Day: March 4, 2023

From CFACT

By Ronald Stein 

The ruling class, powerful elite, and the media lack some energy literacy which may be the reasons they avoid conversations about the ugly side of “green” mandates and subsidies.

Before anyone in Washington decides to procure wind turbines, solar panels, or an EV, they should read the Pulitzer Prize nominated book “Clean Energy Exploitations”,  and decide for themselves if they wish to financially support the humanity atrocities and environmental degradation among folks in developing countries with yellow, brown, and black skin, so that the wealthy countries can go green.

The few wealthy countries pursuing the generation of electricity from wind turbines and solar panels while simultaneously moving to rid the world of fossil fuels have short memories of petrochemical products and human ingenuity being the reasons for the world populating from 1 to 8 billion in less than two hundred years.

Wealth, with no ethical or moral standards for those of lesser means, can be dangerous and fatal to the cheap labor of disposable workforces. We have seen the effects on the disposable workforce when Qatar “needed” to build seven new stadiums in a decade to be ready for the 2022 World Cup. The World Cup in Qatar kicked off on Sunday November 20 at the Al Bayt Stadium, but the “acceptable” toll of more than 6,500 migrant laborers who died between 2011 and 2020, helping to build World Cup infrastructure with cheap disposable workforce will provide viewers and participants with many lingering questions about our ethical and moral beliefs resulting from the grim toll.

The transition to electricity generation from breezes and sunshine has proven to be ultra-expensive for the wealthy countries of Germany, Australia, Great Britain, and the USA representing 6 percent of the world’s population (508 million vs 8 billion). Those wealthy countries now have among the highest cost for their electricity, while the poorer developing countries, currently without the usage of the 20^th century products manufactured from crude oil, are experiencing about 11,000,000 child deaths  every year due to the unavailability of the fossil fuel products used in wealthy countries.

When we look outside the few wealthy countries, we see that at least 80 percent of humanity, or more than six billion in this world are living on less  than $10 a day, and billions living with little to no access to electricity, politicians are pursuing the most expensive ways to generate intermittent electricity. Energy poverty is among the most crippling but least talked-about crises of the 21^st century. We should not take energy for granted. Wealthy countries may be able to bear expensive electricity and fuels, but not by those that can least afford living in “energy poverty.”

Decades ago, it was sweat shops in the textile industry that grabbed everyone’s humanity interests, but today it is the “green” movement that is dominated by poorer developing countries mining for the exotic minerals and metals that support the wealthy countries that are going green at any cost to humanity, remains out of the spotlight.

Today, the wealthy countries understand developing countries have virtually no environmental laws nor labor laws, which allows those locations unlimited opportunities to exploit folks with yellow, brown, and black skin, and inflict environmental degradation to their local landscapes.

A recent report by the International Energy Agency (IEA) notes: “A typical electric car requires six times the mineral inputs of a conventional car and an onshore wind plant requires nine times more mineral resources than a gas-fired plant”.

• Lithium: Over half of the world’s Lithium reserves are found in three South American countries that border the Andes Mountains: Chile, Argentina and Bolivia. These countries are collectively known as the “Lithium Triangle”.
• Cobalt: The Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) produces 70 percent of the world’s Cobalt. While there is no shortage of environmental issues with its Cobalt mining, the overriding problem here is human rights: dangerous working conditions and the use of child labor. Cobalt is a toxic metal. Prolonged exposure and inhalation of Cobalt dust can lead to health issues of the eyes, skin, and lungs.
• Nickel: A major component of the EV batteries, is found just below the topsoil in the Rainforests of Indonesia and the Philippines. As a result, the nickel is extracted using horizontal surface mining that results in extensive environmental degradation: deforestation and removal of the top layer of soil. 
• Copper: Chile is the leading producer of the world’s Copper. Most of the Chile’s Copper comes from open pit/strip mines. This type of mining negatively affects vegetation, topsoil, wildlife habitats, and groundwater. The next three largest producers of copper are Peru, China, and the infamous Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Showing no moral or ethical concerns for the disposable workforce, wealthy countries continue to encourage subsidies to procure EV’s and build more wind and solar. Those subsidies are providing financial incentives to the developing countries mining for those “green” materials to continue their exploitations of poor people, and environmental degradation to their local landscapes. Are those subsidies ethical, moral, and socially responsible to those being exploited?

Many of us had a chance to view the 2006 movie “Blood Diamonds” starring  Leonardo DiCaprio that portrays many of the similar atrocities now occurring in pursuit of the “Blood Minerals” i.e., those exotic minerals and metals to support the “green” movement within wealthy countries that continue promoting environmental degradation to landscapes in developing countries, and imposes humanity atrocities to citizens with yellow, brown, and black skinned workers being exploited for the green movement of the few wealthy nations.

A few years ago in 2021, Ronald Stein co-authored the Pulitzer Prize nominated book “Clean Energy Exploitations – Helping Citizens Understand the Environmental and Humanity Abuses That Support Clean Energy. The book does an excellent job of discussing the lack of transparency to the world of the green movement’s impact upon humanity exploitations in the developing countries that are mining for the exotic minerals and metals required to create the batteries needed to store “green energy”. In these developing countries, these mining operations exploit child labor, and are responsible for the most egregious human rights’ violations of vulnerable minority populations. These operations are also directly destroying the planet through environmental degradation.

Every individual should enhance their energy literacy and know where and how the lithium, cobalt, nickel, copper, etc. are being mined and the worldwide humanity atrocities and environmental degradation that is occurring in the developing countries with yellow, brown, and black skinned people.  Then, with that knowledge in hand about the supply chain of those “blood minerals” required to support the wealthy countries mandates and subsidies toward green electricity, they can make their own decision to financially support, or not support, those exploitation atrocities.

Author

• Ronald Stein
• Ronald Stein is an engineer, senior policy advisor on energy literacy for CFACT, and co-author of the Pulitzer Prize nominated book “Clean Energy Exploitations.”

From Watts Up With That?

Essay by Eric Worrall

h/t John C; Desflurane has a greenhouse gas potential 2500x greater than CO2. But “… ensuring patient safety remains at the heart of every clinical decision …”.

Scotland first to ban environmentally harmful anaesthetic

By Smitha Mundasad
Health reporter 

Scotland has become the first country in the world to stop its hospitals using the anaesthetic desflurane because of the threat it poses to the environment. 

NHS data suggests the gas, used to keep people unconscious during surgery, has a global warming potential 2,500 times greater than carbon dioxide. 

Banning it in Scotland – from its peak use in 2017 – would cut emissions equal to powering 1,700 homes a year.

UK hospitals have already cut down.

…

Scottish Health and Social Care Secretary, Humza Yousaf, said: “Programmes like this are key to our transition to become a net-zero health service, whilst ensuring patient safety remains at the heart of every clinical decision.

…Read more: https://www.bbc.com/news/health-64347191

What can I say – try not to get sick in Scotland.

According to Wikipedia, ” … It has the most rapid onset and offset of the volatile anesthetic drugs used for general anesthesia due to its low solubility in blood. …”. Given Desflurane is used to maintain surgical anaesthesia, this would seem to imply Desflurane is the absolute best drug for maintaining the correct level of surgical anaesthesia, because patients respond very rapidly when the anaesthesiologist adjusts the dose.

Scotland assures us that “patient safety remains at the heart of every clinical decision”, but if that were the case, why ban Desflurane? Why not let surgeons know about the greenhouse issue, but leave the choice of which drug to use to the judgement of the surgical team?

Perhaps the differences between Desflurane and the alternatives are too small to matter – this is not an issue I have studied. But whether Desflurane’s advantages are significant for a particular case no longer matters. Medical teams are now forbidden from using Desflurane, even if in their medical opinion Desflurane is the best anaesthetic for the procedure, so in that scenario at least, patient health comes second to the Scottish Health climate agenda.

From Science Matters

By Ron Clutz

Ross McKitrick writes at Financial Post Policing misinformation from the misinformation police.  Excerpt in italics with my bolds and added images.

State-sponsored ‘experts’ on ‘misinformation’ are typically the worst offenders

As citizens of a liberal democracy Canadians have long believed that only the free contest of differing points of view can produce genuine intellectual progress. But now we are told we face a crisis of “misinformation” that calls for vigorous censorship of heretical opinion. On all of today’s major public controversies, we are asked to believe, all of us would enthusiastically assent to the one obviously correct view (which happens to be the view promulgated by the governing class) were it not for the pernicious influence of a shadowy conspiracy of social-media traffickers in misinformation — voices that must be suppressed for the good of society.

In his 1859 essay On Liberty, John Stuart Mill decisively rebutted this argument. “Complete liberty of contradicting and disproving our opinion,” he wrote, “is the very condition which justifies us in assuming its truth for purposes of action; and on no other terms can a being with human faculties have any rational assurance of being right.” It is one thing, Mill argues, if the holders of received opinion conclude their view is correct because, though challenged, it has not been refuted; but another thing altogether if it’s simply assumed true and challenge is therefore forbidden.

Yet that’s precisely the position of today’s would-be “misinformation” police.

In reality, state-sponsored “experts” on “misinformation” are typically the worst offenders. Presuming themselves infallible, they call for new laws to shut everyone else up.

In the climate domain, a group called the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD) boasts a Climate Disinformation Team consisting of five staff members, all trained in arts or political science (none in economics or physical sciences) who have put out a long report (and follow-up) supposedly documenting these networks of online misinformation and calling for new legislation and stricter rules for social media companies to combat it.

The reports feature screenshots of social media posts that critique
alarmist climate claims or the high costs of climate policy.

The ISD does not rebut but simply displays these posts — as if their mere existence is proof censorship is needed. For instance, they say “Calling into question the viability and effectiveness of renewable energy sources is a common practice among climate sceptics and delayist actors,” and then show a series of social media posts pointing out problems associated with wind and solar power systems. But wind and solar power systems do have problems, including intermittency and the need for costly fossil-fuel backups. To suggest otherwise is itself misinformation.

Closer to home, an organization called the Council of Canadian Academies (CCA), which purports to draw on top experts in Canada to give guidance to policy-makers, recently issued a report on “science and health misinformation” that concludes society would benefit from more vigorous efforts to suppress debate and ban more people from social media.

Much of the report consists of finger-wagging against anyone
who questioned anti-COVID public health measures.

For instance: “(O)ngoing claims that mask wearing is ineffective or even harmful have shifted firmly into the realm of misinformation.” Meanwhile, back in science, a newly-published, peer-reviewed meta-analysis summarizing 10 randomized control trials involving nearly 277,000 people concludes that “Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of influenza-like illness (ILI)/COVID-19 like illness compared to not wearing masks.” So who’s spreading misinformation?

The CCA report also has much to say about supposed climate misinformation. But again none of the authors is an economist or climate scientist. The closest they come to an “expert” is a psychologist who has spent years studying, or more precisely denigrating, skeptical climate blogs and their contributors. In several places, the CCA report relies on his 2012 article asserting that climate skepticism is correlated with a wide set of dubious conspiracies, such as believing the moon landing was a hoax. But it fails to mention a 2015 statistical critique published in the same journal that showed its conclusions “are not supported by the data.”

CCA brags about its peer review process, saying reviewers were selected for their “diverse perspectives and areas of expertise.” But again the reviewers did not include climate scientists or economists; nor is there any evidence of diversity of perspectives. As a rule, one-sided and unimpressive polemicists constitute the CCA’s “expert team.”

And yet CCA complains (at length) about the public’s declining trust in scientific institutions.

To the extent the CCA report offers any factual assertions about climate change, it points to “catastrophic events” such as “droughts, floods, and wildfires exacerbated by climate change.” It fails to mention, however, that Chapter 11 of the most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report says, concerning droughts, that “Global studies generally show no significant trends” and that in most places around the world there’s “inconclusive evidence” tying droughts to human-induced climate change. In North America in particular there’s “low confidence in the attribution of long-term changes in meteorological drought.”

Regarding floods, “In general, there is low confidence in attributing changes in the probability or magnitude of flood events to human influence because of a limited number of studies, differences in the results of these studies and large modelling uncertainties.” As for wildfires, they have been trending down globally for the past decade. In Canada, according to the Canadian National Fire Database, both the number of forest fires and total area burned peaked in the late 1980s and has been declining ever since. Yet again the CCA offers misinformation to support its case for more censorship.

Here’s a better idea. Ignore the CCA and the ISD
and all the other would-be enforcers of orthodoxy.

Drop the fixation on “misinformation,” which is just the latest iteration of the same old desire of governments to censor their opponents. Allow the public the freedom, as Mill counselled, to hear arguments “from persons who actually believe them; who defend them in earnest, and do their very utmost for them.” A dangerous thought in 1859, and judging by the current misinformation craze, an utter heresy today; yet true nonetheless.

Ross McKitrick is a professor of economics at the University of Guelph and senior fellow of the Fraser Institute.

From Watts Up With That?

Essay by Eric Worrall

Green policy obsessed European leaders are ignoring the implications of Sri Lanka’s organic farming food crisis.

Massive farmers protest disrupts Brussels traffic

BRUSSELS (AP) — Hundreds of tractors driven by angry farmers protesting a plan to cut nitrate levels converged on Brussels on Friday, creating major traffic disruption in Belgium’s capital city.

The BB farmers union and several others combined efforts to gather more than 2,700 farm vehicles, according to Brussels police.

…

The Flemish regional government is struggling to find a deal to cut nitrate pollution over farmers’ objections that it would put many out of business. 

Farmers also claim that their trade has to make much deeper cuts than industry and want to see a more equitable spread.

…Read more: https://apnews.com/article/eu-belgium-farmers-protests-tractors-77b9c462e45050a144b958c1055cfc26

Why are EU member state governments clamping down on farming practices?

Nitrates

Protecting waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources

Overview

Nitrogen is a crucial nutrient that helps plants and crops grow, but high concentrations are harmful to people and nature. Pure, clean water is vital to human health and to natural ecosystems. Excess nitrogen from agricultural sources is one of the main causes of water pollution in Europe.

Nitrates and organic nitrogen compounds from fertilizer and manure enter groundwater through leaching and reach surface water through runoff from agricultural fields. A high level of nitrate makes water unsuitable as drinking water.

In rivers, lakes and marine waters, nitrogen and other nutrients, in particular phosphorus, stimulate the growth of algae. At moderate levels, algae serve as food for aquatic organisms, including fish. However, excessive nutrient concentration in water systems will cause algae to grow excessively. This affects the natural ecosystem and can lead to depletion of the oxygen in the water. This phenomenon, known as eutrophication, has negative consequences for biodiversity, fisheries and recreational activities.

…Read more: https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/water/nitrates_en

The EU also has another reason for trying to force down the use of fertiliser. Nitrous oxide emissions from farms are a potent greenhouse gas.

Special Report: Common Agricultural Policy and climate

Half of EU climate spending but farm emissions are not decreasing

European Court of Auditors

Since 2013, climate action has been one of the main objectives of the Common Agricultural Policy – the CAP. The Commission attributed over €100 billion – more than a quarter of the total CAP budget – to mitigating and adapting to climate change during the 2014-2020 period.

II The EU’s role in mitigating climate change in the agricultural sector is crucial because the EU sets environmental standards and co-finances most of Member States’ agricultural spending. We decided to audit the CAP because a large share of its budget is attributed to mitigating and adapting to climate change and because of the close links between climate and agricultural policy. We expect our findings to be useful in the context of the EU’s objective of becoming climate neutral by 2050.

…

Livestock emissions, mainly driven by cattle, represent around half of emissions from agriculture and have been stable since 2010. However, the CAP does not seek to limit livestock numbers; nor does it provide incentives to reduce them. The CAP market measures include promotion of animal products, the consumption of which has not decreased since 2014.

VI Emissions from chemical fertilisers and manure, accounting for almost a third of agricultural emissions, increased between 2010 and 2018. The CAP supports practices that may reduce the use of fertilisers, such as organic farming and grain legumes. However, we found that these practices have an unclear impact on greenhouse gas emissions. Instead, practices that are more effective received little funding.

…Read more: https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADocuments/SR21_16/SR_CAP-and-Climate_EN.pdf

EU bureaucracies claim they do not support reducing livestock headcount, but I don’t believe them. Reduced livestock headcount would be an inevitable consequence of pursuing their stated goal of reduced fertiliser use. Intensive farming, including livestock farming, needs lots of fertiliser.

Netherlands announces €25bn plan to radically reduce livestock numbers

Tom Levitt Thu 16 Dec 2021 01.00 AEDT

Programme to tackle pollution crisis caused by an overload of manure faces fierce opposition from farmers

The Dutch government has unveiled a €25bn (£21bn) plan to radically reduce the number of livestock in the country as it struggles to contain an overload of animal manure.

A deal to buy out farmers to try to reduce levels of nitrogen pollution in the country had been mooted for some time, and was finally confirmed after the agreement of a new coalition government in the Netherlands earlier this week. 

But the plan, the first of its kind in the world, faces a huge backlash from farmers who have staged big street protests in recent years over the prospect of tough regulation and farmer buyouts. They fear permanent damage to food production in the country if too many farmers are forced to quit.

…Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/dec/15/netherlands-announces-25bn-plan-to-radically-reduce-livestock-numbers

Is fertiliser runoff affecting Netherlands and other European wilderness ecosystems? Absolutely – I’m not disputing that intensive farming causes algal blooms and significantly impacts wilderness ecosystems. But Europe has other problems, problems which should be treated as a higher priority.

European food inflation is already running at 16-18%, because of rising energy and fertiliser prices, and also likely because European farmers have to spend time attending protests against European attempts to ruin their businesses, instead of tending their farms and growing food.

Inflation in Europe is falling but food prices are rising. Who is paying the most and what for?

By Rita Palfi  •  Updated: 26/01/2023

Food prices have continued to rise across Europe despite inflation dropping for a second consecutive month in December, according to data shared on Wednesday by Eurostat, the European statistics agency.

The inflation of food prices in the EU was 18.2 per cent, and 16.2 per cent in the eurozone in December, which is a slight decrease compared to November on average. But some basic food items like sugar, milk cheese and eggs, oils, and fats prices are still going up.

The highest price rise was seen in Hungary at nearly 50 per cent, Lithuania the second highest with 33.5 per cent followed by Estonia with 30.8 per cent.

…Read more: https://www.euronews.com/next/2023/01/26/inflation-in-europe-is-falling-but-food-prices-are-rising-who-is-paying-the-most-and-what-

Declaring war on European farmers, at a time when food prices are rising out of control, because of climate targets and concerns about wilderness protection, is a recipe for disaster. 

The determination of Europe’s out of touch leaders to cling to their climate and wilderness protection goals, no matter what the consequences to the lives of ordinary European people, is undermining European food security.

Around 20 per cent of Germans reportedly fear for their jobs amid the country’s green agenda push, research has reportedly found.

From Breitbart

By PETER CADDLE

A survey done by the German Trade Union Confederation has reportedly found that one in five employees now fear for the future of their jobs as a result of the country’s push for green agenda measures aimed at curbing climate change.

It is the latest piece of evidence showing how the European Union’s leading economy is struggling with its own carbon emission goals, with the price of energy soaring over last year as renewable energy sources are unable to fill the hole left by missing Russian gas and deliberately scrapped nuclear energy.

The surging price of electricity and home heating is not all that Germans are worrying about, though, with a report by Die Welt claiming that around 20 per cent of the German workforce now feel the country’s green push could endanger their employment.

Such a statistic is said to increase to 43 per cent among Germans who say they have no training opportunities within their company, who are perhaps more likely to be working-class.

Exclusive Video: German Govt Has 'Mishandled Everything' During Energy Crisis, Says MEP https://t.co/u50yOGraPr

— Breitbart London (@BreitbartLondon) November 27, 2022

The high number of Germans afraid of losing their jobs due to the green agenda push is unsurprising considering how reliant the country is on its automotive industry, a sector of the economy extremely vulnerable to both domestic and EU climate policy.

In particular, plans to see a ban on all new combustion engine vehicles from 2035 onwards have spooked many in the country, with the German Transport Minister, Volker Wissing, threatening earlier this week to see Germany veto the measure should exceptions not be made at least for cars that can burn synthetically produced fuels.

“The EU Commission should propose regulation that allows combustion engines to be registered after 2035, if they can verifiably only be fueled with synthetic fuels (sic),” the minister remarked.

However, the German government minister’s push for leniency from the European Union has already been undermined by figures within his own coalition government, with members of the German Green Party coming out on Wednesday to decry any attempt to stop the progress of the climate change measures.

“Transport Minister Wissing is slipping deeper and deeper into illegality if his ministry doesn’t finally work seriously on implementing the climate laws,” the party’s spokesman on transport, Stefan Gelbhaar, reportedly remarked.

“Synthetic fuels will not change anything because they are not available in relevant quantities now and in the foreseeable future,” he insisted, adding that Wissing’s libertarian-leaning Free Democratic Party must remember that they signed a coalition deal with the Greens and Chancellor Scholz’s Social Democrats in which they agreed to push the green agenda forward, not hinder it.

Revealed: 23 Per Cent of German Population Now Migrants or Children of Migrants https://t.co/nEMaev0MsZ

— Breitbart London (@BreitbartLondon) March 2, 2023

From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

The CO2 Coalition have recently published this new paper by Richard Lindzen and William Happer:

February 23, 2023

Net Zero Plans Are Dangerous and Unsupported by Science and the Scientific Method

Net Zero initiatives of governments and private organizations are scientifically invalid and will lead to worldwide impoverishment and starvation if implemented, according to a paper published by the CO₂ Coalition.

The 46-page paper details how the objectives of Net Zero to eliminate the use of fossil fuels and the emissions of greenhouse gases are based on analytical methods that violate fundamental tenets of the scientific method which originated more than 300 years ago.

“Reliable scientific knowledge is determined by the scientific method, where theoretical predictions are validated by observations or rejected by failing to do so,” say the paper’s authors – two renowned physicists and a geologist of more than 40 years.

“Agreement with observations is the measure of scientific truth,” continues the paper. “Scientific progress proceeds by the interplay of theory and observation. Theory explains observations and makes predictions of what will be observed in the future. Observations anchor understanding and weed out theories that don’t work.”

The paper predicts global starvation if fossil fuels are eliminated. At risk in coming decades would be half of the world’s 8.5 billion to 10 billion people who are fed by crops grown with fertilizers derived from fossil fuels. Listed as an example of Net Zero’s potential consequences is the economic and social calamity of Sri Lanka which had banned the use of fertilizers and pesticides made from fossil fuels.

“The recent experience in Sri Lanka provides a red alert. The world has just witnessed the collapse of the once bountiful agricultural sector of Sri Lanka as a result of government restrictions on mineral fertilizer,” the paper says.

The paper says that 600 million years of geological evidence shows that CO₂ levels are near a record low and that atmospheric increases of the gas follow warming periods rather than precede them.

These data “are good enough to demolish the argument that atmospheric CO₂ concentrations control Earth’s climate and the theory that fossil fuels and CO₂ will cause catastrophic global warming. They will not.”

The paper’s authors are Dr. William Happer, Professor of Physics, Emeritus, Princeton University; Dr. Richard Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Atmospheric Science Emeritus, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; and Gregory Wrightstone, a geologist and executive director of the CO₂ Coalition.

The paper says Net Zero regulations and actions are scientifically invalid because they:

• Fabricate data or omit data that contradict their conclusions. Net Zero proponents regularly report that extreme weather is more severe and frequent because of climate change while the evidence shows no increase – and, in some cases, a decrease – in such events.
• Rely on computer models that do not work. An analysis of 102 computer models used by Net Zero proponents found that 101 of them had failed to match real-world observations. “Simply stated, the (computer) model essential to every government Net Zero regulation, action and the trillions of dollars subsidizing renewables and electric cars, trucks, home heating, appliances and many other products do not work,” said the paper.
• Rely on findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that are government opinions, not science. The paper says that the conclusions of IPCC scientists that contradict the narrative of catastrophic global warming from fossil fuels are rewritten by government bureaucrats for public reports to support the false narrative of Net Zero proponents.
• Omit the extraordinary social benefits of CO₂ and fossil fuels. Carbon dioxide, including that from the burning of fossil fuels, serves as plant food that increases crop production and enables the feeding of more people. CO₂, as well as the greenhouse gases of methane and nitrous oxide, help to keep Earth at temperatures conducive to life; without them, people would suffer. Fossil fuels are economical and abundant sources of energy necessary for modern societies and are critical feedstocks for fertilizers and pesticides that support the lives of billions of people.
• Omit the disastrous consequences of reducing fossil fuels and CO₂ emissions to Net Zero. “It cannot be overemphasized that eliminating fossil fuels and implementing Net Zero policies and actions mean the elimination of fossil fuel-derived nitrogen fertilizers and pesticides that will result in about half the world’s population not having enough food to eat,” says the paper.
• Reject the science that demonstrates there is no risk of catastrophic global warming caused by fossil fuels and CO₂. “We are not aware of any reliable science that supports the National Climate Assessment’s or others’ theory that fossil fuels and CO₂ will cause catastrophic global warming,” said the paper’s authors, “We have written extensively on this issue for decades.”

The Arlington-based CO₂ Coalition is a nonprofit organization of more than 100 scientists and researchers engaged in educating the public and policymakers on the benefits of carbon dioxide and on the role of the gas in climate dynamics.

You may download a printable version of Challenging Net Zero with Science here.

From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

h/t Graham Worthington

From The Times:

A Canadian company plans to dump hundreds of tonnes of a mineral off the Cornish coast to slow climate change, despite calls by environmentalists to halt the trial.

The pioneering scheme by Planetary Technologies is designed to remove CO2 from the atmosphere by increasing the alkalinity of the water. The UN climate science panel said last year that removing billions of tonnes of CO2 from the air would be vital for the world to meet the Paris agreement’s goals.

Planetary Technologies will release between 200 and 300 tonnes of magnesium hydroxide in its mineral form, brucite, in St Ives Bay over three months this spring.

Magnesium hydroxide is probably better known as the compound Milk of Magnesia, used as a laxative. Senior company figures are attending public meetings in Hayle and Truro to assuage concerns about the project.

The approach is called ocean alkalinity enhancement, and uses an alkaline mineral to shift the pH value of the sea. Making the water more alkaline speeds up the natural way oceans lock CO2 away by neutralising dissolved CO2 and turning it into a salt.

The method has the bonus of reversing ocean acidification, a threat to marine life that has been caused by cars, power stations and factories releasing CO2.

“We’re trying to restore the ocean and restore the climate for generations,” said Peter Chargin, vice president of commercialisation and community relations at Planetary Technologies. “We’re transforming CO2 in the air into salt in the ocean. We think this can be a big arrow in the quiver of solutions for climate change,” he added.

The Nova Scotia-headquartered firm studied locations around the world for the test. It chose Cornwall’s waters because they are shallow, which is important for CO2 removal because the alkalinity-enhanced water needs to be in contact with the air for a long time. The water is also very well-mixed, or turbulent, which should help the process.

The experiment, which will operate under a licence issued by the regulator for England, the Environment Agency, marks a significant scaling up of previous tests.

Planetary Technologies released about four tonnes in the area last year, at a rate that Chargin calls “hysterically small”. While the increase to 200-300 tonnes over 90 days marks a big increase, Chargin said it was still relatively small, a “drop in the bucket”.

Brucite is the mineral form of magnesium hydroxide

Sue Sayer, director of the Cornwall Seal Research Trust, said she welcomed companies exploring such approaches but felt the release should be blocked until further research had been conducted.

She said: “I am all for the project in that we need to find some innovative solutions to climate change, and find them quickly. It’s a very exciting project, potentially.

“My main thoughts are that we need to make sure there are no unintended effects. My feeling is there isn’t sufficient data on this introduction [of the mineral] and therefore no release should be done until the data is available. It’s not me trying to do the nimby thing, St Ives Bay is a really vital bay for the Cornish economy and the environment.”

Sayer said it was not obvious what the negative side effects might be, but that she was concerned about possible impacts on the marine food web affecting mammals such as grey seals.

Ruth Williams, marine conservation manager at the Cornwall Wildlife Trust, said the company’s approach was innovative and she welcomed its engagement with locals.

However, she said: “Whilst we support their ambition of trying to find a way to help tackle our current climate emergency, and agree that in principle the chemistry should work, we are very aware that there is potential for unintended consequences with new ideas such as this, and there has been very little environmental research done to mitigate concerns to date that we are aware of.”

Chargin said he hoped the public meetings would put people’s fears to rest. “We feel compelled to act, because the environment is at risk from ocean acidification and climate change. Cornwall is a great place to do it,” he said.

The company is also running trials in Canada and hopes to increase the concentration and duration of its brucite releases in future projects.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/85bcd158-b77e-11ed-a1e6-75eebc433c21?shareToken=70a3d8002dea090438c59d378457f588

This is absolutely crazy. Maybe somebody would like to do the sums, but I would imagine the amount of CO2 sequestered in this way would be infinitesimal.

But as Sue Sayer points out, there could be unintended effects from messing around with the natural eco-systems.

One last question – who is paying for this nonsense?

From Science Matters

By Ron Clutz

Update February 28, 2023

Chinese virologist Dr. Li-Meng Yan reacts to a classified intelligence report from the Energy Department that found COVID-19 most likely came from a Chinese lab on ‘Tucker Carlson Tonight.’ Video below followed by transcript from closed captions. TC is Tucker Carlson and LMY is Dr. Li-Meng Yan.

TC: Li-Meng Yan was one of the first people to tell the truth in the United States.  At great personal cost she was there. She joins us now: Doctor, thank you so much for coming on. You said three years ago you believed that this virus was intentionally released by the government you once worked for, the government of China.  Today we’re hearing in the Wall Street Journal that it was accidental. Do you believe this leak was accidental or intentional?

LMY: Hi Tucker thank you for having me again. First I really appreciate you and also Fox News have been taking so much effort pursuing the truths of Covid origin. Without your help, there wouldn’t be such milestone achievements. And I want to say, of course it was not an accident. And maybe for people who don’t have this kind of biosafety labs, this kind of experience on coronavirus, maybe it’s easy for them to accept the accidental lab leak idea.

However I’m the scientist working in such lab using coronavirus, and I can tell you based on the print protocol and also the other surveillance, it will be impossible for the lab leak to accidentally happen in such a lab. Because of the Wuhan outbreak and also the pandemic, so definitely now we just reach to the first step: It was from China’s lab. Now we need to pursue the truth of origin and we need to keep going on.

TC: We know the Chinese government allowed its infected citizens to travel in huge groups to Western Europe in the early days of the pandemic–that was intentional. But you believe the whole thing: that they came up with this virus and then they unleashed it on the world to destroy the Western economies and to elevate their own position globally.

LMY: I want to emphasize one thing. I would say based on the evidence and the sources I have, that the virus was intentionally brought out of this strict lab and released into the community. However I don’t think the outbreak in Wuhan was intentional. I would say it was because CCP government and Military scientists underestimated the transmissibility. That’s why finally it got out of control and caused the local outbreak. However we should know that CCP government intentionally made it go all over the world to kill millions of people all over the world later.

TC: We just have to hope and pray that you will be interviewed by many other journalists in this country over the coming weeks now that this has been confirmed. You’re an eyewitness to it, you have a I think a credible story to tell, and I really hope you’re no longer ignored. I appreciate you’re coming on again tonight Li Meng Yan.

Background from 2021 Post:   Ex-CDC Director Believes Wuhan Flu Escaped from a Lab

Live Science reports Ex-CDC director believes COVID-19 escaped from a lab, but cites no evidence

Excerpts in italics with my bolds.  A previous post is reprinted further on showing the evidence not discussed and hand-waved away by Fauci, whose NIH funded the Wuhan research facility from which the virus likely came.

Dr. Robert Redfield told CNN that this was his opinion on the origins of the virus.

“I’m of the point of view that I still think the most likely etiology of this pathogen in Wuhan was from a laboratory, you know, escaped,” Redfield told CNN’s Dr. Sanjay Gupta. “Other people don’t believe that, that’s fine. Science will eventually figure it out.”

Still, a number of scientists say the most likely explanation is that the virus emerged naturally, passing from bats to another animal and then to humans, Live Science previously reported. Recently, a team from the World Health Organization, which is investigating the origins of SARS-CoV-2, said that it agrees with this hypothesis — WHO officials said the virus likely passed from bats to animals on wildlife farms in China, and then to humans, Live Science previously reported.

Redfield said he didn’t believe the bat theory. “Normally, when a pathogen goes from a zoonosis to humans, it takes a while for it to figure out how to become more and more efficient in human-to-human transmission,” Redfield told CNN. “I just don’t think this makes biological sense.”

The former CDC chief wasn’t suggesting SARS-CoV-2 is an engineered virus — another theory with no supporting evidence — just a natural escapee. “In the lab, you think that that process of becoming more efficient was happening?” Gupta asked. [Note:  There is significant evidence of an engineered virus documented in the discussion below.]

“Yeah, let’s just say I have coronavirus that I’m working on. Most of us in the lab, we’re trying to grow a virus, we try to help make it grow better and better and better … so we can do experiments,” Redfield responded.

Why Wu Flu Virus Looks Man-made ( previously posted Sept. 2020)

A virologist who fled China after studying the early outbreak of COVID-19 has published a new report claiming the coronavirus likely came from a lab.  This adds to the analysis done by Dr. Luc Montagnier earlier this year, and summarized in a previous post reprinted later on.  Dr. Yan was interviewed on Fox News, and YouTube has now blocked the video.

If you are wondering why Big Tech is censoring information unflattering to China, see Lee Smith’s Tablet article America’s China Class Launches a New War Against Trump  The corporate, tech, and media elites will not allow the president to come between them and Chinese money

Doctor Li-Meng Yan, a scientist who studied some of the available data on COVID-19 has published her claims on Zenodo, an open access digital platform. She wrote that she believed COVID-19 could have been “conveniently created” within a lab setting over a period of just six months, and “SARS-CoV-2 shows biological characteristics that are inconsistent with a naturally occurring, zoonotic virus”.

The paper by Yan, Li-Meng; Kang, Shu; Guan, Jie; Hu, Shanchang  is Unusual Features of the SARS-CoV-2 Genome Suggesting Sophisticated Laboratory Modification Rather Than Natural Evolution and Delineation of Its Probable Synthetic Route.  Excerpts in italics with my bolds.

Overview

The natural origin theory, although widely accepted, lacks substantial support. The alternative theory that the virus may have come from a research laboratory is, however, strictly censored on peer-reviewed scientific journals. Nonetheless, SARS-CoV-2 shows biological characteristics that are inconsistent with a naturally occurring, zoonotic virus. In this report, we describe the genomic, structural, medical, and literature evidence, which, when considered together, strongly contradicts the natural origin theory.

The evidence shows that SARS-CoV-2 should be a laboratory product created by using bat coronaviruses ZC45 and/or ZXC21 as a template and/or backbone.

Contents

Consistent with this notion, genomic, structural, and literature evidence also suggest a non-natural origin of SARS-CoV-2. In addition, abundant literature indicates that gain-of-function research has long advanced to the stage where viral genomes can be precisely engineered and manipulated to enable the creation of novel coronaviruses possessing unique properties. In this report, we present such evidence and the associated analyses.

Part 1 of the report describes the genomic and structural features of SARS-CoV-2, the presence of which could be consistent with the theory that the virus is a product of laboratory modification beyond what could be afforded by simple serial viral passage. Part 2 of the report describes a highly probable pathway for the laboratory creation of SARS-CoV-2, key steps of which are supported by evidence present in the viral genome. Importantly, part 2 should be viewed as a demonstration of how SARS-CoV-2 could be conveniently created in a laboratory in a short period of time using available materials and well-documented techniques. This report is produced by a team of experienced scientists using our combined expertise in virology, molecular biology, structural biology, computational biology, vaccine development, and medicine.

We present three lines of evidence to support our contention that laboratory manipulation is part of the history of SARS-CoV-2:

i. The genomic sequence of SARS-CoV-2 is suspiciously similar to that of a bat coronavirus discovered by military laboratories in the Third Military Medical University (Chongqing, China) and the Research Institute for Medicine of Nanjing Command (Nanjing, China).

ii. The receptor-binding motif (RBM) within the Spike protein of SARS-CoV-2, which determines the host specificity of the virus, resembles that of SARS-CoV from the 2003 epidemic in a suspicious manner. Genomic evidence suggests that the RBM has been genetically manipulated.

iii. SARS-CoV-2 contains a unique furin-cleavage site in its Spike protein, which is known to greatly enhance viral infectivity and cell tropism. Yet, this cleavage site is completely absent in this particular class of coronaviruses found in nature. In addition, rare codons associated with this additional sequence suggest the strong possibility that this furin-cleavage site is not the product of natural evolution and could have been inserted into the SARS-CoV-2 genome artificially by techniques other than simple serial passage or multi-strain recombination events inside co-infected tissue cultures or animals.

Background from Previous post June 30, 2020:  Pandemic Update: Virus Weaker, HCQ Stronger

In past weeks there have been anecdotal reports from frontline doctors that patients who would have been flattened fighting off SARS CV2 in April are now sitting up and recovering in a few days. We have also the statistical evidence in the US and Sweden, as two examples, that case numbers are rising while Covid deaths continue declining. One explanation is that the new cases are younger people who have been released from lockdown (in US) with stronger immune systems. But it may also be that the virus itself is losing potency.

In the past I have noticed theories about the origin of the virus, and what makes it “novel.” But when the scientist who identified HIV weighs in, I pay particular attention. The Coronavirus Is Man Made According to Luc Montagnier the Man Who Discovered HIV. Excerpts in italics with my bolds.

Contrary to the narrative that is being pushed by the mainstream that the COVID 19 virus was the result of a natural mutation and that it was transmitted to humans from bats via pangolins, Dr Luc Montagnier the man who discovered the HIV virus back in 1983 disagrees and is saying that the virus was man made.

Professor Luc Montagnier, 2008 Nobel Prize winner for Medicine, claims that SARS-CoV-2 is a manipulated virus that was accidentally released from a laboratory in Wuhan, China. Chinese researchers are said to have used coronaviruses in their work to develop an AIDS vaccine. HIV RNA fragments are believed to have been found in the SARS-CoV-2 genome.

“With my colleague, bio-mathematician Jean-Claude Perez, we carefully analyzed the description of the genome of this RNA virus,” explains Luc Montagnier, interviewed by Dr Jean-François Lemoine for the daily podcast at Pourquoi Docteur, adding that others have already explored this avenue: Indian researchers have already tried to publish the results of the analyses that showed that this coronavirus genome contained sequences of another virus, … the HIV virus (AIDS virus), but they were forced to withdraw their findings as the pressure from the mainstream was too great.

To insert an HIV sequence into this genome requires molecular tools

In a challenging question Dr Jean-François Lemoine inferred that the coronavirus under investigation may have come from a patient who is otherwise infected with HIV. No, “says Luc Montagnier,” in order to insert an HIV sequence into this genome, molecular tools are needed, and that can only be done in a laboratory.

According to the 2008 Nobel Prize for Medicine, a plausible explanation would be an accident in the Wuhan laboratory. He also added that the purpose of this work was the search for an AIDS vaccine.

In any case, this thesis, defended by Professor Luc Montagnier, has a positive turn.

According to him, the altered elements of this virus are eliminated as it spreads: “Nature does not accept any molecular tinkering, it will eliminate these unnatural changes and even if nothing is done, things will get better, but unfortunately after many deaths.”

This is enough to feed some heated debates! So much so that Professor Montagnier’s statements could also place him in the category of “conspiracy theorists”: “Conspirators are the opposite camp, hiding the truth,” he replies, without wanting to accuse anyone, but hoping that the Chinese will admit to what he believes happened in their laboratory.

To entice a confession from the Chinese he used the example of Iran which after taking full responsibility for accidentally hitting a Ukrainian plane was able to earn the respect of the global community. Hopefully the Chinese will do the right thing he adds. “In any case, the truth always comes out, it is up to the Chinese government to take responsibility.”

Implications: Leaving aside the geopolitics, this theory also explains why the virus weakens when mutations lose the unnatural pieces added in the lab. Since this is an RNA (not DNA) sequence mutations are slower, but inevitable. If correct, this theory works against fears of a second wave of infections. It also gives an unintended benefit from past lockdowns and shutdowns, slowing the rate of infections while the virus degrades itself.

From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/uk-weather-forecast-snow-met-office-weekend-update-105930724.html

Apparently there’s going to be some yellow snow next week!!

But what did the winter just gone look like weather wise?

Let’s start with mean temperatures.

https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/climate/maps-and-data/uk-and-regional-series

Overall it was an unremarkable winter, just 0.1C above the 30-year average, which itself is only 0.6C higher than it was in the 1930s. This winter was 33rd warmest since 1884, in a tie with 1898/8, 1912/13 and 1936/7.

Apart from the exceptionally mild winter of 2015/16, no winter in the past decade has been warmer than earlier winters such as 1974/5 and 1988/9.

In short we have been having relatively mild winters lately because of weather, not climate change.

Our winters are said to be getting wetter, but the last two years have bucked the trend:

https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/climate/maps-and-data/uk-and-regional-series

While winter rainfall has been slowly trending up since the 1970s, long term averages are barely higher now than in the years up to 1940.

Again, it is noticeable that, with the exception of the exceptionally wet winter of 2013/14, other recent wet winters, such as 2019/20 and 2020/21 have not been unusually wet by historical standards.

The data tells us that the English climate is changing much less than we have been told.

STOP THESE THINGS

These things have a terrifying habit of succumbing to gravity, their 300-tonne superstructures dropping like giant, wounded flies, splattering their inner workings far and wide; and, no doubt, providing locals with an exhilarating seismic experience.

We reported on the phenomenon only a few weeks back, noting that there has been a significant increase in the number of collapses in the last 18 months – and that, accordingly, insurers are cranking up the premiums they charge their owners.

In his piece below, Tim Newcomb notes the increase in gravitational disruption, and puts forward the idea that as the size, bulk and scale of these things increases, the number of collapses can only increase, too. Or, as they say, the bigger they come, the harder they fall.

Giant Wind Turbines Keep Mysteriously Falling Over
Popular Mechanics
Tim Newcomb
24 January 2023

• Turbine failures are on the uptick across the world, sometimes with blades falling off or even full turbine collapses.
• A recent report says production issues may be to blame for the mysterious increase in failures.
• Turbines are growing larger as quality control plans get smaller.

The taller the wind turbine, the harder they fall. And they sure are falling.

Wind turbine failures are on the uptick, from Oklahoma to Sweden and Colorado to Germany, with all three of the major manufacturers admitting that the race to create bigger turbines has invited manufacturing issues, according to a report from Bloomberg.

Multiple turbines that are taller than 750 feet are collapsing across the world, with the tallest—784 feet in stature—falling in Germany in September 2021. To put it in perspective, those turbines are taller than both the Space Needle in Seattle and the Washington Monument in Washington, D.C. Even smaller turbines that recently took a tumble in Oklahoma, Wisconsin, Wales, and Colorado were about the height of the Statue of Liberty.

Turbines are falling for the three largest players in the industry: General Electric, Vestas, and Siemens Gamesa. Why? “It takes time to stabilize production and quality on these new products,” Larry Culp, GE CEO, said last October on an earning call, according to Bloomberg. “Rapid innovation strains manufacturing and the broader supply chain.”

Without industrywide data chronicling the rise—and now fall—of turbines, we’re relying on industry experts to note the flaws in the wind farming. “We’re seeing these failures happening in a shorter time frame on the new turbines,” Fraser McLachlan, CEO of insurer GCube Underwriting, told Bloomberg, “and that’s quite concerning.”

The push to produce bigger wind-grabbing turbines has sped production of the growing apparatuses. Bloomberg reports that Siemens has endured quality control issues on a new design, Vestas has seen project delays and quality challenges, and GE has seen an uptick in warranty costs and repairs. And this all comes along with uncertain supply chain issues and fluctuating material pricing.

With heights stretching taller than 850 feet, blades 300 feet long, and energy generation abilities ratcheting up accordingly, the bigger the turbine, the more energy it can capture. But the bigger the turbine, the more that can go wrong—and the farther it falls.
Popular Mechanics