iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-04-20--Modelling Catastrophe In A Climate Of Fear

“ The government have ramped up the level of fear to a point where it ’ s very hard for people to hear the messages about ‘ this is the way out ’ .
” Our house is on fire .
I am here to say , our house is on fire.
” “ We are facing a disaster of unspoken sufferings for enormous amounts of people .
And now is not the time for speaking politely or focusing on what we can or can not say .
Now is the time to speak clearly.
” Adults keep saying : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people to give them hope.
” But I don ’ t want your hope .
I don ’ t want you to be hopeful .
I want you to panic .
I want you to feel the fear I feel every day .
And then I want you to act .
I want you to act as you would in a crisis .
I want you to act as if our house is on fire .
Because it is .
So said Greta , at Davos , 3 months ago , even as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new , real , more imminent crisis which would grip the world and force governments to act – largely , in retrospect , out of fear , not knowledge , not masses of data , not hope .
At first , UK scientists said don ’ t panic , then they said PANIC in big , bold capital letters .
They got it wrong – twice .
They got it wrong the first time because they didn ’ t know enough about the Wuhan Virus to casually float the idea of ‘ herd @ @ @ @ @ @ @ WHO was telling us that the fatality rate was 3.4 % and R0 ( the average number of people one person infects ) was a lot higher than ‘ flu , meaning that , if left unchecked , the disease would rip through communities and very rapidly overwhelm hospitals , meaning that the death rate would rise even higher .
This appeared to be happening in Italy , though not in Germany , not in Japan , not in South Korea and not in a few other countries besides .
It ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been hard hit , even in lockdown , but it ’ s not happening here either .
Nightingale is empty .
But at the time , public fear , whipped up by the media , and amplified by ‘ new ’ modelling data , dictated that the government act to save lives and save the NHS .
They got it wrong the second time because they relied upon an epidemiological model ( adapted from an old ‘ flu model ) which predicted 510,000 deaths from a virus which we knew virtually nothing about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , London said ‘ DO SOMETHING OR PEOPLE WILL DIE !
’ So the government did something and people still died , not in their hundreds of thousands , but , it would seem , in numbers probably irrespective of a lockdown which was initiated too late in the day and was nowhere near strict enough to have a measurable effect on what is probably an exceptionally contagious virus .
American IMHE modellers got it wrong a third time , predicting loads more deaths in the UK and the US , even in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ change modellers never get it wrong , simply because even when their models don ’ t agree with reality , this is either because the observations are wrong , or because they still ‘ do a reasonable job ’ of modelling past and present climate change ( especially when inconvenient ‘ blips ’ are ironed out by retrospective adjustments to the data ) , but principally because the subject of their claimed modelling expertise lies many years off in the future – climate change to be expected in 2050 or 2100 , when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ felt .
Imperial ’ s and IMHE ’ s worst case scenarios look way off , just weeks after they were proposed and after governments acted on the modeller ’ s advice .
Their assumptions are being rapidly challenged by new data and research .
Nothing similar happens in climate change land .
Their worst case scenario ( RCP8.5 ) , though comprehensively debunked , still lives on and is still being defended by Met Office scientists on the basis that ‘ carbon feedbacks ( however unlikely ) can not be ruled out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Covid-19 ; they ’ re scared of dying , naturally , not in many years ’ time because of bad weather , but next week , due to some horrible illness which probably escaped from a lab in Wuhan , China .
The government and the Medicine Men currently in control of control of government decision-making , use that fear to control us and to convince us of the legitimacy of their policy .
Thus , mostly , we have obediently stayed at home , and acted responsibly whilst out , but that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who ’ ve taken great pleasure in making up their own list of # CovidCrimes and harrassing and fining innocent members of the public guilty of committing mass murder by not staying at home .
However , the data keeps rolling in and the research keeps piling up , even as we sit on the sofa and watch our economy go down the tubes and our civil liberties disappear in the haze of ‘ the new normal ’ .
Covid-19 is not the disease we thought it was 2 months ago and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a moment ’ s thought by epidemiologists and politicians singularly intent on saving lives and saving ‘ our NHS ’ ) look set to be even more severe than the consequences of the disease itself .
It ’ s all very odd , because a few months ago , adults at Davos nodded approvingly whilst Greta reprimanded them for giving her generation false hope , saying that she wanted everyone to panic and take action .
Little Greta believed that such action based upon fear , based in turn upon the scary output @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world and restore the God given right of her generation to inherit a ‘ habitable planet ’ .
Today , we have adults panicked into taking action on Covid-19 who have destroyed the hopes and aspirations of the younger generation , wrecked their education and who are busy bequeathing to them an austere future where their parents are out of work and their prospects for their own futures look bleak .
This is basically the same as # netzero or the Green New Deal of course , but a global depression won ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Hence why some climate fanatics are OK with lockdown and economic ruin as long as it morphs long term into Green austerity .
There are signs that now Boris is on the mend , things might start to change and the government may be reconsidering its obsessive lockdown strategy , but I ’ m not that hopeful as yet , having witnessed the Minister for Suicide Prevention , Nadine Dorries , state on Twitter that lockdown will continue until a vaccine is developed , Grant Shapps telling us not to book a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that an ‘ equally distributed ’ vaccine is our only hope , No .
10 telling us to stay at home and bake a cake , and five government ‘ tests ’ for ending lockdown which can never be met .
Gove is said to be setting up a panel which will be examining the potential negative impacts of lockdown .
In this respect , we read in the Telegraph today the following : The exit strategy is very much on academic minds .
For this part of the process , we should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ modellers , says Robert Dingwall , Professor of Social Sciences at Nottingham Trent University , and an advisor to one of the SAGE sub committees .
“ There is a space in the policy making that might be occupied by a combination of sociologists , political scientists and historians who have worked on previous pandemics…you could argue there is a gap in the system of expert advice for that kind of input .
“ Modellers are smart people but they ’ re mathematicians primarily and that ’ s why you need to set @ @ @ @ @ @ @ context .
That ’ s why you need to have an understanding of the real world .
“ Ferguson for example keeps talking about social distancing as a kind of all or nothing thing .
Whereas if we ’ re going to talk about an exit strategy , there isn ’ t going to be a VE day where we declare it ’ s all over.
” One problem , he says , is that “ the government have ramped up the level of fear to a point where it ’ s very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about ‘ this is the way out ’ .
” He describes the lockdown on parks , for instance , as “ cruel and unjust.
” “ It ’ s a policy by people like me who live in houses with big gardens .
“ If the politicians are trying to follow the science , and the science is only giving them a limited range of input , then it might be quite difficult for some of these everyday considerations to get taken more seriously.
” Prof Sullivan echoes some of those points @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there is extraordinary .
Now , it ’ s our view that the fear is out of all proportion to the threat and the risk .
There ’ s been a real perspective loss here .
“ I keep saying to people we have as many if not more people dying of pneumonia and loads of other conditions .
I think life has to start renormalizing again with sufficient care and attention to the vulnerable.
” The post Modelling Catastrophe In A Climate Of Fear appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum @ @ @ @

“The government have ramped up the level of fear to a point where it’s very hard for people to hear the messages about ‘this is the way out’.”
Our house is on fire. I am here to say, our house is on fire.” “We are facing a disaster of unspoken sufferings for enormous amounts of people. And now is not the time for speaking politely or focusing on what we can or cannot say. Now is the time to speak clearly.” Adults keep saying: “We owe it to the young people to give them hope.” But I don’t want your hope. I don’t want you to be hopeful. I want you to panic. I want you to feel the fear I feel every day. And then I want you to act. I want you to act as you would in a crisis. I want you to act as if our house is on fire. Because it is.
So said Greta, at Davos, 3 months ago, even as another crisis was rapidly emerging, a new, real, more imminent crisis which would grip the world and force governments to act – largely, in retrospect, out of fear, not knowledge, not masses of data, not hope.
At first, UK scientists said don’t panic, then they said PANIC in big, bold capital letters. They got it wrong – twice. They got it wrong the first time because they didn’t know enough about the Wuhan Virus to casually float the idea of ‘herd immunity’. The now thoroughly discredited WHO was telling us that the fatality rate was 3.4% and R0 (the average number of people one person infects) was a lot higher than ‘flu, meaning that, if left unchecked, the disease would rip through communities and very rapidly overwhelm hospitals, meaning that the death rate would rise even higher. This appeared to be happening in Italy, though not in Germany, not in Japan, not in South Korea and not in a few other countries besides. It’s still not happening. The UK has been hard hit, even in lockdown, but it’s not happening here either. Nightingale is empty. But at the time, public fear, whipped up by the media, and amplified by ‘new’ modelling data, dictated that the government act to save lives and save the NHS.
They got it wrong the second time because they relied upon an epidemiological model (adapted from an old ‘flu model) which predicted 510,000 deaths from a virus which we knew virtually nothing about. Professor Neil Ferguson at Imperial College, London said ‘DO SOMETHING OR PEOPLE WILL DIE!’ So the government did something and people still died, not in their hundreds of thousands, but, it would seem, in numbers probably irrespective of a lockdown which was initiated too late in the day and was nowhere near strict enough to have a measurable effect on what is probably an exceptionally contagious virus. American IMHE modellers got it wrong a third time, predicting loads more deaths in the UK and the US, even in lockdown, than actually occurred.
Climate change modellers never get it wrong, simply because even when their models don’t agree with reality, this is either because the observations are wrong, or because they still ‘do a reasonable job’ of modelling past and present climate change (especially when inconvenient ‘blips’ are ironed out by retrospective adjustments to the data), but principally because the subject of their claimed modelling expertise lies many years off in the future – climate change to be expected in 2050 or 2100, when the real impacts will begin to be felt. Imperial’s and IMHE’s worst case scenarios look way off, just weeks after they were proposed and after governments acted on the modeller’s advice. Their assumptions are being rapidly challenged by new data and research. Nothing similar happens in climate change land. Their worst case scenario (RCP8.5), though comprehensively debunked, still lives on and is still being defended by Met Office scientists on the basis that ‘carbon feedbacks (however unlikely) cannot be ruled out’.
People are still scared by Covid-19; they’re scared of dying, naturally, not in many years’ time because of bad weather, but next week, due to some horrible illness which probably escaped from a lab in Wuhan, China. The government and the Medicine Men currently in control of control of government decision-making, use that fear to control us and to convince us of the legitimacy of their policy. Thus, mostly, we have obediently stayed at home, and acted responsibly whilst out, but that’s not enough for the police who’ve taken great pleasure in making up their own list of #CovidCrimes and harrassing and fining innocent members of the public guilty of committing mass murder by not staying at home. However, the data keeps rolling in and the research keeps piling up, even as we sit on the sofa and watch our economy go down the tubes and our civil liberties disappear in the haze of ‘the new normal’.
Covid-19 is not the disease we thought it was 2 months ago and the unintended consequences of lockdown (given hardly a moment’s thought by epidemiologists and politicians singularly intent on saving lives and saving ‘our NHS’) look set to be even more severe than the consequences of the disease itself.
It’s all very odd, because a few months ago, adults at Davos nodded approvingly whilst Greta reprimanded them for giving her generation false hope, saying that she wanted everyone to panic and take action. Little Greta believed that such action based upon fear, based in turn upon the scary output of climate models, would save the world and restore the God given right of her generation to inherit a ‘habitable planet’. Today, we have adults panicked into taking action on Covid-19 who have destroyed the hopes and aspirations of the younger generation, wrecked their education and who are busy bequeathing to them an austere future where their parents are out of work and their prospects for their own futures look bleak. This is basically the same as #netzero or the Green New Deal of course, but a global depression won’t save the planet in the process. Hence why some climate fanatics are OK with lockdown and economic ruin as long as it morphs long term into Green austerity.
There are signs that now Boris is on the mend, things might start to change and the government may be reconsidering its obsessive lockdown strategy, but I’m not that hopeful as yet, having witnessed the Minister for Suicide Prevention, Nadine Dorries, state on Twitter that lockdown will continue until a vaccine is developed, Grant Shapps telling us not to book a summer holiday, Dominic Raab telling us that an ‘equally distributed’ vaccine is our only hope, No. 10 telling us to stay at home and bake a cake, and five government ‘tests’ for ending lockdown which can never be met.
Gove is said to be setting up a panel which will be examining the potential negative impacts of lockdown. In this respect, we read in the Telegraph today the following:
The exit strategy is very much on academic minds. For this part of the process, we should definitely not rely solely on the mathematical modellers, says Robert Dingwall, Professor of Social Sciences at Nottingham Trent University, and an advisor to one of the SAGE sub committees. “There is a space in the policy making that might be occupied by a combination of sociologists, political scientists and historians who have worked on previous pandemics…you could argue there is a gap in the system of expert advice for that kind of input. “Modellers are smart people but they’re mathematicians primarily and that’s why you need to set their advice into a social and economic context. That’s why you need to have an understanding of the real world. “Ferguson for example keeps talking about social distancing as a kind of all or nothing thing. Whereas if we’re going to talk about an exit strategy, there isn’t going to be a VE day where we declare it’s all over.” One problem, he says, is that “the government have ramped up the level of fear to a point where it’s very hard for people to hear the messages about ‘this is the way out’.” He describes the lockdown on parks, for instance, as “cruel and unjust.” “It’s a policy by people like me who live in houses with big gardens. “If the politicians are trying to follow the science, and the science is only giving them a limited range of input, then it might be quite difficult for some of these everyday considerations to get taken more seriously.” Prof Sullivan echoes some of those points: “I think the fear out there is extraordinary. Now, it’s our view that the fear is out of all proportion to the threat and the risk. There’s been a real perspective loss here. “I keep saying to people we have as many if not more people dying of pneumonia and loads of other conditions. I think life has to start renormalizing again with sufficient care and attention to the vulnerable.”
The post Modelling Catastrophe In A Climate Of Fear appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF).
via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)
https://ift.tt/3bnam6J
April 20, 2020 at 03:33AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-04-20--Methane forms under space conditions in laboratory

It ’ s now thought that methane , aka natural gas , existed even before planet formation , which looks like the final nail in the coffin for the idea that it should be regarded exclusively as a ‘ fossil ’ fuel .
– – – An international team of astronomers has shown in a laboratory at Leiden University ( the Netherlands ) that methane can form on icy dust particles in space , reports Phys.org .
The possibility had existed for quite some time , but because the conditions in space were difficult to simulate , it was not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conditions .
The researchers will publish their findings Monday evening in the journal , Nature Astronomy .
Methane , known to us as the main compound of natural gas , is one of the simplest hydrocarbons .
It consists of a carbon atom with four hydrogen atoms : CH4 .
On Earth , we mainly know methane as a flammable gas that forms from decaying organic material .
Methane is also available in space as a gas , liquid , or ice .
For example , Neptune and Uranus contain , in addition @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gas .
Saturn ’ s moon , Titan , the only moon in our solar system with a dense atmosphere , does not rain water but liquefied methane .
Outside of our solar system in interstellar space , methane ice is one of the ten most abundant ices to be detected .
The prevailing opinion about how methane is created in space is that CH is formed first , then CH2 , CH3 , and finally CH4 .
In the gas phase , this reaction is slow .
But because methane is formed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ grain itself helps speed-up the formation process .
For example , dust grains provide a ‘ hangout ’ spot for atoms , increasing their likelihood to meet each other in the vastness of space .
They can also absorb the energy that is produced from chemical reactions that would otherwise break apart molecules , such as methane .
Researchers from the Laboratory for Astrophysics at Leiden Observatory ( Leiden University , the Netherlands ) have now for the first time succeeded in making methane under relevant space conditions .
They let hydrogen atoms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ degrees Celsius ( -442 °F , 10 K ) in an ultrahigh vacuum environment on an ice-cold surface .
The researchers had previously succeeded in making water ( H2O ) and ammonia ( NH3 ) in a similar way .
They did so by letting oxygen and nitrogen atoms react with hydrogen atoms .
However , reactions with carbon atoms proved to be more challenging .
That is because carbon is very sticky , which makes experimenting with it very difficult .
Danna Qasim , Ph.D. student at Leiden Observatory and lead author @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , adds : “ It is difficult to conduct an experiment with carbon atoms .
Carbon likes to stick , so it is challenging to produce a controlled beam of pure carbon atoms .
At the same time , you have to make sure that after an experiment , your entire setup is not completely covered with carbon.
” The researchers were able to vary the conditions in their experiments .
This allowed them to investigate exactly how and how efficiently methane can be formed by the reaction of carbon and hydrogen atoms @

It’s now thought that methane, aka natural gas, existed even before planet formation, which looks like the final nail in the coffin for the idea that it should be regarded exclusively as a ‘fossil’ fuel.
– – –
An international team of astronomers has shown in a laboratory at Leiden University (the Netherlands) that methane can form on icy dust particles in space, reports Phys.org.
The possibility had existed for quite some time, but because the conditions in space were difficult to simulate, it was not possible to prove this under relevant space conditions.
The researchers will publish their findings Monday evening in the journal, Nature Astronomy.
Methane on Earth
Methane, known to us as the main compound of natural gas, is one of the simplest hydrocarbons. It consists of a carbon atom with four hydrogen atoms: CH4. On Earth, we mainly know methane as a flammable gas that forms from decaying organic material.
Methane in space
Methane is also available in space as a gas, liquid, or ice. For example, Neptune and Uranus contain, in addition to hydrogen and helium, mainly methane gas. Saturn’s moon, Titan, the only moon in our solar system with a dense atmosphere, does not rain water but liquefied methane.
Outside of our solar system in interstellar space, methane ice is one of the ten most abundant ices to be detected.
Ice grain dust as hangout
The prevailing opinion about how methane is created in space is that CH is formed first, then CH2, CH3, and finally CH4. In the gas phase, this reaction is slow. But because methane is formed on an icy dust grain, the grain itself helps speed-up the formation process.
For example, dust grains provide a ‘hangout’ spot for atoms, increasing their likelihood to meet each other in the vastness of space. They can also absorb the energy that is produced from chemical reactions that would otherwise break apart molecules, such as methane.
Creating methane in ‘space lab’
Researchers from the Laboratory for Astrophysics at Leiden Observatory (Leiden University, the Netherlands) have now for the first time succeeded in making methane under relevant space conditions. They let hydrogen atoms collide with carbon atoms at minus 263 degrees Celsius (-442 °F, 10 K) in an ultrahigh vacuum environment on an ice-cold surface.
The researchers had previously succeeded in making water (H2O) and ammonia (NH3) in a similar way. They did so by letting oxygen and nitrogen atoms react with hydrogen atoms.
However, reactions with carbon atoms proved to be more challenging. That is because carbon is very sticky, which makes experimenting with it very difficult.
Danna Qasim, Ph.D. student at Leiden Observatory and lead author of the scientific publication in Nature Astronomy, adds: “It is difficult to conduct an experiment with carbon atoms. Carbon likes to stick, so it is challenging to produce a controlled beam of pure carbon atoms. At the same time, you have to make sure that after an experiment, your entire setup is not completely covered with carbon.”
The researchers were able to vary the conditions in their experiments. This allowed them to investigate exactly how and how efficiently methane can be formed by the reaction of carbon and hydrogen atoms.
Full report here.
via Tallbloke’s Talkshop
https://ift.tt/3etU4e2
April 20, 2020 at 02:54AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-04-20--Recession Buster: Australia’s Economic Recovery Depends On Cheap & Reliable Coal-Fired Power

A Chinese virus has taken up where Australia ’ s suicidal energy policies left off ; crushing the entire economy @ @ @ @ @ hungry industries , like manufacturing and mineral processing .
Well , in truth , it @ @ @ @ @ to COVID-19 that ’ s done the damage , rather than the pathogen itself .
@ @ @ @ @ tourism sectors overnight , [ … ]

A Chinese virus has taken up where Australia’s suicidal energy policies left off; crushing the entire economy, rather than just energy hungry industries, like manufacturing and mineral processing. Well, in truth, it’s the political reaction to COVID-19 that’s done the damage, rather than the pathogen itself. Having destroyed the hospitality and tourism sectors overnight, […]
Read more
via STOP THESE THINGS
https://ift.tt/2wRtESw
April 20, 2020 at 02:31AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-04-20--UK Climate Assembly Calls Lockdown A ‘Test Run’ For Greener Lifestyles

Working from home and other measures to help stem the spread of the coronavirus outbreak in Britain show how quickly the country could change its ways to address climate change too , participants in the Climate Assembly UK said on Sunday .
“ With coronavirus , ( the government ) has had to act because they had no choice in the matter .
With climate change , they need to act in the same way , ” said Marc Robson , 46 , a British Gas installer and one of the 110 members of the citizens ’ assembly .
As @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disease , “ people will die if we don ’ t do it ” , the Newcastle resident warned in a video interview .
“ And we all need to buy into this as well .
It needs to be explained to the public that if we don ’ t change what we ’ re doing , it ’ s going to cost us , big time.
” The assembly , chosen to reflect Britain ’ s diverse geographic and demographic makeup , as well as different viewpoints on climate change , has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ January to hear from experts on climate science and policy .
It is expected to submit over the summer its recommendations to the government on how Britain should meet a legally binding goal to cut its climate-heating emissions to net zero by 2050 .
But with coronavirus restrictions now in place on public gatherings , the assembly this weekend was held for the first time online – a change some assembly members saw as a “ test run ” for potential climate-smart shifts they had been discussing .
The post UK Climate Assembly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ For Greener Lifestyles appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum ( GWPF ) .

Working from home and other measures to help stem the spread of the coronavirus outbreak in Britain show how quickly the country could change its ways to address climate change too, participants in the Climate Assembly UK said on Sunday.
“With coronavirus, (the government) has had to act because they had no choice in the matter. With climate change, they need to act in the same way,” said Marc Robson, 46, a British Gas installer and one of the 110 members of the citizens’ assembly.
As with the response to the COVID-19 respiratory disease, “people will die if we don’t do it”, the Newcastle resident warned in a video interview.
“And we all need to buy into this as well. It needs to be explained to the public that if we don’t change what we’re doing, it’s going to cost us, big time.”
The assembly, chosen to reflect Britain’s diverse geographic and demographic makeup, as well as different viewpoints on climate change, has met once a month in Birmingham since January to hear from experts on climate science and policy.
It is expected to submit over the summer its recommendations to the government on how Britain should meet a legally binding goal to cut its climate-heating emissions to net zero by 2050.
But with coronavirus restrictions now in place on public gatherings, the assembly this weekend was held for the first time online – a change some assembly members saw as a “test run” for potential climate-smart shifts they had been discussing.
The post UK Climate Assembly Calls Lockdown A ‘Test Run’ For Greener Lifestyles appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF).
via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)
https://ift.tt/2XNcErK
April 20, 2020 at 02:29AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-04-20--China Green-Lights New Coal Plants To Fight Economic Slump

China has lowered the risk ratings for coal-power overcapacity in many parts of the country for the third year in a row .
The move opens the door for more regions to build coal power in 2021-23 and has been interpreted by experts as a signal that coal will be a key part of the 14th Five Year Plan , which will start next year .
Every year the National Energy Administration ( NEA ) releases a “ risk alert for coal power capacity planning and construction ” , which looks ahead three years .
The 2023 Risk Alert , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ red rating for capacity adequacy – meaning there ’ s a high risk of coal power overcapacity – to just three regions .
Orange ratings increased from two to three , and all other regions were rated green .
The alert ’ s resource constraint assessment , which tracks coal and water availability , remained unchanged from last year , with the same 12 regions rated as red .
As for profitability , ten regions were rated red – meaning operations are likely to be unprofitable – and the number of orange regions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ profitability warnings are only advisory , a red or orange rating for capacity adequacy or resource constraints means binding restrictions : these regions can not approve or start construction on new coal power projects intended to supply local demand ; only a green rating gives permission .
Over the past three years , the risk alerts have seen the number of regions with red or orange warnings for capacity adequacy and resource constraint fall from 26 to 17 to 13 for the years 2021 , 2022 and 2023 .
[ … ] Yet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are getting underway .
Figures from Global Energy Monitor show that in just the first 18 days of March , China approved the construction of 7.96 gigawatts of coal power – more than the 6.31 gigawatts approved during all 2019 .
There is nothing similar for wind or solar power , which are still waiting for the energy authorities to extend grid connection deadlines for already approved projects so that subsidies can be disbursed .
So why , with the cost of renewables falling and a global energy transition underway , is China @ @ @ @ @ @ @ risk of asset stranding ?
Yuan Jiahai told China Dialogue the answer is to do with stability and size .
Coal is a controllable and reliable source of power that makes stabilising the power grid easier .
Also , large coal power construction projects are better suited for a quick economic boost than much smaller renewables projects .
Yuan thinks the sudden spurt of power plant approvals in March shows that local governments were keen to soften the economic impact of the epidemic by stabilising investment and spurring the economy .
Qin Haiyan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Society ’ s wind power committee , points to the role of coal power lobbying and conservative attitudes toward renewables .
“ Some people continue to think wind and solar can ’ t replace coal .
That we have to rely on coal to ensure our power supply , ” he told China Dialogue .
“ There ’ s no consensus yet on the strategic direction for China ’ s power industry.
” The post China Green-Lights New Coal Plants To Fight Economic Slump appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum ( @ @ @

China has lowered the risk ratings for coal-power overcapacity in many parts of the country for the third year in a row.
The move opens the door for more regions to build coal power in 2021-23 and has been interpreted by experts as a signal that coal will be a key part of the 14th Five Year Plan, which will start next year.
Every year the National Energy Administration (NEA) releases a “risk alert for coal power capacity planning and construction”, which looks ahead three years.
The 2023 Risk Alert, published on 26 February, gave a red rating for capacity adequacy – meaning there’s a high risk of coal power overcapacity – to just three regions. Orange ratings increased from two to three, and all other regions were rated green.
The alert’s resource constraint assessment, which tracks coal and water availability, remained unchanged from last year, with the same 12 regions rated as red. As for profitability, ten regions were rated red – meaning operations are likely to be unprofitable – and the number of orange regions dropped from two to one.
While profitability warnings are only advisory, a red or orange rating for capacity adequacy or resource constraints means binding restrictions: these regions cannot approve or start construction on new coal power projects intended to supply local demand; only a green rating gives permission.
Over the past three years, the risk alerts have seen the number of regions with red or orange warnings for capacity adequacy and resource constraint fall from 26 to 17 to 13 for the years 2021, 2022 and 2023. […]
The changing role of coal power
Yet restrictions are being relaxed and new projects are getting underway. Figures from Global Energy Monitor show that in just the first 18 days of March, China approved the construction of 7.96 gigawatts of coal power – more than the 6.31 gigawatts approved during all 2019.
There is nothing similar for wind or solar power, which are still waiting for the energy authorities to extend grid connection deadlines for already approved projects so that subsidies can be disbursed.
So why, with the cost of renewables falling and a global energy transition underway, is China pouring money into an unprofitable sector at risk of asset stranding?
Yuan Jiahai told China Dialogue the answer is to do with stability and size. Coal is a controllable and reliable source of power that makes stabilising the power grid easier. Also, large coal power construction projects are better suited for a quick economic boost than much smaller renewables projects. Yuan thinks the sudden spurt of power plant approvals in March shows that local governments were keen to soften the economic impact of the epidemic by stabilising investment and spurring the economy.
Qin Haiyan, secretary of the China Renewable Energy Society’s wind power committee, points to the role of coal power lobbying and conservative attitudes toward renewables. “Some people continue to think wind and solar can’t replace coal. That we have to rely on coal to ensure our power supply,” he told China Dialogue. “There’s no consensus yet on the strategic direction for China’s power industry.”
The post China Green-Lights New Coal Plants To Fight Economic Slump appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF).
via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)
https://ift.tt/3akoImL
April 20, 2020 at 01:46AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-04-20--Financiers Failed Us: Focused on Fake Crisis

Terence Corcoran writes at Financial Post Why all the macroprudes failed on COVID-19 .
Excerpts in italics with my bolds Global policy-makers shoved pandemic risk aside and spread climate alarm instead One of the noble houses of global macroprudentialism , the International Monetary Fund , declared Tuesday that “ The Great Lockdown ” will plunge the global economy into the “ worst recession since the Great Depression , surpassing that seen during the global financial crisis a decade ago.
” Along with the rest of the world ’ s economic overseers and protectors of financial stability , the IMF seems @ @ @ @ @ @ @ overwhelmed by — the arrival of COVID-19 .
That the IMF was blindsided is clear in the opening words of Tuesday ’ s World Economic Outlook .
“ The world has changed dramatically in the three months since our last World Economic Outlook update on the global economy .
A pandemic scenario had been raised as a possibility in previous economic policy discussions , but none of us had a meaningful sense of what it would look like on the ground and what it would mean for the economy.
” That ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” had a sense of what such a pandemic might impose on the world economy .
It ’ s not clear who is included in the collective “ us , ” but it seems fair to assume the IMF is referring to the host of other members of the global fraternity of institutions that have assumed the role of guardians of the stability of the global financial system .
Among the institutions that should have been preparing for and assessing the risks of a global viral pandemic , in addition to the IMF @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Bank for International Settlements , the G20 assembly of finance ministers , the World Bank and the European Central Bank .
In the wake of the 2008 financial crisis , which “ none of us ” had anticipated , these global entities and national authorities adopted “ macroprudential policy ” to prevent the next global financial meltdown and , if possible , prepare plans to deal with a new blow to global financial stability .
Wikipedia has an excellent and authoritative review of the origins of macroprudentialism , describing it as an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to mitigate risk to the financial system as a whole.
” In the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis , policy-makers and economic researchers backed the need to reorient the global regulatory framework “ towards a macroprudential perspective.
” As the world sinks into lockdown and decline , one wonders why the whole macroprudential policy preparations , underway since the 2008 financial crisis and formally installed in 2016 , so obviously failed to prepare for the financial stability shakeup brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic ?
There are two explanations .
One is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an international bureaucratic collection of agencies dedicated to the pursuit of meaningless bureaucratic interventions .
The second explanation is that the macroprudential apparatus , from the IMF through to the FSB and down , was hijacked by activists pushing climate change as the dominant systemic risk of our time .
In 2017 , Mark Carney , then Bank of England governor and head of the FSB , reviewed the successes of macroprudential policy and highlighted new risks .
The FSB , said Carney , is assessing “ emerging vulnerabilities affecting the global financial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Among the risks identified , he said , were “ risks from FinTech , climate‐related financial risks and misconduct in financial institutions.
” Carney has been something of a poster boy for climate change .
In a 2015 speech at Lloyd ’ s of London — titled “ Breaking the tragedy of the horizon — climate change and financial stability , ” Carney warned the insurance industry to prepare for big climate risks — including defaults , lawsuits , stranded assets and increased liabilities related to a changing climate .
The insurance execs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ replacement of pandemic risks with climate change as a threat to the global financial and economic system was highlighted this week by Roger Pielke Jr. at the University of Colorado .
In 2008 , the No .
1 risk cited by insurance executives was a pandemic , described as “ a new highly infectious and fatal disease spreads through the human population.
” In 2019 , the top risk was identified as “ global temperature change.
” Pandemic was not even one of the top-10 insurance risks .
Over the past several years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ major efforts of the macroprudes has been to spread alarm about the financial stability risks allegedly building around climate change .
Never mind pandemics and other more mundane but genuine financial risks , such a soaring government debt buildup and U.S. political schemes to dismantle Big Tech .
Instead , banks and other financial institutions have been pressed to get out of fossil fuels and shift into ethical investing , sustainable financing , green financing , social financing , impact investing , ESG investment , responsible investing .
At the turn of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ BBC television calling for “ action on financing ” from banks against fossil investments .
One day later , the Communist government in China informed the World Health Organization of pneumonia cases in Wuhan City , Hubei province , with unknown cause .
Carney ’ s get-out-of oil call caused alarm within Canada ’ s fossil fuel industry .
At the time , oil was trading at US $ 55 a barrel .
On Tuesday , thanks in part to the pandemic Carney and the macroprudes failed to plan for , West Texas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ US $ 20 .
By promoting the risks of far-off climate change and ignoring the real financial and economic risks of a pandemic , the macroprudes got what they wanted by helping to usher in a global economic crisis they claimed to be attempting to prevent .

Terence Corcoran writes at Financial Post Why all the macroprudes failed on COVID-19. Excerpts in italics with my bolds
Global policy-makers shoved pandemic risk aside and spread climate alarm instead
One of the noble houses of global macroprudentialism, the International Monetary Fund, declared Tuesday that “The Great Lockdown” will plunge the global economy into the “worst recession since the Great Depression, surpassing that seen during the global financial crisis a decade ago.” Along with the rest of the world’s economic overseers and protectors of financial stability, the IMF seems to have been unprepared for — and overwhelmed by — the arrival of COVID-19.
That the IMF was blindsided is clear in the opening words of Tuesday’s World Economic Outlook. “The world has changed dramatically in the three months since our last World Economic Outlook update on the global economy. A pandemic scenario had been raised as a possibility in previous economic policy discussions, but none of us had a meaningful sense of what it would look like on the ground and what it would mean for the economy.”
That’s some statement: “None of us” had a sense of what such a pandemic might impose on the world economy.
It’s not clear who is included in the collective “us,” but it seems fair to assume the IMF is referring to the host of other members of the global fraternity of institutions that have assumed the role of guardians of the stability of the global financial system.
Among the institutions that should have been preparing for and assessing the risks of a global viral pandemic, in addition to the IMF, are the Financial Stability Board, the Bank for International Settlements, the G20 assembly of finance ministers, the World Bank and the European Central Bank.
In the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, which “none of us” had anticipated, these global entities and national authorities adopted “macroprudential policy” to prevent the next global financial meltdown and, if possible, prepare plans to deal with a new blow to global financial stability.
Wikipedia has an excellent and authoritative review of the origins of macroprudentialism, describing it as an “approach to financial regulation that aims to mitigate risk to the financial system as a whole.” In the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, policy-makers and economic researchers backed the need to reorient the global regulatory framework “towards a macroprudential perspective.”
As the world sinks into lockdown and decline, one wonders why the whole macroprudential policy preparations, underway since the 2008 financial crisis and formally installed in 2016, so obviously failed to prepare for the financial stability shakeup brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic?
There are two explanations. One is that the whole financial stability-macroprudential effort is an international bureaucratic collection of agencies dedicated to the pursuit of meaningless bureaucratic interventions.
The second explanation is that the macroprudential apparatus, from the IMF through to the FSB and down, was hijacked by activists pushing climate change as the dominant systemic risk of our time.
In 2017, Mark Carney, then Bank of England governor and head of the FSB, reviewed the successes of macroprudential policy and highlighted new risks. The FSB, said Carney, is assessing “emerging vulnerabilities affecting the global financial system … within a macroprudential perspective.” Among the risks identified, he said, were “risks from FinTech, climate‐related financial risks and misconduct in financial institutions.”
Carney has been something of a poster boy for climate change. In a 2015 speech at Lloyd’s of London — titled “Breaking the tragedy of the horizon — climate change and financial stability,” Carney warned the insurance industry to prepare for big climate risks — including defaults, lawsuits, stranded assets and increased liabilities related to a changing climate.
The insurance execs picked up the macroprudential warnings. The replacement of pandemic risks with climate change as a threat to the global financial and economic system was highlighted this week by Roger Pielke Jr. at the University of Colorado. In 2008, the No. 1 risk cited by insurance executives was a pandemic, described as “a new highly infectious and fatal disease spreads through the human population.” In 2019, the top risk was identified as “global temperature change.” Pandemic was not even one of the top-10 insurance risks.
Over the past several years, but especially through 2019, the major efforts of the macroprudes has been to spread alarm about the financial stability risks allegedly building around climate change. Never mind pandemics and other more mundane but genuine financial risks, such a soaring government debt buildup and U.S. political schemes to dismantle Big Tech. Instead, banks and other financial institutions have been pressed to get out of fossil fuels and shift into ethical investing, sustainable financing, green financing, social financing, impact investing, ESG investment, responsible investing.
At the turn of the 2020 New Year, Carney appeared on BBC television calling for “action on financing” from banks against fossil investments. One day later, the Communist government in China informed the World Health Organization of pneumonia cases in Wuhan City, Hubei province, with unknown cause. Carney’s get-out-of oil call caused alarm within Canada’s fossil fuel industry. At the time, oil was trading at US$55 a barrel.
On Tuesday, thanks in part to the pandemic Carney and the macroprudes failed to plan for, West Texas crude continued to languish at just above US$20.
By promoting the risks of far-off climate change and ignoring the real financial and economic risks of a pandemic, the macroprudes got what they wanted by helping to usher in a global economic crisis they claimed to be attempting to prevent.
via Science Matters
https://ift.tt/2KjHosp
April 20, 2020 at 04:24PM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-04-20--Checklist of Green Deal cost elements

Checklist of Green Deal cost elements

Green Deal proposals are springing up around the world .
The core concept is zero CO2 emissions via decarbonization .
The proponents of these Green Deals deliberately avoid cost estimates because the costs are horrendous .
To help force these huge costs out into the open I have developed the following simple checklist of Green Deal cost elements .
Any comprehensive cost estimate needs to address all of these elements , most of which are unbelievably expensive .
I have included some comments on the cost drivers as well .
Note that social elements like those in the Green New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . )
are not included .
My list is just about the cost of decarbonization .
4 .
In-building or facility distribution ( behind the meter ) Most existing buildings may need rewired for EVs .
Note : Electrification of transportation and other fossil fuel uses will dramatically increase the amount of electricity required to be generated , transmitted and distributed .
Use of biofuels and offsets , and their cost , are major unknowns .
Can not be electrified , except for short flights .
Can not be electrified , except for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mowers and portable generators .
May be redundant with zero emission generation .
Redundant if cars are zero emission .
• David Wojick David Wojick , Ph.D. is an independent analyst working at the intersection of science , technology and policy .
For origins see https : //ift.tt/2zz5zQ7 For over 100 prior articles for CFACT see https : //ift.tt/2sLXIur Available for confidential research and consulting .

Reposted with permission from CFACT
By David Wojick |April 18th, 2020|Energy|74 Comments
Green Deal proposals are springing up around the world. The core concept is zero CO2 emissions via decarbonization. The proponents of these Green Deals deliberately avoid cost estimates because the costs are horrendous.
To help force these huge costs out into the open I have developed the following simple checklist of Green Deal cost elements. Any comprehensive cost estimate needs to address all of these elements, most of which are unbelievably expensive. I have included some comments on the cost drivers as well.
Note that social elements like those in the Green New Deal (free health care, etc.) are not included. My list is just about the cost of decarbonization.
Checklist of decarbonization cost elements (with comments)
A. Electric power grid
(with zero fossil fuel carbon emissions)
1. Generation (from central power plants)
Feasibility of CCS is a major unknown.
2. Transmission
Especially for widely distributed renewable sites.
3. Distribution
EV charging stations are a major addition.
4. In-building or facility distribution (behind the meter)
Most existing buildings may need rewired for EVs.
5. Generation behind the meter
Primarily solar.
Note: Electrification of transportation and other fossil fuel uses will dramatically increase the amount of electricity required to be generated, transmitted and distributed.
B. Transportation
Switch to EVs.
Use of biofuels and offsets, and their cost, are major unknowns.
1. Personal passenger vehicles
2. Medium trucks and vans (short haul)
3. Heavy trucks and busses
4. Trains
5. Airplanes
Cannot be electrified, except for short flights.
6. Ships
Cannot be electrified, except for short trips.
C. Industrial processes presently using fossil fuel combustion
Complete electrification
1. Steel making
2. Cement making
3. Refineries
4. Chemical plants
4. Plastic production from fossil fuels
5. Manufacturing
6. Commercial activity
7. Agriculture
8. Construction
D. Electrifying gas fired systems and equipment (non industrial)
1. Building heating systems
2. Equipment presently powered with internal combustion engines
From bulldozers to lawn mowers and portable generators.
3. Gas fired appliances,
Especially cook stoves and water heaters.
E. Energy efficiency
May be redundant with zero emission generation.
1. Buildings
2. Transportation
3. Industrial processes
F. Building public transit to reduce car usage
Redundant if cars are zero emission.
G. Transition support payments
Unemployment, training, relocation, etc.
Author


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-04-20--George Carlin on germs and viruses

George Carlin on germs and viruses

Video from 2011 that seems to align with today ’ s circumstances .
Snippet from “ You are all Diseased @ @ @ @ @ copyrighted and was uploaded to YouTube for educational purposes .
I claim no ownership of @ @ @ @ @ Adoni for this video The post George Carlin on germs and viruses appeared first on @ @ @ @

Video from 2011 that seems to align with today’s circumstances.
Snippet from “You are all Diseased!”
This footage is copyrighted and was uploaded to YouTube for educational purposes. I claim no ownership of this material.
http://www.georgecarlin.com/
Buy the DVD here: DVD: http://www.amazon.com/George-Carlin-Y…
Buy the CD here: http://www.amazon.com/You-Are-Disease…
Thanks to Adoni for this video
The post George Carlin on germs and viruses appeared first on Ice Age Now.
via Ice Age Now
https://ift.tt/34Rcm4x
April 20, 2020 at 01:29PM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-04-20--Sweden claims success after refusing to lock down

20 Apr 2020 – Criticized for refusing to lock down , Sweden ’ s top health official says herd immunity is inevitable and took credit for the slowing of coronavirus numbers .
“ According to our modelers , we are starting to see so many immune people in the population in Stockholm that it is starting to have an effect on the spread of the infection , ” Anders Tegnell , who led the charge to keep Sweden open , told local media .
“ Our models point to some time in May.
” As of this morning , 14,777 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coronavirus .
Of those , 1,463 have died .
Now let ’ s see how the countries who trampled all over their citizen ’ s freedoms will fare .
If Sweden ’ s spread of infections reaches a peak “ some time in May , ” when will the martial-law countries reach their peak ?
And after the peak , will Sweden ’ s rate of infections then drop off precipitously ?
What about the other countries ?
Will their rate of infections also fall off a cliff , or will the lock @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It looks to me that Sweden took the most sensible route .
Thanks to Stephen Bird for this link The post Sweden claims success after refusing to lock down appeared first on Ice Age Now .

Schools, businesses, parks, gyms, bars, restaurants remained open as other countries panicked.
20 Apr 2020 – Criticized for refusing to lock down, Sweden’s top health official says herd immunity is inevitable and took credit for the slowing of coronavirus numbers. “According to our modelers, we are starting to see so many immune people in the population in Stockholm that it is starting to have an effect on the spread of the infection,” Anders Tegnell, who led the charge to keep Sweden open, told local media. “Our models point to some time in May.”
As of this morning, 14,777 people in Sweden have tested positive for coronavirus. Of those, 1,463 have died.
Now let’s see how the countries who trampled all over their citizen’s freedoms will fare. If Sweden’s spread of infections reaches a peak “some time in May,” when will the martial-law countries reach their peak?
And after the peak, will Sweden’s rate of infections then drop off precipitously?
What about the other countries? Will their rate of infections also fall off a cliff, or will the lock downs simply have prolonged the misery?
It looks to me that Sweden took the most sensible route.
See entire article:
http://www.webnewsys.com/2020/04/sweden-claims-coronavirus-success-after.html
Thanks to Stephen Bird for this link
The post Sweden claims success after refusing to lock down appeared first on Ice Age Now.
via Ice Age Now
https://ift.tt/3cxF3pL
April 20, 2020 at 12:25PM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-04-20--Californian antibody test finds only 1.5% of self selecting group in highest risk county actually ha

Californian antibody test finds only 1.5% of self selecting group in highest risk county actually had coronavirus

“ Coronavirus may be far more widespread than known ” .
Or not .
Yet another small non-random study shows “ 48,000″ people in Santa Clara County had Coronavirus and didn ’ t know it , but all the study really shows may be motivated reasoning .
The Santa Clara study looked at the county with the highest number of Covid cases in California , then advertised on Facebook for people to come forward for an unvalidated test , after which the results were adjusted upwards and converted into headline grabbing ratios and extrapolated to include the whole county and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for participants creates an obvious selection bias straight away – people who thought they may have had coronavirus are more likely to want to go and get tested .
But people who knew they didn ’ t have it ( because they had self isolated ) might not want to turn up and stand in a queue or even catch coronavirus while they waited .
Basically , they found 50 people out of 3,330 tested positive .
About half of which were likely to be false positives .
They weighted the sample by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but for some reason , didn ’ t adjust for age , which is a defining characteristic of infection [ … ]

“Coronavirus may be far more widespread than known”. Or not.
Yet another small non-random study shows “48,000″ people in Santa Clara County had Coronavirus and didn’t know it, but all the study really shows may be motivated reasoning.
The Santa Clara study looked at the county with the highest number of Covid cases in California, then advertised on Facebook for people to come forward for an unvalidated test, after which the results were adjusted upwards and converted into headline grabbing ratios and extrapolated to include the whole county and to calculate case fatality rates.
Advertising for participants creates an obvious selection bias straight away – people who thought they may have had coronavirus are more likely to want to go and get tested. But people who knew they didn’t have it (because they had self isolated) might not want to turn up and stand in a queue or even catch coronavirus while they waited.
Basically, they found 50 people out of 3,330 tested positive. About half of which were likely to be false positives. They weighted the sample by zip code, race and sex, but for some reason, didn’t adjust for age, which is a defining characteristic of infection […]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
via JoNova
https://ift.tt/3czp7Ua
April 20, 2020 at 12:20PM