Day: November 12, 2023

Just Believe and Drought Not

Pasadena

From Watts Up With That?

Guest Essay by Kip Hansen — 10 November 2023

If you read a newspaper or watch or listen to TV or radio news, you have heard that the drought in the State of California is one or more of the following:   finally ended; maybe ended; only seemingly ended; not ended at all.  Worse than the confusion these apparently conflicting statements represent is the fact they are all true.

I could write you a thousand words supporting each of the scenarios complete with references and images from the various drought monitoring agencies and departments.

I explained the reasons for this confusing situation earlier in the year in a post titled Doubts About Droughts .   According to Drought.gov “in the early 1980s researchers found more than 150 published definitions of drought, reflecting differences in regions, needs, and approaches.”  In short, there is no single referenceable metric by which to determine if an area, such as the State of California, is in a drought.

During the last water year, California received a great deal of precipitation.

The rain and snow came not only from the atmospheric rivers in the above graphic, but from a rare tropical storm that came up through the Gulf of California — Hurricane Hilary – which dropped inches of rain on the deserts of Southern California and Arizona/Nevada.   

How much precipitation?

So, 141% of the historical average for rain, and 237% of the historical average for snowpack.  That’s a great deal of extra water for a state that is generally dry.  Generally dry, you ask?

The following image shows the Köppen climate types found in California.  All of California consists of types described as dry, hot, desert, semi-arid, or Mediterranean, with the exception of the High Sierra, which are “dry-summer subarctic and tundra”.  California’s very long-term climate is dry and warm-to-hot.  It is natively dry. 

On a personal note:  I have recently returned from a trip to southern Italy, Greece, Crete, Rhodes, Cyprus, and Turkey – and they have Mediterranean climates and they are dry and dusty but with a two-month rainy season.  Physically, they look very much like the rolling hills of Southern Californian deserts, complete with broad arroyos that flood when it rains.  Scrub brush and cactus grow there. 

The Köppen types tell us that California does not need a drought to be dry.  It has been dry for a very longtime.  And, it is expected, climatologically, to stay dry.  If California suddenly switched to the climate of the U.S.  corn belt, which is Köppen type Dfa — D (Continental) f (No dry season) a (Hot summer) – that would be climate change.  But hot/warm and dry is normal and is not a change at all.

So why all the fuss when California is dry for a year or two or three?  Why cry “endless drought in California”?

“Half of all fruits and vegetables grown in the U.S. come from California, and the state effectively produces all (at least 99 percent) of America’s almonds, pistachios, pomegranates, and walnuts. California is also the nation’s leading grower of lima beans, lemons, kumquats, raspberries, strawberries, and spinach…”  [ source ]

California is the most populous state with over 39 million people making their home there.  The Greater Los Angeles/San Diego Megalopolis, alternately the Southern California Megaregion, alone has 23.76 million residents.

Agriculture and people consume a lot of water.

On the Köppen map above you can see a horizontal line that goes right across the state, right up near the top of the image.  That line is made up of three county northern borders but can be considered the line separating Southern California from the rest of the state (opinions vary…).   What climate type prevails in Southern California with its approximately 24 million people?   The red and pink areas ( BWh and BWk) are  outright deserts. Brownish and tan areas are “arid” which means dry (BSh and BSk).    The remaining two, yellow and greenish-yellow,  Csa and Csb, are mediterranean climates which typically have dry summers and wet winters, with summer conditions ranging from warm to hot and winter conditions typically being mild to cool. 

As seen from space:

The greenish coastal hills are brush covered and dry most of the year.  There are pine forests in the higher elevations in the mountains around the Los Angeles Basin but these forests are hot and dry during the summer too.   That encouraging looking great big lake, center bottom, is the Salton Sea – salt water like the Dead Sea in the Middle East.  But the green areas extending to the north and south of the Salton Sea are the Imperial Valley, an important agricultural area for irrigated crops (using water from the Colorado River).  The rest is, as it appears, a great big desert.

California has reservoirs for two reasons:  1) To store rainy season water for the rest of the year – for drinking and agriculture and 2)  As flood control infrastructure.   Here’s the current (as of 9 November 2023) conditions of the state’s major reservoirs:

The good news is that most reservoirs are above historical averages – which only means that they have not been drawn down by the demands of this past summer.   Of course, they mustn’t be kept too full, as the rainy season is coming and an overfull and overflowing reservoir is worse than an almost empty reservoir. [see here and related Oroville Dam stories from Spring 2017 – and the disaster in Libya in September]

And finally, pay almost no attention to mass media and governmental sources showing images from Drought.gov:

Most of the mass media have been touting the one labelled “U.S. Drought monitor: California” (lower left) which shows no drought, just a little “abnormally dry”.   But the Long-term Multi-Indicator Drought Index (top left) shows much of the state wet and maybe too wet. The Short-term Multi-Indicator Drought Index is a mixed bag. And the 1-week change map shows no change.   

Take your pick.

One thing we can be sure of is that California is better off to have had the rain and the snow.  But can we say that “The Drought” is over?  Not exactly clear, is it?

# # # # #

Author’s Comment:

I grew up in Los Angeles and am familiar with the climate there.  My brothers and I sailed Tom Sawyer-style rafts on the lake where our local park was usually found — a lake that formed when the heavy winter rains came.   When those rains came, sometimes houses would slide down the slopes into the canyons, arroyos would flood and wash out roads and highways, and the drainage ditches – designed to carry away the flood waters —  would fill and the water would flow into the sea.  Almost every year. One year a bunch of us “hippies” from UCSB went down to Carpenteria to fight the flooding. 

The rest of the year was hot and dry – every year the brush on the hills somewhere above Hollywood and Malibu would burn and fill the air with smoke, adding to the smog. 

If you are still curious, go to the WestSide Drought Tracker and use the selection list on the left to cycle through all the many maps showing differing views of various drought metrics.

That’s a mediterranean climate.

Thanks for reading.

West Antarctica Temperature FALLS 2°C in 20 Years

From The DAILY SCEPTIC

BY CHRIS MORRISON

The continent of Antarctica is a difficult hunting ground for climate apocalypse fanatics since there has been barely any overall warming over the last 70 years. The exception is West Antarctica where there has been some local climate variation, possibly helped by significant geothermal activity. Of course this is enough for a scare or two, so don’t expect to see reported in mainstream media some startling new evidence showing significant cooling in West Antarctica starting in the early 1990s, with temperatures falling by 0.93°C each decade from 1999-2018, a total of 2°C over the 20 years.

In a paper published by the American Meteorological Society, a group of international scientists note the “statistically significant” rate of temperature decline with the strongest cooling occurring in spring. During this season, the temperature fell by a massive 1.84°C every decade between 1999-2018. In the winter, the decadal fall was 1.19°C. The cooling was measured by a number of databases, while an accurate consistent record was collected from the Marie Byrd weather station. Despite some differences in cooling, all the databases are said to have shared similar changes across seasons and throughout the region. The graph below plots the temperature record at Marie Byrd back to the 1950s.

So what has caused this precipitous temperature decline? As we have seen in many science papers, whenever temperatures fall, consideration of rising human-caused carbon dioxide levels is put to one side. The scientists come down firmly on the side of natural causes, with the changes mostly attributed to tropical Pacific influences. In particular, sea surface temperatures have dropped in the eastern Pacific equatorial region over the last 20 years. A reference to “atmospheric teleconnections” refers to the natural processes at work in the climate as heat is transferred around the planet in a not-fully-understood process involving ocean and atmospheric currents.

Almost needless to say, none of this cooling was forecast by climate models. The authors suggest that models are an “important tool” in making future projections of future climate changes over Antarctica. But they admit that the models did not pick up the recent significant cooling in West Antarctica. There is said to be “no robust agreement” among the models on the important sea temperatures driving the western Antarctica air temperatures. Tropical Pacific climate oscillation is still an important source of uncertainty in future projections of West Antarctica air temperatures, it is observed.

Was it ever thus? Forty years of hopelessly inaccurate temperature forecasts, along with unrealistic climate ‘tipping’ impacts driven by ridiculous suggestions that the temperature will rise by 4°C in less than 80 years, is hardly a record that inspires confidence. The recent appearance of clickbait attributions trying to pin individual weather events on human activities is little more than a scientific joke. These politicised attempts to measure the unmeasurable are a complete waste of time and money, the uncharitable might note. Not least because the models are corrupted by the notion promoted by the UN’s IPCC that all or most global warming since 1900 is caused by humans burning fossil fuel. This might seem an increasingly implausible suggestion in the light of much science including this latest paper on the recent dramatic drop in Antarctica temperatures.

Despite the refusal of Antarctica to show any significant warming, the climate apocalypse circus regularly rides into town to drum up catastrophe business. Last September, the headlines were full of a “mind-blowing” fall in winter sea ice to 17 million square kilometres. The BBC said it showed a “worrying new benchmark” for a region that once seemed resistance to global warming. The “mind-blowing” remark was attributed to Dr. Walter Meier, who monitors sea ice with the Colorado-based National Snow and Ice Data Centre (NSIDC). He added that it was “far outside anything we’ve seen”. Inexplicably, he seemed to forget that he was part of an earlier team that had reviewed photos from the 1960s Nimbus weather satellites that showed similar levels of ice in 1966. Just seven years ago, Meier held the view that extreme highs and lows of Antarctica sea ice “are not unusual”.

Of course, the 2023 low sea ice story has moved on. In mainstream media it would be considered very bad form to note that according to the latest figures from the NSIDC, the start of summer in October saw below-trend ice melt – 903,000 square kilometres compared with the average of 985,000 sq kms. Up in the Arctic, pickings have been thin for some years following the small cyclical recovery in sea ice that set in around 2014. As the winter takes hold, the NSIDC reports that the ice has increased “at a faster than average pace”. The freeze is said to have been particularly rapid along the Siberian seas where the ice cover expanded to the coast by the end of last month. Things are not look good for Sir David Attenborough’s claim in last year’s Frozen Planet II that summer sea ice could all be gone in 12 years. Over at the Greenland ice sheet, the latest information from the Danish Polar Portal shows winter ice growing back faster than the 1981-2010 average.

Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.

BBC: Kenya’s Ogiek People are Being Evicted for Carbon Credits

From Watts Up With That?

Essay by Eric Worrall

More Carbon Credit crimes against humanity?

Kenya’s Ogiek people being evicted for carbon credits – lawyers

By Claire Marshall

BBC Environment & Rural Affairs Correspondent

Kenya’s government is illegally evicting hunter-gatherers from their ancestral lands to profit from carbon offsetting schemes, human rights lawyers say.

Hundreds of members of the Ogiek community are being evicted from the Mau Forest, say their representatives.

Ogiek leader Daniel Kobei said armed forest rangers were “pulling down the houses with axes and hammers”.

Kenya’s government says such operations are to protect the environment.

Dr Justin Kenrick from the Forest People’s Programme said that carbon credits and offsetting were “key” to what was happening.

The developing global carbon credit market allows a polluter to emit carbon dioxide or other climate-heating gas and pay a forest owner to capture those emissions through the carbon-absorption power of their trees.

Dr Kenrick argues that by evicting the Ogiek, Kenya’s government is trying to cement its full territorial – and financial – control over an increasingly lucrative asset.

“Those in control of Africa’s forests stand to earn a lot of money,” he said.

“The Mau is Kenya’s biggest forest and in our view it’s clear that the interest shown by offsetting companies is prompting the Kenyan Government to assert its control.

…Read more: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-67352067

It is time to boycott any company which publicly declares an investment in carbon credits, just as decent people boycott Chinese goods made by slave labor.

Carbon credit atrocities against vulnerable native people have been happening for years, yet nobody seems to care – Western companies just keep pouring money into these vile schemes. Western corporate desperation for a little virtue signalling just seems more important to them than the fact some of their carbon credit money is being used to fund committing violence against African villagers.

I can understand companies turning a blind eye to rampant carbon credit fraud. Nobody cares if the carbon credits are fraudulent, except when that fraud is exposed. But what kind of monster can turn a blind eye to people being forcibly evicted from their homes, just so carbon credit purveyors can claim their subsidy farm forest is pristine?

It’s time to pull the plug on these blood soaked carbon credits once and for all, and to stop associating with businesses which promote or boast about their use.

The Storms of January 1993

The MV Braer oil tanker ran aground off Shetland in January 1993

On January 5, 1993, the MV Braer  oil tanker was traveling between Norway and Canada when it lost power in hurricane force winds. The vessel was forced aground at Garths Ness, Shetland, spilling more than 84,000 tonnes of crude oil.

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

January 1993 was another extremely wind month in the 1990s.

The Met Office report says it all:

The simple fact that Scotland had 25 days on the trot with winds of at least 70 kts, 80 mph, is astonishing enough in itself. So was the fact that at least 17 people died  because of storms on five separate days.

And 82 kts, which is 94 mph, at Leeds is remarkable for an inland location.

According to one analysis:

https://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/wea.2097

And the Met Office described it as a significant weather event:

We certainly have not seen anything approaching the storminess of 1987, 1990 and 1993 in the last decade.

Radical environmentalists eager to end rodeo

“I started building this coalition that we call the Western Sports Industry Coalition. This coalition is unlike anything the Western horse world’s ever seen. And actually the thoroughbred people have called me and complimented me on putting this together. And the reason it’s so hard to put something like that together and get all of these organizations out there people don’t…realize how many organizations are rodeo-type organizations and companies out there that you know, actually have their own Association and their own group of people that rodeo.” — Dave Duquette of Western Justice

In Episode 392 of District of Conservation, Gabriella interviews Dave Duquette from Western Justice about efforts to protect animal agriculture and rodeo from attacks by preservationist environmentalists and animal rights activists. Tune in to learn more!

Listen on Apple Podcasts

EP 579: BAAJA Blast: Permitting Reform or Bust – District of Conservation

In Episode 579 of District of Conservation, Gabriella discusses the permitting reform bill – aka BAAJA – that is gaining traction in Congress now. The Senate will hold a cloture vote starting at 3:30pm ET in a motion to proceed. Gabriella discusses the status quo without permitting reform, how BAAJA is good for the environment and affordability. Tune in!SHOW NOTESBipartisan Policy Center: BAAJA ExplainerEstimating the US Energy System Impacts of the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act
  1. EP 579: BAAJA Blast: Permitting Reform or Bust
  2. EP 578: Midterms, CO Amendment 83, Disneyland Goes Electric
  3. EP 577: Kaylyn Glenn – Florida Gladeswoman & Conservationist
  4. EP 576: Chiricahua National Park & Energy Security Index
  5. EP 575: Menhaden Madness (ft. Whit Fosburgh, Forage Fish Campaign)

SHOW NOTES

⁠Western Justice⁠ + ⁠Dave Duquette⁠

⁠Rodeo Events: The Far Left’s Latest Target⁠

⁠Western Sports Industry Coalition⁠ + ⁠Backgrounder

Gabriella Hoffman

Gabriella Hoffman is a Media Strategist and Award-Winning Outdoor Writer. She hosts the “District of Conservation” podcast and CFACT’s original YouTube series “Conservation Nation.” Learn more about her work at http://www.gabriellahoffman.com

The post Radical environmentalists eager to end rodeo appeared first on CFACT

As The Transition To Green Energy Crumbles, Funding For The Climate Scare Soars

From The MANHATTAN CONTRARIAN

Francis Menton

In December 2016, Donald Trump had just been elected President. He had been widely accused of calling the climate scare a “hoax.” In a post titled “The Impending Collapse Of The Global Warming Scare,” I went out on a limb predicting that the change of administration could bring about a the rapid demise of the climate scare. The post reported the then-increasing focus of the environmental movement on the climate issue, and ended with this prediction:

The environmental movement has climbed itself way out onto the global warming limb.  Now the Trump administration is about to start sawing off the limb behind them.

Well, that didn’t happen. In the event, the Trump Administration was mostly a disappointment to us climate skeptics. Yes, they did take on a few significant regulatory matters, like rescinding the so-called Clean Power Plan (forced closure of fossil fuel power plants). But they never tackled the Endangerment Finding (labeling CO2 a “danger” to human health and welfare); nor did they make any meaningful pushback against the activist bureaucracies or scientific societies; nor did they cut funding for the climate alarm movement to any significant degree.

So we have been left to wait for the climate scare and the energy transition to collapse under the weight of the combination of their own scientific absurdity, physical impossibility, and crushing costs. It has been a long wait.

But you have likely seen over the course of just the past few months that the supposed green energy transition — widely hyped and massively subsidized for two decades — has suddenly started to crumble on multiple fronts. We are rapidly approaching the green energy wall. And yet at the same time, the promoters of the climate scare are not backing down. Not in the least. To the contrary, the New York Times reports just today that the major environmental NGOs are in a process of cutting their funding for their most basic programs, like dealing with toxic chemicals, in order to double down and focus even more on the one big issue — climate change.

More on that in a minute. But first, a small update on the approach of the green energy wall. Here are just a few of the latest data points on the supposed green energy transition not happening due to issues of cost and physical impossibility:

  • From the New York Times, November 2: “Wind Power, Key to Democrats’ Climate-Change Goals, Faces a Crisis.” The article recounts the developers backing out of four big offshore wind projects off New York a couple of months ago, followed by an overlapping group of developers backing out of two big wind projects of the coast of New Jersey just a few days ago (November 1). (See also my post of October 5 as to other cancelations of offshore wind projects off the mid-Atlantic and New England.). For New York, where offshore wind is supposed to be the magic elixir that will enable us to close all our natural gas plants and at the same time electrify all buildings and cars, we are left with exactly one offshore project currently moving forward, with all of 12 turbines. Excerpt from the Times piece: “Instead of gathering momentum as the long-promised benefits of offshore wind farms are about to be realized, the industry is now mired in an existential crisis. An assortment of recent obstacles to projects in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut are almost certain to delay — and possibly derail — Northeastern states’ grand ambitions to harness the winds blowing over the Atlantic Ocean.”
  • The darned fossil fuels just won’t go away. From the New York Times today: “Nations That Vowed to Halt Warming Are Expanding Fossil Fuels, Report Finds.” Excerpt: “In 2030, if current projections hold, the United States will drill for more oil and gas than at any point in its history. Russia and Saudi Arabia plan to do the same. They’re among the world’s fossil fuel giants that, together, are on course this decade to produce twice the amount of fossil fuels than a critical global warming threshold allows, according to a United Nations-backed report issued on Wednesday.”
  • Values of stocks of wind and solar developers have been crashing. Jo Nova reports today that the Invesco Solar ETF is down 40% year-to-date. She previously produced this chart of the stock price of Siemens Energy, with two dramatic drops in the past few months tied to announcements of losses in the wind energy business:

Which brings us to the other New York Times article from today, headline: “Environmental Groups Cut Programs as Funding Shifts to Climate Change.” Even as everyone can see that this whole green energy thing is just not going to work, the Times reports that the entire environmental movement is doubling down, cutting other programs and focusing their funding on climate change to the exclusion of everything else:

A significant shift in donor contributions to nonprofits fighting climate change in recent years has left some of the nation’s biggest environmental organizations facing critical shortfalls in programs on toxic chemicals, radioactive contamination and wildlife protection. The Natural Resources Defense Council is shutting down its nuclear mission and has laid off its top lawyer in the field. . . . The NRDC is not alone. The Sierra Club, Defenders of Wildlife and the Environmental Working Group, which have been at the forefront of efforts to clean up waste water, regulate pesticides and adopt tougher standards for atomic power plants, are facing similar financial problems.

All the funders and the activists care about any more is climate change:

Meanwhile, global spending to fight climate change by environmental groups and other nonprofits reached $8 billion in 2021, most of it in the United States and Canada, according to a survey released in September by the Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy. . . . “Funders that had a nuclear program or a toxics program have left those fields entirely and have gone to climate change,” said Marylia Kelley, senior adviser and former executive director of a citizens oversight group. . . .

I’d be surprised if the total annual funding of all climate skeptic organizations is as much as $25 million. Well, they have religious fervor and fanaticism on their side, but we have reality.

Oil Tanker Fire Sparked by Lithium-ion Battery Explosion -NTSB

​​​NTSB highlights potential fire risks of lithium-ion batteries.

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) on Thursday cited thermal runaway of a cell within a handheld radio’s lithium-ion battery as the cause of a fire on an oil tanker docked in Baton Rouge, La.

The Liberian-registered oil tanker S-Trust was docked at the Genesis Port Allen Terminal on November 13, 2022, when a fire on the bridge was sparked by one of the cells in a lithium-ion battery for an ultra-high-frequency handheld radio exploding, the NTSB’s investigation found. The batteries and chargers for the handheld radios were located on the communications table on the bridge, reports  MarineLink

By the time the vessel’s crew extinguished the fire, the S-Trust’s navigation, communication and alarm systems were damaged beyond use. In total, the fire caused $3 million in damage to the vessel. No injuries were reported.

S-Trust at anchor following the casualty. (Source: U.S. Coast Guard, courtesy NTSB)

Lithium-ion battery cell explosions are typically caused by a thermal runaway, a chemical reaction that can cause the cell to ignite and explode, according to the NTSB. A lithium-ion battery cell can spontaneously experience a thermal runaway if damaged, shorted, overheated, defective or overcharged.

The NTSB said crews can help to prevent thermal runaways and ensuing fires by:

  • Following manufacturers’ instructions for the care and maintenance of lithium-ion batteries;
  • Properly disposing of damaged batteries;
  • Avoiding unsupervised charging; and
  • Keeping batteries and chargers away from heat sources and flammable materials.

“Companies should ensure that lithium-ion batteries and devices that use lithium-ion battery packs are certified by Underwriters Laboratory or another recognized organization,” the report said.

If a lithium-ion battery fire occurs, crews can attempt to extinguish the fire with water, foam, CO2, or other dry chemical or powdered agents designed for use on Class A (combustible) fires. If the battery fire cannot be extinguished, personnel should attempt to allow the pack to burn in a controlled manner, including by watching for nearby cells that may also experience thermal runaway and extinguishing other combustibles that may catch on fire.

Photos from the bridge closed-circuit camera showing (1) a second explosion occurs, (2) an object is propelled on fire into the air (circled), and (3) the object, still on fire, landing on the floor. (Source: Stalwart Management Ltd, courtesy NTSB)

MIR2323Herunterladen

The Futile Climate Crusade in One Graph

By Robert Bradley Jr.

This graph has crossed my computer time and again. Kudos to the creator.

The bottom line of failed mitigation policy is not the work of Big Oil or “disinformers” or “deniers” … it is the reality of the best energies rising to the top of the market despite efforts of politicians to restrict the same.

Credit consumers who naturally choose energy value (affordability, reliability, abundance); like to eat meat and drink dairy; and like such things as charcoaling, cozying up to the fire, and holiday lighting.

May freedom ring–and the plants thrive.

The post The Futile Climate Crusade in One Graph appeared first on Master Resource.

The first great green scandals are just the tip of the iceberg

A prime minister has been forced out of office over a scandal centering on a crucial raw material for the transition to renewable energy.

One of the largest sellers of carbon offsetting credits – the virtue-signalling tokens pushed by high-end restaurants and business class airlines – finds itself ensnared in a controversy over exaggerated claims.

The Telegraph has the story.

And the founder of an electric truck maker, committed to reducing carbon emissions, has been jailed for misleading investors. 

We have, recently, started to witness a succession of what might be termed “green scandals”. But, could these be just the tip of the iceberg? 

Governments around the world are throwing hundreds of billions of dollars, euros, pounds at hitting their net zero targets. And history teaches us one very simple lesson. Where there is “free” money available in such huge quantities, fraud and massive waste often follow – and this may be becoming evident now.

It has been a bad few weeks for anyone who thought all the money poured into our low carbon transition would be well spent.

This week, Portugal’s long-serving prime minister, António Costa, resigned after police raided his official residence as part of a corruption probe into his administration’s handling of lithium mining, one of the crucial materials for electric cars, and a green hydrogen project. 

The results of the investigation, of course, remain to be seen, but one has to wonder how likely it is that the Socialist Party politician will ever return to power. 

Meanwhile, South Pole, the Swiss-based leader in carbon offsetting, is fighting off allegations that it inflated the impact of the climate products it sold. It has reportedly cut ties with a huge forest protection project in Zimbabwe, and laid off staff to cope with the fall-out. 

And it is not that long since Trevor Milton, the founder of the electric truck maker Nikola was found guilty of fraud for misleading investors, precipitating a collapse in the share price of a company which, at one point, was worth more than Ford. 

Taken together, a picture is beginning to emerge of some political leaders, projects and companies finding themselves the subject of controversy, scandal and, at worst, fraud. 

Meanwhile, in a separate development, Shell is suing Greenpeace for $2m for disruption, a welcome sign that major companies are starting to defend their right to go about their business so long as they are within the law.

In a desperate scramble to meet targets that were set with seemingly little thought to how they might be met, governments are spending extraordinary amounts on green industrial policies.

In the US, Joe Biden, the president, is spending an estimated $720bn on the energy transition; with open ended tax credits the final bill is likely to break through the $1 trillion barrier. 

The EU has committed to parting with $270bn for its “Green New Deal” by the end of the decade, with more money being made available if it is needed. Mark Carney, the former Governor of the Bank of England, has grandly pledged that his climate finance action group will mobilise $130trillion in net zero investment over the next few years. The list goes on and on. 

The trouble is, these sorts of commitments, and the very real concern that success will be judged not on outcomes but rather on how much money is “invested”, throw up countless opportunities for sharp practice. 

When a new factory is being subsidised with millions of dollars, it is not that hard to overspend on consulting or management fees. When so much money is being committed to carbon offsetting, it is not hard to see how the figures might end up being inflated. 

There is a very real concern that adequate checks and balances are not being placed on some of these investments. When there is a wide government safety net, where is the incentive to ensure green projects are being delivered on time for the lowest cost possible? 

Even in the private sector, one has to wonder whether new start-ups promising to revolutionise electric vehicles, or tidal power, or fusion energy, are really worth the valuations they are being given. 

The point is this: some “green projects” don’t have to meet normal commercial criteria, and even when they are subjected to the same kind of scrutiny that a regular investment would be, red flags can be missed by woke capitalists eager to back businesses that could, they hope, change the world.

Few would disagree that we need to transition to a carbon neutral economy of course. It is a major project, and one that will require lots of investment. But right now we are going about it in the worst way possible. 

We are pursuing old-fashioned central planning, expecting politicians to pick winners rather than allowing the market discovery process to steer us towards the most cost-effective solutions. Far better to tax emissions, letting the market decide how to reduce them and which technologies to use.

This might not hand political leaders the opportunity to boast about how much they are “investing”. But industrial policy always leads to waste – and that doesn’t change because there is a green label attached. 

Of the hundreds of billions that are being spent, much of it will simply disappear into thin air, and much of the 2030s could be spent investigating and prosecuting hundreds if not thousands of frauds. Money that was desperately needed elsewhere will have been frittered away.

The myth of cheap offshore wind has been exposed

The pervasive narrative about offshore wind in recent years has been that costs are falling and that wind power is cheap. But scratch below the surface and you find that things are not quite so rosy. 

By Net Zero Watch

London, 10 November – Net Zero Watch is calling for an investigation after it was reported that ministers are considering doubling the guaranteed prices on offer for offshore windfarms next year to between £70 and £75/MWh.

The news comes after this year’s auction failed to attract any bids from offshore wind developers.

Net Zero Watch director Andrew Montford said:

“Just a few months ago, Whitehall was telling us that the cost of offshore wind was just £44/MWh. If this story is true, they will be effectively admitting that they have been lying. We must get to the bottom of why civil servants have consistently been underplaying offshore wind costs, despite repeatedly being warned that the underlying financial accounts of windfarms told a different story.”

Dr John Constable, Net Zero Watch director of energy, said:

“Consumers will continue to be forced to foot the bill for offshore wind farms that are expensive, unproductive, and destroy the economics of the grid.”

Note for editors

In 2022, the offshore wind auction cleared at £35/MWh. However, these contracts were effectively options, allowing the holders to refuse to activate their contracts, and earn high windfall profits during the energy crisis.

In 2023, this loophole was closed, forcing developers to bid prices that reflected their underlying costs. As a result, no bids where received despite the price cap being raised to £44/MWh.

Since 2017, Whitehall has claimed that offshore wind costs have fallen dramatically. Windfarm accounts show that this is not true.

These figures are in 2012 prices, so are considerably higher in today’s money.