today has seen a big global drop from 60.5 deaths per 1000 live births in 1995 to 26 deaths per 1000 live births in 2023.
That’s remarkable in such a short time period of 28 years.
Certainly no dangerous Climate Change can be found in those numbers.
https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/WLD/world/infant-mortality-rate
140
Another nail in the Coal-Fired EV (in most places) coffin!
Tesla files recall on 2 million vehicles to fix autopilot software
Tesla is recalling about two million cars to limit the use of the Autopilot function after a long investigation by US regulators.
The mass recall follows a two-year investigation into about 1000 crashes that occurred when the tech was in use.
70
Do you have a link?
10
Here’s one:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-12-13/tesla-recalls-more-than-2-million-vehicles-across-us/103226538
Cheers
Dave B
20
Thanks David. Very interesting.
30
Imagine if the UN body was effective at stopping wars, preventing death from hunger and cold and had the magic power to control the climate by reducing CO2. Their failure on the first two is exerbated by their efforts on the third item.
Fortunately for life on Earth. the UN is a hopeless organisation unable to achieve anything. The crazy aspect is that nations continue to fund this cancerous group of clowns.
I am looking for a politician with the conviction to defend the UN.
90
What we need is someone with the coviction to disband the UN.
Maybe Rick will ?
40
Will not be Rick but I will cheerfully give my vote to anyone pledging to defund the UN.
Peta Credlin probably has the appropriate background and maybe the stamina. She has presence.
30
I am looking for a politician with the conviction to defend the UN.
Rick Will
Better:
I am looking for a politician with the conviction to defund the UN
40
COP 28– Is this a classic look over here “Diversionary operation” while the REAL obscenity is being entrenched by the WHO. https://richardsonpost.com/david-bell/34069/proposed-who-pandemic-agreement/
60
COP 28 amounted to a cynical excuse for an all expenses paid luxury, taxpayer funded junket.
If the global elites want to gain a smidgen of respectability they should do the rest of us and the biosphere a big generous favour and forego their luxury perks and do GOP 29 by telecommuting via ZOOM, SKYPE, or GOOGLE MEET. Then they will have genuine bragging rights to their ‘low carbon footprint’ aspirations.
50
Now wait for the agriculture interventions…
40
In Canada Trudeau is hitting farmers with a carbon tax, because climate…or rather should I say, because Marxism.
20
COP28… This has been going on for 28 years!
Time flys when you’re having fun – with someone else’s money.
70
Child mortality ( up to 15 years) has seen an unbelievable change since the start of the Industrial Revolution, but was still about 27% in 1950.
But for thousands of years , literally half of all infants born had died by the age of 15 years.
And this was still the case in Europe in 1750, but a very slow change increased rapidly after 1950 and today the global average is about 4.3% global child deaths in 2020.
Just another strong argument for the use of FOSSIL FUELS and the wonderful improvement for parents over the last 73 years.
Aussies have very low child deaths numbers today of about 0.4% and similar very low numbers for the other wealthy OECD countries.
Biden, Bowen, Albo, the Greens, Gore etc are liars and con merchants and we should ignore these lunatics and hopefully they’ll be voted out soon.
But where are the Pollies, MSM, journalists , so called Scientists etc? Or are they just too frightened or too stupid to understand the DATA?
Here’s the link to OWI Data and the accurate information for thousands of years from all around the world.
https://ourworldindata.org/child-mortality-in-the-past
30
Does anyone have this information
What is the value of Chinese made solar panels being imported into Australia every year?
What is the value of Chinese made wind turbines (or parts) being imported into Australia every year (whether they have being branded as Chinese brands or otherwise (most European wind turbine makers can no longer compete with Chinese made turbines due to high energy costs in Europe))
This information is a matter of national energy security.
Australia is spending $368 Billion on nuclear subs to counter the “Chinese Threat”!!!!
But what is the point if China controls the Australian power grid?
The largest wind farm in NSW is owned and operated by a Chinese Company and uses Chinese made wind turbines.
50
Australia is far more dependent on what China buys from Australia than what Australia buys from China.
If Australia was not selling iron ore and coal to China then Australia could not afford to buy any of the stuff China manufactures.
Both USA and UK recognise the strategic importance of Australia to China. Australian iron ore is second to none in terms of purity and reliability of supply. China has been successful in diversifying supply of thermal coal away from Australia with its Indonesian partnership but has not been as successful in finding other sources of iron ore or met coal that can displace Australian iron ore and met coal. Brazil’s Vale has a strong partnership with China but they always seem to have production issues. China is investing in Mongolia to ramp up supply of met and thermal coal but Australia is still the dominant source for Chinese met coal imports.
China would have severe economic problems if Australia closed up shop to China but Australia would be in deeper water. Australia makes nothing of note. We may be able to feed ourselves for a while but we would could not afford to import cars, build houses or even clothe ourselves. We would struggle to fuel our cars.
There are currently about 100 bulk carriers anchored, berthed or steaming around the iron ore ports:
https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:117.2/centery:-19.8/zoom:8
Like flies around cow turds.
The biggest of these will have 250,000 tonne cargoes. It truly is big businesss that brings in big money. Sadly, not all that money stays in Australia but Australia gets a good share of it.
China is actively reducing its reliance on Australia while the western world becomes increasingly dependent on China.
60
Very well said and thought Rick.
20
“Australia is spending $368 Billion on nuclear subs to … add to the profits of America’s war industry because we were told to by the Yanks, who didn’t want to see that money wasted on the French, whom they hate…
00
COP28 was a meeting of the oligarchs (and their minions) to work out how to rule the world . As long as the public don’t wake up the status wont change , and most people don’t want to know until it affects them . The smartest are often the easiest to fool… they think that it can’t happen to them.
70
‘ … most people don’t want to know until it affects them .’
Its all the media’s fault, reporting corrupt science with no room for an alternative theory on how the system works.
Most people have been severely brainwashed or cowered into conformity.
30
Donkeys and mules led by fools . .
Man made climate change is a hoax, renewable energy is a farce, CO2 is not warming the planet and netzero emissions is unattainable.
20
Who’s Patsy? Us.
10
What is far more worrying is the idea that the fake scientists of the IPCC should override democratically elected – well nominally – national governments to implement their insane policies. On top of that, the leftwing UK Financial Times had a comment column back in September that proposed COP decisions should no longer require unanimous agreement but have a majority vote instead. Just think how bad things would be if that became the case.
30
What is needed is a graph showing ALL the fossil fuel used to create these ‘renewable’ energy projects, from mining of raw materials, refining, transportation, fabrication, installation and support structure [such as connection to the grid for solar and wind].
Which will be the bigger amount of energy?
20
[…] following post on the topic of COP28 is syndicated from jonova.com.au originally published on the 14th of December, […]
10
[…] https://www.joannenova.com.au/2023/12/cop28-one-big-global-psy-op-to-screw-more-money-out-of-a-few-p… […]
10