Germany’s Monumental Environmental Fail: CO2 Emissions Rise Despite €Trillions Blown on Subsidised Wind & Solar

And after a €1TRILLION of other people’s money burnt on Energiewende, ideologically-green Germany is reverting *back* to CO2-intensive coal with the biggest coal-fired power expansion in her history planned over the next ten years.

What a sick joke.

What a scam.

What a giant con.

https://climatism.wordpress.com/2016/03/28/green-german-lies/

STOP THESE THINGS

report-card

In Germany, around €190 billion has already been burnt on renewable subsidies; currently the green energy levy costs €56 million every day. And, the level of subsidy for wind and solar sees Germans paying €20 billion a year for power that gets sold on the power exchange for around €2 billion.

Energy poverty is a feature of daily life for hundreds of thousands; the promise of millions of groovy ‘green’ jobs is little more than a cruel hoax; and, adding insult to injury, the pretext for the insanity – the reduction of CO2 emissions in the electricity sector – hasn’t quite panned out as Green edicts predicted: emissions are, instead, rising fast.

If the justification for subsidies that will top €1 tillion was cutting CO2 gas emissions, the report card for 2016 on Germany’s Energiewende should score a big fat ‘F’.

Failure…Hundreds Of Billions For Nothing As Germany CO2 Reductions…

View original post 927 more words


Is Carbon Dioxide A Pollutant?

co2

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

Driving down on Saturday, we stopped off at Crickley Country Park in Gloucestershire.

On the information board there was the usual eco stuff we often see these days. At the top it mentioned (roughly)

Carbon Dioxide is a pollutant and is harmful to the environment.

According to the Oxford Dictionary, the definition of pollution is;

The presence in or introduction into the environment of a substance which has harmful or poisonous effects.

Clearly, CO2 is not poisonous, and far from being harmful is absolutely essential for life on Earth as we know it.

At best, the only argument can be that an increase in CO2 levels MAY, on balance, be harmful, but equally a reduction could be even more harmful.

Unfortunately, this sort of sloppy, lazy propaganda is far too common these days.

Crickley Park is owned and run by Gloucestershire County Council. It is sad we cannot count on…

View original post 8 more words


China won’t classify CO2 as a pollutant in new environment law

102_2_co2-logo.png

Umm, perhaps because China is pragmatic and still ‘scientific’ enough not to yield to the radical environmentalist con that the colourless, odorlesss, trace gas and plant food carbon dioxide (CO2) is a “pollutant”.

The big lie of climate alarmist’s is to conflate real ‘carbon’ pollution (soot) with CO2. China sees this a mile away and isn’t influenced by ‘carbon’ propaganda and western eco-political correctness.

Yet again – smart China, dumb West.

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

View original post


Can’t See Forests for the Theory

“Too bad so much effort and funding is wasted on IPCC circuses.”

The global warming aka climate change meme is simply the latest attempt by leftists to trick society into remaking itself in their image. It was never about science. It was always about power and money.

Science Matters

Warming alarmists see no good coming out of rising CO2 and the current climate optimum, and their warnings extend to forests as well. So in love with their theory of global warming, they cannot see the forests as they are, and as documented in numerous research studies.

Claim: Forest growth is diminished by higher CO2 and warmer summers.
Fact: CO2 increases have improved forest health.

Claim: Forest areas will be hard-hit by future droughts.
Fact: No trend in droughts is discernible.

Claim: Warmer temperatures increase damage from pests and pathogens.
Fact: Enhanced CO2 is making forests more resilient to diseases and infestations.

Claim: Old growth forests will not sequester CO2 as young forests do.
Fact: Rising CO2 has given new life even to aging forests.

Basic Vegetation Biology (from Bill Illis here)

Almost ALL C3 pathway vegetation (trees, bushes, wheat, rice and 95% of all plants) are CO2-starved except in extremely…

View original post 1,244 more words


Researchers Against CO2

Stanford university trying to tell us that CO2 is bad for plant life ⁉️

We truly are living in the age of collective eco-insanity.

Though not surprising coming out of the University that is home to infamous population freak Paul Ehrlich and housed the now deceased 1970’s ‘global cooling’ alarmist then ‘global warming’ alarmist Stephen Schneider.

This latest dose of taxpayer funded junk science is yet another example of why I am a devout climate change sceptic.

More on Ehrlich and Schneider here:

• Stanford Universities Paul Ehrlich wanted to poison black Africans to fight Climate Change.
https://climatism.wordpress.com/2016/04/24/stanford-universities-paul-ehrlich-wanted-to-poison-black-africans-to-fight-climate-change/

• Stanford Universities Stephen Schneider went from ‘cooling’ alarmist to ‘warming alarmist in just four years.
https://climatism.wordpress.com/2015/04/14/schneider-went-from-cooling-alarmist-to-warming-alarmist-in-just-four-years/

Science Matters


The media are reporting stories with a new theme: More CO2 is bad for plant life. This flies in the face of biochemistry, but the activist motivation is clear: They want people thinking CO2 is bad in every way. They don’t want the warming scare undermined by the idea that CO2 along with warming actually helps plant life and agriculture.

The current stories are coming from researchers involved with an outdoor laboratory site called Jasper Ridge, affiliated with Stanford University, my alma mater and home to famous alarmist Stephen Schneider (deceased). The headlines are occasioned by a new paper appearing Sept. 5 in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, authored by Chris Field, director of the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment..

Headlines Claim, Details Deny

Headlines and claims like those below are appearing this week, but as we shall see, the details do not support the conclusions…

View original post 1,378 more words


Virtually indistinguishable – Comparing early 20th Century warming to late 20th Century warming

If human CO2 influence was negligible during early 20th Century warming, what influence (if any) did CO2 have in late 20th Century warming and any future theorised warming?

CO2 sensitivity – the great unknown and unanswered climate question, yet we base trillions of dollars of taxpayers money on radical climate policy and climate fixes (wind/solar), based on predictive models that assume CO2 is the fundamental ‘climate control knob’.

Doesn’t sound very sciency or smart to me. Though, welcome to “Climate Crisis Inc.”, the trillion dollar eco-crisis we had to have to satisfy a multitude of political and professional ambitions.

Watts Up With That?

Guest essay by Andy May

Many writers, including Professor Richard Lindzen and Ed Caryl have noticed the remarkable similarity in global warming observed from around 1910 to 1944 and 1975 to 2009. The similarity in slopes exists in all global surface temperature datasets. Figure 1 shows the HadCRUT version 4 dataset and the NASA GISS land (GHCN v3) and ocean (ERSST v4) temperature dataset. We’ve identified the two periods of interest on the figure. All datasets also show some cooling between 1945 and 1975.

clip_image002

Figure 1

Figure 2 shows the two periods overlain with data from the HadCRUT version 4 dataset. This display is scaled to actual average temperature. Unlike Figure one this figure and the next one use smoothed monthly data. In that way, we can see some of the variation within each year.

clip_image004

Figure 2

The left side of Figure 2 represents 1910 for the blue line…

View original post 2,685 more words


Fruity News From The Global Warming Front

CO2 plant food

Good news from the field of global warming science! A happy South Australian grower is cleaning up:

 

No artificial gases are used to redden or ripen the tomatoes. But in another hi-tech innovation, carbon dioxide levels are elevated in the glasshouses to boost crop production by about 30 per cent.

 

Imagine how good that would be if replicated with the planet.

 
OMG! It has been! :

Satellite data gathered over 33 years has shown there has been a ‘persistent and widespread increase’ in the growing season of plants.

 
The Earth is getting greener with rising carbon dioxide levels, researchers have revealed. They found over the past 33 years, leaf cover around more than half of the vegetated area of the world has increased. They say the extra greenery is equivalent to covering the USA twice with plants.

 
Scientists say up to half of the world’s vegetated areas are now showing signs of increased leaf cover, with the majority caused by extra carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

 

Source: Fruity news from the global warming front – Herald Sun

•••

CO2 Greening The Planet Related :