iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-11-17--UN seeks urgent climate action to PREVENT “greening” of Sahara Desert

Why ?
I thought the whole point of the fight against global warming was to create a greener world .
Six thousand years ago during the Holocene Climatic Optimum the Sahara desert was covered in lakes and vegetation .
All this went away when the world cooled .
Some of the poorest people in the world , descendants of survivors of the great drying , struggle to survive by scratching a living in the Sahel , the marginal land on the southern edge of the Sahara .
But now , thanks to global warming , the Sahel region of Western @ @ @ @ @ @ @ WMO ’ s Regional Strategic Office Director , Filipe Lucio .
Wouldn ’ t you consider this good news ?
Imagine the benefits to Africa and Arabia , and other arid equatorial regions , if global warming restored the ancient Monsoons , which failed 6000 years ago after the end of the Holocene Optimum ?
Northern Africa and Arabia could once again be like the Garden of Eden .
But no .
“ Overall , Africa needs to take action , ” said Lucio .
“ Action is needed today in terms of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in terms of mitigation.
” Lest you be mislead , please understand that the initials ‘ WMO ’ stand for the World Meteorological Organization , a specialized agency of the United Nations .
Can we really believe anything they say ?
The post UN seeks urgent climate action to PREVENT “ greening ” of Sahara Desert appeared first on Ice Age Now .

Why? I thought the whole point of the fight against global warming was to create a greener world.
Six thousand years ago during the Holocene Climatic Optimum the Sahara desert was covered in lakes and vegetation. All this went away when the world cooled. Some of the poorest people in the world, descendants of survivors of the great drying, struggle to survive by scratching a living in the Sahel, the marginal land on the southern edge of the Sahara.
But now, thanks to global warming, the Sahel region of Western Africa will get wetter, according to WMO’s Regional Strategic Office Director, Filipe Lucio.
Wouldn’t you consider this good news?
Imagine the benefits to Africa and Arabia, and other arid equatorial regions, if global warming restored the ancient Monsoons, which failed 6000 years ago after the end of the Holocene Optimum? Northern Africa and Arabia could once again be like the Garden of Eden.
But no. “Overall, Africa needs to take action,” said Lucio. “Action is needed today in terms of adaptation, but also is needed tomorrow in terms of mitigation.”
Lest you be mislead, please understand that the initials ‘WMO’ stand for the World Meteorological Organization, a specialized agency of the United Nations. Can we really believe anything they say?
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/10/28/un-urgent-climate-action-required-to-prevent-the-greening-of-the-sahara-desert/
Here’s the UN report:
https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/10/1076162
The post UN seeks urgent climate action to PREVENT “greening” of Sahara Desert appeared first on Ice Age Now.
via Ice Age Now
https://ift.tt/3lTl2zj
November 17, 2020 at 01:55PM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-11-17--Where Are All the Sick People?

Where Are All the Sick People?

When I am puzzled by something , I try to find out what ’ s really going on .
Years ago , I wrote “ What Are They Really Counting ?
” .
The lessons in that essay are even more important today than they were when I penned it at the end of 2015 .
Many governments of the world have largely shut down their economies and issued edicts restricting the normal every-day activities of their citizens because of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and the illness it causes – Covid-19 .
We are bombarded in the media with screaming headlines @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : The curious thing is that among all my family , friends , acquaintances and colleagues , I know of only two people who have been sick with/from ( or even suspected ) Covid-19 during the entire pandemic period .
My wife has one extended family member who was sick , hospitalized for 24 hours out of extreme caution , in Spain .
No one I ask knows anyone who is sick with/from Covid-19 .
For those of you with little time or no patience : [ if that does not work , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ There is one exception , we have a friend with a daughter who is a nurse in a dedicated Covid-ward in a local hospital .
There have been some sick Covid-19 patients there .
Some have even died : This graph shows the daily Covid-19 deaths for my local county .
There have been 87 deaths in the county with Covid-19 mentioned in any way on the death certificate .
Since June 2020 , there have been only 8 deaths from/with Covid .
With a population of about 180,000 .
This gives my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 48.3/100,000 .
Even if Covid-deaths continue at the current rate and rise to 105 by the end of the year – our annual country-wide Covid-death rate would be only 58/100,000 .
New York State as a whole has a Covid-death rate of 175/100,000 .
The death rate of NY State is over 3.6 times higher than in my county .
For comparison , the annual death rate from cancers , nationally , is about 160/100,000 .
Our local NPR station out of Albany , NY , which I will call “ WDNC ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ today ’ s “ Round Table ” program from several readers , all of whom claimed that they didn ’ t know anyone who had been or was presently sick with Covid-19 , however , they were sure that the apparent-President-elect would do the right thing by issuing orders for every citizen to “ wear a mask ” .
Previous to this , I thought it might be a quirk that among my friends and acquaintances , my family , my county that there weren ’ t any/many sick people .
However , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she too didn ’ t know any sick people , but had heard that there were some in Texas .
During a rather unpleasant visit to my dentist earlier today , neither the dentist or any or his staff knew anyone who had been or was sick with Covid-19 .
My father was a doctor , I come from a medical family , I studied Pre-Med originally before switching majors , several times .
I did humanitarian work in a third-world country where the threats of malaria , dengue and yellow fever were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ must be sick people – there are people dying , after all .
A lot of people dying , seemingly , but .
.
.
.
Total Deaths in the U.S. are not higher than normal for this time of year , despite Covid 19 according to CDC mortality figures .
( To see Total Deaths , you must download the .csv file from the GREEN LINK near the top of the page . )
The CDC figures for New York State show the same thing – Total Deaths are running even with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Same link – select State instead of the default National .
The .csv file is by week , so compare previous years by week numbers .
Note : The most current weeks will be incorrect – too low — not fully reported yet – back at least three weeks . )
So , just to try to get a handle on the actuality of the Covid-19 pandemic , as experienced in the real world by readers here , I have created this little three-question survey – I will publish the results here once @ @ @ @ @ @ @ week , which comes first .
[ if that does not work , click here to take the survey ] The survey is only three questions , with dropdowns for your numerical answers .
Very quick and easy .
If you wish to contribute personal or local information , or anecdotes , use the comment section .
Covid-19 is not a hoax .
It is not a fantasy .
It is not simply made up .
However , the responses of our governments , in the United States , and in many other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more harmful that the pandemic itself .
History will replete with books recounting the horrors caused by the worldwide Covid Pandemic Panic .
One of the first to hit the stands is : “ The Price of Panic : How the Tyranny of Experts Turned a Pandemic Into a Catastrophe ” by Jay W. Richards , William M. Briggs and Douglas Axe .
Available in hardback , e-book editions and in audible formats .
I recommend it .
Keep following Watts Up With That to catch the survey results .

Guest Survey by Kip Hansen – 17 November 2020
When I am puzzled by something, I try to find out what’s really going on. Years ago, I wrote “What Are They Really Counting?”. The lessons in that essay are even more important today than they were when I penned it at the end of 2015. Many governments of the world have largely shut down their economies and issued edicts restricting the normal every-day activities of their citizens because of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and the illness it causes – Covid-19. We are bombarded in the media with screaming headlines of “rising cases” like this:
The curious thing is that among all my family, friends, acquaintances and colleagues, I know of only two people who have been sick with/from (or even suspected) Covid-19 during the entire pandemic period. My wife has one extended family member who was sick, hospitalized for 24 hours out of extreme caution, in Spain. No one I ask knows anyone who is sick with/from Covid-19.
For those of you with little time or no patience:
[if that does not work, click here to take the survey]
There is one exception, we have a friend with a daughter who is a nurse in a dedicated Covid-ward in a local hospital. There have been some sick Covid-19 patients there. Some have even died:
This graph shows the daily Covid-19 deaths for my local county. There have been 87 deaths in the county with Covid-19 mentioned in any way on the death certificate. Since June 2020, there have been only 8 deaths from/with Covid. With a population of about 180,000. This gives my county an approximate generalized death rate of 48.3/100,000. Even if Covid-deaths continue at the current rate and rise to 105 by the end of the year – our annual country-wide Covid-death rate would be only 58/100,000. New York State as a whole has a Covid-death rate of 175/100,000. The death rate of NY State is over 3.6 times higher than in my county. For comparison, the annual death rate from cancers, nationally, is about 160/100,000.
Our local NPR station out of Albany, NY, which I will call “WDNC” for obvious reasons, read letters in today’s “Round Table” program from several readers, all of whom claimed that they didn’t know anyone who had been or was presently sick with Covid-19, however, they were sure that the apparent-President-elect would do the right thing by issuing orders for every citizen to “wear a mask”.
Previous to this, I thought it might be a quirk that among my friends and acquaintances, my family, my county that there weren’t any/many sick people. However, emailing a friend in Portugal revealed that she too didn’t know any sick people, but had heard that there were some in Texas. During a rather unpleasant visit to my dentist earlier today, neither the dentist or any or his staff knew anyone who had been or was sick with Covid-19.
My father was a doctor, I come from a medical family, I studied Pre-Med originally before switching majors, several times. I did humanitarian work in a third-world country where the threats of malaria, dengue and yellow fever were real everyday worries. I know there must be sick people – there are people dying, after all. A lot of people dying, seemingly, but . . . . Total Deaths in the U.S. are not higher than normal for this time of year, despite Covid 19 according to CDC mortality figures. (To see Total Deaths, you must download the .csv file from the GREEN LINK near the top of the page.) The CDC figures for New York State show the same thing – Total Deaths are running even with previous years – despite Covid-19. (Same link – select State instead of the default National. The .csv file is by week, so compare previous years by week numbers. Note: The most current weeks will be incorrect – too low — not fully reported yet – back at least three weeks.)
So, just to try to get a handle on the actuality of the Covid-19 pandemic, as experienced in the real world by readers here, I have created this little three-question survey – I will publish the results here once there are enough participants or in a week, which comes first.
[if that does not work, click here to take the survey]
The survey is only three questions, with dropdowns for your numerical answers. Very quick and easy. If you wish to contribute personal or local information, or anecdotes, use the comment section.
# # # # #
Author’s Comment:
Covid-19 is not a hoax. It is not a fantasy. It is not simply made up.
However, the responses of our governments, in the United States, and in many other countries around the world have been far more harmful that the pandemic itself. History will replete with books recounting the horrors caused by the worldwide Covid Pandemic Panic.
One of the first to hit the stands is: “The Price of Panic : How the Tyranny of Experts Turned a Pandemic Into a Catastrophe” by Jay W. Richards, William M. Briggs and Douglas Axe. Available in hardback, e-book editions and in audible formats. I recommend it.
Keep following Watts Up With That to catch the survey results.
# # # # #
Like this: Like Loading…
Related


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-11-17--Rudy Guliani, we have more than enough illegal ballots to overturn the results

Several people have sent me these videos – and I wonder if everyone has seen them already .
Then I remember what the Legacy Media is like , so I figure I should share .
In other news , Georgia ’ s recount is a whitewash because no one is allowed to check signatures .
( We ’ ve seen the same process of so many times in the Climate Wars ) .
Wisconsin wants to charge $ 7 million to recount the votes , far more than in previous elections .
Meanwhile history is unfolding and hardly any news @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — the American Coup ?
In any normal year , this election battle would be non-stop coverage .
Rudy Guliani : ” we have more than enough illegal ballots to overturn the results ” Sidney Powell With Maria Bartiromo : “ Evidence is coming in through a fire hose… ” Retired Admiral Peter Neffenger is on the board of Smartmatic and on Joe Bidens presumptuous President Elect transition team .
According to Sidney Powell “ Millions of Americans have written in ” to tell them about election fraud .
Boiled down , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s also used on other brand ’ s voting machines .

Several people have sent me these videos – and I wonder if everyone has seen them already. Then I remember what the Legacy Media is like, so I figure I should share. In other news, Georgia’s recount is a whitewash because no one is allowed to check signatures. (We’ve seen the same process of so many times in the Climate Wars). Wisconsin wants to charge $7 million to recount the votes, far more than in previous elections.
Meanwhile history is unfolding and hardly any news service wants to mention The Biggest Story — the American Coup? In any normal year, this election battle would be non-stop coverage.
Rudy Guliani: ” we have more than enough illegal ballots to overturn the results”
Rudy Giuliani With Maria Bartiromo
…
Sidney Powell With Maria Bartiromo: “Evidence is coming in through a fire hose…”
Retired Admiral Peter Neffenger is on the board of Smartmatic and on Joe Bidens presumptuous President Elect transition team.
According to Sidney Powell “Millions of Americans have written in” to tell them about election fraud. Boiled down, the software was the problem, and it’s also used on other brand’s voting machines.
Every […]
Rating: 10.0/10 (2 votes cast)
via JoNova
https://ift.tt/2H9vT8W
November 17, 2020 at 11:48AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-11-17--African Lives Matter Too

African Lives Matter Too

New study shows how American clean coal technology can increase access to electricity and cut deaths from indoor air pollution Arlington , VA .
The CO2 Coalition of 60 climate scientists and energy engineers today released a White Paper showing how American “ high efficiency – low emissions ” power plants can save lives in Africa .
Only a third of Africans have access to electricity , and the World Health Organization estimates that 439,000 Africans die every year because they have to cook in their homes with wood and dried animal dung .
According to a top researcher for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fire in your kitchen is like burning 400 cigarettes an hour.
” New-tech American Coal-fired Electricity for Africa : Clean Air , Indoors and Out reports on a field visit and interviews at the “ Ultra Super-Critical ” John Turk coal-fired power plant that serves Arkansas , Texas , and Oklahoma .
The plant eliminates virtually all pollutants from its emissions .
The White Paper reviews ten challenges that the operation of such a plant would face in the African economic and political context , and calls on the U.S. government to support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American technology .
Under Obama-era policies that are based on computer models that project a future “ climate crisis ” from emissions of a non-polluting plant food , carbon dioxide , U.S. foreign aid agencies currently oppose coal-fired electrical generation in Africa .
As the White Paper shows , international energy agencies agree that Africa will continue to use its abundant , inexpensive coal for electricity for decades to come .
Unless this American technology is exported , China will build the scores of new power plants without pollution controls .
The post @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Global Warming Policy Forum ( GWPF ) .

New study shows how American clean coal technology can increase access to electricity and cut deaths from indoor air pollution
Arlington, VA. The CO2 Coalition of 60 climate scientists and energy engineers today released a White Paper showing how American “high efficiency – low emissions” power plants can save lives in Africa. Only a third of Africans have access to electricity, and the World Health Organization estimates that 439,000 Africans die every year because they have to cook in their homes with wood and dried animal dung. According to a top researcher for the WHO, “having an open fire in your kitchen is like burning 400 cigarettes an hour.”
New-tech American Coal-fired Electricity for Africa: Clean Air, Indoors and Out reports on a field visit and interviews at the “Ultra Super-Critical” John Turk coal-fired power plant that serves Arkansas, Texas, and Oklahoma. The plant eliminates virtually all pollutants from its emissions.
The White Paper reviews ten challenges that the operation of such a plant would face in the African economic and political context, and calls on the U.S. government to support proposals by African governments to import the American technology. Under Obama-era policies that are based on computer models that project a future “climate crisis” from emissions of a non-polluting plant food, carbon dioxide, U.S. foreign aid agencies currently oppose coal-fired electrical generation in Africa.
As the White Paper shows, international energy agencies agree that Africa will continue to use its abundant, inexpensive coal for electricity for decades to come. Unless this American technology is exported, China will build the scores of new power plants without pollution controls.
The post African Lives Matter Too appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF).
via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)
https://ift.tt/35E1rgD
November 17, 2020 at 09:45AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-11-17--Meet ‘The Centre for Climate Repair’

Meet ‘The Centre for Climate Repair’

This takes climate pretension to a new level .
Bizarre .
– – – WHO WE ARE — The Centre for Climate Repair at Cambridge is working in affiliation with Cambridge Zero at the University of Cambridge to safeguard our planet from the disastrous effects of global warming .
We are a cross-disciplinary research institution , aiming to develop and understand the solutions that will safeguard our planet from the disastrous consequences of global warming .
[ Talkshop note : their repetition , not ours . ]
Restoring broken climate systems – – – Each of these themes has a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Example : Researching solutions to restore damaged climate systems , for example refreezing the poles and preventing major ice sheets ( e.g .
Greenland ) from breaking off and causing sea levels to rise .
What measures and technologies could be safely deployed to return critical elements of the climate system to an undamaged state ?
Under what circumstances would these need to be deployed ?
Which authorities would need to allow the deployment of these measures ?
What are , amongst others , the legal , economic , political and ethical implications @ @ @ @ @ @ @ global cooperation in developing and possibly deploying these measures , in such a way that promotes peace and stability ?

This takes climate pretension to a new level. Bizarre.
– – –
WHO WE ARE — The Centre for Climate Repair at Cambridge is working in affiliation with Cambridge Zero at the University of Cambridge to safeguard our planet from the disastrous effects of global warming.
We are a cross-disciplinary research institution, aiming to develop and understand the solutions that will safeguard our planet from the disastrous consequences of global warming.
[Talkshop note: their repetition, not ours.]
RESEARCH THEMES
Deep and rapid emissions reductions
Greenhouse gas removal
Restoring broken climate systems
– – –
Each of these themes has a ‘find out more’ link. Example:
Restoring broken climate systems
Researching solutions to restore damaged climate systems, for example refreezing the poles and preventing major ice sheets (e.g. Greenland) from breaking off and causing sea levels to rise.
What measures and technologies could be safely deployed to return critical elements of the climate system to an undamaged state? Under what circumstances would these need to be deployed?
Which authorities would need to allow the deployment of these measures? What are, amongst others, the legal, economic, political and ethical implications of this?
How can we ensure global cooperation in developing and possibly deploying these measures, in such a way that promotes peace and stability?
via Tallbloke’s Talkshop
https://ift.tt/36HfSQp
November 17, 2020 at 09:18AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-11-17--The Trapdoor US Election

The Trapdoor US Election

An article at the Citizens Journal explains Whistleblowers Reveal How Software Manipulates Votes to Change Election Results .
Excerpts in italics with my bolds .
WASHINGTON—Trump campaign lawyer and former federal prosecutor Sidney Powell released an explosive affidavit on Nov. 16 , from a whistleblower who purports to have witnessed how election software secretly manipulates votes without leaving a trace .
The whistleblower—whose background is with the Venezuelan military , including the national security guard detail of the Venezuelan president—outlines a conspiracy between Smartmatic software executives , former Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez , and that country ’ s election officials @ @ @ @ @ @ @ retained power for years .
The whistleblower said he was present at multiple meetings .
“ I was witness to the creation and operation of a sophisticated electronic voting system that permitted the leaders of the Venezuelan government to manipulate the tabulation of votes for national and local elections and select the winner of those elections in order to gain and maintain their power , ” the affidavit states .
“ From that point on , Chavez never lost any election .
In fact , he was able to ensure wins for himself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mayors from townships.
” According to a U.S. intelligence professional who handled global telecommunications and participated in the investigation of the Smartmatic voting software , the software , regardless of any upgrade or branding differences , was used in multiple different voting machine companies during the 2020 election for the president and various down-ballot races .
The whistleblower said the “ software and fundamental design of the electronic electoral system and software of Dominion and other election tabulating companies relies upon software that is a descendant of the Smartmatic Electoral Management System.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is in the DNA of every vote tabulating company ’ s software and system , “ the whistleblower said .
The affidavit states that Dominion is one of three major companies that tabulates votes in the United States .
Powell said in a Nov. 15 interview , “ We ’ re getting ready to overturn election results in multiple states.
” She claimed that the U.S. election software switched “ millions of votes ” from Trump to Biden The whistleblower said Smartmatic created a system that anonymized the voters ’ choices inside the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ income by the end of the election day .
No vote could be traced back to an individual voter .
In the April 2013 Venezuelan election , the affidavit states , the conspirators had to take the internet down for two hours to reset the machines , as Nicolás Maduro was losing by too many votes to Capriles Radonsky .
The whistleblower said Chavez eventually exported the software to Bolivia , Nicaragua , Argentina , Ecuador , and Chile .
A second whistleblower , who came forward to The Epoch Times on Nov. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voter machine software works in the United States and how it can be programmed to predetermine the outcome .
Tore Maras said she ’ s a private contractor who worked for a conglomerate of private companies that were all created under the purview of former CIA Director John Brennan .
Maras alleges that the voting machine software used in U.S. elections was developed by one of Brennan ’ s companies , and allows “ full control of the electoral process.
” Her role during the 2012 federal election was to ensure evidence of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote tallies were complete at the end of the night .
She said the type of voter machine is irrelevant as they all carry the same software that can be tapped into and an algorithm sets the results .
As a paper ballot is fed through the machine , the information goes into an area called a trapdoor , which is where the manipulation occurs .
Only with a master key can the trapdoor be seen .
The trapdoor is ostensibly set up , Maras explained , to preserve voter anonymity .
However @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the software decides on the outcome .
The machines are programmed to feed out a vote tally report at set times or as a certain number of votes is reached .
For example , every time 500 votes , or 30 minutes has been reached , the results will leave the trapdoor and be sent to election reporting company Scytl , and then The Associated Press .
Maras said the algorithms are set to match the expected turnout and voter outcome in the county each machine is in .
In battleground counties , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden would receive 50.9 percent of the overall votes , and Trump would receive 48.1 percent , and a third candidate 1 percent .
“ They make it a little bit more believable , like there ’ s a race .
They input it , and then as the people vote , the algorithm regulates that , ” she said .
“ We don ’ t care if you voted for Mickey Mouse , the software is going to tell you what you voted for .
You ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump won in 2016 because the turnout for him exceeded the expected amount , which the software had been capped at .
She alleges that , because of 2016 , a turnout cap wasn ’ t likely set in 2020 , and again , when Trump voters exceeded predicted numbers , some states stopped counting in the middle of the night and waited for more Biden ballots to be shipped in , to cover a possible recount scenario .
Maras said the software has been used in many countries including Ukraine— ” that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their elections ” —as well as Iraq , Afghanistan , Macedonia , Albania , Germany , the UK , and Greece .

An article at the Citizens Journal explains Whistleblowers Reveal How Software Manipulates Votes to Change Election Results. Excerpts in italics with my bolds.
WASHINGTON—Trump campaign lawyer and former federal prosecutor Sidney Powell released an explosive affidavit on Nov. 16, from a whistleblower who purports to have witnessed how election software secretly manipulates votes without leaving a trace.
The whistleblower—whose background is with the Venezuelan military, including the national security guard detail of the Venezuelan president—outlines a conspiracy between Smartmatic software executives, former Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez, and that country’s election officials, to ensure Chavez won reelections and retained power for years. The whistleblower said he was present at multiple meetings.
“I was witness to the creation and operation of a sophisticated electronic voting system that permitted the leaders of the Venezuelan government to manipulate the tabulation of votes for national and local elections and select the winner of those elections in order to gain and maintain their power,” the affidavit states.
“From that point on, Chavez never lost any election. In fact, he was able to ensure wins for himself, his party, Congress persons and mayors from townships.”
According to a U.S. intelligence professional who handled global telecommunications and participated in the investigation of the Smartmatic voting software, the software, regardless of any upgrade or branding differences, was used in multiple different voting machine companies during the 2020 election for the president and various down-ballot races.
The whistleblower said the “software and fundamental design of the electronic electoral system and software of Dominion and other election tabulating companies relies upon software that is a descendant of the Smartmatic Electoral Management System.”
“In short, the Smartmatic software is in the DNA of every vote tabulating company’s software and system, “the whistleblower said.
The affidavit states that Dominion is one of three major companies that tabulates votes in the United States.
Powell said in a Nov. 15 interview, “We’re getting ready to overturn election results in multiple states.” She claimed that the U.S. election software switched “millions of votes” from Trump to Biden
The whistleblower said Smartmatic created a system that anonymized the voters’ choices inside the machine and then spat out the desired income by the end of the election day. No vote could be traced back to an individual voter.
In the April 2013 Venezuelan election, the affidavit states, the conspirators had to take the internet down for two hours to reset the machines, as Nicolás Maduro was losing by too many votes to Capriles Radonsky.
The whistleblower said Chavez eventually exported the software to Bolivia, Nicaragua, Argentina, Ecuador, and Chile.
Inside the United States
A second whistleblower, who came forward to The Epoch Times on Nov. 15, explained more about how the voter machine software works in the United States and how it can be programmed to predetermine the outcome.
Tore Maras said she’s a private contractor who worked for a conglomerate of private companies that were all created under the purview of former CIA Director John Brennan.
Maras alleges that the voting machine software used in U.S. elections was developed by one of Brennan’s companies, and allows “full control of the electoral process.” Her role during the 2012 federal election was to ensure evidence of vote manipulation had been erased after the vote tallies were complete at the end of the night.
She said the type of voter machine is irrelevant as they all carry the same software that can be tapped into and an algorithm sets the results. As a paper ballot is fed through the machine, the information goes into an area called a trapdoor, which is where the manipulation occurs. Only with a master key can the trapdoor be seen.
The trapdoor is ostensibly set up, Maras explained, to preserve voter anonymity. However, she alleges that’s where the software decides on the outcome. The machines are programmed to feed out a vote tally report at set times or as a certain number of votes is reached. For example, every time 500 votes, or 30 minutes has been reached, the results will leave the trapdoor and be sent to election reporting company Scytl, and then The Associated Press.
Maras said the algorithms are set to match the expected turnout and voter outcome in the county each machine is in. In battleground counties, for example, it could be preset that Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden would receive 50.9 percent of the overall votes, and Trump would receive 48.1 percent, and a third candidate 1 percent.
“They make it a little bit more believable, like there’s a race. They input it, and then as the people vote, the algorithm regulates that,” she said. “We don’t care if you voted for Mickey Mouse, the software is going to tell you what you voted for. You’re never voting.”
Maras predicts that Trump won in 2016 because the turnout for him exceeded the expected amount, which the software had been capped at. She alleges that, because of 2016, a turnout cap wasn’t likely set in 2020, and again, when Trump voters exceeded predicted numbers, some states stopped counting in the middle of the night and waited for more Biden ballots to be shipped in, to cover a possible recount scenario.
Maras said the software has been used in many countries including Ukraine—”that’s how we helped usher in their elections”—as well as Iraq, Afghanistan, Macedonia, Albania, Germany, the UK, and Greece.
#political-foibles
via Science Matters
https://ift.tt/3f7D0v0
November 17, 2020 at 09:06AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-11-18--Boris’s “Green Industrial Revolution” is Economic Lockdown, for ever…

The Global Warming Policy Forum ( GWPF ) today described the Prime Minister ’ s 10 Point Plan for a ‘ Green Industrial Revolution ’ as shallow gesture politics , but a gesture with severely negative economic implications from day one into the foreseeable future .
And we know that this will happen because all previous attempts to create a viable green economy have failed .
In March 2009 , the then Prime Minister Gordon Brown announced his Labour government ’ s ‘ industrial strategy , ’ a term the Conservatives have also adopted , promising to create 400,000 jobs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reminiscent of today ’ s announcement : Twelve years later Britain has green industries that are still dependent on huge handouts , now totalling £10 billion a year — and building nearly all their green equipment overseas .
The recent Seagreen offshore wind farm , for example , has awarded its contracts to two countries with cheap energy , the UAE and China , bitterly disappointing BiFab and other Scottish manufacturers .
Green miracles just don ’ t happen .
Chairman Boris ’ s Great Leap Forward will also fail to deliver the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ planning ” , it is an incoherent utopian dream unconstrained by economic and physical realities and a mess of unaffordable and incompatible goals .
For example , meeting the absurd offshore wind target of an additional 30 GW of capacity ( giving a total of 40 GW in 2030 ) , will have a total capital cost of £120bn–£130 billion for wind farms and offshore transmission grid , nearly all that expenditure going to overseas companies , just as it did with Seagreen .
Paying for that investment and all ancillary costs related @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a year on the UK electricity bill , roughly double the wholesale market value of the entire UK electricity sector at present , with horrific implications for electricity prices by the end of the decade .
Those high electricity prices will render utterly unaffordable the Prime Minister ’ s proposals for heat pumps and electric vehicles .
This will cause anger , not only because UK consumers will be confined to their freezing homes , but because many will have spent a fortune on realising the PM ’ s green utopia .
Heat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to install , so the Prime Minister aim of installing 600,000 Ground Source Heat Pumps a year by 2028 implies an annual cost of between £60 billion and £100 billion a year .
The post Boris ’ s “ Green Industrial Revolution ” is Economic Lockdown , for ever… appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum ( GWPF ) .

The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF) today described the Prime Minister’s 10 Point Plan for a ‘Green Industrial Revolution’ as shallow gesture politics, but a gesture with severely negative economic implications from day one into the foreseeable future.
And we know that this will happen because all previous attempts to create a viable green economy have failed.
In March 2009, the then Prime Minister Gordon Brown announced his Labour government’s ‘industrial strategy,’ a term the Conservatives have also adopted, promising to create 400,000 jobs. Brown’s words are strangely reminiscent of today’s announcement:
I want to create a global ‘green new deal’ that will pave the way for a low carbon recovery and to help us build tomorrow’s green economy today.”
Twelve years later Britain has green industries that are still dependent on huge handouts, now totalling £10 billion a year — and building nearly all their green equipment overseas. The recent Seagreen offshore wind farm, for example, has awarded its contracts to two countries with cheap energy, the UAE and China, bitterly disappointing BiFab and other Scottish manufacturers. Green miracles just don’t happen.
Chairman Boris’s Great Leap Forward will also fail to deliver the goods because, like all “economic planning”, it is an incoherent utopian dream unconstrained by economic and physical realities and a mess of unaffordable and incompatible goals.
For example, meeting the absurd offshore wind target of an additional 30 GW of capacity (giving a total of 40 GW in 2030), will have a total capital cost of £120bn–£130 billion for wind farms and offshore transmission grid, nearly all that expenditure going to overseas companies, just as it did with Seagreen.
Paying for that investment and all ancillary costs related to it will put something £27 billion a year on the UK electricity bill, roughly double the wholesale market value of the entire UK electricity sector at present, with horrific implications for electricity prices by the end of the decade.
Those high electricity prices will render utterly unaffordable the Prime Minister’s proposals for heat pumps and electric vehicles. This will cause anger, not only because UK consumers will be confined to their freezing homes, but because many will have spent a fortune on realising the PM’s green utopia.
Heat pumps cost between £10,000 and £20,000 each to install, so the Prime Minister aim of installing 600,000 Ground Source Heat Pumps a year by 2028 implies an annual cost of between £60 billion and £100 billion a year.
Dr John Constable, GWPF energy editor, said:
These over-reaching proposals are technically absurd, economically deluded and politically disastrous. Does the Prime Minister have any competent advisors? One wonders?”
The post Boris’s “Green Industrial Revolution” is Economic Lockdown, for ever… appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF).
via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)
https://ift.tt/2UQqjvD
November 18, 2020 at 06:12AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-11-18--Report Claim: In retrospect, the burning of wood in district heating plants has resulted in climate

Report Claim: In retrospect, the burning of wood in district heating plants has resulted in climate saving

A new report from the University of Copenhagen shows that the burning of wood is significantly more climate friendly than coal and slightly more climate friendly than ENERGY A new report from the University of Copenhagen shows that the burning of wood is significantly more climate friendly than coal and slightly more climate friendly than natural gas over the long run .
For the first time , researchers quantified what the conversion of 10 Danish cogeneration plants from coal or natural gas to biomass has meant for their greenhouse gas emissions .
Energy production is responsible for a large part @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2018 , more than 20 percent of greenhouse gas emissions were released as a result of heat and electricity production ( 9.4 out of 48 million tonnes of CO ) .
Photo : Getty A conversion to wood biomass ( wood chips and pellets ) by Danish district heating plants has benefited the climate and is the more climate-friendly option compared to coal and natural gas .
These are the findings of a new report from the University of Copenhagen ’ s Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management .
The study is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what a conversion to wood biomass has meant for greenhouse gas emissions at ten Danish cogeneration plants — and thereby the climate impact of replacing either coal or natural gas in favour of wood biomass .
Among other things , researchers calculated the so-called carbon payback period for each plant , i.e .
how long it takes for the conversion to wood biomass to elicit a positive climate effect .
“ Our results demonstrate that the transition from coal to wood biomass has had a positive effect on CO emissions after an average @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the transition from natural gas , it has in most cases taken between 9 and 22 years , and in one case 37 years before CO emissions were reduced , ” says Associate Professor Niclas Scott Bentsen of the Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management , who is one of the authors of the report .
The researchers also looked at the total CO emissions from the three energy sources over a 30-year period , which is the life expectancy of a cogeneration plant .
Transitioning from coal to biomass resulted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in CO emissions , while the move away from natural gas resulted in emissions reductions between -4 and 19 percent .
The fact that , in one case , emissions were -4 percent after 30 years as a result of the conversion , is partly due to the fact that , in relation to energy content , burning natural gas emits less CO than burning wood , and that this particular plant had notable changes in its product portfolio .
“ When such large fluctuations in the figures occur , it is because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CO emissions saved are significantly affected by the type of fuel , where it comes from and other alternative uses of the wood , ” says Associate Professor Niclas Scott Bentsen Forestry residues are best for the climate The 10 Danish cogeneration plants collected 32 percent of their wood biomass from Danish forests , while 41 percent was sourced from the Baltic states , seven percent from Russia and Belarus , and seven percent from the United States .
The type of wood biomass used and the distance it needed to be transported @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , according to Professor Bentsen .
“ For the typical plant that was once coal-fired , but now using wood from around Denmark and only uses forestry residue that can not be used for other products , the payback period was roughly one year .
The 30-year saving was as much as 60 % , ” explains Niclas Scott Bentsen .
Wood has an enormous potential to displace carbon heavy construction materials such as steel and concrete and is therefore an important aspect of the green transition .
“ Our study demonstrates that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for construction or other forms of production , where the long lifespan of wood can bind CO , is even better for the climate than using it as fuel , ” says Niclas Scott Bentsen .
The method used in the study includes an analysis of time series from individual plants that includes the pre- and post-conversion period from fossil energy sources to wood biomass .
Among other things , the analysis included specific knowledge of the type of fuel used , where the fuel came from and what alternative uses the wood @ @ @ @ @ @ @ responsible for a large part of Danish greenhouse gas emissions .
In 2018 , more than 20 percent of greenhouse gas emissions were released as a result of heat and electricity production ( 9.4 out of 48 million tonnes of CO ) Of Denmark ’ s total energy consumption , 16 percent of energy is generated from the burning of wood biomass .
By comparison , 7 percent of energy consumption comes from wind turbines .
To reduce the carbon recovery period and atmospheric CO emissions , utilities should focus on using residual @ @ @ @ @ @ @ logging or residuals from the wood industry that have no other use ) , biomass from productive forests , as well as reducing long transport distances .
The project is funded by Danish Energy and the Danish District Heating Association .
The project was followed by a follow-up group consisting of representatives from the Council for Green Conversion , the Danish Society for Nature Conservation , Concito and the Danish Energy Agency .
The report is peer reviewed by internationally renowned researchers .

A new report from the University of Copenhagen shows that the burning of wood is significantly more climate friendly than coal and slightly more climate friendly than
FACULTY OF SCIENCE – UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN
Research News
ENERGY A new report from the University of Copenhagen shows that the burning of wood is significantly more climate friendly than coal and slightly more climate friendly than natural gas over the long run. For the first time, researchers quantified what the conversion of 10 Danish cogeneration plants from coal or natural gas to biomass has meant for their greenhouse gas emissions.
Heat plant
Energy production is responsible for a large part of Danish greenhouse gas emissions. In 2018, more than 20 percent of greenhouse gas emissions were released as a result of heat and electricity production (9.4 out of 48 million tonnes of CO 2 ). Photo: Getty
A conversion to wood biomass (wood chips and pellets) by Danish district heating plants has benefited the climate and is the more climate-friendly option compared to coal and natural gas. These are the findings of a new report from the University of Copenhagen’s Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management.
The study is the first retrospective investigation by researchers of what a conversion to wood biomass has meant for greenhouse gas emissions at ten Danish cogeneration plants — and thereby the climate impact of replacing either coal or natural gas in favour of wood biomass.
Among other things, researchers calculated the so-called carbon payback period for each plant, i.e. how long it takes for the conversion to wood biomass to elicit a positive climate effect.
“Our results demonstrate that the transition from coal to wood biomass has had a positive effect on CO 2 emissions after an average of six years. When it comes to the transition from natural gas, it has in most cases taken between 9 and 22 years, and in one case 37 years before CO 2 emissions were reduced,” says Associate Professor Niclas Scott Bentsen of the Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management, who is one of the authors of the report.
Reduction in CO 2 emissions
The researchers also looked at the total CO 2 emissions from the three energy sources over a 30-year period, which is the life expectancy of a cogeneration plant.
Transitioning from coal to biomass resulted in a 15 to 71 percent reduction in CO 2 emissions, while the move away from natural gas resulted in emissions reductions between -4 and 19 percent.
The fact that, in one case, emissions were -4 percent after 30 years as a result of the conversion, is partly due to the fact that, in relation to energy content, burning natural gas emits less CO 2 than burning wood, and that this particular plant had notable changes in its product portfolio.
“When such large fluctuations in the figures occur, it is because the payback period and the amount of CO 2 emissions saved are significantly affected by the type of fuel, where it comes from and other alternative uses of the wood,” says Associate Professor Niclas Scott Bentsen
Forestry residues are best for the climate
The 10 Danish cogeneration plants collected 32 percent of their wood biomass from Danish forests, while 41 percent was sourced from the Baltic states, seven percent from Russia and Belarus, and seven percent from the United States. The type of wood biomass used and the distance it needed to be transported factored into the carbon budget as well, according to Professor Bentsen.
“For the typical plant that was once coal-fired, but now using wood from around Denmark and only uses forestry residue that cannot be used for other products, the payback period was roughly one year. The 30-year saving was as much as 60%,” explains Niclas Scott Bentsen.
Wood has an enormous potential to displace carbon heavy construction materials such as steel and concrete and is therefore an important aspect of the green transition.
“Our study demonstrates that the extent to which wood is used for construction or other forms of production, where the long lifespan of wood can bind CO 2 , is even better for the climate than using it as fuel,” says Niclas Scott Bentsen.
FACTS:
The method used in the study includes an analysis of time series from individual plants that includes the pre- and post-conversion period from fossil energy sources to wood biomass. Among other things, the analysis included specific knowledge of the type of fuel used, where the fuel came from and what alternative uses the wood might have had.
Energy production is responsible for a large part of Danish greenhouse gas emissions. In 2018, more than 20 percent of greenhouse gas emissions were released as a result of heat and electricity production (9.4 out of 48 million tonnes of CO 2 )
Of Denmark’s total energy consumption, 16 percent of energy is generated from the burning of wood biomass. By comparison, 7 percent of energy consumption comes from wind turbines.
To reduce the carbon recovery period and atmospheric CO 2 emissions, utilities should focus on using residual biomass (tree branches and crowns from logging or residuals from the wood industry that have no other use), biomass from productive forests, as well as reducing long transport distances.
###
The project is funded by Danish Energy and the Danish District Heating Association. The project was followed by a follow-up group consisting of representatives from the Council for Green Conversion, the Danish Society for Nature Conservation, Concito and the Danish Energy Agency. The report is peer reviewed by internationally renowned researchers.
From EurekAlert!
Like this: Like Loading…
Related


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-11-18--COVID Lockdowns Have Had No Impact On Atmospheric CO2

The Green New Deal has arrived , and it has nothing to do with either CO2 or climate .
The @ @ @ @ @ CO2 has not been affected by lockdowns or destruction of the airline industry .
Global @ @ @ @ @ reading →

The Green New Deal has arrived, and it has nothing to do with either CO2 or climate. The rate of growth of atmospheric CO2 has not been affected by lockdowns or destruction of the airline industry. Global Monitoring Laboratory – … Continue reading →
via Real Climate Science
https://ift.tt/35GTW8D
November 18, 2020 at 04:41AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-11-18--Banning the sale of petrol cars is ‘a colossal error’

According to the author , Professor Gautam Kalghatgi , because most vehicles will still run on fossil fuels in ten years ’ time , banning the sale of new ones would prevent any improvement in the efficiency of most of the vehicle fleet .
Even with an improbable hundred-fold increase to 10 million in battery electric vehicle numbers in 2030 , 75 % of cars will still run on petrol and diesel ” , says Professor Kalghatgi .
But no manufacturer is going to invest in more advanced cars if they are banned from selling them ” .
And Professor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ significant improvements in efficiency : If a battery car delivers a 25 % saving in greenhouse gas emissions on a life cycle basis , the overall reduction for the UK would be less than 4 % by 2030 .
A larger reduction emissions could be delivered with a 5 % improvement in fuel consumption of petrol and diesel vehicles.
” Banning the sale of new petrol and diesel cars simply means abandoning the possibility of future emissions reductions in this sector by freezing the technology of a vast majority of vehicles running U.K. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The post Banning the sale of petrol cars is ‘ a colossal error ’ appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum ( GWPF ) .

Eminent engineer reveals major flaw in UK Govt’s electric car plans
According to the author, Professor Gautam Kalghatgi, because most vehicles will still run on fossil fuels in ten years’ time, banning the sale of new ones would prevent any improvement in the efficiency of most of the vehicle fleet.
As Professor Kalghatgi explains:
Even with an improbable hundred-fold increase to 10 million in battery electric vehicle numbers in 2030, 75% of cars will still run on petrol and diesel”, says Professor Kalghatgi. But no manufacturer is going to invest in more advanced cars if they are banned from selling them”.
And Professor Kalghatgi says those advances could bring about significant improvements in efficiency:
If a battery car delivers a 25% saving in greenhouse gas emissions on a life cycle basis, the overall reduction for the UK would be less than 4% by 2030. A larger reduction emissions could be delivered with a 5% improvement in fuel consumption of petrol and diesel vehicles.” Banning the sale of new petrol and diesel cars simply means abandoning the possibility of future emissions reductions in this sector by freezing the technology of a vast majority of vehicles running U.K. transport for decades to come “.
The post Banning the sale of petrol cars is ‘a colossal error’ appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF).
via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)
https://ift.tt/35GZobS
November 18, 2020 at 04:25AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-11-18--Electric cars are good fun for wealthy virtue signallers, but a dreadful way to save the planet

In a move to burnish Britain ’ s green credentials , Boris Johnson is to announce a ban on the sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 .
He is following other political leaders , including Joe Biden , in promising lavish carrots to energise the market for electric cars along with sticks to outlaw petrol cars .
Unfortunately , electric cars will achieve only tiny emissions savings at a very high price .
Electric cars are certainly fun , but almost everywhere cost more across their lifetime than their petrol counterparts .
That is why subsidies are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because of their short range and long recharging times .
Despite the US handing out up to $ 10,000 ( £7,600 ) for each electric car , for example , fewer than 0.5 per cent of its cars are battery electric .
And almost all the support goes to the rich .
Ninety per cent of electric car owners also have a fossil-fuel driven car they drive further .
Indeed , electric vehicles are mostly a “ second car ” used for shorter trips and virtue signalling .
If you subsidise electric cars @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Almost 10 per cent of all Norway ’ s passenger cars are now electric because of generous policies that waive most costs .
Over its lifetime , a £23,000 car might receive benefits worth more than £20,000 .
But this approach is unsustainable for most nations .
Even Norway is starting to worry , losing more than a billion euros a year from exempt drivers .
Innovation will eventually make electric cars economical even without subsidies , but concerns over range and slow recharging will remain .
That is why most scientific prognoses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over the world .
A new study shows that by 2030 , just 13 per cent of new cars will be battery-electric .
If Johnson bans new petrol cars by then , he would essentially forbid 87 per cent of consumers from buying the cars they want .
It is hard to imagine that could be politically viable .
The International Energy Agency estimates that by 2030 , if all countries live up to their promises , the world will have 140 million electric cars on the road .
Yet , this would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for two reasons .
First , electric cars require large batteries , often produced in China using coal power .
Just producing the battery for an electric car can emit almost as much as a quarter of the greenhouse gasses emitted from a petrol car across its entire lifetime .
Second , the electric car is recharged on electricity that almost everywhere is significantly fossil-fuel based .
Together , this means that a long-range electric car will emit more CO2 for its first 60,000km than a petrol car .
This is why having @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could mean higher overall emissions .
Comparing electric and petrol , the International Energy Agency estimates the electric car will save six tons of CO2 over its lifetime , assuming global average electricity emissions .
Even if the electric car has a short range and its battery is made in Europe mostly using renewable energy , its savings will be at most 10 tons .
To use America as an example , if Biden restores the full electric car tax credit , he will essentially pay £5,700 to reduce emissions by at most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get US power producers to cut 10 tons for just £45 .
Indeed , if the whole world follows through and gets to 140 million electric cars by 2030 , the IEA estimates it will reduce emissions by just 190 million tonnes of CO2 – a mere 0.4 per cent of global emissions .
We need a reality check .
First , politicians should stop writing huge cheques just because they believe electric cars are a major climate solution .
Second , there is a simpler solution .
The hybrid car saves about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ electric car over its lifetime .
Third , climate change doesn ’ t care about where CO2 comes from .
Personal cars are only about 7 per cent of global emissions , and electric cars will only help a little .
Right now , electric car subsidies are something wealthy countries can afford to give elites to show virtue .
But if we want to fix the climate , we need to focus on the big emitters and drive innovation to create better low-CO2 energy from fusion , fission , geothermal , wind @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make just one of them cheaper than fossil fuels would mean not just rich Londoners changing their habits , but everyone , including China and India , switching large parts of their energy consumption toward zero emissions .
via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood
h/t Philip Bratby
A dose of reality from Bjorn Lomborg:
.
In a move to burnish Britain’s green credentials, Boris Johnson is to announce a ban on the sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030. He is following other political leaders, including Joe Biden, in promising lavish carrots to energise the market for electric cars along with sticks to outlaw petrol cars. Unfortunately, electric cars will achieve only tiny emissions savings at a very high price.
Electric cars are certainly fun, but almost everywhere cost more across their lifetime than their petrol counterparts. That is why subsidies are needed. And consumers are still anxious because of their short range and long recharging times. Despite the US handing out up to $10,000 (£7,600) for each electric car, for example, fewer than 0.5 per cent of its cars are battery electric. And almost all the support goes to the rich. Ninety per cent of electric car owners also have a fossil-fuel driven car they drive further. Indeed, electric vehicles are mostly a “second car” used for shorter trips and virtue signalling.
If you subsidise electric cars enough, people will buy them. Almost 10 per cent of all Norway’s passenger cars are now electric because of generous policies that waive most costs. Over its lifetime, a £23,000 car might receive benefits worth more than £20,000. But this approach is unsustainable for most nations. Even Norway is starting to worry, losing more than a billion euros a year from exempt drivers.
Innovation will eventually make electric cars economical even without subsidies, but concerns over range and slow recharging will remain. That is why most scientific prognoses show that electric cars will not take over the world. A new study shows that by 2030, just 13 per cent of new cars will be battery-electric. If Johnson bans new petrol cars by then, he would essentially forbid 87 per cent of consumers from buying the cars they want. It is hard to imagine that could be politically viable.
The International Energy Agency estimates that by 2030, if all countries live up to their promises, the world will have 140 million electric cars on the road. Yet, this would not make a significant impact on emissions for two reasons. First, electric cars require large batteries, often produced in China using coal power. Just producing the battery for an electric car can emit almost as much as a quarter of the greenhouse gasses emitted from a petrol car across its entire lifetime.
Second, the electric car is recharged on electricity that almost everywhere is significantly fossil-fuel based. Together, this means that a long-range electric car will emit more CO2 for its first 60,000km than a petrol car. This is why having a second electric car for short trips could mean higher overall emissions. Comparing electric and petrol, the International Energy Agency estimates the electric car will save six tons of CO2 over its lifetime, assuming global average electricity emissions. Even if the electric car has a short range and its battery is made in Europe mostly using renewable energy, its savings will be at most 10 tons.
To use America as an example, if Biden restores the full electric car tax credit, he will essentially pay £5,700 to reduce emissions by at most 10 tons. Yet, he can get US power producers to cut 10 tons for just £45. Indeed, if the whole world follows through and gets to 140 million electric cars by 2030, the IEA estimates it will reduce emissions by just 190 million tonnes of CO2 – a mere 0.4 per cent of global emissions.
We need a reality check. First, politicians should stop writing huge cheques just because they believe electric cars are a major climate solution. Second, there is a simpler solution. The hybrid car saves about the same amount of CO2 as an electric car over its lifetime. Third, climate change doesn’t care about where CO2 comes from. Personal cars are only about 7 per cent of global emissions, and electric cars will only help a little.
Right now, electric car subsidies are something wealthy countries can afford to give elites to show virtue. But if we want to fix the climate, we need to focus on the big emitters and drive innovation to create better low-CO2 energy from fusion, fission, geothermal, wind, and solar. Innovations that will make just one of them cheaper than fossil fuels would mean not just rich Londoners changing their habits, but everyone, including China and India, switching large parts of their energy consumption toward zero emissions.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/11/17/dont-expect-electric-cars-save-planet/
via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
https://ift.tt/35E1AAO
November 18, 2020 at 03:54AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-11-18--More Boris disasters waiting to happen

More Boris disasters waiting to happen

To risk a series of disasters , both economic and environmental , in exchange for a few hours in the limelight seems extraordinarily foolish .
Whatever your views of the rights and wrongs of lockdowns , the coronavirus pandemic has undoubtedly been a national disaster .
The damage to the economy , to the health and wealth of the nation , and to trust in our institutions will be long-term and possibly irreparable .
People will be arguing for years about whether the Johnson government could have managed things differently , but the Prime Minister will never escape the fact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and his legacy will always be tarnished by questions of whether the real disaster was the response to the pandemic rather than the virus itself .
Largely unnoticed , a couple of weeks ago , we narrowly avoided another crisis , which , if not of the Prime Minister ’ s making , was at least the result of policy measures he supports and wants to extend .
With wind speeds very low , the much-vaunted fleet of offshore wind turbines was dismally failing to pull the skin off the proverbial rice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of its theoretical capacity .
In the middle of the week , it looked as though the country was in danger of being plunged into blackouts , and grid managers put out repeated requests for somebody – anybody !
– to step into the breach , either by switching on mothballed plant or by reducing demand .
Customers of one electricity company were invited to switch appliances off during the evening peak in return for free electricity another time .
Desperate measures were clearly the order of the day , but they at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
With every power plant generating , including much-maligned coal-fired power stations , the country made it through the evening peak unscathed .
Just .
How much longer that will be possible remains to be seen .
The Government is hell-bent on eliminating anything fossil-fuelled , which means pretty much anything that can be switched on when needed .
Interconnectors to Europe are not going to save us either , because low wind speeds typically affect the whole continent .
It seems clear that we will soon have no way to fill the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blow .
At that point , widespread power cuts will become the norm and Mr Johnson will have played his part in creating a second national disaster .
And unfortunately , there are signs of a third car-crash – this time one that is both economic and environmental – on the horizon .
It turns out that offshore wind farm operators have been siting turbines too close to each other .
Usually the impact of so-called ‘ wake effects ’ is hidden , but it emerged today that one of the two wind @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pay the other one the best part of £2million pounds per year – six per cent of turnover – to compensate for the upwind turbines both ‘ stealing ’ energy from the downwind ones and causing turbulence , with knock-on effects on performance and operating costs .
Future wind farms will therefore have to be much more spaced out .
This will have two effects .
Firstly , developers will have to move further offshore to find enough space .
This will take them into deeper waters , driving the cost of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the cost of power from fossil fuels and rising fast – up still further .
Higher energy prices means fewer jobs , so Mr Johnson ’ s plans may make him the architect of a second , wholly avoidable , economic disaster .
But worse , the area of ocean that will be required for all these wind farms will be much greater .
The capacity that the Committee on Climate Change says we will need to decarbonise the economy will occupy an area roughly half the size of Scotland .
We would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than 20 miles across and more than 200 metres ( 656ft ) high , stretching from Thanet to John O ’ Groats .
Migratory birds are known to fly around wind farms if they can .
Whether any would make it through a barrier of the kind that Prime Minister plans to build remains to be seen .
In other words , a national environmental disaster could be another part of the Johnson legacy to the country .
The word from within Whitehall is that the Government is doing everything it can to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ big climate conference in Glasgow at the end of next year .
Mr Johnson will let nothing get in the way of his being able to strut the international stage and win the plaudits of other green-minded leaders .
But to risk a series of disasters , both economic and environmental , in exchange for a few hours in the limelight seems extraordinarily foolish .
The post More Boris disasters waiting to happen appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum ( GWPF ) .

To risk a series of disasters, both economic and environmental, in exchange for a few hours in the limelight seems extraordinarily foolish.
Whatever your views of the rights and wrongs of lockdowns, the coronavirus pandemic has undoubtedly been a national disaster.
The damage to the economy, to the health and wealth of the nation, and to trust in our institutions will be long-term and possibly irreparable.
People will be arguing for years about whether the Johnson government could have managed things differently, but the Prime Minister will never escape the fact that things went pear-shaped on his watch, and his legacy will always be tarnished by questions of whether the real disaster was the response to the pandemic rather than the virus itself.
Largely unnoticed, a couple of weeks ago, we narrowly avoided another crisis, which, if not of the Prime Minister’s making, was at least the result of policy measures he supports and wants to extend. With wind speeds very low, the much-vaunted fleet of offshore wind turbines was dismally failing to pull the skin off the proverbial rice pudding, generating only a tiny fraction of its theoretical capacity.
In the middle of the week, it looked as though the country was in danger of being plunged into blackouts, and grid managers put out repeated requests for somebody – anybody! – to step into the breach, either by switching on mothballed plant or by reducing demand.
Customers of one electricity company were invited to switch appliances off during the evening peak in return for free electricity another time. Desperate measures were clearly the order of the day, but they at least seem to have done the trick. With every power plant generating, including much-maligned coal-fired power stations, the country made it through the evening peak unscathed. Just.
How much longer that will be possible remains to be seen. The Government is hell-bent on eliminating anything fossil-fuelled, which means pretty much anything that can be switched on when needed. Interconnectors to Europe are not going to save us either, because low wind speeds typically affect the whole continent.
It seems clear that we will soon have no way to fill the void when the wind doesn’t blow. At that point, widespread power cuts will become the norm and Mr Johnson will have played his part in creating a second national disaster.
And unfortunately, there are signs of a third car-crash – this time one that is both economic and environmental – on the horizon. It turns out that offshore wind farm operators have been siting turbines too close to each other.
Usually the impact of so-called ‘wake effects’ is hidden, but it emerged today that one of the two wind farms sited off Wirral is having to pay the other one the best part of £2million pounds per year – six per cent of turnover – to compensate for the upwind turbines both ‘stealing’ energy from the downwind ones and causing turbulence, with knock-on effects on performance and operating costs. Future wind farms will therefore have to be much more spaced out.
This will have two effects. Firstly, developers will have to move further offshore to find enough space. This will take them into deeper waters, driving the cost of the electricity they produce – already many times the cost of power from fossil fuels and rising fast – up still further. Higher energy prices means fewer jobs, so Mr Johnson’s plans may make him the architect of a second, wholly avoidable, economic disaster.
But worse, the area of ocean that will be required for all these wind farms will be much greater. The capacity that the Committee on Climate Change says we will need to decarbonise the economy will occupy an area roughly half the size of Scotland.
We would need a wall of turbines, more than 20 miles across and more than 200 metres (656ft) high, stretching from Thanet to John O’Groats. Migratory birds are known to fly around wind farms if they can. Whether any would make it through a barrier of the kind that Prime Minister plans to build remains to be seen. In other words, a national environmental disaster could be another part of the Johnson legacy to the country.
The word from within Whitehall is that the Government is doing everything it can to look green in the run-up to the big climate conference in Glasgow at the end of next year. Mr Johnson will let nothing get in the way of his being able to strut the international stage and win the plaudits of other green-minded leaders. But to risk a series of disasters, both economic and environmental, in exchange for a few hours in the limelight seems extraordinarily foolish.
The post More Boris disasters waiting to happen appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF).
via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)
https://ift.tt/3pBLQGh
November 18, 2020 at 03:49AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-11-18--PM’s “green industrial revolution” plan hits the road — subsidies all round

Of course the assumption behind most of this is that the climate needs ‘ saving ’ from the demonic trace gas CO2 , according to failing climate models anyway .
We ’ ll skip most of the BBC commentary and show the main points of the plan .
The expressed aim is ‘ to put the UK on track to meet its goal of net zero emissions by 2050 ’ .
No sign of the eye-watering costs , in this report at least .
– – – New cars and vans powered wholly by petrol and diesel will not be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Boris Johnson has said .
But some hybrids would still be allowed , he confirmed .
It is part of what the prime minister calls a “ green industrial revolution ” to tackle climate change and create jobs in industries such as nuclear .
Critics of the plan say the £4bn allocated is far too small for the scale of the challenge .
The total amount of new money announced in the package is a 25th of the projected £100bn cost of high-speed rail , HS2 .
.
.
.
The PM ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : Produce enough offshore wind to power every home in the UK , quadrupling how much it produces to 40 gigawatts by 2030 , and supporting up to 60,000 jobs .
# 2 Hydrogen : Have five gigawatts of “ low carbon ” hydrogen production capacity by 2030 – for industry , transport , power and homes – and develop the first town heated by the gas by the end of the decade .
# 3 Nuclear : Pushing nuclear power as a clean energy source and including provision for a large nuclear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ small nuclear reactors , which could support 10,000 jobs .
# 4 Electric vehicles : Phasing out sales of new petrol and diesel cars and vans by 2030 to accelerate the transition to electric vehicles and investing in grants to help buy cars and charge point infrastructure .
# 5 Public transport , cycling and walking : Making cycling and walking more attractive ways to travel and investing in zero-emission public transport for the future .
# 6 Jet zero and greener maritime : Supporting research projects for zero-emission planes and ships .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Making homes , schools and hospitals greener , warmer and more energy efficient , including a target to install 600,000 heat pumps every year by 2028 .
# 8 Carbon capture : Developing world-leading technology to capture and store harmful emissions away from the atmosphere , with a target to remove 10 million tonnes of carbon dioxide by 2030 – equivalent to all emissions of the industrial Humber .
# 9 Nature : Protecting and restoring the natural environment , with plans to include planting 30,000 hectares of trees a year .
# @ @ @ @ @ @ @ technologies and making the City of London the global centre of green finance .
.
.
.
Talkshop note : The report ends with some of the usual suspects , so to speak , claiming it ’ s nowhere near enough .

Of course the assumption behind most of this is that the climate needs ‘saving’ from the demonic trace gas CO2, according to failing climate models anyway. We’ll skip most of the BBC commentary and show the main points of the plan. The expressed aim is ‘to put the UK on track to meet its goal of net zero emissions by 2050’. No sign of the eye-watering costs, in this report at least.
– – –
New cars and vans powered wholly by petrol and diesel will not be sold in the UK from 2030, Boris Johnson has said.
But some hybrids would still be allowed, he confirmed.
It is part of what the prime minister calls a “green industrial revolution” to tackle climate change and create jobs in industries such as nuclear.
Critics of the plan say the £4bn allocated is far too small for the scale of the challenge.
The total amount of new money announced in the package is a 25th of the projected £100bn cost of high-speed rail, HS2.
. . .
The PM’s 10-point plan
#1 Offshore wind: Produce enough offshore wind to power every home in the UK, quadrupling how much it produces to 40 gigawatts by 2030, and supporting up to 60,000 jobs.
#2 Hydrogen: Have five gigawatts of “low carbon” hydrogen production capacity by 2030 – for industry, transport, power and homes – and develop the first town heated by the gas by the end of the decade.
#3 Nuclear: Pushing nuclear power as a clean energy source and including provision for a large nuclear plant, as well as for advanced small nuclear reactors, which could support 10,000 jobs.
#4 Electric vehicles: Phasing out sales of new petrol and diesel cars and vans by 2030 to accelerate the transition to electric vehicles and investing in grants to help buy cars and charge point infrastructure.
#5 Public transport, cycling and walking: Making cycling and walking more attractive ways to travel and investing in zero-emission public transport for the future.
#6 Jet zero and greener maritime: Supporting research projects for zero-emission planes and ships.
#7 Homes and public buildings: Making homes, schools and hospitals greener, warmer and more energy efficient, including a target to install 600,000 heat pumps every year by 2028.
#8 Carbon capture: Developing world-leading technology to capture and store harmful emissions away from the atmosphere, with a target to remove 10 million tonnes of carbon dioxide by 2030 – equivalent to all emissions of the industrial Humber.
#9 Nature: Protecting and restoring the natural environment, with plans to include planting 30,000 hectares of trees a year.
#10 Innovation and finance: Developing cutting-edge technologies and making the City of London the global centre of green finance.
. . .
Talkshop note: The report ends with some of the usual suspects, so to speak, claiming it’s nowhere near enough.
Full report here.
via Tallbloke’s Talkshop
https://ift.tt/3lKXGeX
November 18, 2020 at 03:30AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-11-18--‘Is it time for the political fall of renewable energy?’ [Peacock in the Houston Chronicle]

Is it time for the political fall of renewable energy ?
[ Opinion ] The Houston Chronicle will not publish me , despite my hometown status and credential of being associated with a The piece by Peacock , a principal here at MasterResource , follows in its entirety .
At the end of October , several electricity generators and wind industry representatives teamed up to ask the Public Utility Commission of Texas to impose an electricity “ tax ” on Texas consumers of up to $ 4 billion a year in order to increase their revenues .
Their reason for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t think they make enough money .
Rather than pushing the PUC and the Texas Legislature to eliminate one of the main reasons that some of them are taking a revenue hit , renewable energy subsidies , they decided to ask for subsidies themselves .
To understand why this is happening , let ’ s back up a bit .
In our new paper , The Economic Fall & Political Rise of Renewable Energy , Robert Bradley , Jr. points out that from the beginning of history , renewable energy held @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But over the last 300 years , that market share dropped to nearly zero in the developed world , except where water was abundant .
At the end of October , several electricity generators and wind industry representatives teamed up to ask the Public Utility Commission of Texas to impose an electricity “ tax ” on Texas consumers of up to $ 4 billion a year in order to increase their revenues .
Their reason for asking for this new tax ?
They don ’ t think they make enough money .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Texas Legislature to eliminate one of the main reasons that some of them are taking a revenue hit , renewable energy subsidies , they decided to ask for subsidies themselves .
To understand why this is happening , let ’ s back up a bit .
In our new paper , The Economic Fall & Political Rise of Renewable Energy , Robert Bradley , Jr. points out that from the beginning of history , renewable energy held a market share of about 100 percent .
But over the last 300 years , that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the developed world , except where water was abundant .
This happened because renewables like wind and solar are unreliable , inefficient , and expensive sources of energy .
And when something better came along , i.e.
, fossil and nuclear fuels , the market all but eliminated them from the fuel mix .
This began to change in the 1970s when politicians and energy experts became ( wrongly ) convinced that we were running out of oil and gas .
So , they started to pour billions of tax dollars into synthetic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Yet , as Bradley writes , “ despite a four-decade effort , wind power , solar power , and ethanol are still not competitive against conventional carbon-based energy .
Electric vehicles are also uneconomic on a stand-alone basis compared to the internal combustion engine.
” Renewables will never catch up to modern , efficient sources of energy .
But this hasn ’ t stopped federal , state and local governments from continuing to force consumers and taxpayers to subsidize renewable energy companies , making energy in American less affordable and reliable in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ national leader in this effort .
Texas built $ 7 billion worth of “ CREZ ” transmission lines to benefit wind and solar farms located far from population centers ; Texas electricity customers pay down this debt every month , with interest , on their electric bills .
Mandates to purchase renewable energy have added another $ 500 million .
We ’ ve also paid close to $ 1 billion more to connect renewable generators to the grid .
Local tax abatements ( Tax Code Chapters 312 and 313 ) have reduced property @ @ @ @ @ @ @ million .
And the cost of federal subsidies ( stimulus payments and the Production Tax Credit ) to renewable generation in Texas have topped $ 6 billion .
Add it all up and renewable energy generators in Texas have reaped close to $ 18 billion since 2006 , all of it coming out of the pockets of taxpayers and consumers .
It is impossible to track which businesses benefit from all these subsidies .
But we can track which companies benefit from the tax credits offered through PTC .
NextEra Energy leads the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ billion of tax credits since 2008 .
Also , on the list are NRG Energy ( $ 1.1 billion ) , BP ( $ 913 million ) , and Exelon ( $ 528 ) million .
These companies have a combined market cap of $ 278 billion .
Despite all the money we ’ ve been forced to pay these and other companies , it still is not enough , as witnessed by the energy generators operating in Texas — most generators have both conventional and renewable assets — going to the PUC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ per year .
They claim that if Texas doesn ’ t force consumers to pay them higher prices for electricity , the lights will go out .
But they made the same claim back in 2012 .
These companies seem to hope that a sympathetic PUC may force this electricity tax on consumers .
But this should not be the PUC ’ s decision to make .
If Texas is going to abandon its world-class competitive electricity market and force consumers to pay generators another $ 4 billion a year , that decision @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the governor .
But it need not come to that ; the way to improve our tight — though sufficient — electricity reserves is through the market with less subsidies , not more .
The PUC should end operating procedures that favor renewable generation , such as subsidizing their transmission and allowing them to fail to dispatch electricity when needed without penalty .
The Texas Legislature should end local 312 and 313 tax abatements for renewable generation and mandates for purchasing electricity from renewable sources .
And it should tell the PUC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ PTC .
Markets have already declared renewable energy outdated .
It is time for policy makers to do the same .
Peacock is the vice president of research at the Texas Public Policy Foundation .
Update : Bill is

By Bill Peacock Dec. 5, 2018
Is it time for the political fall of renewable energy? [Opinion]
———————
By Bill Peacock Dec. 5, 2018
———————
The Houston Chronicle will not publish me, despite my hometown status and credential of being associated with a
The piece by Peacock, a principal here at MasterResource, follows in its entirety.
At the end of October, several electricity generators and wind industry representatives teamed up to ask the Public Utility Commission of Texas to impose an electricity “tax” on Texas consumers of up to $4 billion a year in order to increase their revenues.
Their reason for asking for this new tax? They don’t think they make enough money.
Rather than pushing the PUC and the Texas Legislature to eliminate one of the main reasons that some of them are taking a revenue hit, renewable energy subsidies, they decided to ask for subsidies themselves.
To understand why this is happening, let’s back up a bit.
In our new paper, The Economic Fall & Political Rise of Renewable Energy, Robert Bradley, Jr. points out that from the beginning of history, renewable energy held a market share of about 100 percent. But over the last 300 years, that market share dropped to nearly zero in the developed world, except where water was abundant.
At the end of October, several electricity generators and wind industry representatives teamed up to ask the Public Utility Commission of Texas to impose an electricity “tax” on Texas consumers of up to $4 billion a year in order to increase their revenues.
Their reason for asking for this new tax? They don’t think they make enough money.
Rather than pushing the PUC and the Texas Legislature to eliminate one of the main reasons that some of them are taking a revenue hit, renewable energy subsidies, they decided to ask for subsidies themselves.
To understand why this is happening, let’s back up a bit.
In our new paper, The Economic Fall & Political Rise of Renewable Energy, Robert Bradley, Jr. points out that from the beginning of history, renewable energy held a market share of about 100 percent. But over the last 300 years, that market share dropped to nearly zero in the developed world, except where water was abundant.
This happened because renewables like wind and solar are unreliable, inefficient, and expensive sources of energy. And when something better came along, i.e., fossil and nuclear fuels, the market all but eliminated them from the fuel mix.
This began to change in the 1970s when politicians and energy experts became (wrongly) convinced that we were running out of oil and gas. So, they started to pour billions of tax dollars into synthetic fuels, electric cars and renewables.
Yet, as Bradley writes, “despite a four-decade effort, wind power, solar power, and ethanol are still not competitive against conventional carbon-based energy. Electric vehicles are also uneconomic on a stand-alone basis compared to the internal combustion engine.”
Renewables will never catch up to modern, efficient sources of energy. But this hasn’t stopped federal, state and local governments from continuing to force consumers and taxpayers to subsidize renewable energy companies, making energy in American less affordable and reliable in the process.
Unfortunately, Texas is a national leader in this effort.
Texas built $7 billion worth of “CREZ” transmission lines to benefit wind and solar farms located far from population centers; Texas electricity customers pay down this debt every month, with interest, on their electric bills. Mandates to purchase renewable energy have added another $500 million. We’ve also paid close to $1 billion more to connect renewable generators to the grid.
Local tax abatements (Tax Code Chapters 312 and 313) have reduced property tax revenue by more than $500 million. And the cost of federal subsidies (stimulus payments and the Production Tax Credit) to renewable generation in Texas have topped $6 billion.
Add it all up and renewable energy generators in Texas have reaped close to $18 billion since 2006, all of it coming out of the pockets of taxpayers and consumers.
It is impossible to track which businesses benefit from all these subsidies. But we can track which companies benefit from the tax credits offered through PTC.
NextEra Energy leads the list, being eligible for $5.7 billion of tax credits since 2008. Also, on the list are NRG Energy ($1.1 billion), BP ($913 million), and Exelon ($528) million. These companies have a combined market cap of $278 billion.
Despite all the money we’ve been forced to pay these and other companies, it still is not enough, as witnessed by the energy generators operating in Texas — most generators have both conventional and renewable assets — going to the PUC to ask for another $4 billion per year.
They claim that if Texas doesn’t force consumers to pay them higher prices for electricity, the lights will go out. But they made the same claim back in 2012.
These companies seem to hope that a sympathetic PUC may force this electricity tax on consumers. But this should not be the PUC’s decision to make.
If Texas is going to abandon its world-class competitive electricity market and force consumers to pay generators another $4 billion a year, that decision should be made by the Texas Legislature and the governor.
But it need not come to that; the way to improve our tight — though sufficient — electricity reserves is through the market with less subsidies, not more.
The PUC should end operating procedures that favor renewable generation, such as subsidizing their transmission and allowing them to fail to dispatch electricity when needed without penalty. The Texas Legislature should end local 312 and 313 tax abatements for renewable generation and mandates for purchasing electricity from renewable sources. And it should tell the PUC to eliminate the distortions caused by the PTC.
Markets have already declared renewable energy outdated. It is time for policy makers to do the same.
—————
Peacock is the vice president of research at the Texas Public Policy Foundation. Update: Bill is


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-11-18--Washington Post: President Biden will Punish Australia for Climate Failures

According to the Washington Post , Biden plans to impose trade tariffs on Australia unless Australia embraces a net zero carbon plan and curbs Australia ’ s CO2 intensive energy export industry .
SYDNEY — Joe Biden ’ s victory in the presidential election was largely welcomed by America ’ s friends as a step toward more predictable and conventional U.S. foreign policy .
One close American ally , though , faces a thorny predicament as a result of Biden ’ s plan to build a global coalition to combat global warming : Australia .
Australia is the world ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ natural gas exporter , according to industry bodies , and one of the biggest emitters of greenhouse gases per person .
This status , combined with years of hand-wringing on both sides of Australian politics over climate policies , has earned the country a reputation as a climate-change laggard .
“ Australia has nowhere to hide , ” former Labor prime minister Kevin Rudd said in an interview .
“ It ’ s time for Morrison to swallow his pride , admit he was wrong and embrace a carbon target.
” “ Our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the United Kingdom ; they won ’ t be set in Brussels ; they won ’ t be set in any part of the world other than here , ” Morrison said last week .
Once a Biden administration takes office , one of the main economic threats to Australia is whether the United States goes ahead with a plan to impose tariffs on big emitters of carbon dioxide .
A lot of Australian mainstream media outlets and celebrities backed Biden to win against Trump .
If Biden imposes climate sanctions , or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ placate a new US administration , everyone in Australia would feel the impact ; curbing Australian exports would likely turn Australia ’ s mild trade surplus into a trade deficit , ending the economic free run Australians have enjoyed for the last two decades , by putting upward pressure on interest rates and the prices of imported goods .
Biden sanctions could force Australia to choose between reconciliation with China and economic ruin .
Australia ’ s support for US efforts to curb China ’ s aggressive expansionism has triggered a costly trade @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no position to fight a trade war with both the USA and China at the same time .

Aussie PM Scott Morrison Brandishes a Lump of Coal in Parliament
Guest essay by Eric Worrall
According to the Washington Post, Biden plans to impose trade tariffs on Australia unless Australia embraces a net zero carbon plan and curbs Australia’s CO2 intensive energy export industry.
Biden’s plan to combat climate change leaves coal-loving Australia an outlier By A. Odysseus PatrickNovember 17, 2020 at 8:00 p.m. GMT+10 SYDNEY — Joe Biden’s victory in the presidential election was largely welcomed by America’s friends as a step toward more predictable and conventional U.S. foreign policy. One close American ally, though, faces a thorny predicament as a result of Biden’s plan to build a global coalition to combat global warming: Australia. Australia is the world’s second-largest coal exporter and top liquefied natural gas exporter, according to industry bodies, and one of the biggest emitters of greenhouse gases per person. This status, combined with years of hand-wringing on both sides of Australian politics over climate policies, has earned the country a reputation as a climate-change laggard. … “Australia has nowhere to hide,” former Labor prime minister Kevin Rudd said in an interview. “It’s time for Morrison to swallow his pride, admit he was wrong and embrace a carbon target.” … “Our policies won’t be set in the United Kingdom; they won’t be set in Brussels; they won’t be set in any part of the world other than here,” Morrison said last week. … Once a Biden administration takes office, one of the main economic threats to Australia is whether the United States goes ahead with a plan to impose tariffs on big emitters of carbon dioxide. … Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/australia-climate-fires-biden-murdoch/2020/11/17/25516342-2306-11eb-9c4a-0dc6242c4814_story.html
A lot of Australian mainstream media outlets and celebrities backed Biden to win against Trump.
If Biden imposes climate sanctions, or if Australia shuts down energy exports to placate a new US administration, everyone in Australia would feel the impact; curbing Australian exports would likely turn Australia’s mild trade surplus into a trade deficit, ending the economic free run Australians have enjoyed for the last two decades, by putting upward pressure on interest rates and the prices of imported goods.
Biden sanctions could force Australia to choose between reconciliation with China and economic ruin. Australia’s support for US efforts to curb China’s aggressive expansionism has triggered a costly trade war with China. Australia is in no position to fight a trade war with both the USA and China at the same time.
Like this: Like Loading…
Related