notrickszone--2020-12-06--Former WMO Official: CO2 “Insignificant For Balance Of Energy”, “Completely Unnecessary” To Reduce C

Former WMO Official: CO2 “Insignificant For Balance Of Energy”, “Completely Unnecessary” To Reduce CO2

CO2 has little impact on climate , important for life , says former UN official .
With this manuscript I would like to deal with the CO2 topic , which currently seems to be so extremely important for media and politics , solely according to the precepts of free and real scientific argumentation , but also driven by my conscience as a physicist who has been active in this field since about 1960 .
I am compelled by moral obligation for my fellow human beings , to whom one would expect financial sacrifices in the trillions of dollars and very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the following years and decades , although CO2 has practically nothing to do with climate change .
After having played a major role in the development and operation of the German air pollution monitoring network for the DFG and UBA , I had the opportunity to gain a lot of experience as Chief Environment Division at the World Meteorological Organization ( WMO ) of the United Nations .
I was also responsible for the office of the WMO “ Panel of Experts on Meteorological Aspects of Environmental Pollution ” .
Its members , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Chemistry in Mainz , Prof. Chr .
Junge as Chairman , were the world ’ s leading experts , mostly heads of university institutes , some of whom were also the authors of the then standard textbooks .
This panel also dealt with the recently emerging interest in CO2 and its presumed impact on the climate .
It was then very clear that , if a quantitative , rather than the previously only qualitative , view were taken , CO2 would have to be virtually insignificant .
This is because the omnipresent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as clouds , fog , etc . )
, which is present in much higher concentrations ( 10-20 liters/m3 ) .
Water vapor absorbs in all IR frequencies and does so 1000 times more strongly and more than the anthropogenic CO2 , which in its very low concentration ( 20-40 milliliters/m3 ) .
absorbs far less in only two IR bands .
For the IR radiation balance , anthropogenic CO2 is ineffective .
The natural frequencies of the two molecules are so different because the O=C=O ( molecular weight 44 ) atom is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weight 18 ) atom is relatively heavier ( H:1 , C:12 , O:16 ) .
Thus , the two molecules are fundamentally different in their IR behavior .
CO2 is not intended by nature as a climatic parameter .
Thanks to its long residence time , it serves to transport organic reactive carbon into the vegetation areas .
Now a statistical correlation between CO2 concentration and atmospheric temperature has been found from observational data .
But it is important to know that such a correlation does not say anything about which of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and above all it is not possible to see if the correlation is a direct causal one .
Because a correlation between two variables seems to exist even if both respond in the same direction with one or more other variables .
That could be clarified with sufficient data .
Since the presumed connection was seen first only qualitatively , fantastic assumptions are available for a hypothesis ; they need only to appear plausible .
There can be no question of a fulfilled criterion .
The suspected connection remains a pure hypothesis as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seriously checked and discussed .
But this no longer happened , because this physical topic was already withdrawn from classical science in the 1970s , taken up decisively by politics and the media and used with zeal to make us believe that CO2 is a “ greenhouse gas ” .
Serious scientists were no longer allowed to have their say , and since then only the hypothesis of the “ climate gas CO2 ” , which was shaped by the media , politics , fanatical laymen , catastrophic media , self-proclaimed know-it-alls of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been valid .
In view of the mass of greener , unobjectively incited followers , the conservative parties felt compelled to do everything they could to keep their voters , but above all to win back those they had lost .
This is how the many climate protection slogans and ultimately also parliamentary “ climate protection ” laws came into being , for which physics must not apply .
The fight for the climate is a matter of life and death .
This was already shown by the first green action that initially @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the laws of thermodynamics , it has a slightly better efficiency than the gasoline engine because the diesel cylinder is hotter due to the higher pressure – which also produces the highly life-threatening particulate matter .
The scientific literature of the 1960s had vehemently warned against the diesel engine because its unique , otherwise unheard-of particulate matter penetrates directly into human cells where it causes cancer ( especially in the lungs and brain ) , even enhanced by all the harmful gases whose molecules adhere firmly to this particulate matter .
Thousands of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ every year .
But when it came to climate protection , a human life was obviously worth nothing .
In the past , environmental protection also and above all took care of human health .
Today a human life for a few saved CO2 molecules is now good news for the green climate protectors .
By the way , diesel drivers then opted for stronger engines because of the cheaper fuel , thus ultimately emitted more CO2 than they saved .
People continue to murder without hesitation and with a clear conscience because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ macabre moral .
The fine particles of diesel fuel can not be held back by any filter that can be installed in a car .
Filters that can do this would have to have a huge surface or would have such a high flow resistance that the engine would not be able to run well .
It is therefore understandable that car manufacturers have to resort to tricks because they can not change the laws of physics , even if politicians apparently think it is possible .
There is only one possibility : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ removed from the road if one wanted to prevent thousands of deaths every year , but this seems to be no longer an issue .
Killing for “ climate protection ” ?
Simply incredible !
And even an electric car hardly saves any energy because it has to carry the huge battery around with it , while a carburetor car gets the oxygen it needs as an essential element from the air for free .
To the just mentioned thermodynamics : The efficiency of each energy conversion is determined by it .
So @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , coal , gas ) into other forms of energy ( motion , pressure , electrical or potential energy , etc . )
with the help of our highly intelligent technology , according to thermodynamics this happens only partially with an efficiency of usually less than 50 % , on average about 20-40 % .
The remaining 60-80 % are irreversibly lost as “ waste ” heat and causes a warming of the environment , especially the lower air layers .
There are certain possibilities , e.g .
with the combined heat and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but here too , the law of residual heat applies to every conversion .
Thus , in all energy conversions we give off about twice the amount of the used energy as waste heat to the lower air layers , a considerable amount .
( By the way , every adult is also a radiator of 75 watts ) .
So our energy consumption alone heats up the environment .
And this energy consumption is of course proportional to the number of people inhabiting the earth .
It allows people to enjoy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ progress provide .
This correlation between energy consumption and the earth ’ s temperature , which is determined by physics , has so far been attributed , without ever wanting to doubt it , only to the CO2 produced by the consumption of fossil fuels .
The CO2 ultimately comes from the oceans .
On the ocean floor , the earth ’ s crust is only 7 km away from the hot interior of the earth .
And the volcanoes on the sea floor release magma into the sea .
This results in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CO2 dissolved in the sea surface .
There it evaporates , also according to the law of partial pressure , and thanks to its extraordinarily long dwell time in the atmosphere , it then reaches the interior of large continents , where it is needed by vegetation .
As the concentration of CO2 increases , the Earth ’ s green spaces increase , as NASA observations have shown .
Nature is clever .
Water vapor almost entirely regulates the energy balance CO2 is therefore primarily to feed us and to supply the biosphere @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Therefore , CO2 has its 24-hour maximum at night .
Nevertheless , it is insignificant for the balance of the energy radiated by the sun during the day and the energy released into space at night as infrared radiation , far more than 90 % of the radiated energy .
This balance is , as explained above , regulated almost exclusively by the water content of the atmosphere .
Every morning we get the proof for it .
After a cloudy night , the early temperature is hardly lower than the previous evening @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is up to 10°C and more cooler than in the evening before , despite the nightly maximum of anthropogenic CO2 .
If you try to imagine the huge amounts of energy involved , it is easy to understand that the little anthropogenic CO2 gets completely “ lost ” .
Temperature rise “ hardly anything to do with CO2 ” The strong increase in population density , almost tenfold , a whole order of magnitude , which occurred barely 150 years ago with the beginning of industrialization , in the blink of an eye @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ran parallel to the relatively abrupt rise in atmospheric temperature .
As already mentioned , this has hardly anything to do with CO2 .
One can certainly regard CO2 as an indicator of energy consumption , but not as the cause of warming .
It is not only impossible to reduce CO2 , it is also completely unnecessary .
All the planned , expensive , painful measures that reduce our quality of life can be spared without affecting the temperature curve .
So there are only two ways to prevent the so-called “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : A clear restraint in energy consumption of any kind , and , still utopian , to push back the population of the earth , which would require a very long time , if at all possible , it would be a challenge of the century .
To nourish even more inhabitants , fertilizer chemistry would no longer be sufficient .
The planet is probably already overpopulated .
So only the energy saving remains .
Here politics , media , fanatics , Greens , misguided , notorious know-it-alls and self-proclaimed experts of all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strategy and leave CO2 to nature .
Without the carbohydrates in our plant-derived food , there would be no more human life .
But we would not burn up in an apocalyptic climate catastrophe , because instead we would all first suffocate without the oxygen obtained from CO2 .
But all those who present themselves so devotedly and overly self-confidently as the preventers of an apocalypse , they should realize that nature can not be changed and that man can not , and does not want to , fight against natural events .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and even inspiration .
They also should not constantly imagine catastrophes and present them as the sure future for our children , who are unable to psychologically process them and therefore have to be treated psychologically , probably even Greta Thunberg .
When it comes to saving energy , there are still countless possibilities for heating , cooking , cooling , transport , etc .
We already know this .
Only a small example : When preparing meals , even a small family can easily save 1-2 kWh each if the cooking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Just a few drops and a well-fitting lid are enough for healthy steaming at a reduced cooker temperature , because to heat water from 20° to 100° you need about 80 kcal per ml , but to evaporate the 100° hot water you need another 540 kcal per ml .
Where you see steam , energy is being wasted massively .
That says it all .
With a little thought , everyone can find many ways to save energy , there are almost no limits to your imagination .
And besides , you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ safely forget about CO2 !
Its removal would only bring us misfortune .
And even if we could completely eliminate anthropogenic CO2 , nature would simply get it back from the oceans .
Even the burial of CO2 would be pointless .
No model has come true , incorrect , arbitrary assumptions A few words about the often quoted climate models .
These models are adapted to known weather data from the past and then extrapolated into the future .
No model has been correct beyond a forecast period of a few months @ @ @ @ @ @ @ So the question is justified how well models can predict the weather for decades and centuries .
In any case , nothing that the first climate models predicted for today in 1970 came true , no meter-high rise in sea level , no 4-5° higher temperatures .
Too much had been ignored in the models , they also contain some factors whose value can not be determined experimentally and must be estimated arbitrarily .
So one is easily tempted to choose them in such a way that one comes close to the hoped-for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ H2O was underestimated in the models , the CO2 effect had to be overestimated to get the desired prediction curve , as a Finnish academic paper recently reported .
The models also calculated how much Germany can contribute to lowering the temperature by the planned reduction of CO2 .
Result : 7/100 degrees , theoretically , and unmeasurable .
No noticeable success for two trillion euros .
Creation can not be botched up .
Man can not change the world .
He can not , as already indicated , mobilize the necessary energies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the approximately 7000 thunderstorms daily converts the energy of the Hiroshima bomb in one hour ( which it did in a fraction of a second ) ; a single tropical cyclone has the energy that corresponds to man ’ s global consumption of electrical energy in one year ; and if one wanted to generate the heat that the small Gulf Stream carries , one would have to operate 110,000 nuclear power plants across the Atlantic , i.e .
one every 50 meters ( not km ) .
That shows how weak @ @ @ @ @ @ @ man could make weather , he would have a new weapon of war .
Good thing that we know so little about the weather that we can not do it ourselves .
( Spatially and temporally very limited precipitation can be influenced , nothing more ) .
In the end , wise nature protects us .
Another observation gives us clues for the temporal sequence of heat and CO2 concentration .
Recent palaeoclimatic studies show that in the course of the earth ’ s history , it became warmer first and then the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that , as already mentioned , by far the largest part of CO2 on earth is found in the oceans .
The concentrations in the depths are higher than in the upper layers , a consequence of the many volcanoes active on the ocean floor .
By the way , the CO2 in the ocean also serves to enable the life of calcareous aquatic plants ( e.g .
corals ) .
The worldwide consensus on the CO2 issue is repeatedly pointed out .
This was mainly due to the fact that skeptical scientists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and their work no longer published ( also because publishers were afraid of fanatics who were ready to commit terror ) .
Skeptics , often inappropriately called “ climate deniers ” , are insulted , silenced under threats or career consequences .
Yet , the scientific research institutes ( climate impact research ) run by the state at high cost would have to be closed down if they accepted CO2 as insignificant .
Many jobs would be lost .
This can not be risked .
But a consensus among those ( where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the field – there are not that many ) is not a scientific criterion .
Consensus as proof ?
Only to the ignorant !
The planet ’ s climate control system regulates the infrared radiation budget with water vapor and clouds .
A reduction of anthropogenic CO2 , with an enormously expensive expenditure and loss of life quality , is not suitable for this purpose because of its low IR sensitivity .
The waste heat inevitably generated by 9 billion earthlings according to the physics of thermodynamics can only be reduced by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by a decrease in population .
However , as already mentioned , this can be done by the diesel engine , especially as SUV .
Whether politicians want to make further use of this possibility is up to their ethical standards .
What is new is that Chinese climate researchers recently reported several long-term temperature cycles with periods of varying length .
These will have a roughly simultaneous minimum in the coming decades , leading to significantly lower temperatures initially in Central Asia .
It can not be ruled out that the rest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

Share this...
CO2 has little impact on climate, important for life, says former UN official.
By Albert Köhler MSc.
(Translation, editing, subheadings by P Gosselin)
With this manuscript I would like to deal with the CO2 topic, which currently seems to be so extremely important for media and politics, solely according to the precepts of free and real scientific argumentation, but also driven by my conscience as a physicist who has been active in this field since about 1960. I am compelled by moral obligation for my fellow human beings, to whom one would expect financial sacrifices in the trillions of dollars and very significant losses in quality of life in the following years and decades, although CO2 has practically nothing to do with climate change.
After having played a major role in the development and operation of the German air pollution monitoring network for the DFG and UBA, I had the opportunity to gain a lot of experience as Chief Environment Division at the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) of the United Nations. I was also responsible for the office of the WMO “Panel of Experts on Meteorological Aspects of Environmental Pollution”. Its members, under the then Director of the MPI for Chemistry in Mainz, Prof. Chr. Junge as Chairman, were the world’s leading experts, mostly heads of university institutes, some of whom were also the authors of the then standard textbooks. This panel also dealt with the recently emerging interest in CO2 and its presumed impact on the climate.
Water vapor 1000 times stronger
It was then very clear that, if a quantitative, rather than the previously only qualitative, view were taken, CO2 would have to be virtually insignificant. This is because the omnipresent water vapor of the atmosphere (H2O as clouds, fog, etc.), which is present in much higher concentrations (10-20 liters/m3). Water vapor absorbs in all IR frequencies and does so 1000 times more strongly and more than the anthropogenic CO2, which in its very low concentration (20-40 milliliters/m3). absorbs far less in only two IR bands. For the IR radiation balance, anthropogenic CO2 is ineffective. The natural frequencies of the two molecules are so different because the O=C=O (molecular weight 44) atom is relatively lighter and the H-O-H (molecular weight 18) atom is relatively heavier (H:1, C:12, O:16). Thus, the two molecules are fundamentally different in their IR behavior. CO2 is not intended by nature as a climatic parameter. Thanks to its long residence time, it serves to transport organic reactive carbon into the vegetation areas.
Correlation not a causal one
Now a statistical correlation between CO2 concentration and atmospheric temperature has been found from observational data. But it is important to know that such a correlation does not say anything about which of the two variables is cause and effect, and above all it is not possible to see if the correlation is a direct causal one. Because a correlation between two variables seems to exist even if both respond in the same direction with one or more other variables. That could be clarified with sufficient data. Since the presumed connection was seen first only qualitatively, fantastic assumptions are available for a hypothesis; they need only to appear plausible. There can be no question of a fulfilled criterion. The suspected connection remains a pure hypothesis as long as not all doubts have been seriously checked and discussed.
Serious scientists blocked out
But this no longer happened, because this physical topic was already withdrawn from classical science in the 1970s, taken up decisively by politics and the media and used with zeal to make us believe that CO2 is a “greenhouse gas”. Serious scientists were no longer allowed to have their say, and since then only the hypothesis of the “climate gas CO2”, which was shaped by the media, politics, fanatical laymen, catastrophic media, self-proclaimed know-it-alls of all faculties and political parties, has been valid. In view of the mass of greener, unobjectively incited followers, the conservative parties felt compelled to do everything they could to keep their voters, but above all to win back those they had lost. This is how the many climate protection slogans and ultimately also parliamentary “climate protection” laws came into being, for which physics must not apply.
Diesel engines initially welcome
The fight for the climate is a matter of life and death. This was already shown by the first green action that initially coddled the diesel engine. According to the laws of thermodynamics, it has a slightly better efficiency than the gasoline engine because the diesel cylinder is hotter due to the higher pressure – which also produces the highly life-threatening particulate matter. The scientific literature of the 1960s had vehemently warned against the diesel engine because its unique, otherwise unheard-of particulate matter penetrates directly into human cells where it causes cancer (especially in the lungs and brain), even enhanced by all the harmful gases whose molecules adhere firmly to this particulate matter. Thousands of frequent drivers therefore have to die earlier every year. But when it came to climate protection, a human life was obviously worth nothing.
Human life acceptable price for saving CO2
In the past, environmental protection also and above all took care of human health. Today a human life for a few saved CO2 molecules is now good news for the green climate protectors. By the way, diesel drivers then opted for stronger engines because of the cheaper fuel, thus ultimately emitted more CO2 than they saved. People continue to murder without hesitation and with a clear conscience because they supposedly save CO2, a very macabre moral. The fine particles of diesel fuel cannot be held back by any filter that can be installed in a car. Filters that can do this would have to have a huge surface or would have such a high flow resistance that the engine would not be able to run well. It is therefore understandable that car manufacturers have to resort to tricks because they cannot change the laws of physics, even if politicians apparently think it is possible. There is only one possibility: The diesel engine would have to be removed from the road if one wanted to prevent thousands of deaths every year, but this seems to be no longer an issue. Killing for “climate protection”? Simply incredible! And even an electric car hardly saves any energy because it has to carry the huge battery around with it, while a carburetor car gets the oxygen it needs as an essential element from the air for free.
Energy conversion leads to waste heat
To the just mentioned thermodynamics: The efficiency of each energy conversion is determined by it. So if we convert chemical energy (oil, coal, gas) into other forms of energy (motion, pressure, electrical or potential energy, etc.) with the help of our highly intelligent technology, according to thermodynamics this happens only partially with an efficiency of usually less than 50%, on average about 20-40%. The remaining 60-80% are irreversibly lost as “waste” heat and causes a warming of the environment, especially the lower air layers. There are certain possibilities, e.g. with the combined heat and power system, to use residual heat, but here too, the law of residual heat applies to every conversion. Thus, in all energy conversions we give off about twice the amount of the used energy as waste heat to the lower air layers, a considerable amount. (By the way, every adult is also a radiator of 75 watts). So our energy consumption alone heats up the environment. And this energy consumption is of course proportional to the number of people inhabiting the earth. It allows people to enjoy all the comforts that science and technical progress provide.
CO2 leads to greening
This correlation between energy consumption and the earth’s temperature, which is determined by physics, has so far been attributed, without ever wanting to doubt it, only to the CO2 produced by the consumption of fossil fuels. The CO2 ultimately comes from the oceans. On the ocean floor, the earth’s crust is only 7 km away from the hot interior of the earth. And the volcanoes on the sea floor release magma into the sea. This results in the formation of various compounds, including CO2 dissolved in the sea surface. There it evaporates, also according to the law of partial pressure, and thanks to its extraordinarily long dwell time in the atmosphere, it then reaches the interior of large continents, where it is needed by vegetation. As the concentration of CO2 increases, the Earth’s green spaces increase, as NASA observations have shown. Nature is clever.
Water vapor almost entirely regulates the energy balance
CO2 is therefore primarily to feed us and to supply the biosphere with the oxygen released during photosynthesis. Therefore, CO2 has its 24-hour maximum at night. Nevertheless, it is insignificant for the balance of the energy radiated by the sun during the day and the energy released into space at night as infrared radiation, far more than 90% of the radiated energy. This balance is, as explained above, regulated almost exclusively by the water content of the atmosphere. Every morning we get the proof for it. After a cloudy night, the early temperature is hardly lower than the previous evening, but in the open air it is up to 10°C and more cooler than in the evening before, despite the nightly maximum of anthropogenic CO2. If you try to imagine the huge amounts of energy involved, it is easy to understand that the little anthropogenic CO2 gets completely “lost”.
Temperature rise “hardly anything to do with CO2”
The strong increase in population density, almost tenfold, a whole order of magnitude, which occurred barely 150 years ago with the beginning of industrialization, in the blink of an eye in the history of the Earth, ran parallel to the relatively abrupt rise in atmospheric temperature. As already mentioned, this has hardly anything to do with CO2. One can certainly regard CO2 as an indicator of energy consumption, but not as the cause of warming. It is not only impossible to reduce CO2, it is also completely unnecessary. All the planned, expensive, painful measures that reduce our quality of life can be spared without affecting the temperature curve.
Curbing waste heat from 9 billion people
So there are only two ways to prevent the so-called “climate catastrophe”. And these are: A clear restraint in energy consumption of any kind, and, still utopian, to push back the population of the earth, which would require a very long time, if at all possible, it would be a challenge of the century. To nourish even more inhabitants, fertilizer chemistry would no longer be sufficient. The planet is probably already overpopulated. So only the energy saving remains. Here politics, media, fanatics, Greens, misguided, notorious know-it-alls and self-proclaimed experts of all colors must abandon the past comfortable consensus strategy and leave CO2 to nature. Without the carbohydrates in our plant-derived food, there would be no more human life. But we would not burn up in an apocalyptic climate catastrophe, because instead we would all first suffocate without the oxygen obtained from CO2.
Leave the climate catastrophe threats out
But all those who present themselves so devotedly and overly self-confidently as the preventers of an apocalypse, they should realize that nature cannot be changed and that man cannot, and does not want to, fight against natural events. They should accept it with due modesty, and even inspiration. They also should not constantly imagine catastrophes and present them as the sure future for our children, who are unable to psychologically process them and therefore have to be treated psychologically, probably even Greta Thunberg.
Many easy, practical ways to save energy
When it comes to saving energy, there are still countless possibilities for heating, cooking, cooling, transport, etc. We already know this. Only a small example: When preparing meals, even a small family can easily save 1-2 kWh each if the cooking pots are not filled with water. Just a few drops and a well-fitting lid are enough for healthy steaming at a reduced cooker temperature, because to heat water from 20° to 100° you need about 80 kcal per ml, but to evaporate the 100° hot water you need another 540 kcal per ml. Where you see steam, energy is being wasted massively. That says it all. With a little thought, everyone can find many ways to save energy, there are almost no limits to your imagination. And besides, you even save money. But you can safely forget about CO2! Its removal would only bring us misfortune. And even if we could completely eliminate anthropogenic CO2, nature would simply get it back from the oceans. Even the burial of CO2 would be pointless.
No model has come true, incorrect, arbitrary assumptions
A few words about the often quoted climate models. These models are adapted to known weather data from the past and then extrapolated into the future. No model has been correct beyond a forecast period of a few months with forecasts that are still acceptable. So the question is justified how well models can predict the weather for decades and centuries. In any case, nothing that the first climate models predicted for today in 1970 came true, no meter-high rise in sea level, no 4-5° higher temperatures. Too much had been ignored in the models, they also contain some factors whose value cannot be determined experimentally and must be estimated arbitrarily. So one is easily tempted to choose them in such a way that one comes close to the hoped-for result. But because the influence of H2O was underestimated in the models, the CO2 effect had to be overestimated to get the desired prediction curve, as a Finnish academic paper recently reported.
Statistically insignificant, unmeasurable human impact
The models also calculated how much Germany can contribute to lowering the temperature by the planned reduction of CO2. Result: 7/100 degrees, theoretically, and unmeasurable. No noticeable success for two trillion euros. Creation cannot be botched up. Man cannot change the world. He cannot, as already indicated, mobilize the necessary energies. Here are some examples: Each of the approximately 7000 thunderstorms daily converts the energy of the Hiroshima bomb in one hour (which it did in a fraction of a second); a single tropical cyclone has the energy that corresponds to man’s global consumption of electrical energy in one year; and if one wanted to generate the heat that the small Gulf Stream carries, one would have to operate 110,000 nuclear power plants across the Atlantic, i.e. one every 50 meters (not km). That shows how weak humans are. Thank heavens because if man could make weather, he would have a new weapon of war. Good thing that we know so little about the weather that we cannot do it ourselves. (Spatially and temporally very limited precipitation can be influenced, nothing more). In the end, wise nature protects us.
CO2 follows temperature
Another observation gives us clues for the temporal sequence of heat and CO2 concentration. Recent palaeoclimatic studies show that in the course of the earth’s history, it became warmer first and then the CO2 increased. It must be considered that, as already mentioned, by far the largest part of CO2 on earth is found in the oceans. The concentrations in the depths are higher than in the upper layers, a consequence of the many volcanoes active on the ocean floor. By the way, the CO2 in the ocean also serves to enable the life of calcareous aquatic plants (e.g. corals).
Climate science consensus is a myth, scientists silenced
The worldwide consensus on the CO2 issue is repeatedly pointed out. This was mainly due to the fact that skeptical scientists were often silenced in an unseemly manner, and their work no longer published (also because publishers were afraid of fanatics who were ready to commit terror). Skeptics, often inappropriately called “climate deniers”, are insulted, silenced under threats or career consequences. Yet, the scientific research institutes (climate impact research) run by the state at high cost would have to be closed down if they accepted CO2 as insignificant. Many jobs would be lost. This cannot be risked. But a consensus among those (where a vast majority cannot be experts in the field – there are not that many) is not a scientific criterion.
Consensus as proof? Only to the ignorant!
Short summary, and interesting news
The planet’s climate control system regulates the infrared radiation budget with water vapor and clouds. A reduction of anthropogenic CO2, with an enormously expensive expenditure and loss of life quality, is not suitable for this purpose because of its low IR sensitivity. The waste heat inevitably generated by 9 billion earthlings according to the physics of thermodynamics can only be reduced by strict energy saving or at some point by a decrease in population. However, as already mentioned, this can be done by the diesel engine, especially as SUV. Whether politicians want to make further use of this possibility is up to their ethical standards.
What is new is that Chinese climate researchers recently reported several long-term temperature cycles with periods of varying length. These will have a roughly simultaneous minimum in the coming decades, leading to significantly lower temperatures initially in Central Asia.
It cannot be ruled out that the rest of the world will also be affected.
Albert Köhler MSc.
Germany, November 2020
Donate - choose an amount
5 10 15 20 50 100 250 500 1000


notrickszone--2020-12-07--12 Indian Meteorologists Demonstrate How Warming Can Be ‘Discovered’ In Temperature Records

A new temperature record for all of India shows no obvious net warming since 1951 or 1705 .
But when scientists select a cold year and draw in a red-hot short-term upward trend from that point , warming appears .
Pages 21 to 45 of a new Springer book entitled Assessment of Climate Change over the Indian Region and authored by 12 Indian meteorologists ( Sanjay et al.
, 2020 ) assesses the temperature changes for India as a whole throughout the last few centuries .
A proxy temperature reconstruction since 1705 reveals no obvious net modern warming – and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
When the drawn-in trend lines are removed , an annual , max .
and min .
instrumental record that begins in 1951 also shows no obvious net warming .
Since a non-warming trend during an era when CO2 concentrations rose from 315 to 415 ppm would not support the narrative that the globe has been rapidly warming due to human activity , the authors took the necessary steps to create a warming trend where none existed .
A cold year , 1986 , was selected as the starting point for the newfangled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a red-hot warming trend line was drawn-in and a per-decade rate of warming ( i.e.
, 0.15°C ) also emerged in flaming red tones .
And , just like that , India is in the fold , sweltering in the throes of anthropogenic global warming .

Share this...
A new temperature record for all of India shows no obvious net warming since 1951 or 1705. But when scientists select a cold year and draw in a red-hot short-term upward trend from that point, warming appears.
Pages 21 to 45 of a new Springer book entitled Assessment of Climate Change over the Indian Region and authored by 12 Indian meteorologists (Sanjay et al., 2020) assesses the temperature changes for India as a whole throughout the last few centuries.
A proxy temperature reconstruction since 1705 reveals no obvious net modern warming – and a warmer 18th century than recent decades.
When the drawn-in trend lines are removed, an annual, max. and min. instrumental record that begins in 1951 also shows no obvious net warming.
Since a non-warming trend during an era when CO2 concentrations rose from 315 to 415 ppm would not support the narrative that the globe has been rapidly warming due to human activity, the authors took the necessary steps to create a warming trend where none existed.
A cold year, 1986, was selected as the starting point for the newfangled global warming in India. From there, a red-hot warming trend line was drawn-in and a per-decade rate of warming (i.e., 0.15°C) also emerged in flaming red tones.
And, just like that, India is in the fold, sweltering in the throes of anthropogenic global warming.


notrickszone--2020-12-08--Environment Of Dystopia: Germany Plans To Wipe Out 20 Million Sq M Of 1000-Year Old Forest, For Wind

Environment Of Dystopia: Germany Plans To Wipe Out 20 Million Sq M Of 1000-Year Old Forest, For Wind Parks!

20 million square meters of 1000-year old “ fairy tale ” forest to be designated as an industrial wind park zone .
“ Approval procedure in final phase ” !
At Facebook , environmentalist Gero Lenhardt writes a desperate plea to rescue one of Germany ’ s most idyllic , fairy tale-like forests : the Reinhardswald located in the hilly region just west of Göttingen .
1000-year-old “ fairy tale ” forest is slated to be industrialized for “ green ” energy The German state of Hesse ’ s largest contiguous forest area will become a wind industry area if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Reinhardswald is known as the “ treasure house of European forests ” or “ Grimm ’ s fairy tale forest ” .
“ A total of about 2000 hectares ( 20 million m² ) of the thousand-year-old Reinhardswald have been designated for wind power plant development , ” says Lenhardt , at Gegenwind Deutschland .
“ The massive resistance of the affected citizens is being ignored by the state government , ” reports Lenhardt .
Natural , virtually undisturbed habitat may fall victim of the greed of crony policymakers and industry lobbyists .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ unprecedented size are planned ( see map ) , the approval procedure is in its final phase , ” says Lenhardt .
Location of planned wind parks in the Reinhardswald , west of Göttingen ( Google Map ) .
And that would only be the beginning : A total of more than 60 of these gigantic wind turbines could be built on 7 large areas .
Lenhardt writes that their wonderful Reinhardswald is “ on the verge of being degraded ” and “ with incalculable consequences for nature and the whole region.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ citizens and the attention from around the world .
Lenhardt says that not only will the planned turbines pose a hazard to drinking water for over 50,000 people , it will also disfigure the landscape and lead to noise pollution for hikers , tourists and residents .
Moreover it will seriously endanger rare bird life such as the black stork , red kite , bats and other red-listed species .
You can write a statement protesting the planned construction of the wind parks by sending an email to : Einwendungen_III_33-1 @ rpks.hessen.de .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ as many Germans understand English quite well .
You can visit their site at : www.rettet-den-reinhardswald.de .
“ But no matter what you write , the main thing is that you write !
” says Lenhardt .
The following are visualizations are that are true to scale and position and thus illustrate what the Reinhardswald will look like should the project go through .

Share this...
Green madness and environmental destruction
20 million square meters of 1000-year old “fairy tale” forest to be designated as an industrial wind park zone. “Approval procedure in final phase”!
At Facebook, environmentalist Gero Lenhardt writes a desperate plea to rescue one of Germany’s most idyllic, fairy tale-like forests: the Reinhardswald located in the hilly region just west of Göttingen.
1000-year-old “fairy tale” forest is slated to be industrialized for “green” energy
The German state of Hesse’s largest contiguous forest area will become a wind industry area if profit-seeking planners get their way.
The Reinhardswald is known as the “treasure house of European forests” or “Grimm’s fairy tale forest”.
“A total of about 2000 hectares (20 million m²) of the thousand-year-old Reinhardswald have been designated for wind power plant development,” says Lenhardt, at Gegenwind Deutschland. “The massive resistance of the affected citizens is being ignored by the state government,” reports Lenhardt.
Natural, virtually undisturbed habitat may fall victim of the greed of crony policymakers and industry lobbyists. “The first 20 wind turbines of unprecedented size are planned (see map), the approval procedure is in its final phase,” says Lenhardt.
Location of planned wind parks in the Reinhardswald, west of Göttingen (Google Map).
60 gigantic turbines, danger to red-listed species
And that would only be the beginning: A total of more than 60 of these gigantic wind turbines could be built on 7 large areas.
Lenhardt writes that their wonderful Reinhardswald is “on the verge of being degraded” and “with incalculable consequences for nature and the whole region.”
He needs both the support of local citizens and the attention from around the world.
Lenhardt says that not only will the planned turbines pose a hazard to drinking water for over 50,000 people, it will also disfigure the landscape and lead to noise pollution for hikers, tourists and residents.
Moreover it will seriously endanger rare bird life such as the black stork, red kite, bats and other red-listed species.
You can write a statement protesting the planned construction of the wind parks by sending an email to: Einwendungen_III_33-1@rpks.hessen.de. Emails in the English language are fine as many Germans understand English quite well. You can visit their site at: www.rettet-den-reinhardswald.de.
“But no matter what you write, the main thing is that you write!” says Lenhardt.
Visualizations of dystopian environment
The following are visualizations are that are true to scale and position and thus illustrate what the Reinhardswald will look like should the project go through.
Donate - choose an amount
5 10 15 20 50 100 250 500 1000


notrickszone--2020-12-09--German Greens, NABU, Slammed For Giving Big Wind A Clear Way For Large-Scale Wind Projects In Forest

German Greens, NABU, Slammed For Giving Big Wind A Clear Way For Large-Scale Wind Projects In Forests

“ The wind power industry can not be expanded in a ‘ nature-compatible ’ way , ” says nature conservation group Naturschutzinitiativ .
Slams pseudo environmental groups , the German Green Party .
Yesterday I wrote about plans to transform 20 million square meters of a 1000-year old forest into an industrial wind complex comprising 60 200+ meter tall turbines with a rotor diameter of 150 meters and a rated capacity of 5.6 MW True nature conservationists are in shock at the proposal , which is now in its final approval phase .
How can anyone even consider such environmental @ @ @ @ @ @ @ environmentalists like the German Green Party and groups like NABU .
All of this is being made possible by the relaxation of otherwise strict environmental standards all in the name of the superordinate “ climate change protection ” .
Now , real nature protection group Naturschutz Initiativ here issued a press release asking if the traditional environmental protection groups such as NABU or the German Green Party have abandoned their original mission of environmental protection and become the lobbyists for Big Wind .
Nothing to do with environmental protection .
Photo : red @ @ @ @ @ @ @ NI archive .
NABU and the Greens say auf Wiedersehen to environmental protection NABU and Bündnis 90/Die Grünen ( German Green Party ) have presented a joint strategy paper to accelerate the allegedly “ nature-compatible ” expansion of wind energy , says Naturschutzinitiativ , “ The paper is rather a farewell of the once bird protection association for nature and species protection .
The paper calls for “ electricity quantity-related expansion targets ” with the aim of “ exceptional reasons of public safety under species protection law ” .
As a consequence , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weakening of nature conservation , which is obviously intended by the authors , or at least accepted by them .
Provisions in the paper are aimed at completely releasing the approval procedures from the urgently needed constitutional examination for the wind power industry .
Naturschutzinitiativ also states : The wording of one provision in the paper is an attempt to finally undermine the EU legal protection of individuals of specially protected species by taking it to the population level .
The formulation of NABU and the Greens is a 1:1 implementation of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Under the guise of climate protection The German government clearly wants to comply with the wind power industry ’ s demand to exempt nature-damaging interventions in the context of “ climate protection ” from the compensation obligations under nature conservation law , states the press release Naturschutzinitiativ adds : “ Wherever the wind power industry invades the last natural areas , exactly the opposite consequences occur : The devaluation of previously large , coherently valuable areas.
” Big Wind should be “ as unhindered as possible ” The remaining points of the paper @ @ @ @ @ @ @ goal of the paper : To enable the wind power industry to operate in a framework that is as unhindered as possible .
The paper is no basis for a “ peace ” deal between the wind power industry and nature .
It is rather the parting of the former bird protection environmental group from nature and protection of species , ” says Harry Neumann , Federal Chairman of the Nature Conservation Initiative e.V .
( NI ) and Dr. Wolfgang Epple .
“ The wind power industry can not be expanded in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has apparently given up both the protection of large-scale near-natural landscapes and the technically sound protection of species by adopting the Green Party platforms and by submitting to the demands of the wind power lobby , ” said Harry Neumann and Dr. Wolfgang Epple .

Share this...
“The wind power industry cannot be expanded in a ‘nature-compatible’ way,” says nature conservation group Naturschutzinitiativ. Slams pseudo environmental groups, the German Green Party.
Yesterday I wrote about plans to transform 20 million square meters of a 1000-year old forest into an industrial wind complex comprising 60 200+ meter tall turbines with a rotor diameter of 150 meters and a rated capacity of 5.6 MW
True nature conservationists are in shock at the proposal, which is now in its final approval phase. How can anyone even consider such environmental destruction? Blame it on corrupt “environmentalists like the German Green Party and groups like NABU.
All of this is being made possible by the relaxation of otherwise strict environmental standards all in the name of the superordinate “climate change protection”.
Now, real nature protection group Naturschutz Initiativ here issued a press release asking if the traditional environmental protection groups such as NABU or the German Green Party have abandoned their original mission of environmental protection and become the lobbyists for Big Wind.
Nothing to do with environmental protection. Photo: red kite struck by wind turbine blade / NI archive.
NABU and the Greens say auf Wiedersehen to environmental protection
NABU and Bündnis 90/Die Grünen (German Green Party) have presented a joint strategy paper to accelerate the allegedly “nature-compatible” expansion of wind energy, says Naturschutzinitiativ, “The paper is rather a farewell of the once bird protection association for nature and species protection.
The paper calls for “electricity quantity-related expansion targets” with the aim of “exceptional reasons of public safety under species protection law”. As a consequence, the strategy paper calls for a central weakening of nature conservation, which is obviously intended by the authors, or at least accepted by them.
Bypassing approval procedures
Provisions in the paper are aimed at completely releasing the approval procedures from the urgently needed constitutional examination for the wind power industry.
Naturschutzinitiativ also states: The wording of one provision in the paper is an attempt to finally undermine the EU legal protection of individuals of specially protected species by taking it to the population level. The formulation of NABU and the Greens is a 1:1 implementation of the goals of the wind power lobby.”
Under the guise of climate protection
The German government clearly wants to comply with the wind power industry’s demand to exempt nature-damaging interventions in the context of “climate protection” from the compensation obligations under nature conservation law, states the press release
Naturschutzinitiativ adds: “Wherever the wind power industry invades the last natural areas, exactly the opposite consequences occur: The devaluation of previously large, coherently valuable areas.”
Big Wind should be “as unhindered as possible”
The remaining points of the paper can be summarized under the recognizable overall goal of the paper: To enable the wind power industry to operate in a framework that is as unhindered as possible.
The paper is no basis for a “peace” deal between the wind power industry and nature. It is rather the parting of the former bird protection environmental group from nature and protection of species,” says Harry Neumann, Federal Chairman of the Nature Conservation Initiative e.V. (NI) and Dr. Wolfgang Epple.
“The wind power industry cannot be expanded in a “nature-compatible” way.
NABU has apparently given up both the protection of large-scale near-natural landscapes and the technically sound protection of species by adopting the Green Party platforms and by submitting to the demands of the wind power lobby,” said Harry Neumann and Dr. Wolfgang Epple.
Donate - choose an amount
5 10 15 20 50 100 250 500 1000


notrickszone--2020-12-10--Real-World Outdoor Experiment: As CO2 Naturally Rises From 1% To 75%, Surface Temperatures Drop 10°C

At an outdoor test site in Italy CO2 concentrations vacillating between 1,000 and 750,000 ppm have no more or less an effect on local temperatures than a nearby site with stable , ambient ( < 400 ppm ) CO2 concentrations .
Mofette fields are “ natural carbon dioxide springs ” that allow us to observe the effect that a 100 % ( 1,000,000 ppm ) CO2 concentration has on ecosystems , temperatures…even spiders ( Balkenhol et al.
, 2016 ) .
Temperature changes over the CO2-spewing Bossoleto spring in Tuscany , Italy , were measured over the course of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gardingen et al.
, 1995 .
The scientists observed the site ’ s CO2 rises daily from 1,000 ppm at 3:30 p.m. in the afternoon to 750,000 ppm by 7:00 a.m. the next morning .
The temperature changes associated with these extreme CO2 variations are about 33°C at 3:30 p.m. , falling to 23°C by 7 a.m. More specifically , when the Sun rises above the horizon , temperatures abruptly warm by 10°C and then CO2 rapidly falls from its morning peak ( 750,000 ppm ) to its afternoon nadir ( 1,000 ppm @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where CO2 levels center around an ambient 360 ppm ( 1992 levels ) throughout the day , Gardingen and colleagues observed temperature changes to be effectively identical to the Bossoleto site : 23°C at 7 a.m. and 33°C at 3:30 p.m .
In other words , the CO2 concentration – whether a stable 0.036 % throughout the day or a wildly fluctuating 1 % to 75 % over the course of a 24-hour period – had no detectable effect on changes to the surface temperature .
This real-world temperature-CO2 experiment would appear to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ factors , but it does not appear to causally affect temperature changes .

Share this...
At an outdoor test site in Italy CO2 concentrations vacillating between 1,000 and 750,000 ppm have no more or less an effect on local temperatures than a nearby site with stable, ambient (<400 ppm) CO2 concentrations.
Mofette fields are “natural carbon dioxide springs” that allow us to observe the effect that a 100% (1,000,000 ppm) CO2 concentration has on ecosystems, temperatures…even spiders (Balkenhol et al., 2016).
Temperature changes over the CO2-spewing Bossoleto spring in Tuscany, Italy, were measured over the course of a few days in the early 1990s by Van Gardingen et al., 1995.
The scientists observed the site’s CO2 rises daily from 1,000 ppm at 3:30 p.m. in the afternoon to 750,000 ppm by 7:00 a.m. the next morning. The temperature changes associated with these extreme CO2 variations are about 33°C at 3:30 p.m., falling to 23°C by 7 a.m.
More specifically, when the Sun rises above the horizon, temperatures abruptly warm by 10°C and then CO2 rapidly falls from its morning peak (750,000 ppm) to its afternoon nadir (1,000 ppm).
At a nearby site, where CO2 levels center around an ambient 360 ppm (1992 levels) throughout the day, Gardingen and colleagues observed temperature changes to be effectively identical to the Bossoleto site: 23°C at 7 a.m. and 33°C at 3:30 p.m.
In other words, the CO2 concentration – whether a stable 0.036% throughout the day or a wildly fluctuating 0.1% to 75% over the course of a 24-hour period – had no detectable effect on changes to the surface temperature.
This real-world temperature-CO2 experiment would appear to show CO2 varies in response to environmental factors, but it does not appear to causally affect temperature changes.
Donate - choose an amount
5 10 15 20 50 100 250 500 1000


notrickszone--2020-12-10--Real-World Outdoor Experiment: As CO2 Naturally Rises From 0.1% To 75%, Surface Temperatures Drop 10

Real-World Outdoor Experiment: As CO2 Naturally Rises From 0.1% To 75%, Surface Temperatures Drop 10°C

At an outdoor test site in Italy CO2 concentrations vacillating between 1,000 and 750,000 ppm have no more or less an effect on local temperatures than a nearby site with stable , ambient ( < 400 ppm ) CO2 concentrations .
Mofette fields are “ natural carbon dioxide springs ” that allow us to observe the effect that a 100 % ( 1,000,000 ppm ) CO2 concentration has on ecosystems , temperatures…even spiders ( Balkenhol et al.
, 2016 ) .
Temperature changes over the CO2-spewing Bossoleto spring in Tuscany , Italy , were measured over the course of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gardingen et al.
, 1995 .
The scientists observed the site ’ s CO2 rises daily from 1,000 ppm at 3:30 p.m. in the afternoon to 750,000 ppm by 7:00 a.m. the next morning .
The temperature changes associated with these extreme CO2 variations are about 33°C at 3:30 p.m. , falling to 23°C by 7 a.m. More specifically , when the Sun rises above the horizon , temperatures abruptly warm by 10°C and then CO2 rapidly falls from its morning peak ( 750,000 ppm ) to its afternoon nadir ( 1,000 ppm @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where CO2 levels center around an ambient 360 ppm ( 1992 levels ) throughout the day , Gardingen and colleagues observed temperature changes to be effectively identical to the Bossoleto site : 23°C at 7 a.m. and 33°C at 3:30 p.m .
In other words , the CO2 concentration – whether a stable 0.036 % throughout the day or a wildly fluctuating 0.1 % to 75 % over the course of a 24-hour period – had no detectable effect on changes to the surface temperature .
This real-world temperature-CO2 experiment would appear to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ factors , but it does not appear to causally affect temperature changes .


notrickszone--2020-12-11--Energy Masterminds Announce Latest Folly: Shutdown Of Modern Coal Power Plant Commissioned Just 5 Yr

Energy Masterminds Announce Latest Folly: Shutdown Of Modern Coal Power Plant Commissioned Just 5 Yrs Ago!

Pressured by climate activism , power genherator Vattenfall announced it will shut down its recently commissioned 1.65 GW modern Moorburg coal power plant in Hamburg , Germany .
It will take the equivalent of over 1600 wind turbines to take up the slack .
Just days ago , I reported here how Big Wind and crony politicians are pushing to clear 2000 hectares of 1000-year old forests to make way for 60 giant 5-MW wind turbines .
Now imagine this being done 25 times because one ultra-modern coal plant will be decommissioned after being in service just 5 years .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ race in Germany to build up wind parks everywhere possible ( environment be damned ) stems from the political folly of shutting down baseload-providing modern coal power plants .
Swedish power giant Vattenfall just announced ) hat it will be decommissioning its new 1.65 GW combined heat and power ( CHP ) coal Hamburg-Moorburg power plant .
Under pressure from environmental activists , Swedish Vattenfall announced the decommissioning of Hamburg , Germany ’ s modern Moorburg CHP coal power plant after being in operation only 5 years .
It will take some 1600 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ slack ( assuming 20 % efficiency ) .
Image credit : Vattenfall Hamburg Moorburg The decommissioning of the Moorburg plant has been approved by the Bundesnetzwerkagentur ( Federal Network Agency ) .
As one of the most modern coal-fired power plants , Moorburg was commissioned in 2015 and is still considered as brand new on a power plant scale .
It came with a 3-billion euro price tag and was scheduled to run until 2038 .
The power plant plays an important role in the power supply in northern Germany , in Hamburg @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , metal operations and Airbus .
But Swedish operator Vattenfall has lost interest in the plant and has wanted to shut it down .
The two units of this modern , most environmentally friendly coal-fired power plant have a sensationally high efficiency of up to 46.5 percent .
This means that a high proportion of the energy contained in the coal can be converted into electricity , which reduces fuel consumption and CO2 emissions .
The latest technical filter technology is also installed in the exhaust lines .
The Moorburg plant technology is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up within a quarter of an hour , making it flexible in times of power fluctuations .
Until recently , coal-fired and nuclear power plants had been suitable for supplying base load energy at a high level .
But power generation fluctuations cause significant thermal problems when boilers and pipes expand – or contract – under heat .
Engineers solved that problem .
Yet , environmental protests pressured the plant to shut down .
Taxpayer gets stuck with the bill From the Vattenfalls ’ point of view , it is more economical to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than to burn more and more money .
Green environment and energy senator Jens Kerstan earlier welcomed a quick shutdown of Moorburg : “ There is an oversupply of electricity on the market , and so Hamburg ’ s electrical supply is not at risk without Moorburg.
” He did not explain further where the electricity would come from in times of shortage , when there is little wind and the sun is not shining .
Forests threatened : 1600 monster wind turbines to take up the slack With Moorburg ’ s rated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ take over 1600 wind turbines with a rated capacity of 5-MW ( operating at 20 % ) to replace the power plant .
That could mean a profound impact on forests and landscapes in Germany if they have to be cleared for more wind parks .
The calculation does not include the heat the plant would provide .
Will need the approval from power grid operators In the next step of the decommissioning , the grid operators must check whether the two Hamburg-Moorburg power plant units are “ system-relevant ” .
If they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shut down .
Otherwise they will be decommissioned next year .
Vattenfall Germany CEO Tuomo Hatakka : “ Now we will push ahead with the planning for the early closure .
This includes helping our employees find new jobs .
”

Share this...
Pressured by climate activism, power genherator Vattenfall announced it will shut down its recently commissioned 1.65 GW modern Moorburg coal power plant in Hamburg, Germany. It will take the equivalent of over 1600 wind turbines to take up the slack.
Just days ago, I reported here how Big Wind and crony politicians are pushing to clear 2000 hectares of 1000-year old forests to make way for 60 giant 5-MW wind turbines. Now imagine this being done 25 times because one ultra-modern coal plant will be decommissioned after being in service just 5 years.
One folly leads to another. The race in Germany to build up wind parks everywhere possible (environment be damned) stems from the political folly of shutting down baseload-providing modern coal power plants. Swedish power giant Vattenfall just announced )hat it will be decommissioning its new 1.65 GW combined heat and power (CHP) coal Hamburg-Moorburg power plant.
Under pressure from environmental activists, Swedish Vattenfall announced the decommissioning of Hamburg, Germany’s modern Moorburg CHP coal power plant after being in operation only 5 years. It will take some 1600 monster-size wind turbines to take up the slack (assuming 20% efficiency). Image credit: Vattenfall Hamburg Moorburg
$3 billion plant operates only 5 years
The decommissioning of the Moorburg plant has been approved by the Bundesnetzwerkagentur (Federal Network Agency). As one of the most modern coal-fired power plants, Moorburg was commissioned in 2015 and is still considered as brand new on a power plant scale. It came with a 3-billion euro price tag and was scheduled to run until 2038. The power plant plays an important role in the power supply in northern Germany, in Hamburg and the surrounding area with its port, metal operations and Airbus.
Sensationally high 46% thermal efficiency
But Swedish operator Vattenfall has lost interest in the plant and has wanted to shut it down. The two units of this modern, most environmentally friendly coal-fired power plant have a sensationally high efficiency of up to 46.5 percent. This means that a high proportion of the energy contained in the coal can be converted into electricity, which reduces fuel consumption and CO2 emissions. The latest technical filter technology is also installed in the exhaust lines.
New standard in flexibility
The Moorburg plant technology is designed so that power can be ramped up within a quarter of an hour, making it flexible in times of power fluctuations. Until recently, coal-fired and nuclear power plants had been suitable for supplying base load energy at a high level. But power generation fluctuations cause significant thermal problems when boilers and pipes expand – or contract – under heat. Engineers solved that problem. Yet, environmental protests pressured the plant to shut down.
Taxpayer gets stuck with the bill
From the Vattenfalls’ point of view, it is more economical to let the taxpayer pay for the phase-out than to burn more and more money. Green environment and energy senator Jens Kerstan earlier welcomed a quick shutdown of Moorburg: “There is an oversupply of electricity on the market, and so Hamburg’s electrical supply is not at risk without Moorburg.” He did not explain further where the electricity would come from in times of shortage, when there is little wind and the sun is not shining.
Forests threatened: 1600 monster wind turbines to take up the slack
With Moorburg’s rated capacity of 1.65 GW, it will take over 1600 wind turbines with a rated capacity of 5-MW (operating at 20%) to replace the power plant. That could mean a profound impact on forests and landscapes in Germany if they have to be cleared for more wind parks. The calculation does not include the heat the plant would provide.
Will need the approval from power grid operators
In the next step of the decommissioning, the grid operators must check whether the two Hamburg-Moorburg power plant units are “system-relevant”. If they are, then they cannot be shut down. Otherwise they will be decommissioned next year.
Vattenfall Germany CEO Tuomo Hatakka: “Now we will push ahead with the planning for the early closure. This includes helping our employees find new jobs.”
Donate - choose an amount
5 10 15 20 50 100 250 500 1000


notrickszone--2020-12-12--Restraint Doesn’t Work, Only A 1000% Tax On Sugar Will Help Solve The Global Obesity Health Crisis

It ’ s Christmas season , and so it ’ s a good time to think twice about indulging in all the sweets out there .
I wrote about sugar earlier , but a refresher doesn ’ t hurt .
10 reasons to drastically reduce sugar , and to TAX it The latest research not only shows sugar is addictive , but how it is behind the global epidemic of diabetes and heart disease .
It also causes cancer , obesity , violent behavior and hyperactivity in children .
Today tens of thousands of food products found in supermarkets and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of it .
Depending on the data source , the average American now consumes some 50 kilograms of sugar in the form of sucrose and high fructose corn syrup annually .
That ’ s a kilogram of the poison every week .
A couple of centuries ago the average person consumed just a few kilograms per year .
The human body was just never designed for today ’ s massive sugar intake .
Nowadays we are finding out that sucrose ( table sugar ) and like high fructose corn syrup are causing a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ According to Dr. Robert Lustig , Endocrinology Division , University Of California San Francisco , there will be up to 165 million obese people in USA by 203o — 130 million of whom will be diabetic .
A national health crisis .
Globally in 2011 there were an estimated 366 million diabetic persons , and according to the World Health Organization ( WHO ) there were 422 million diabetic persons in 2014 .
Moreover , Lustig claims there were 640 million obese people globally and that the figure will approach 1 billion by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sugar .
Funding healthcare systems to treat all this will not be possible .
Lustig believes that the bottom will fall out of the healthcare system within 10 years .
What follows are 10 reasons to avoid sugar and to tax it massively .
Table sugar , sucrose , which is 50 % glucose and 50 % fructose , causes blood sugar ( glucose ) levels to spike .
High blood sugar is detrimental to the organs and blood vessels , and causes severe damage over time .
The sugar you ingest is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fructose molecules , which rapidly get absorbed into the bloodstream .
The result : your blood sugar ( glucose ) spikes to dangerously high levels and this triggers the secretion of insulin by the pancreas .
The insulin acts to remove the excessive levels of glucose from the blood and store the excess as fat in your cells .
Blood sugar spikes lead to the creation of fat .
On the other hand , complex carbohydrates , which are chains of sugar molecules that need time to be broken down by your digestive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sugar rises and are thus far better .
Complex carbs have great amounts of fiber and often fraught with important nutrients like minerals .
Over time , after years of being on the blood sugar roller coaster , there ’ s a high risk of cells becoming insulin resistant , meaning they will no longer stop taking in glucose from the blood to convert it into fat .
Blood sugar thus remains high ( hyperglycemia ) and is very harmful .
There ’ s a high chance that the pancreas will give up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mellitus 2 .
Calories are not equal .
Some calories fuel the cells of our bodies , which is good , while others can not be used and end up going straight to the gut and clogging your organs .
The two most notorious here are calories from alcohol and fructose .
Table sugar is 50 % fructose which can not be used by the body , and so it gets converted into visceral fat by the liver .
This fat gets stored inside everywhere between the organs .
It ’ s natural @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not great amounts .
The following image shows a comparison of a healthy set of organs to a diseased one fully clogged with visceral fat : The fat-clogged organs ( right ) were extracted from a deceased 350-lb man .
According to renowned plastinator Gunther von Hagens , the fat-clogged set of organs weighed three times more than the healthy set ( left ) .
Image cropped from : Visceral Fat Explained .
Just how bad visceral fat can get is poignantly illustrated by this short video here ( Warning : not for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ average American eats close to 50,000 grams of sugar annually .
That converts to over 200,000 calories .
It ’ s easy to calculate the potential fructose-induced visceral fat production from this .
When your body goes on a sweets consumption-induced blood-sugar roller-coaster , the insulin overshoots and ends up removing too much glucose from the blood .
The result : low blood sugar , known as hypoglycemia ( 3 ) .
The brain sets off the alarms and tells you to get the sugar level back up .
The body can not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ keep the cells going : Figure 3 : After eating very sugary food , blood sugar skyrockets ( 1 ) , insulin is secreted by the pancreas to bring blood sugar back down ( 2 ) , but overshoots and can result in blood sugar that is too low ( 3 ) , and lead to powerful cravings and unruly behavior .
Eating more sweets to satiate your craving will only lead to the next high blood sugar roller-coaster cycle .
Compounding the problems , obesity itself wreaks havoc with hormones and adds @ @ @ @ @ @ @ syndrome .
If table sugar in itself wasn ’ t bad enough already , it ’ s also addictive .
Over the recent years , researches have found that sugar has an addictive effect on the body much in the same way as alcohol or nicotine .
It does this in two ways .
Firstly , fat cells produce leptin , the appetite modulator , which signals the brain you have had enough to eat .
But over time with too much exposure to sugar , leptin gets disrupted and the person no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one eats sugar , neuro-transmitter dopamine gives you a feeling of pleasure .
According to Dr. Robert Lustig , over time dopamine-tolerance develops within the pleasure zone of the brain and so greater quantities are needed to produce the same pleasure effect – very much in the same manner as alcohol or nicotine .
Result : Tolerance + withdrawal = addiction .
Blood sugar leads to the natural process known as glycation .
Sugar in your bloodstream attaches to proteins and fat to form harmful new molecules called advanced glycation end products ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many , as is the case with high sugar consumption , your body can not get rid of them and thus lead to oxidative stress and inflammation in the body .
According to Doris J .
Day , M.D.
, clinical associate professor of dermatology at New York University Langone Medical Center , glycation attacks the skin protein ’ s collagen and elastin ( the ones that make you look young ) .
When bonded with glucose , the skin becomes stiff and inflexible , more lines and wrinkles form .
Moreover , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ elastin and so skin repair is difficult .
Free radicals in your brain stemming from the consumption of sugar have been found to be linked to dementia and Alzheimers .
Free radicals cause damage to cells and make them age faster , especially brain cells .
According Dr. Russell Blaylock , a former clinical assistant professor of neurosurgery at the University of Mississippi Medical Center : Reason 8 : Sugar causes cells to become cancerous If accelerated aging wasn ’ t bad enough , sugar consumption is also strongly linked to cancer .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ on glucose .
But this is not something recently discovered .
It was known already in the 1930s by Otto Warburg , who won the Nobel Prize .
New research shows that sugar may even create cancer cells .
According to a 2013 study published in the Journal of Clinical Investigation ( JCI ) : “ Increased sugar uptake promotes oncogenesis via EPAC/RAP1 and O-GlcNAc pathways ” .
The study summarizes : “ These results may provide additional evidence for how hyperglycemia in diseases such as obesity and diabetes could provide a microenvironment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cancers ( 69 , 70 ) .
” There are numerous studies showing how violent behavior is linked to hypoglycemia ( low blood sugar ) , according to Dr. Russel Blaylock .
Hypoglycemia significantly increases “ excitability ” .
When the brain is in a state of hypoglycemia , neurotransmitter glutamate is released .
It is the “ primary thing that turns the brain into high gear “ .
According to Blaylock ( 7:30 ) , convicted criminals become far less violent when they are put on a healthy , low blood sugar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they return to sugary diets , violent behavior increases .
There ’ s a clear link between crime and nutrition , says Blaylock .
A group of researchers led by psychologist Simon Moore from Cardiff University in the United Kingdom have also shown in a study that boys who ate sweets daily at age 10 are far more likely to commit violent crimes in adulthood .
The human body needs a steady supply of some 90 essential vitamins , minerals , trace elements , amino acids and fatty acids to stay in good @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in just a single nutrient can wreak havoc on the body ’ s health and lead to chronic disease .
Unfortunately sugar , high fructose corn syrup , highly refined flours and starches provide only so-called empty calories , i.e .
they deliver near zero essential nutrients .
Should the calorie intake by children or adults come in large part from nutrient-void source like sugar , white flour , processed starches , meaning nutrient-rich foods get booted off the table , then over the years nutrient deficiencies invariably result and lead to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ run .
Nowadays it ’ s not uncommon to see some children get 30 – 40 % of their calories from near-zero nutrient junk food .
This is really sad .
Of course no one is calling for a sugar ban .
However it is imperative that action be taken QUICKLY to get sugar and junk food consumption down drastically to the much lower levels that nature intended for our bodies .
Junk and sugary foods need to be seen as treats given out from time to time , and not something that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ table as part of the normal diet .
Today , a hefty sugar tax ( 1000 % , yes 1000 % ) would make great sense and is probably the only way to partially avert the coming human health collapse .

Share this...
It’s Christmas season, and so it’s a good time to think twice about indulging in all the sweets out there. I wrote about sugar earlier, but a refresher doesn’t hurt.
10 reasons to drastically reduce sugar, and to TAX it
Not about “socialism”!
The latest research not only shows sugar is addictive, but how it is behind the global epidemic of diabetes and heart disease. It also causes cancer, obesity, violent behavior and hyperactivity in children.
Today tens of thousands of food products found in supermarkets and restaurants are spiked with sugar, lots of it. Depending on the data source, the average American now consumes some 50 kilograms of sugar in the form of sucrose and high fructose corn syrup annually.
That’s a kilogram of the poison every week.
A couple of centuries ago the average person consumed just a few kilograms per year. The human body was just never designed for today’s massive sugar intake.
Unimaginable epidemic
Nowadays we are finding out that sucrose (table sugar) and like high fructose corn syrup are causing a public health disaster of monstrous proportions. According to Dr. Robert Lustig, Endocrinology Division, University Of California San Francisco, there will be up to 165 million obese people in USA by 203o — 130 million of whom will be diabetic. A national health crisis.
1 billion obese worldwide by 2050
Globally in 2011 there were an estimated 366 million diabetic persons, and according to the World Health Organization (WHO) there were 422 million diabetic persons in 2014. Moreover, Lustig claims there were 640 million obese people globally and that the figure will approach 1 billion by 2050 – all thanks mostly to zero-nutrient sugar.
Funding healthcare systems to treat all this will not be possible. Lustig believes that the bottom will fall out of the healthcare system within 10 years. What follows are 10 reasons to avoid sugar and to tax it massively.
10 Reasons to tax/avoid sugar
Reason 1: High blood sugar
Table sugar, sucrose, which is 50% glucose and 50% fructose, causes blood sugar (glucose) levels to spike. High blood sugar is detrimental to the organs and blood vessels, and causes severe damage over time.
Fig. 1: Blood sugar impacts from simple carbohydrates (red) and complex carbohydrates (blue).
The sugar you ingest is quickly broken down into simple glucose and fructose molecules, which rapidly get absorbed into the bloodstream. The result: your blood sugar (glucose) spikes to dangerously high levels and this triggers the secretion of insulin by the pancreas. The insulin acts to remove the excessive levels of glucose from the blood and store the excess as fat in your cells.
Blood sugar spikes lead to the creation of fat.
On the other hand, complex carbohydrates, which are chains of sugar molecules that need time to be broken down by your digestive system, lead to only moderate blood sugar rises and are thus far better. Complex carbs have great amounts of fiber and often fraught with important nutrients like minerals.
Reason 2: Metabolic syndrome, diabetes mellitus 2
Over time, after years of being on the blood sugar roller coaster, there’s a high risk of cells becoming insulin resistant, meaning they will no longer stop taking in glucose from the blood to convert it into fat. Blood sugar thus remains high (hyperglycemia) and is very harmful.
There’s a high chance that the pancreas will give up producing insulin. The result: diabetes mellitus 2.
Reason 3: Sugar leads to nasty visceral fat
Calories are not equal. Some calories fuel the cells of our bodies, which is good, while others cannot be used and end up going straight to the gut and clogging your organs. The two most notorious here are calories from alcohol and fructose.
Table sugar is 50% fructose which cannot be used by the body, and so it gets converted into visceral fat by the liver. This fat gets stored inside everywhere between the organs. It’s natural to have some visceral fat, but not great amounts.
The following image shows a comparison of a healthy set of organs to a diseased one fully clogged with visceral fat:
The fat-clogged organs (right) were extracted from a deceased 350-lb man. According to renowned plastinator Gunther von Hagens, the fat-clogged set of organs weighed three times more than the healthy set (left). Image cropped from: Visceral Fat Explained.
Just how bad visceral fat can get is poignantly illustrated by this short video here (Warning: not for sensitive stomachs).
Recall how the average American eats close to 50,000 grams of sugar annually. That converts to over 200,000 calories. It’s easy to calculate the potential fructose-induced visceral fat production from this.
Reason 4: cravings lead to more eating!
When your body goes on a sweets consumption-induced blood-sugar roller-coaster, the insulin overshoots and ends up removing too much glucose from the blood. The result: low blood sugar, known as hypoglycemia (3). The brain sets off the alarms and tells you to get the sugar level back up. The body cannot live without the blood sugar needed to keep the cells going:
Figure 3: After eating very sugary food, blood sugar skyrockets (1), insulin is secreted by the pancreas to bring blood sugar back down (2), but overshoots and can result in blood sugar that is too low (3), and lead to powerful cravings and unruly behavior.
Eating more sweets to satiate your craving will only lead to the next high blood sugar roller-coaster cycle. Compounding the problems, obesity itself wreaks havoc with hormones and adds an impetus to the development of metabolic syndrome.
Reason 5: Sugar is addictive
If table sugar in itself wasn’t bad enough already, it’s also addictive. Over the recent years, researches have found that sugar has an addictive effect on the body much in the same way as alcohol or nicotine. It does this in two ways.
Firstly, fat cells produce leptin, the appetite modulator, which signals the brain you have had enough to eat. But over time with too much exposure to sugar, leptin gets disrupted and the person no longer feels satiated.
Secondly: when one eats sugar, neuro-transmitter dopamine gives you a feeling of pleasure. According to Dr. Robert Lustig, over time dopamine-tolerance develops within the pleasure zone of the brain and so greater quantities are needed to produce the same pleasure effect – very much in the same manner as alcohol or nicotine. Result: Tolerance + withdrawal = addiction.
Reason 6: Accelerated aging
Blood sugar leads to the natural process known as glycation. Sugar in your bloodstream attaches to proteins and fat to form harmful new molecules called advanced glycation end products (AGEs). When there are too many, as is the case with high sugar consumption, your body cannot get rid of them and thus lead to oxidative stress and inflammation in the body.
According to Doris J. Day, M.D., clinical associate professor of dermatology at New York University Langone Medical Center, glycation attacks the skin protein’s collagen and elastin (the ones that make you look young). When bonded with glucose, the skin becomes stiff and inflexible, more lines and wrinkles form. Moreover, AGEs hinder production of new collagen and elastin and so skin repair is difficult.
Reason 7: Significantly greater risk of Alzheimers
Free radicals in your brain stemming from the consumption of sugar have been found to be linked to dementia and Alzheimers. Free radicals cause damage to cells and make them age faster, especially brain cells. According Dr. Russell Blaylock, a former clinical assistant professor of neurosurgery at the University of Mississippi Medical Center:
Big consumers of sugar have 6 times higher incidence of Alzheimers.”
Reason 8: Sugar causes cells to become cancerous
If accelerated aging wasn’t bad enough, sugar consumption is also strongly linked to cancer. It turns out that cancer cells thrive on glucose. But this is not something recently discovered. It was known already in the 1930s by Otto Warburg, who won the Nobel Prize.
In fact cancer cells consumer glucose 19 times faster than normal cells, reports Dr. Murray Susser, MD.
New research shows that sugar may even create cancer cells. According to a 2013 study published in the Journal of Clinical Investigation (JCI): “Increased sugar uptake promotes oncogenesis via EPAC/RAP1 and O-GlcNAc pathways”. The study summarizes: “These results may provide additional evidence for how hyperglycemia in diseases such as obesity and diabetes could provide a microenvironment that results in higher risk of some cancers (69, 70).”
Reason 9: Hypoglycemia triggers violent behavior
There are numerous studies showing how violent behavior is linked to hypoglycemia (low blood sugar), according to Dr. Russel Blaylock. Hypoglycemia significantly increases “excitability”. When the brain is in a state of hypoglycemia, neurotransmitter glutamate is released. It is the “primary thing that turns the brain into high gear“.
According to Blaylock (7:30), convicted criminals become far less violent when they are put on a healthy, low blood sugar inducing diet. But as soon as they return to sugary diets, violent behavior increases. There’s a clear link between crime and nutrition, says Blaylock.
A group of researchers led by psychologist Simon Moore from Cardiff University in the United Kingdom have also shown in a study that boys who ate sweets daily at age 10 are far more likely to commit violent crimes in adulthood.
Reason 10: Nutrient deficiency, chronic disease
The human body needs a steady supply of some 90 essential vitamins, minerals, trace elements, amino acids and fatty acids to stay in good health. Everyone knows that a deficiency in just a single nutrient can wreak havoc on the body’s health and lead to chronic disease.
Unfortunately sugar, high fructose corn syrup, highly refined flours and starches provide only so-called empty calories, i.e. they deliver near zero essential nutrients. Should the calorie intake by children or adults come in large part from nutrient-void source like sugar, white flour, processed starches, meaning nutrient-rich foods get booted off the table, then over the years nutrient deficiencies invariably result and lead to a host of chronic diseases over the long run.
Nowadays it’s not uncommon to see some children get 30 – 40% of their calories from near-zero nutrient junk food. This is really sad.
Time to tax sugar (heftily)
Of course no one is calling for a sugar ban. However it is imperative that action be taken QUICKLY to get sugar and junk food consumption down drastically to the much lower levels that nature intended for our bodies.
Junk and sugary foods need to be seen as treats given out from time to time, and not something that is to be served daily at the table as part of the normal diet.
Today, a hefty sugar tax (1000%, yes 1000%) would make great sense and is probably the only way to partially avert the coming human health collapse.
Donate - choose an amount
5 10 15 20 50 100 250 500 1000


notrickszone--2020-12-13--Expert On Germany’s Green Energy Policy: “We Are Threatened With A Dramatic Loss Of Prosperity”

Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt was interviewed by the Hamburger Abendblatt on a new book he co-authored : “ Unerwünschte Wahrheiten : Was Sie über den Klimawandel wissen sollten “ ( Unwanted Truths : What You Have To Know About Climate Change ) .
He warns that Germany ’ s energy policy of transitioning to renewable energies could lead to a “ dramatic loss of prosperity ” .
The interview appeared on December 11 , 2020 : What follows are some excerpts : Former Environment Senator Vahrenholt : “ We are threatened with a loss of prosperity “ ABENDBLATT : With solar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ efficiency gains are possible .
VAHRENHOLT : That ’ s true with solar energy , when I think back to my first solar cells at Shell .
We can produce electricity for a few cents at sunny sites , and the drop in cost is not as significant with wind .
But that doesn ’ t solve the problem of intermediate storage , which becomes unaffordable with the amount that needs to be stored .
ABENDBLATT : Do you have something against renewable energies ?
VAHRENHOLT : No , not at all – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ photovoltaics at Shell , wind power at Repower .
RWE Innogy ’ s first offshore plant in the North Sea bears my name : Fritz .
But I would never have thought of making such a fluctuating energy the sole source of electricity , heat and mobility.
” ABENDBLATT : What should be done , in your view ?
VAHRENHOLT : If the situation is as dramatic as they always say , I wonder why we don ’ t rethink it over .
Why aren ’ t we willing to think about capturing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ why do we refuse to look at new nuclear energy technologies with an open mind ?
Even the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change considers them an alternative .
But we don ’ t want to see it .
VAHRENHOLT : Yes , but she is driven by public sentiment .
That ’ s what her about-face on nuclear power showed .
On the subject of deindustrialization , we ’ re with your party – the SPD .
VAHRENHOLT : Unfortunately , the SPD no longer has its clientele in mind .
There is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ green urban crowd .
But the employees in the steel , chemical or car industry have been lost from sight .
The little people will now be punished with a CO2 tax starting in January .
It will cost the average household 270 euros in the first year , and this amount is set to rise further and further to over 600 euros .
”

Die kalte Sonne
Image: GWPF
Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt was interviewed by the Hamburger Abendblatt on a new book he co-authored: “Unerwünschte Wahrheiten: Was Sie über den Klimawandel wissen sollten“ (Unwanted Truths: What You Have To Know About Climate Change).
He warns that Germany’s energy policy of transitioning to renewable energies could lead to a “dramatic loss of prosperity”.
The interview appeared on December 11, 2020: What follows are some excerpts:
Former Environment Senator Vahrenholt: “We are threatened with a loss of prosperity“
[…]
ABENDBLATT: With solar cells, we have just seen what efficiency gains are possible.
VAHRENHOLT: That’s true with solar energy, when I think back to my first solar cells at Shell. We can produce electricity for a few cents at sunny sites, and the drop in cost is not as significant with wind. But that doesn’t solve the problem of intermediate storage, which becomes unaffordable with the amount that needs to be stored.
ABENDBLATT: Do you have something against renewable energies?
VAHRENHOLT: No, not at all – I helped to make them big, photovoltaics at Shell, wind power at Repower. RWE Innogy’s first offshore plant in the North Sea bears my name: Fritz. But I would never have thought of making such a fluctuating energy the sole source of electricity, heat and mobility.”
ABENDBLATT: What should be done, in your view?
VAHRENHOLT: If the situation is as dramatic as they always say, I wonder why we don’t rethink it over. Why aren’t we willing to think about capturing CO2 from coal-fired power plants? And why do we refuse to look at new nuclear energy technologies with an open mind? Even the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change considers them an alternative. But we don’t want to see it.
ABENDBLATT: Our chancellor is a natural scientist…
VAHRENHOLT: Yes, but she is driven by public sentiment. That’s what her about-face on nuclear power showed.
On the subject of deindustrialization, we’re with your party – the SPD.
VAHRENHOLT: Unfortunately, the SPD no longer has its clientele in mind. There is already a party for the hip, green urban crowd. But the employees in the steel, chemical or car industry have been lost from sight. The little people will now be punished with a CO2 tax starting in January. It will cost the average household 270 euros in the first year, and this amount is set to rise further and further to over 600 euros.”


notrickszone--2020-12-14--Modern Iceland’s Climate Is Colder With More Ice Than Any Other Time In The Last 8000 Years Except T

Modern Iceland’s Climate Is Colder With More Ice Than Any Other Time In The Last 8000 Years Except The 1800s

A wealth of new research in glacier and sea ice extent show modern Iceland is 2-4°C colder than all of the last 8000 years except for a slightly colder late 19th century .
Even the 1700s were warmer with less ice than today in and around Iceland .
A new study ( Geirsdóttir et al.
, 2020 ) now affirms peak Holocene warmth at least “ ∼3–4 °C above modern in Iceland ” prevailed throughout much of the last 8000 years .
Data from tree growth , glacier-induced soil erosion , algae productivity , sea ice biomarker proxies ( IP25 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these conclusions .
Harning et al.
, 2020 report an overall 7°C Holocene cooling trend In Iceland ’ s surrounding sea surface temperatures ( SST ) .
“ In terms of foraminifera-reconstructed SST there is an overall trend of cooling throughout the last 8 ka from ~10 °C to ~3 °C.
” It is only in the last few centuries of the modern era that temperatures sharply plummeted to their lowest values of the last 10,000 years ( Geirsdóttir et al.
, 2020 ) .
“ The coolest climate of the last 10 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Consequent to the peak cooling , glaciers and sea ice reached their maximum extents of the Holocene just 150 years ago .
While Iceland ’ s glaciers and North Shelf sea ice extent did partially recover in the first half of the 20th century , the ice extents are still beyond what they were in the 1700s and earlier .
There is nothing to indicate modern warmth or ice recession in and around Iceland is unprecedented or even unusual .

Share this...
A wealth of new research in glacier and sea ice extent show modern Iceland is 2-4°C colder than all of the last 8000 years except for a slightly colder late 19th century. Even the 1700s were warmer with less ice than today in and around Iceland.
A new study (Geirsdóttir et al., 2020) now affirms peak Holocene warmth at least “∼3–4 °C above modern in Iceland” prevailed throughout much of the last 8000 years. Data from tree growth, glacier-induced soil erosion, algae productivity, sea ice biomarker proxies (IP25), and other climate indices affirm these conclusions.
Harning et al., 2020 report an overall 7°C Holocene cooling trend In Iceland’s surrounding sea surface temperatures (SST).
“In terms of foraminifera-reconstructed SST there is an overall trend of cooling throughout the last 8 ka from ~10 °C to ~3 °C.”
It is only in the last few centuries of the modern era that temperatures sharply plummeted to their lowest values of the last 10,000 years (Geirsdóttir et al., 2020).
“The coolest climate of the last 10 ka occurred in the late 1800s CE.”
Consequent to the peak cooling, glaciers and sea ice reached their maximum extents of the Holocene just 150 years ago.
While Iceland’s glaciers and North Shelf sea ice extent did partially recover in the first half of the 20th century, the ice extents are still beyond what they were in the 1700s and earlier.
There is nothing to indicate modern warmth or ice recession in and around Iceland is unprecedented or even unusual.
Donate - choose an amount
5 10 15 20 50 100 250 500 1000