{"id":265942,"date":"2023-07-07T18:38:08","date_gmt":"2023-07-07T16:38:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=265942"},"modified":"2023-07-07T18:38:11","modified_gmt":"2023-07-07T16:38:11","slug":"national-academies-climate-junk-summit-7-11-7-12-is-open-to-all","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=265942","title":{"rendered":"National Academies \u201cClimate Junk Summit\u201d 7\/11-7\/12 is open to all"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From CFACT<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By\u00a0David Wojick<\/a>\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The U.S. National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM) are holding a \u201cClimate Crossroads Summit\u201d on July 11-12. Virtual attendance is open to all.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

See https:\/\/mailchi.mp\/nas\/youre-invited-climate-crossroads-summit-pvwfmxkgln?e=1fb63d8b69<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

These \u201cAcademies\u201d are supposed to give objective advice to Congress but they might as well be the Green Party of Germany. Here is your chance to hear ridiculous alarmism at the highest national level.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The website say \u201cThere will be numerous discussions and other opportunities for virtual participants to engage throughout the program.\u201d I will be surprised if skeptics are allowed to speak, but we can try.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The supposed \u201ccrossroads\u201d is the usual nonsense refrain that we have to (finally) act fast before it is too late. Here is how NASEM puts it: \u201cThe global community is in a crucial window for addressing the many threats climate change poses to the planet and society. To meet these challenges, the nation and the world must harness the full complement of knowledge and skills across science, engineering, and medicine.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So \u201ccrucial window \u2014 many threats \u2014 nation and world must\u201d. In this case we must harness knowledge, which is an obscure but entertaining metaphor.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It might be hard to sit through two long days of this green junk but I encourage people to at least look in a bit. This is what Congress is getting from the once great National Academies that we are paying big bucks for. Confusion in a green wrapper.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Also under the big green tent, the National Academy of Engineering (NAE) has dedicated the latest issue of its quarterly magazine \u201cThe Bridge\u201d to climate alarmism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The official title is \u201cEngineering the Energy Transition\u201d which is explained thusly: \u201cThis issue explores the energy transition needed to address the mounting threats of climate change. The articles are an excellent resource to help inform meaningful decisions and steps for energy-related contributions to reduce carbon emissions.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

See https:\/\/www.nae.edu\/294933\/Summer-Bridge-on-Engineering-the-Energy-Transition<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

So \u201cmounting threats \u2014 energy transition \u2014 reduce carbon emissions\u201d. More pure green junk.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

They buy right into net zero. The NAE President\u2019s piece is titled: \u201cPresident\u2019s Introduction The Goal of a Net Zero Carbon Energy System: The Importance of How\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Given that a net zero energy system is impossible it is no surprise that there are no real how\u2019s here. Just the usual arm waving and exhortations to somehow come up with something. But I suppose somehow is a how of sorts. Okay not really. Every net zero \u201cplan I have seen is not a plan, just a wishlist. Wishes are not plans.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If they ever actually did the engineering it would quickly become obvious that net zero is wildly impossible. For example I calculated roughly what it would take, using batteries as backup, to simply replace today\u2019s US fossil fueled power generation with wind and solar. At today\u2019s prices it comes to around $150 trillion for the batteries, which is nearly seven times annual GDP. See my study and others at https:\/\/www.cfact.org\/netzerorealitycoalition\/<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The net zero energy transition Bridge issue has an article on storage as well, of course. Here is a summary excerpt, where LDES stands for Long Duration Energy Storage which does not exist:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cProgress in the integration of renewable energy requires both significant increases in the amount of energy storage on the grid and the development of new types of energy storage that can ensure reliability over days and seasons. While there is cause for optimism on this front, continued investment in research, development, and deployment of LDES technologies is crucial to enable electric grid decarbonization.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is a wish, not a plan. And so it is with net zero everywhere we look. There is no plan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You can watch the summit of net zero nonsense or read about the somehows. In either case the US National Academies have clearly lost sight of their mission, blinded by the green light of alarmism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Congress should ignore NASEM.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Author<\/h2>\n\n\n\n