GREEN ENERGY FAIL – World Coal Power Development Up 43%

Coal China.jpg

The ultra-supercritical Shanghai Waigaoqiao No. 3 is one of China’s flagship high-efficiency, low-emissions coal-fired power plants.

UNRELIABLE energy (wind/solar) proponents parrot the same mindless, groupthink propaganda about the so-called “green energy revolution” (which provides under 2% of the world’s power after trillions of dollars spent), demanding that we must “transition now!” so as to not be “left behind by the rest of the world!”.

MEMO to the misinformed …

From The New York Times

“1,600 new coal-fired power plants are planned or under construction in 62 countries.”

Coal fired power staions NYT

 

MEANWHILE, back in Australia, global warming theory obsessed politicians are giving up the countries once prized economic advantage of having cheap, reliable energy, by decommissioning and blowing up their last remaining coal-fired power plants. Greens and Labor parties even cheering about it!

Playford A Power Station Stack Felling

NPS West Coal Bunker and Tower Demolition

NPS East Coal Bunker and Coal Transfer Towers

via Augusta Power Stations – Flinders Power

 

NEIGHBOURING State, Victoria, whose Socialist Left government is also obsessed with green energy and the climate faith has closed Hazelwood coal-fired power station, which did not merely supply Victoria with a quarter of its power but also helped bail out South Australia.

ALL this destruction of Australia’s once cheap, efficient, relaible, baseload power supply has led to Australia now having some of the highest power prices in the world. South Australia officially has “the highest“!

THE world sure got the message: South Australia is closed for investment in heavy industry, and so, soon, will be the rest of Australia if they don’t learn from the dire consequences of destroying cheap power.

THE situation has become so dire in SA that the Weatherill Labor government is now spending a whopping $360 million on imported diesel generators in an attempt to maintain power supply after a summer of statewide blackouts 2016/17, which earned SA title of “the blackout capital of the world.”

 

More from The Herald Sun’s Andrew Bolt:

The public is now waking up to this madness, and to the falsehoods that inspired it.

Let’s expose the five biggest.

FALSEHOOD ONE: We can afford Labor’s green energy target.

In fact, just to meet the targets set by Labor in Queensland and Victoria would force us to build 4800 wind generators at an estimated cost of $41 billion. And those states would then have a power system as dodgy as South Australia’s.

FALSEHOOD TWO: This green energy creates lots of “green jobs”.

In fact, it costs jobs. The wind power industry gives full-time jobs to just 1230 Australians, according to the Bureau of Statistics. But if the Victorian Government goes ahead with policies to close the giant Hazelwood coal-fired station, that alone would cost the jobs of 1000 Hazelwood workers.

Worse, other businesses would be hit with power price rises of up to 5 per cent, enough to probably kill the power-intensive Portland aluminium smelter, for one, with its 750 workers.

FALSEHOOD THREE: Australia will save the planet by switching to green power. In fact, cutting our emissions makes no measurable difference to global temperatures, which is why politicians refuse to say how much temperatures will fall as a consequence of the billions they are spending. Ask them yourself: for all this pain, how much will we gain? By how much will temperatures fall?

I’ve asked everyone from the Liberals’ Greg Hunt to Labor’s Penny Wong, from alarmist Tim Flannery to populist Kevin Rudd, and not one will answer.

FALSEHOOD FOUR: We are doomed if we don’t cut the temperature. In fact, the warmists’ predictions of doom keep bombing.

In 2007, Climate Council boss Flannery warned that “even the rain that falls will not fill our dams and our river systems”. In 2008, the weather bureau warned that drought could become “our new climate”. In 2012, the Australian Conservation Foundation warned it “will be less and less likely that we can feed the human population”.

But what do we see instead?

Years of good rain. Dams filling. Rivers flooding. A record world harvest of grain crops.

FALSEHOOD FIVE: the public still believes this warming scare.

In fact, even a survey for the embarrassed Climate Institute last month found just 30 per cent of Australians still believed the world was warming and humans were mostly to blame.

Most Australians are now sceptics. The great warming scare is failing, which explains the panic over South Australia’s blackout.

The lights went out. But for many Australians, a light bulb went on.

Pardon? Here were storms bringing the rains the warmists told us were gone, and switching off the green power the warmists told us would stay.

Green power, gone with the wind. 

South Australian blackout puts questions on value of wind power | Herald Sun

•••

Energy Related :

World Coal-Fired Power Surge Related :

Unreliable Energy Related :


EXTREME WEATHER Expert: “World Is Presently In An Era Of Unusually Low Weather Disasters”

EXTREME Weather data.jpg

CLIMATE sceptics have been consistently pointing to data rather than superstition, politics and emotion in order to examine the contentious relationship between human CO2 emissions and global warming climate change.

Climate alarmists will frequently default to the “extreme weather” narrative in order to deceptively promote the catastrophic anthropogenic global warming (CAGW) narrative by instilling fear, doom and gloom directly into the human psyche.

However, by most metrics, the data shows us that extreme weather events are becoming ‘less’ extreme as CO2 increases.

Climate Depot with more…

Professor Roger Pielke Jr. of the University of Colorado Boulder: “The world is presently in an era of unusually low weather disasters. This holds for the weather phenomena that have historically caused the most damage: tropical cyclones, floods, tornadoes and drought. Given how weather events have become politicized in debates over climate change, some find this hard to believe…

The US has seen a decrease of about 20% in both hurricane frequency and intensity at landfall since 1900…

Data on floods, drought and tornadoes are similar in that they show little to no indication of becoming more severe or frequent…

Thus, it is fair to conclude that the costs of disasters worldwide is depressed because, as the global economy has grown, disaster costs have not grown at the same rate. Thus, disaster costs as a proportion of GDP have decreased. One important reason for this is a lack of increase in the weather events that cause disasters, most notably, tropical cyclones worldwide and especially hurricanes in the United States.

Why has this occurred? Is it good luck, climate change or something else?

A good place to start is with tropical cyclones, given that they are often the most costly weather events to occur each year.  The figure below shows global tropical cyclone landfalls from 1990 through 2016. These are the storms that cause the overwhelming majority of property damage. Since 1990 there has been a reduction of about 3 landfalling storms per year (from ~17 to ~14), which certainly helps to explain why disaster losses are somewhat depressed.

Even more striking is the extended period in the United States, which has the most exposure to tropical cyclone damage, without the landfall of an intense hurricane. The figure below shows the number of days between each landfall of a Category 3+ hurricane in the US, starting in 1900. As of this writing the tally is approaching 4500 days, which is a streak of good fortune not seen in the historical record.

Read full study here…

Via: https://riskfrontiers.com/weather-related-natural-disasters-should-we-be-concerned-about-a-reversion-to-the-mean/

 

•••

See Also :


10 REASONS Not To Believe The Climate Hype

weatherchanges.jpg

Paul Homewood of NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT recently posted a blog listing ten reasons countering climate “scientist” Katharine Hayhoe’s assertion that some of us don’t believe in global warming because we don’t care!

I don’t know a single person who doesn’t “care” about the planet or their environment. So, it would appear Katharine is using more of that divisive and marginalising language favoured by the totalitarian Left, in preference to facts and reason, in a deliberate effort to force you into a narrow set of beliefs that align with the alarmist orthodoxy.

By extension, these ten points lay out fundamental reasoning as to why increasingly, more and more climate truth-seekers are forming a sceptical view of the hayhoe-hysterical “climate change” debate.

And, they happen to make an excellent resource for your next friendly climate debate!

1) We don’t trust climate scientists.

The Climategate emails revealed just how untrustworthy the climate establishment has become.

We know that literally billions in grants are being shovelled their way, and that these grants would quickly dry up if they dropped their alarmism.

2) We don’t like being misled.

You, Katharine, have form in this respect, as you know.

It was you who claimed, in a magazine article in 2011, that increasing winter temperatures in Texas were a sign of climate change.

You came to this conclusion by starting your analysis in 1965, right at the start of a cold period.

You, of course, must have known that warming since then was just part of a cycle, and that temperatures have actually changed little since the 1920s.

Texa Winter Temps

Texas Winter Mean Temperatures

https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2011/11/25/whats-katharine-hiding/

3) It was hotter in the 1930s

We are aware that temperatures across the US were considerable higher in the 1930s than in recent years.

Is it surprising that people are not in the least concerned about current climate?

4) It was warmer in the Middle Ages

Despite various attempts to disappear the MWP, evidence worldwide indicates that the climate was just as warm then as now, and that previous warm periods, such as the Roman and Minoan, were warmer still.

There is nothing unprecedented about current climate, so why should we be concerned?

5) The 19thC was the coldest period since the ice age

Ice cores show that the Little Ice Age was an exceptionally cold time. Why should we be surprised or concerned that there has been a small amount of warming since?

6) Cold kills

There can be no question at all that our current climate is beneficial compared with the cold of the Little Ice Age.

Or maybe you would prefer to return to that age of famine, cold, storms, floods and drought?

7) Extreme weather is not increasing

Despite climate scientists attempts to blame every bit of bad weather on climate change, there is no evidence that extreme weather is getting worse.

Droughts in the US, that were severe and widespread in the 1930s and 50s, have become much less of a problem since.

The US has now gone 11 years without a major hurricane, the longest such period on record.

The USGS can find no evidence that flooding has got worse.

And tornado activity has also diminished significantly since the cold years of the 1970s.

8) We don’t trust your data

Global temperature data has continually been adjusted to show more warming.

Yet the satellite data continues to diverge from surface data, and still shows temperatures have not increased since 1998.

9) Apocalypse never comes

For many years, we have been fed scare stories of apocalypse round the corner. These, of course, never materialise.

If climate scientists were to treat us with a bit of respect, honestly admitted that they have little idea of what is to come, and stopped trying to intimidate us with silly scares, you might find that we returned that respect.

10) Redistribution of wealth

Your attempts to treat us like children and trust the nice scientists ignore the issue.

Regardless of the science, the whole issue of climate change has been hijacked by politicians, the UN and a veritable army of vested interests.

People are not stupid, and know that developed countries have committed to transferring $100bn a year to developing ones, as part of the Paris Agreement.

Christina Figueres herself admitted that the goal of environmentalists is to destroy capitalism.

Full article: Ten Reasons Why We Don’t Believe You, Katharine | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

•••

Related :


Warmist Scientist Admits: Our Models Were Wrong

MORE on the shock, global warming “pause” paper from warmists Santer, Mann et al !

via PA Pundits…

 

UPDATE via Climatism:

 

MAKE NO MISTAKE. This paper is massive. It basically reaffirms what climate sceptics (“Deniers”) have been stating for years – that despite record CO2 emissions over the past 20 years, there has been NO statistically significant global warming over this period.

There is a catastrophic problem with the UN’s billion dollar CMIP5 climate models that essentially drive the $trillion global warming industry. They are grossly overheated, leading to the panic, hysteria and fake news seen daily on the topic.

Something other than CO2 must be driving the climate. And The Godfather’s of global warming doom and gloom – Ben Santer and Mikey (hockey stick) Mann et al have released this *scientific* paper supporting the sceptical notion of a lower CO2 sensitivity than perceived by the “97%”.

It is being touted in the sceptic community as “Black Monday” owing to the release day.

Surely, this paper spells the beginning of the end for the greatest and most costly scientific fraud ever perpetrated upon mankind.

PA Pundits - International

By Andrew Bolt ~

Even leading alarmist Ben Santer, lead author of a paper in Nature Geoscience, now admits the world isn’t warming as predicted by global warming models. Even Michael Mann, who produced the infamous hockey stick, has put his name to this paper.

From the abstract:

In the early twenty-first century, satellite-derived tropospheric warming trends were generally smaller than trends estimated from a large multi-model ensemble.

The problem is the models on which the global warming scare is based were simply wrong:

We conclude that model overestimation of tropospheric warming in the early twenty-first century is partly due to systematic deficiencies in some of the post-2000 external forcings used in the model simulations.

James Delingpole describes Santer’s colorful history in the climate wars since he was outed in the Climategate scandal.

Sceptical scientists identified this problem years ago:

John Christy, who collects satellite temperature data…

View original post 93 more words


EPA’s Pruitt: Establish ‘Red Team, Blue Team’ of scientists to examine climate risk of CO2

A beginning to the end of politicized, monopolized and monetized, one-way, CO2-centric climate ‘science’. About time!

Watts Up With That?

Interviewed by Breitbart’s Joel Pollak, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt says the American people deserve ‘a true legitimate, peer reviewed, objective, transparent discussion about CO2.’ Pruitt calls for the establishment of a ‘Red Team/Blue Team’ of scientist to examine ‘what do we know, what don’t we know, and what risk does it pose to health, the United States, and the world’.

EPA ADMINISTRATOR PRUITT: “What the American people deserve, I think, is a true legitimate, peer reviewed, objective, transparent discussion about CO2. And, you know there was a great article that was in the Wall Street Journal, about a month or so ago, Joel, called ‘Red Team/Blue Team’ by Steve Koonin, a scientist I believe at NYU. And, he talked about the importance of having a red team of scientist and a blue team of scientists and those scientists get in a room and ask what do we know, what don’t…

View original post 61 more words


Arctic Ice Goes Above Average

More inconvenient climate change (aka global warming) news…

Science Matters

Heavy ice is making it impossible for fishermen from the Twillingate area to get to their crab fishing grounds. It may not open up until mid-May. (Twitter/@jeddore1972) Source: CBC

The title of this post sounds contradictory to most of what the media is saying about Arctic ice being in a tailspin, setting records for low extents, etc. And reports of ice blocking Newfoundland also fly in the face of media claims.

I will let you in on a secret: Arctic Ocean ice is doing fine and well above the decadal average. The only place where ice is below normal is outside the Arctic Ocean, namely Bering and Okhotsk Seas in the Pacific. Claims of disappearing ice pertain not to the Arctic itself, but to marginal Pacific seas that will melt out anyway in September.

I noticed the pattern this April when it became obvious that including Bering and Okhotsk in…

View original post 513 more words


Slingo Speaks: ‘…no extreme weather or climate event can be attributed solely to climate change”

Comment from the high priestess of global warming alarmism:

“No extreme weather or climate event can be attributed solely to climate change.” – Julia Slingo, fmr UK Met chief

Watts Up With That?

Weather and climate: in the eye of the storm

By Julio Slingo,  published in the Financial Times, 13 April 2017 (h/t to Larry Kummer)

Julia Slingo is the former chief scientist of the Met Office.

In 1972, fresh from a physics degree at Bristol University, I joined the UK’s national weather service, the Met Office. I liked meteorology because I could look out of the window and see physics in action. Clouds forming in a blue sky, and the wind blowing so often from the west

— it was not immediately obvious why that should be, and I was intrigued. (I learnt later that the UK lies right in the path of the jet stream, a band of westerly winds that circles the mid-latitudes. The jet stream arises from the rotation of the Earth — the Coriolis Force — and because the planet is heated at the equator and cooled…

View original post 2,114 more words