Global warming, climate change, all these things are just a dream come true for politicians. I deal with evidence and not with frightening computer models because the seeker after truth does not put his faith in any consensus. The road to the truth is long and hard, but this is the road we must follow. People who describe the unprecedented comfort and ease of modern life as a climate disaster, in my opinion have no idea what a real problem is.
A: Airlines that would be grounded, and airports that would be closed, without a replacement for the crude oil that makes the fuels that politicians want to rid the world of.
B: Billions on this planet that exist because of all the products and various fuels made from crude oil that were not around before the 1800s.
C:Climate policies that favor wind turbines and solar panels that only generate occasional electricity but CANNOT make any products.
D: Death spiral imposed on the auto industry to only manufacture EVs just for the elites to drive a vehicle.
E:Elephant in the Room is that the ruling class, powerful elite, and media avoid energy literacy conversations as the end of crude oil that is manufactured into all the products and transportation fuels that built the world to eight billion would be the end of civilization as “unreliable electricity” from breezes and sunshine cannot manufacture anything.
F:Fossil fuels manufacture everything for the 8 billion on this planet, i.e., products and transportation fuels.
G:Give me a Break, as John Stossel often says about the very few parents, teachers, students, politicians, and those in the media who have any clues or understanding about the basis of the products in our daily lives!
H:Humanity abuses that support “clean energy” and the lack of transparency to the environmental degradation and humanity atrocities occurring in developing countries mining for those exotic minerals and metals to support the “green” movement.
I: Inventories of unsold EVs continue to grow.
J:Jumping out of an airplane with a parachute without a plan to identify the replacement for the oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil that are the basis of products, travel, and communications for the 8 billion on this planet.
K: Knowledge that renewable energy is only intermittent electricity generated from unreliable breezes and sunshine, as wind turbines and solar panels cannot manufacture anything for the 8 billion on this planet.
L: Life expectancy continues to increase from the products made from oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil.
M: Materialistic society that we’ve become over the last 200 years, and the world has populated from 1 to 8 billion because of all the products and different fuels for planes, ships, trucks, cars, military, and the space programs that did not exist before the 1800s.
N: No parts or components can be made from “just electricity” from wind turbines, solar panels, nuclear, and hydro, and for all the mining equipment used to extract the metals and minerals to build clean “electricity” as they are all made with the oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil!
O: Only occasional electricity from wind turbines and solar panels, but no products for humanity.
P: Parts and components for wind turbines, solar panels, nuclear, and hydro, and for all the mining equipment used to extract the metals and minerals to build clean “electricity” are made with the oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil!
Q: Quality of life that began after the 1800s with the development of more than 6,000 products made from the oil derivatives manufactured from oil.
R: Ridding the world of crude oil usage, i.e., jumping out of an airplane without a parachute, while there is NO plan to identify the replacement for the oil derivatives that are the basis of everything.
S: Shockingly, very few parents, teachers, students, politicians, and those in the media have any clues or understanding about the basis of the products in our daily lives!
T: Truck and automobile components and parts that CANNOT be made by wind turbines or solar panels.
U: Usage of crude oil is NOT for the generation of electricity, but to manufacture derivatives and fuels, which are the ingredients of everything needed by economies and lifestyles to exist and prosper, i.e., all products that did not exist pre-1800s.
V: Vehicles that are 100% comprised of parts and components made from the oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil.
W: Weather-related fatalities have virtually disappeared with all the products and medications available today that are made with oil derivatives from crude oil that were not available a few centuries ago.
X: Xylenes, along with the primary chemicals of ammonia, methanol, ethylene, propylene, benzene, and toluene, all of which are manufactured from crude oil but cannot be made by wind turbines or solar panels.
Y: Yet the state of California, the 4th largest economy in the world but with only 0.5% of the world’s population, believes it can change the world environment at the expense of those living in the State.
Z: Zero products being made from wind turbines and solar panels.
Happy Holidays and a Safe and Prosperous New Year to one and all!
Working with Energinet, the Danish power grid operator, we are proud to announce the launch of our record-breaking electricity interconnector between the UK and Denmark, Viking Link.
The National Grid have proudly announced the launch of the Viking Link, which will send electricity to and fro between here and Denmark:
Working with Energinet, the Danish power grid operator, we are proud to announce the launch of our record-breaking electricity interconnector between the UK and Denmark, Viking Link.
Viking Link is the world’s longest subsea and land interconnector, travelling 475 miles to join Bicker Fen substation in Lincolnshire with Revsing substation in southern Jutland, Denmark. Denmark has one of the world’s highest proportions of wind generation, so it is the perfect country to connect to, sharing clean electricity and helping the UK and EU meet 2050 net zero emission targets.
There will be huge benefits for UK consumers including cheaper, greener power and increased energy security, as the UK can call on additional power from Denmark when needed.
Initially, Viking Link will be operating at a capacity of 800MW before increasing over time to 1.4GW, powering up to 2.5 million UK homes and bringing over £500 million of cumulative savings for UK consumers over the next decade. National Grid and Energinet will be working together to bring the asset up to full capacity over the coming year.
While it may give us access to cheap wind power when there is a glut of it in Denmark, it certainly will do little to enhance energy security, as they claim.
Has it not occurred to the National Grid that when the wind is not blowing here, there is a good chance it is not blowing in Denmark either?
Remember that cold start to December, when high pressure was in charge? Wind power in Britain collapsed to well below 2 GW, a tiny fraction of its normal output:
What power we can manage to get hold of at times of low wind will be astronomically expensive. And if we try to export our surplus wind at times of glut, it will be at a loss, which the public will ultimately pay for.
No doubt it will be a nice little earner for the National Grid. But it the public who will have to pick up the bill!
According to preliminary results from the data collected from Germany’s approximately 2000 weather stations, the year 2023 was the warmest on record. So reports the Offenbach, Germany-based DWD national weather service.
According to preliminary results from the data collected from Germany’s approximately 2000 weather stations, the year 2023 was the warmest on record. So reports the Offenbach, Germany-based DWD national weather service.
Yet, official claims don’t always seem to correspond to real life observations. Despite 6th wettest year on record and mass flooding this recent month, German officials also still insist there’s a drought in many areas. Chart source: UFZ.
DWD activism: “We need to step up climate protection efforts”
2023 was the warmest year in Germany since measurements began in 1881 and “a new record year for temperatures worldwide,” says Tobias Fuchs, Director of Climate and Environment at the German Weather Service (DWD). “Climate change continues unabated. We need to step up our climate protection efforts and adapt to the damage caused by extreme weather events.”
According to the EU climate service Copernicus, 2023 will also be the warmest year ever globally.
Note, however, that according to over 60,000 stations worldwide at temperatureglobal, 2023 was barely above a tenth of a degree warmer. Currently the global temperature is a comparatively cool 14.45°C
In Germany, 2023 was dominated by warm and humid conditions with high levels of precipitation, which made last year one of the wettest on record. According to the DWD, all months in 2023 were too warm. The average temperature in 2023 reached a mean of 10.6 degrees Celsius (°C), more than 1°C above the 1991-2020 reference period. A mild start followed by a hot summer and a warm fall led to the new record.
6th wettest
In terms of precipitation, it was the sixth wettest year since records began, with over 20 percent more precipitation than normal. Around 958 liters per square meter (l/m²) precipitation fell in the year, Normal is 791 l/m². The northeast of Germany remained comparatively “dry” with widespread amounts of around 600 l/m², reports the DWD.
Sunnier than normal
There was 5% more sunshine than usual, at around 1,764 hours. Normal is 1665 hours (1991 – 2020 reference period). It was sunniest near the coast and in the south, with over 2,000 hours in some areas. In comparison, it remained cloudier in the low mountain ranges with around 1,600 hours.
Heartland Institute Board Member Steve Milloy — founder of E&E Legal and Junkscience.com — was on Dagen & Duffy on the Fox Business Channel this week debunking the myth that July was the hottest month in human existence, and make the point that carbon dioxide is NOT driving warming global temperatures at all.
Heartland Institute Board Member Steve Milloy — founder of E&E Legal and Junkscience.com — was on Dagen & Duffy on the Fox Business Channel this week debunking the myth that July was the hottest month in human existence, and make the point that carbon dioxide is NOT driving warming global temperatures at all.
As Miilloy points out: “Over the last eight years there has been no warming despite 500 billion tons of emissions. How can that possibly be?”
Milloy also shares the outrage of the hosts that our children are being indoctrinated about climate, not taught about it, and it is causing a growing mental health crisis — and not just among kids.
Nygren says he recently learned of the Jan. 8 launch of the Vulcan Centaur carrying the Peregrine Mission One. The lander will carry some payloads from a company known to provide memorial services by shipping human cremated remains to the Moon.
Navajo Nation president asks NASA to delay Moon launch over possible human remains
Navajo Nation President Buu Nygren has asked NASA to delay a scheduled launch to the Moon that could include cremated remains.
Nygren says he recently learned of the Jan. 8 launch of the Vulcan Centaur carrying the Peregrine Mission One. The lander will carry some payloads from a company known to provide memorial services by shipping human cremated remains to the Moon.
Nygren wants the launch delayed and the tribe consulted immediately. He noted the Moon is sacred to numerous Indigenous cultures and that depositing human remains on it is “tantamount to desecration.”
“This memorandum reinforced the commitment to Executive Order 13175 of November 6, 2000,” President Nygren wrote. “Additionally, the Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Interagency Coordination and Collaboration for the Protection of Indigenous Sacred Sites, which you and several other members of the Administration signed in November 2021, further underscores the requirement for such consultation.”
He added this explicitly recognizes that sacred sites can consist of “places that afford views of important areas of land, water, or of the sky and celestial bodies.”
The JHI research was funded by the Scottish Government. What chance was there that JHI would conclude that there was nothing to worry about? Instead, we get a new dose of groundless scaremongering.
Euan has another letter in his local paper, the Press & Journal:
Is Scotland’s climate really in the midst of breakdown?
Sir, The James Hutton Institute (JHI) published an editorial in the P&J on December 19th that made many extraordinary claims about Scotland’s climate changing faster than expected.
“We are now in the midst of a climate breakdown – our ecosystems that regulate the climate and enable food production are degrading and are at risk of collapse”.
In truth, global food production is at an all-time high based largely on ammonium nitrate fertilizer (made from natural gas) and the CO2 fertilisation effect. Higher atmospheric CO2 promotes more plant growth. In the past, atmospheric CO2 has been much higher, for example about 2000 ppm during the Jurassic (5 times higher than today), and the planet and dinosaurs flourished.
“Researchers also warned of an increase in water scarcity in the near future stating it could threaten agriculture, forestry and animal habitats…”
And
“We are making Scotland more resilient to flooding…”
I have no problem with investment in flood defences, but are Lochs Tay, Rannoch, Ness, Lomond and Morar really on the verge of drying up? Scotland is one of the wettest countries in Europe.
“Researchers say that in certain parts of Scotland temperatures have risen by 2.5oC in February – with the average of 16.9oC in the period from 1960-89 increasing to 19.4oC during the three decades from 1990-2019.”
Mean February temperatures in Scotland are of the order 2 to 4oC and have barely changed since 1885. Mean July temperatures in Scotland are of the order 12 to 15oC. JHI need to explain where their data come from since official Met Office data do not support their claims.
I have studied numerous Met Office graphs of climate data for Scotland – mean seasonal and annual temperatures 1885 to 2023 and rainfall 1835 to 2023. The graphs show a large amount of variation from one year to the next. There are gradual trends of increasing annual temperature and rainfall that began mid 19th century, as the UK emerged from the Little Ice Age and continue to this day. The upward trends begin well before the surge in fossil fuel emissions, that occurred post WWII. I see no evidence from these graphs to support any of claims made by JHI.
The JHI research was funded by the Scottish Government. What chance was there that JHI would conclude that there was nothing to worry about? Instead, we get a new dose of groundless scaremongering.
Expert shares the year’s worst climate hypocrites, from King Charles to John Kerry – ‘Climate Depot’ publisher Marc Morano ranks the worst climate hypocrites of 2023 on ‘Fox & Friends Weekend.’
Rachel Campos-Duffy: Mirror mirror on the wall. Which climate activist was the most hypocritical of them all. Marc Morano, we love him, he has all the names and he joins us next.
2023 was a year full of climate activists, celebrities, and billionaires, telling you to cut down on carbon emissions while they live life in luxury. So who tops the list of biggest climate Hypocrites this year? Well our next guest can name a few. Climate Depot publisher Marc Morano joins us now in a very snazzy red suit.
Marc Morano: I’m ready to celebrate. I take award ceremonies very seriously.
Rachel Campos-Duffy: I love it. So who tops this Oscar?
Marc Morano: Why don’t we start at the bottom, and then we’ll work our way up. We start with King Charles. King Charles flew to the COP 28 UN climate Summit in a private jet, and he recently founded the Terra Carta, which is the Earth Charter seeking nature rights, which is trying to grant nature, trees, lakes, rivers, equal rights to humans. At the same time, King Charles, formerly Prince Charles, is issuing climate tipping points and here’s the thing Rachel he has servants reportedly iron his shoelaces, and he travels with a portable toilet. So I think he’s probably the last person on planet Earth who should be lecturing us about climate change.
Rachel Campos-Duffy: It’s so funny because the thing about all these people is they’re all really weird. They’re weirdos. So continue, who’s next on the list?
Marc Morano: The UN cop 28 the Climate Summit itself. It had the largest carbon footprint in the history of climate summits. I’ve been to 18 out of the last 20 of these climate summits all over the world, this one in Dubai had almost over 100,000 participants filled the runways with private jets — the UK had three different high government officials arrive in three separate private jets. But that wasn’t all, Rachel. As CNN was telling us we needed ‘carbon passports’ to travel — us the unwashed masses –the UN climate was also planning on restricting our meat eating as John Kerry announced he wanted to go after agriculture. But at the UN climate summit, they were serving wagyu beef, Philly cheese steaks, they had lavish restaurants serving meat. There were no insects on the menu and there was no Bill Gates lab-grown meat either.
Next on the list is before we get to the final winner here is none other than Bill Gates himself. Bill Gates has literally had the world’s largest carbon footprint for years. He’s pushed for longer COVID lockdown during the same weeks he was bidding for bidding on the world’s largest private jet transport company, and Bill Gates has a $43 million Oceanfront home and he’s got a $30,000 a month electricity bill again. This guy has no business lecturing anyone on climate change.
Which leads us to the winner here if you want to do a drum roll.
Rachel Campos-Duffy: I will do it.
Marc Morano: The winner is John Kerry, and John Kerry gets this award easily for the end of 2023. We have to give the number one climate hypocrite award to John Kerry because he stood before Congress at a hearing and was grilled by a Congressman where he repeatedly said ‘I don’t own a private jet, I’ve never owned a private jet.’ And it wasn’t until about 45 minutes later that a congressman grilled him and said wait a minute, your wife owned private jets for decades and then finally sold them when the negative media came out, and John Kerry was forced to say, ‘Yes my wife owns one. Yes, I’ve flown in HER private jets.’
Key video clips of Kerry at 2023 hearing:
🚨🚨Climate goon, John Kerry gets caught lying about his private jet👇😂
“One of the most persistent LIES that I hear is that WE own a PRIVATE JET, I don’t own a private jet and I’ve never owned a private jet”
Morano: If that’s not lying to Congress, I’m not sure what is. So John Kerry gets the award. Let’s celebrate that.
One last final note, and this is an actual positive award to Abigail Disney, the Disney heiress. We’ve got to give her props. She has come out and stopped flying private jets. She is one of the wealthiest heiresses in the world, heir to the Disney fortune. She now wants to ban private jets for the 1% wealthiest people in the world and I say she’s got it right. We need to support Abigail Disney the Disney heiress, because any of these climate rules they come up with should apply to the John Kerrys and the Bill Gates, and King Charles types first. Let’s experiment on them with travel bans, restrictions on meat eating, insect-eating, And only then should we consider these restrictions for the rest of us. Let’s support what the Disney heiress is doing.
Rachel Campos-Duffy: Sadly, all of these bans will do nothing to solve the so-called climate problem. All this is doing is impoverishing Americans, impoverishing the Third World, causing more hunger, and famines. It’s funny because they’re hypocrites, and it’s so obvious. It’s sad because it has real-world consequences on on people’s families and lives.
Marc, I love how you always bring this to our attention. Wishing you a Happy New Year and thanks for joining us with your awesome list.
Morano: Thank you, Rachel appreciate it. Happy New Year.
Rachel Campos-Duffy: Mirror mirror on the wall. Which climate activist was the most hypocritical of them all. Marc Morano, we love him, he has all the names and he joins us next…So who tops the list of biggest climate Hypocrites this year? Well our next guest can name a few. Climate Depot publisher Marc Morano joins us now in a very snazzy red suit.
Marc Morano: I’m ready to celebrate. I take award ceremonies very seriously.
Rachel Campos-Duffy: I love it. So who tops this Oscar?
Marc Morano: Climate Hypocrite #4: We start with King Charles. … King Charles, formerly Prince Charles, is issuing climate tipping points and here’s the thing Rachel he has servants reportedly iron his shoelaces, and he travels with a portable toilet. So I think he’s probably the last person on planet Earth who should be lecturing us.
Climate Hypocrite #3: The UN cop 28 the Climate Summit itself. It had the largest carbon footprint in the history of climate summits. .. As CNN was telling us we needed ‘carbon passports’ to travel — us the unwashed masses –the UN climate was also planning on restricting our meat eating as John Kerry announced he wanted to go after agriculture. But at the UN climate summit, they were serving wagyu beef, Philly cheese steaks, they had lavish restaurants serving meat. There were no insects on the menu and there was no Bill Gates lab-grown meat either.
Climate Hypocrite #2: Next on the list is before we get to the final winner here is none other than Bill Gates himself. Bill Gates has literally had the world’s largest carbon footprint for years. Gates has a $43 million Oceanfront home and he’s got a $30,000 a month electricity bill again.
Climate Hypocrite #1: The winner is John Kerry, and John Kerry gets this award easily for the end of 2023. We have to give the number one climate hypocrite award to John Kerry because he stood before Congress at a hearing and was grilled by a Congressman where he repeatedly said ‘I don’t own a private jet, I’ve never owned a private jet.’ And it wasn’t until about 45 minutes later that a congressman grilled him and said wait a minute, your wife owned private jets for decades and then finally sold them when the negative media came out, and John Kerry was forced to say, ‘Yes my wife owns one. Yes, I’ve flown in HER private jets.’
Morano: An actual positive award to Abigail Disney, the Disney heiress. We’ve got to give her props. She has come out and stopped flying private jets. She is one of the wealthiest heiresses in the world, heir to the Disney fortune. She now wants to ban private jets for the 1% wealthiest people in the world and I say she’s got it right. We need to support Abigail Disney the Disney heiress, because any of these climate rules they come up with should apply to the John Kerrys and the Bill Gates, and King Charles types first. Let’s experiment on them with travel bans, restrictions on meat eating, insect-eating, And only then should we consider these restrictions for the rest of us. Let’s support what the Disney heiress is doing. ..
Rachel Campos-Duffy: Marc, I love how you always bring this to our attention. Wishing you a Happy New Year and thanks for joining us with your awesome list.
After the Alliance for Responsible Citizenship (ARC)* conference finished in London, I caught a British Airlines flight to Seattle, to visit with my daughter. She has just recently moved there, to begin a PhD at the University of Washington.
After the Alliance for Responsible Citizenship (ARC)* conference finished in London, I caught a British Airlines flight to Seattle, to visit with my daughter. She has just recently moved there, to begin a PhD at the University of Washington.
The view from BA53 was of snow covered tundra as we flew from Greenland, then over Baffin Island towards Hudson Strait near Repulse Bay. The outside air temperature was showing as minus 23 degrees Celsius (minus 74 Fahrenheit) at 11,576 metres (37,979 feet) altitude. I could see deep, evenly-spaced channels cut along the eastern edge of the island, presumably cut by water from the snow as it melts each spring. I assume the snow is melted by the Sun. I can’t image it is melted by the atmosphere even though the atmosphere is, I am repeatedly told, on average some one-degree warmer now, because of all the carbon dioxide.
In Seattle, my daughter took me to the most wonderful second-hand bookshop, Magus Books. I purchased several books, as I inevitably do when I visit a bookshop, including Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism and Progress. That was after I checked the book’s index and saw it had a good number of pages on ‘climate change’: pages 136 – 154.
I was hoping to find some ‘reason’ and ‘science’ concerning ‘climate change’. I was hoping to better understand the mainstream view given all the obfuscation I had just experienced at the ARC conference in London. All these talks on ‘Energy and the Environment’ beginning with an acknowledgement that carbon dioxide causes warming without any explanation of how and why.
Even Richard Lindzen suggested at ARC that I should be more accepting of the mainstream historical temperature reconstructions, more accepting of the idea there has been a 1-degree temperature increase and not so concerned about what he mentioned as some slight discrepancies associated with the transition to electronic probes for measuring air temperatures.
Scott Hargreaves, Richard Lindzen and Jennifer Marohasy just before the ARC Energy and Environment dinner.
I know I have a tendency to go down ‘rabbit holes’ and get into a level of detail many find too tedious. Here, I thought as I read the cover of Pinker’s book, here was a book written by a most reasonable person and with a section on climate change. It might help me take a few steps back, as Lindzen was suggesting, and see how more mainstream intellectuals describe the physics.
After all, I reasoned, for anyone to be convinced that human-caused global warming is real and caused by carbon dioxide, the Earth must have physical properties that permit it.
According to Wikipedia, Steven Arthur Pinker is a Canadian American cognitive psychologist, psycholinguist, popular science author, and public intellectual. He is an advocate of evolutionary psychology and the computational theory of mind. Pinker is the Johnstone Family Professor of Psychology at Harvard University. And this book was ostensibly promoting ‘reason’ and had a section on climate change. And I know many of my colleagues are fans of Steven Pinker, as they are fans of Jordon Peterson another Canadian psychologist.
Scanning inside the book, I read: anthropogenic (human-caused) climate change is ‘the most vigorously challenged scientific hypothesis in history’.
Great I thought, Pinker is going to lay out the arguments, the case for and against.
But he didn’t and he doesn’t. Much in the same way John Anderson went on about the importance of debate and discussion and Western civilisation being special because of science at the ARC conference while at every opportunity avoiding any meaningful discussion on the same.
Rather, as I discovered only after I purchased the book by Steven Pinker, he writes that,
By now, all the major challenges – such as that global temperatures have stopped rising, that they only seem to be rising because they were measured in urban heat islands, or that they really are rising but only because the sun is getting hotter have been refuted …
Well. I thought, he might have acknowledged that for much of the twentieth century temperatures were actually falling. I also tried to have some discussion with Bjorn Lomborg about this. But he just defers to Judith Curry.
Further more, global temperatures could be rising due to something other than ‘the sun getting hotter’, but he’s clearly avoiding the core issue, or at least the one that has been concerning me more recently, exactly how carbon dioxide causes the warming. What is the physical mechanism causing carbon dioxide to warm the Earth and the oceans … or is it just that carbon dioxide is warming the atmosphere?
A page earlier Pinker explains the theory thus: we have excess carbon dioxide from the burning of wood, coal, oil, and gas that ‘wafts into the atmosphere’, where it ‘traps heat radiating from the Earth’s surface.’
But he has not explained to me how this causes the temperature of the Earth to rise, though he claims it does. He writes,
If the emission of greenhouse gases continues, the Earth’s average temperature will rise to at least 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) above the preindustrial level by the 21st century …
This was more or less as much detail as Bjorn Lomborg, Michael Shellenberger and Steven Koonin could manage at ARC.
We know that carbon dioxide levels were much higher in the distant past, and temperatures also, but what exactly is the physical mechanism that causes the warming of the Earth and the oceans?
If Pinker, Shellenberger and Lomborg, can’t explain this, which they don’t, well they are just repeating what the King says. Everyone knows King Charles III is a great proponent of global warming, he insists we believe as much.
Pinker claims to have written a book about reason, but he doesn’t even acknowledge any one of the very valid challenges to this theory of human-caused global warming.
It was like this at the ARC conference in London, there was this assumption that everyone knows carbon dioxide causes warming of the Earth and the oceans and that as atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide rise we risk even more warming, but no-one was prepared to engage in any detail or explain the physical mechanisms. Certainly no-one wanted to explain to me how the spike that was occurring in global temperatures while I was in London, how it had been caused by carbon dioxide.
Satellite measurements of atmospheric temperatures do show an increase since 1979, and atmospheric global temperatures have been spiking since at least July, though there was no mention of this during Will Happer’s tour in September, nor at the ARC conference in London beginning late October. If we really care about climate change, we should want to know everything about it and we should want to talk about the spike so evident since July 2023 in global atmospheric temperatures.
It got me thinking, how do I explain succinctly in plain English, why I have come to conclude, that on average, carbon dioxide is not warming planet Earth – not at all!
It got me thinking, I really haven’t explained why I don’t subscribe to even the Will Happer view of global warming: that carbon dioxide is causing some warming, just not much more than 1 degrees Celsius. I have pressed Happer for more mathematics and calculations and more explanation as to how he gets to his 1 degree of warming. But he has not been forthcoming on any of this. There is of course the very popular IPA YouTube from his Australian tour. But it doesn’t have enough detail for me.
If we are going to work from average values, which is how Happer, Lindzen and the IPCC present information, then I just can’t understand how considering overall energy budgets and averages, how carbon dioxide is going to warm the Earth.
To put it very crudely, and appealing to only known physical properties of the Earth: the average temperature of the lower atmosphere is just not warm enough.
The lower atmosphere is certainly not warm enough to warm the oceans that are on average17 degrees Celsius.
And certainly the ocean is a lot warmer where I go scuba diving which is mostly in the Tropics. In the Tropics, ocean temperatures mostly range between 20 and 30 degrees Celsius. Which got me thinking: how can the atmosphere warm the ocean in the Tropics and Subtropics when ocean temperatures are so much warmer than the temperature of even the lower atmosphere and all year around.
To be continued.
This is part 4 of a series that I began with my visit to London late October, you can read part 3 by clicking here.
Jenn descending to 10 metres at Stanley Reef at the Great Barrier Reef, July 7, 2022, with the Sun shinning through. I do understand how the Sun warms the oceans, and how the oceans warm the atmosphere. But how exactly does the atmosphere warm the oceans?Water temperatures at Yongala, not far from Stanley Reef, have been measured at different depths for a good number of seasons now. It is the changing declination of the Sun, that causes the seasons, that causes the cycles so evident in this chart. But I can’t see any overall rise in water temperatures as one might expect given the rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide.
_____________________________
* According to Wikipedia, ARC was founded by four people including Paul Marshall. It also says: “He is the co-founder and chairman of Marshall Wace LLP, one of Europe’s largest hedge fund groups.[8] Marshall Wace[9] was founded in 1997 by Marshall and Ian Wace.[10] At the time, Marshall Wace was one of the first hedge funds in London.[6] The company started with $50 million, half of which was from George Soros.[6]”
John Kerry tilts at reality like Don Quixote tilted at windmills. While the 28th UN-related Conference of Parties (COP 28) was wrapping up in Dubai, America’s Special Presidential Envoy for Climate fumed about funding and building new coal-fired electricity generating plants. He declared himself a “militant” opponent of coal. He very personally decried those who would build a new coal plant.
John Kerry tilts at reality like Don Quixote tilted at windmills. While the 28th UN-related Conference of Parties (COP 28) was wrapping up in Dubai, America’s Special Presidential Envoy for Climate fumed about funding and building new coal-fired electricity generating plants. He declared himself a “militant” opponent of coal. He very personally decried those who would build a new coal plant.
Yet he knows full well that China has funded and built over a hundred coal-fired plants in the past year alone and is building a staggering 234 gigawatts of coal-fired generation. Each gigawatt of generation is equivalent to a new 1000 megawatt coal plant.
Those mind-boggling numbers and the respective increase in emissions of CO2 dwarf hard-won CO2 reductions in the U.S. and Europe. China alone is the mega, indeed, giga windmill Kerry is tilting at.
COP 28 was hosted by the oil-rich United Arab Emirates. The leader of a giant Abu Dhabi-owned oil company was the conference chairman who actually advocated for the importance of fossil fuels in the future of the global economy, stating that “there’s no science to support demands for a phase out of fossil fuels.”
The next host country for COP 29 is another oil-wealth producer, Azerbaijan. The major petro-state producers in the Middle East plus Russia, Algeria, Guyana, Iran, Venezuela, Azerbaijan, Indonesia, and other nations are all looking to expand production for the foreseeable future.
The consuming world is paying them handsomely to do so. They may pay lip-service to a politically and publicly popular climate-change narrative, but given the global economic reality, there is no reason to believe that producers will ever give up their primary wealth creators, oil and gas, and for that matter, coal. Nor will the energy consuming nations, given the symbiosis between producers and consumers.
According to the UN, some 70,000 attended COP 28, with the wealthier, including Mr. Kerry, arriving on their jet-fuel consuming, CO2-creating private jets. The conference was a boon to Dubai’s tourist industry, and a remarkable destination for tourists. But, in the end, the COP 28 final statement incorporates only hortatory language to “transition” away from fossil fuels, not a pledge to “phase-out” fossil fuels.
Hard-core climate activists, led by Kerry, aggressively pursued “phase-out language” but did not get it. That means China, India and developing nations all over the world will continue to burn coal to get their electricity.
The benefit for others
They will continue to need oil and gas to drive their cars, power their economies and use refined derivatives of oil and gas that are part of just about everything produced in the modern world. When John Kerry declares that there should be no coal plants “permitted anywhere in the world,” his words are applied in fact only to the United States, not “anywhere in the world.”
As a result of the COP 28, the big global CO2 emitters will still be able to produce fossil fuel-based wealth, while the Biden administration will continue to try to kill coal — plus oil and gas to a lesser extent (for now) — and thereby undermine America’s industrial and manufacturing sectors and residential ratepayers here at home.
Never mind impending blackouts as coal and gas plants are prematurely “retired” (83 gigawatts worth) resulting from of “green” government regulatory policies and massive taxpayer-funded programs to “go green.” In the Pittsburgh region alone, two coal-fired power plants will be prematurely retired this year because new rules make them uneconomic — rules handed down not from Harrisburg, but from Washington. Rules that pay no attention to how much the area needs that power.
States like Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Kentucky are hard hit by the government’s war on coal — a war that doesn’t apply to miners in Russia, Brazil, India and China, to name just a few countries that live off coal.
The U.S. has some 450 years of coal reserves, the world’s largest. Pennsylvania has some of the finest bituminous coal in the world, coal that consuming and developing countries around the world covet. The state still has nearly 5,000 workers employed in the coal industry. And the administration wants to give it all up.
Diminishing the democracies
Coal is the major target now, but Kerry and company are coming for the CO2 emitted from natural gas next. Marcellus Shale, the largest shale formation in the country, providing natural gas and wealth to Pennsylvania and beyond, is at risk if the climate alarmists and regulatory bodies in Washington have their way.
With the still-developing world, led by China and India, rapidly expanding coal-fired power generation in addition to their increasing appetite for oil and natural gas, squeezing America on CO2 emissions simply makes no sense. Such a strategy only diminishes America and Europe, while empowering China, Russia, and the petro-states.
It cripples the world’s democracies while strengthening the authoritarians. And it does nothing to save the environment.
Just before Christmas the government quietly put out new emissions rules they know Australians won’t like. “Tis the season for dropping press release bombs.
We elect an Australian government but get the EU rules
Just before Christmas the government quietly put out new emissions rules they know Australians won’t like. “Tis the season for dropping press release bombs.
Tough new petrol standards will be introduced at the end of 2025, potentially increasing the cost of fuel while expanding consumer access to leading-edge, mostly European, ultra-efficient vehicles.
By forcing Australians to buy expensive, unreliable cars prone to exploding, the government will stop families going on holidays, burn down a few homes, and keep friends from visiting each other, unless the nation of petrol-heads keep driving their old cars and Utes, Cuba style. For all this pain, the new rules will “slash 18 million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions” which is equivalent to taking 280,000 imaginary cars off the road, or cutting 0.15% of annual emissions from China. i.e. nothing.
All Peter Dutton, the opposition leader in Australia needs to do to win the next election is to stand up for drivers in Australia.
Apparently Australians need to import more EU cars to save German industry or something:
…the government aims to spur greater imports of vehicles that car makers currently do not sell in Australia because the fuel is too dirty for their highly calibrated engines.
The press release reads like it was written by the EU aristocratic snobs, not the Australian Labor Party.
This is no place for an EV.
The government will force you to subsidize the EVs while pretending the manufacturers are doing it:
The trick in the new Command Economy is to make devious rules that force the market to come up with strange and expensive ways to satisfy communist rules.
The new rules mean cars and light commercial vehicles sold from December 2025 will need to meet so-called “Euro 6d noxious emissions standards”. Years in the making, they are separate to a push by the government to introduce a “fuel efficiency standard” that would force car makers to sell more EVs by imposing penalties on the sales of higher-emitting vehicles such as utes, SUVs and four-wheel-drives.
In other words, if the punters buy the cars they want, and not the cars the government wants, then the prices of the “limited” number of popular cars will rise. The penalties that will have to be imposed by the car makers are really subsidies in disguise. They will add thousands in costs to the popular cars so they can use the extra profits to sell the unpopular cars at discount prices.
The net result is that billionaires will keep buying whatever they want to buy, and if it’s an EV it will be subsidized by the workers, who will have to pay more for their own “higher emitting” cars that will still be able to drive as far as the outer suburbs, or God forbid, a country town.
This is a boilerplate policy that been copied from overseas. It’s a blueprint of the global billionaire class. It would mean newer smaller petrol cars will subsidize bigger EV’s, and as Craig Kelly says, put lives at risk on country roads. The small car passengers will be more likely to die in crashes with cows, trees and heavier EV’s. Momentum always wins. Or our children will only be able to drive cheap Chinese-EV’s.
Minister for Infrastructure and Transport Catherine King said the changes would save lives.
“The changes, along with fuel efficiency standards are part of delivering cleaner, cheaper-to-run cars and tackling transport costs for Australian families and businesses,” said Ms King.
Time Australians stood up and paid attention.
Those elected are not on our side, And their contempt for us barely hide, As the truth slowly dawns, That these globalist pawns, Are all to the doom cult allied.
You must be logged in to post a comment.