climatechangedispatch--2020-05-12--Pandemic An Eerie Dress Rehearsal For The Climate Monarchy

Written by Ben Pile on .
Posted in Latest news Months into the pandemic and many unknowns still cloud our understanding of the virus .
The basic parameters of its transmission rate are still contested by scientists .
Rather than shedding light , experts from prestigious institutions descend into acrimonious , politically charged , point-scoring debates .
Even the grim daily ritual of the body count is slated as either an overestimate or a grotesque underestimate .
But the biggest unknown yet is the damage the virus and attempts to control it have done to society and the economy , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this wreckage , the green blob has re-emerged from an all-too-brief period of obscurity with a list of demands that will destroy any hope of recovery .
From the outset , there has been a palpable sense of green jealousy of the virus as it stole attention from the climate fearmongers .
For half a century , greens have been prognosticating the imminent collapse of society .
Yet with each new generation , deadlines to stop the destruction of the planet pass without event .
In reality , the world ’ s population @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we live longer lives than ever before .
Panic about the virus achieved in days what greens have been demanding for years : grounded planes , empty roads , and a halt in economic growth .
Countless lives and livelihoods throughout the world have been destroyed – either by the virus or by the draconian policies intended to stop it .
But the anti-population campaigner , David Attenborough , has still managed to complain that human beings have it too good .
‘ Human beings have overrun the world , ’ he told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Attenborough said that living ‘ in a more modest economic way ’ should be an ‘ ambition ’ : ‘ The world is not a bowl of fruit… if we destroy it , we destroy ourselves.
’ Of course , the natural world has endured despite all the green forecasts of its demise .
But the experience of coronavirus shows that the kind of fear , panic , and mistrust ramped up by doom-laden forecasts has had severe consequences for humanity .
Fear of the virus has threatened to dissolve the essential relationships @ @ @ @ @ @ @ almost in an instant – and on a greater scale than anything Gaia can throw at us in her angry revenge .
Greta Thunberg ’ s maxim – ‘ I want you to panic ’ – should cause environmentalists to pause and consider what they actually want for society .
But such reflection is unlikely to be forthcoming .
After all , lockdown gives greens what they have always wanted : the abolition of flight , and of travel deemed ‘ unnecessary ’ by technocrats ; and the prohibition of goods which have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , this is apparently what a green utopia looks like .
Green pundits have marveled at the clean air – ignoring the boarded-up shops , bars , restaurants , and cafes that may never reopen .
They have cheered the empty blue skies , while human life is confined to the home and neighborhood .
We may have endless free time , but we have no money and no freedom to go anywhere .
Naturally , George Monbiot is delighted .
The virus of green thinking has infected political leaders and their plans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ No one hesitates to make very profound , brutal choices when it ’ s a matter of saving lives , ’ French President Emmanuel Macron told the FT : ‘ It ’ s the same for climate risk.
’ Meanwhile , an unconvincing Dominic Raab , standing in for the prime minister , appeared to contradict him .
‘ There is no choice between cutting emissions and growing our economy – that ’ s a myth the UK has helped to shatter over the past decade , ’ he said in a Twitter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policy , promised Raab , was an ‘ essential element to our strategy to rebound ’ from the pandemic .
But which will it be ?
Raab ’ s green growth or Macron ’ s ‘ brutal choices ’ ?
It can not be both .
The Convention Citoyenne pour le Climat– France ’ s undemocratic climate assembly , set up by Macron to develop climate policy – has called for the strict rolling back of industrial society to be part of the post-coronavirus ‘ recovery ’ .
Its proposal even includes the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , what would you expect ?
No politician , anywhere , has ever been able to explain how green restraints on an economy – and hence material constraints on people , including price rises and travel restrictions – can allow , much less create , growth .
Green platitudes are nothing more than a veneer of bullshit for no-mark politicians to hide behind .
‘ We can turn the crisis of this pandemic into an opportunity to rebuild our economies differently and make them more resilient , ’ said the unelected president of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Leyen , while promoting her ‘ EU Green Deal ’ .
Undemocratic technocrats everywhere – from every national and global political institution , from the UN to the town hall – are agreed on the necessity of rebuilding and redesigning economies along green lines .
But they can not answer how they will rebuild them .
Who will pay for it ?
What do we , the people , get out of it ?
And when do we get to vote on it ?
We do not get any say on it , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ democracy , shall dictate the action .
The climate agenda rescues Macron from his deep domestic crises .
Climate change even makes Raab look like he stands for something .
And it gives the hollow European project purpose .
The green agenda is being brought forward , and the viral crisis is being rolled into the climate crisis because the pandemic has revealed the emptiness of the political class .
Not only are the elites devoid of any ideas for kickstarting economic growth — they have even run out of ideas for how @ @ @ @ @

Written by Ben Pile on May 12, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
Months into the pandemic and many unknowns still cloud our understanding of the virus. The basic parameters of its transmission rate are still contested by scientists.
Rather than shedding light, experts from prestigious institutions descend into acrimonious, politically charged, point-scoring debates.
Even the grim daily ritual of the body count is slated as either an overestimate or a grotesque underestimate.
But the biggest unknown yet is the damage the virus and attempts to control it have done to society and the economy, and how we will recover.
From this wreckage, the green blob has re-emerged from an all-too-brief period of obscurity with a list of demands that will destroy any hope of recovery.
From the outset, there has been a palpable sense of green jealousy of the virus as it stole attention from the climate fearmongers.
For half a century, greens have been prognosticating the imminent collapse of society. Yet with each new generation, deadlines to stop the destruction of the planet pass without event.
In reality, the world’s population has become healthier and wealthier, and we live longer lives than ever before.
Panic about the virus achieved in days what greens have been demanding for years: grounded planes, empty roads, and a halt in economic growth.
Countless lives and livelihoods throughout the world have been destroyed – either by the virus or by the draconian policies intended to stop it.
But the anti-population campaigner, David Attenborough, has still managed to complain that human beings have it too good. ‘Human beings have overrun the world,’ he told the BBC’s Andrew Marr.
Attenborough said that living ‘in a more modest economic way’ should be an ‘ambition’: ‘The world is not a bowl of fruit… if we destroy it, we destroy ourselves.’
Of course, the natural world has endured despite all the green forecasts of its demise. But the experience of coronavirus shows that the kind of fear, panic, and mistrust ramped up by doom-laden forecasts has had severe consequences for humanity.
Fear of the virus has threatened to dissolve the essential relationships of mutual dependence between human beings, almost in an instant – and on a greater scale than anything Gaia can throw at us in her angry revenge.
Greta Thunberg’s maxim – ‘I want you to panic’ – should cause environmentalists to pause and consider what they actually want for society.
But such reflection is unlikely to be forthcoming. After all, lockdown gives greens what they have always wanted: the abolition of flight, and of travel deemed ‘unnecessary’ by technocrats; and the prohibition of goods which have been designated ‘non-essential’.
Indeed, this is apparently what a green utopia looks like. Green pundits have marveled at the clean air – ignoring the boarded-up shops, bars, restaurants, and cafes that may never reopen.
They have cheered the empty blue skies, while human life is confined to the home and neighborhood. We may have endless free time, but we have no money and no freedom to go anywhere. Naturally, George Monbiot is delighted.
The virus of green thinking has infected political leaders and their plans for economic recovery, too.
‘No one hesitates to make very profound, brutal choices when it’s a matter of saving lives,’ French President Emmanuel Macron told the FT: ‘It’s the same for climate risk.’
Meanwhile, an unconvincing Dominic Raab, standing in for the prime minister, appeared to contradict him.
‘There is no choice between cutting emissions and growing our economy – that’s a myth the UK has helped to shatter over the past decade,’ he said in a Twitter address from 10 Downing Street.
Climate policy, promised Raab, was an ‘essential element to our strategy to rebound’ from the pandemic.
But which will it be? Raab’s green growth or Macron’s ‘brutal choices’? It cannot be both.
The Convention Citoyenne pour le Climat– France’s undemocratic climate assembly, set up by Macron to develop climate policy – has called for the strict rolling back of industrial society to be part of the post-coronavirus ‘recovery’.
Its proposal even includes the abolition of out-of-town supermarkets. But then, what would you expect?
No politician, anywhere, has ever been able to explain how green restraints on an economy – and hence material constraints on people, including price rises and travel restrictions – can allow, much less create, growth.
Green platitudes are nothing more than a veneer of bullshit for no-mark politicians to hide behind.
‘We can turn the crisis of this pandemic into an opportunity to rebuild our economies differently and make them more resilient,’ said the unelected president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, while promoting her ‘EU Green Deal’.
Undemocratic technocrats everywhere – from every national and global political institution, from the UN to the town hall – are agreed on the necessity of rebuilding and redesigning economies along green lines.
But they cannot answer how they will rebuild them. Who will pay for it? What do we, the people, get out of it? And when do we get to vote on it?
We do not get any say on it, of course. Political necessity, not democracy, shall dictate the action. The climate agenda rescues Macron from his deep domestic crises.
Climate change even makes Raab look like he stands for something. And it gives the hollow European project purpose.
The green agenda is being brought forward, and the viral crisis is being rolled into the climate crisis because the pandemic has revealed the emptiness of the political class.
Not only are the elites devoid of any ideas for kickstarting economic growth — they have even run out of ideas for how to sustain economic stagnation.
Read rest at Spiked Online
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-05-12--Mexico’s President Puts The Kibosh On Renewables

Written by Irina Slav on .
Posted in Latest news It sounds like a news report out of yet another dystopian novel : Mexico is halting grid connection for new solar and wind power projects .
In a world rushing to produce clean energy , Mexico has suddenly stood out like a sore thumb .
But , as usual , there ’ s more to the story .
The country ’ s National Energy Control Center , or Cenace , announced it would suspend grid connections of new solar and wind farms until further notice earlier this week .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of solar and wind power generation , which , according to the state-owned power market operator , could compromise Mexico ’ s energy security in difficult times .
“ The intermittent generation from wind and PV plants affects the reliability of the national electricity system , [ impacting ] the sufficiency , quality , and continuity of power supply , ” Cenace wrote in a document setting out the rules of the country ’ s electricity market during the COVID-19 lockdown .
Naturally , the move was immediately attacked by the business community @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interfere with private businesses .
[ … ] Mexico ’ s president has made no secret of his attitude to renewable energy , which could be called condescending .
In a late March tweet , the Mexican president called wind turbines “ fans , ” saying they didn ’ t produce much energy .
He proceeded to reportedly say that the government will stop issuing permits for new wind projects that interfere with the environment and cause “ visual pollution.
” Other reports of the same tweet said Obrador also downplayed the amount @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the companies that build them were private businesses that needed to be subsidized .
In short , one could safely say AMLO is not a fan of…fans .
There is , however , the issue of energy storage .
While critics may be right that the decision to halt pre-connection tests for new solar and wind farms , it is a fact that Mexico—and Latin America as a whole—has been slow to build reasonable energy storage capacity , even after it has been identified as crucial for the long-term success of solar and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a real problem .
Its solution is energy storage .
Mexico got its first battery storage facility at the end of 2018 , at a car factory .
A year later , the first behind-the-meter battery facility that also features frequency regulation capabilities came online in Puebla .
Storage is slow in coming .
[ … ] But there is something else , as well .
Lopez Obrador has promised a substantial increase in oil production by the end of his term .
So far , this has proved challenging for many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ oil tenders as well as the latest oil price crisis , which will likely have lingering effects on the global industry .

Written by Irina Slav on May 12, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
It sounds like a news report out of yet another dystopian novel: Mexico is halting grid connection for new solar and wind power projects. In a world rushing to produce clean energy, Mexico has suddenly stood out like a sore thumb.
But, as usual, there’s more to the story.
The country’s National Energy Control Center, or Cenace, announced it would suspend grid connections of new solar and wind farms until further notice earlier this week.
The motivation behind the decision was the intermittency of solar and wind power generation, which, according to the state-owned power market operator, could compromise Mexico’s energy security in difficult times.
“The intermittent generation from wind and PV plants affects the reliability of the national electricity system, [impacting] the sufficiency, quality, and continuity of power supply,” Cenace wrote in a document setting out the rules of the country’s electricity market during the COVID-19 lockdown.
Naturally, the move was immediately attacked by the business community as an attempt by the government to interfere with private businesses. […]
Mexico’s president has made no secret of his attitude to renewable energy, which could be called condescending. In a late March tweet, the Mexican president called wind turbines “fans,” saying they didn’t produce much energy.
He proceeded to reportedly say that the government will stop issuing permits for new wind projects that interfere with the environment and cause “visual pollution.”
Other reports of the same tweet said Obrador also downplayed the amount of electricity wind farms produce and said the companies that build them were private businesses that needed to be subsidized. In short, one could safely say AMLO is not a fan of…fans.
There is, however, the issue of energy storage.
While critics may be right that the decision to halt pre-connection tests for new solar and wind farms, it is a fact that Mexico—and Latin America as a whole—has been slow to build reasonable energy storage capacity, even after it has been identified as crucial for the long-term success of solar and wind power.
Intermittency of power generation is a real problem. Its solution is energy storage. Mexico got its first battery storage facility at the end of 2018, at a car factory.
A year later, the first behind-the-meter battery facility that also features frequency regulation capabilities came online in Puebla. Storage is slow in coming. […]
But there is something else, as well. Lopez Obrador has promised a substantial increase in oil production by the end of his term.
So far, this has proved challenging for many reasons, including the suspension of new oil tenders as well as the latest oil price crisis, which will likely have lingering effects on the global industry.
Read rest at OilPrice
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-05-12--The Mega-Propaganda In The Mega-Drought

The Mega-Propaganda In The Mega-Drought

Written by Gregory Wrightstone on .
Posted in Latest news For some seeking attention — or possibly grant money — bad news can never be bad enough without adding a bit of global-warming hysteria .
The southwestern United States is undergoing one of its worst droughts in 1,200 years and it is being made worse by man-made climate change .
So says a new study released in the journal Science .
According to authors from the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory and other esteemed institutions , including Columbia University , the 19-year period ( 2000 to 2018 ) is marked by a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conclusions were widely and uncritically trumpeted by the media with bold headlines such as Climate change : US mega-drought ‘ already underway ’ and ‘ Mega-drought ’ emerging in the western US might be worse than any in 1,200 years .
The study was based on tree-ring data and was evidenced , according to the authors , by reduced snowpack , increased fire activity , and reduced vegetation .
Of particular interest , the authors stated flatly that this mega-drought was “ still ongoing as of 2020.
” What does the data tell @ @ @ @ @ @ @ note that the study ended in 2018 , and probably for good reason .
The data since that time pours cold water ( pun intended ) on this supposed horrific drought driven by man-made warming .
The National Drought Mitigation Center of the University of Nebraska-Lincoln is the go-to source for drought information for the United States and the data there is not supportive at all of the dire claims made in the study .
Looking at the continental U. S. , the area in a drought of any kind is at nearly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ since they began recordkeeping .
Since early 2019 , severe drought ( figure 2 ) has been well under one percent of the area of the continental US , and you have to search really hard to find that tiny area ( hint : it is in the Delmarva peninsula on the east coast . )
Amazingly , the area in the Southwest that the Lamont study claimed to be in decadal mega-drought had zero areas in drought as of January of this year .
That ’ s correct , zero .
Figure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in DroughtThe authors pointed to increasing fire frequency linked to drought and , based on media coverage of the wildfires in the western states , that would seem to be the case .
The facts say otherwise .
According to the National Interagency Fire Center , the number of fires in the United States has been in a long-term significant decline , falling from more than 200,000 acres in the first half of the 20th century to around 65,000 recently .
Even in California , CalFire reports that the number of fires has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ last several decades .
The authors rightly state that the area has been plagued by recurring cyclic droughts over the last one thousand-plus years , but then draw on the hysteria of supposed human-driven warming to further dramatize the recent dry period .
A previous study by E. R. Cook and others ( 2007 ) took a look at droughts dating to the year 800 AD ( Figure 3 ) and found that southwestern North America has experienced much worse droughts that were catastrophically bad , some lasting more than 200 years .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ 12th century and is the likely cause of the dramatic collapse of the Anasazi culture .
There is certainly no doubt that the southwest of the United States experienced a severe drought in the period 2000 to 2018 , but this study uses cherry-picked data that ends in 2018 , just as the drought itself was ending .
Knowing full well that the dry period had ended more than a year prior to the time of publication , the authors still maintained that it was “ ongoing as of 2020.
” This is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ abuse of science in order to further a state of fear concerning supposed man-made climate change .

Written by Gregory Wrightstone on May 12, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
For some seeking attention — or possibly grant money — bad news can never be bad enough without adding a bit of global-warming hysteria.
The southwestern United States is undergoing one of its worst droughts in 1,200 years and it is being made worse by man-made climate change. So says a new study released in the journal Science.
According to authors from the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory and other esteemed institutions, including Columbia University, the 19-year period (2000 to 2018) is marked by a historic mega-drought.
The study’s conclusions were widely and uncritically trumpeted by the media with bold headlines such as Climate change: US mega-drought ‘already underway’ and ‘Mega-drought’ emerging in the western US might be worse than any in 1,200 years.
The study was based on tree-ring data and was evidenced, according to the authors, by reduced snowpack, increased fire activity, and reduced vegetation. Of particular interest, the authors stated flatly that this mega-drought was “still ongoing as of 2020.” What does the data tell us about these conclusions?
You will note that the study ended in 2018, and probably for good reason. The data since that time pours cold water (pun intended) on this supposed horrific drought driven by man-made warming.
The National Drought Mitigation Center of the University of Nebraska-Lincoln is the go-to source for drought information for the United States and the data there is not supportive at all of the dire claims made in the study.
Looking at the continental U. S., the area in a drought of any kind is at nearly the lowest percentage (figure 1) since they began recordkeeping.
Since early 2019, severe drought (figure 2) has been well under one percent of the area of the continental US, and you have to search really hard to find that tiny area (hint: it is in the Delmarva peninsula on the east coast.)
Amazingly, the area in the Southwest that the Lamont study claimed to be in decadal mega-drought had zero areas in drought as of January of this year. That’s correct, zero.
Figure 2 – United States Drought Monitor Area in DroughtThe authors pointed to increasing fire frequency linked to drought and, based on media coverage of the wildfires in the western states, that would seem to be the case. The facts say otherwise.
According to the National Interagency Fire Center, the number of fires in the United States has been in a long-term significant decline, falling from more than 200,000 acres in the first half of the 20th century to around 65,000 recently.
Even in California, CalFire reports that the number of fires has declined by almost 50% over the last several decades.
The authors rightly state that the area has been plagued by recurring cyclic droughts over the last one thousand-plus years, but then draw on the hysteria of supposed human-driven warming to further dramatize the recent dry period.
The atmosphere and ocean anomalies that drove past mega-droughts very likely dwarfed those that occurred during 2000–2018, but superposition of the 2000–2018 climate dynamics on background anthropogenic soil drying put an otherwise moderately severe soil-moisture drought onto a trajectory characteristic of the mega-droughts of 800–1600 CE.
A previous study by E. R. Cook and others (2007) took a look at droughts dating to the year 800 AD (Figure 3) and found that southwestern North America has experienced much worse droughts that were catastrophically bad, some lasting more than 200 years.
One of these events culminated in the 12th century and is the likely cause of the dramatic collapse of the Anasazi culture.
There is certainly no doubt that the southwest of the United States experienced a severe drought in the period 2000 to 2018, but this study uses cherry-picked data that ends in 2018, just as the drought itself was ending.
Knowing full well that the dry period had ended more than a year prior to the time of publication, the authors still maintained that it was “ongoing as of 2020.”
This is yet one more example of the willful abuse of science in order to further a state of fear concerning supposed man-made climate change.
Read more at BizPacReview
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-05-12--Trump Admin Approves 11-Square-Mile Solar Array, Largest In US

Written by Josh Siegel on .
Posted in Latest news The Trump administration approved a proposal Monday to construct and operate the largest solar power project in U.S. history , issuing a final permit for a massive facility just north of Las Vegas .
The $ 1 billion Gemini project would be the eighth-largest solar facility in the world , the Interior Department said , generating 690-megawatts of power , enough electricity for 260,000 homes in the Las Vegas area and potential markets in Southern California .
Nevada utility NV Energy , a subsidiary of billionaire Warren Buffett ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the project , which will be completed as early as 2022 .
It will generate more than $ 3 million annually in federal revenues , the Interior Department said .
The Trump administration cast the decision as representative of its “ all of the above ” approach to increasing U.S. energy production on public lands , which critics say has been mostly focused on fossil fuels .
President Trump has frequently criticized renewable power , questioning its reliability .
The administration also touted the project as a job-creator for an area hit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Interior Department said construction of the facility , spanning some 7,100 acres ( 11 square miles ) of federal land , would create 500 to 700 temporary jobs , along with 1,100 support jobs during that time .
When the facility is built , it will support 19 permanent jobs , said Casey Hammond , principal deputy assistant secretary for Land and Minerals Management .
“ Our economic resurgence will rely on getting America back to work , and this project delivers on that objective , ” said Interior Secretary David Bernhardt .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ main industry lobbying group , celebrated the decision .
The group ’ s endorsement is notable given it has had disagreements with other Trump administration policies , including its use of tariffs on imported solar panels .
“ The solar industry is resilient and a project like this one will bring jobs and private investment to the state when we need it most , ” said Abigail Ross Hopper , president and CEO of the Solar Energy Industries Association .
“ We appreciate the work that the Trump Administration has done to make @ @ @ @ @ @ @

Written by Josh Siegel on May 12, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
The Trump administration approved a proposal Monday to construct and operate the largest solar power project in U.S. history, issuing a final permit for a massive facility just north of Las Vegas.
The $1 billion Gemini project would be the eighth-largest solar facility in the world, the Interior Department said, generating 690-megawatts of power, enough electricity for 260,000 homes in the Las Vegas area and potential markets in Southern California.
Nevada utility NV Energy, a subsidiary of billionaire Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway, is providing financial backing to the project, which will be completed as early as 2022. It will generate more than $3 million annually in federal revenues, the Interior Department said.
The Trump administration cast the decision as representative of its “all of the above” approach to increasing U.S. energy production on public lands, which critics say has been mostly focused on fossil fuels.
President Trump has frequently criticized renewable power, questioning its reliability. The administration also touted the project as a job-creator for an area hit hard by the coronavirus pandemic.
The Interior Department said construction of the facility, spanning some 7,100 acres (11 square miles) of federal land, would create 500 to 700 temporary jobs, along with 1,100 support jobs during that time.
When the facility is built, it will support 19 permanent jobs, said Casey Hammond, principal deputy assistant secretary for Land and Minerals Management.
“Our economic resurgence will rely on getting America back to work, and this project delivers on that objective,” said Interior Secretary David Bernhardt.
The Solar Energy Industries Association, the main industry lobbying group, celebrated the decision.
The group’s endorsement is notable given it has had disagreements with other Trump administration policies, including its use of tariffs on imported solar panels.
“The solar industry is resilient and a project like this one will bring jobs and private investment to the state when we need it most,” said Abigail Ross Hopper, president and CEO of the Solar Energy Industries Association. “We appreciate the work that the Trump Administration has done to make this historic project a reality.”
Read more at Washington Examiner
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-05-12--Alarmists: Global Warming Will Make Pandemic Worse

Written by Thomas D. Williams , Ph.D. on .
Posted in Latest news Man-made global warming will “ compound ” the devastation wrought by the coronavirus pandemic , according to an article on Sunday in Popular Science .
“ Experts say that climate change will likely compound the problem , ” writes Jeremy Deaton .
“ Soaring temperatures will either compel people wanting relief to go outside , where they could get infected , or the pandemic will force people to stay indoors , where they could swelter .
Both the pandemic and extreme heat pose a mortal risk to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the laughable predictions of “ experts ” in trying to model consequences of the pandemic , climate change alarmists continue to cling to opinions of unnamed climate gurus with reverential devotion .
“ It won ’ t be possible to determine the role of climate change until after the season has passed , experts say , ” Mr. Deaton writes , without explaining how the role of climate change can be determined afterward .
“ Much of the country can expect unusually high temperatures this summer , ” Deaton notes , and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hit hard by the coronavirus , faces an especially high risk of warmer weather.
” Deaton does acknowledge that “ there is some preliminary evidence that sunlight , heat , and humidity could slow the spread of COVID-19 , ” but he immediately moves to suggest that the disadvantages must certainly outweigh the benefits .
One thing the writer fails to mention is that COVID-19 is classified as an “ influenza-like disease ” and as such is likely to mimic the flu in important ways .
There is a “ flu season , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ warmer weather , and thus , relatively few people come down with the flu in the summertime .
In this case , warmer weather — whether caused by “ climate change ” or not — is likely to be a blessing rather than a curse .
But this would not sit well with alarmists because it flies in the face of a fundamental premise of the climate cult : “ warming temperatures can not benefit humanity and therefore must be battled.
” This axiom is not based on science , of course , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It is a dogma that must not be questioned , rather than a conclusion that has been rationally proven .

Written by Thomas D. Williams, Ph.D. on May 12, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
Man-made global warming will “compound” the devastation wrought by the coronavirus pandemic, according to an article on Sunday in Popular Science.
“Experts say that climate change will likely compound the problem,” writes Jeremy Deaton.
“Soaring temperatures will either compel people wanting relief to go outside, where they could get infected, or the pandemic will force people to stay indoors, where they could swelter. Both the pandemic and extreme heat pose a mortal risk to the elderly and the infirm.”
Despite the laughable predictions of “experts” in trying to model consequences of the pandemic, climate change alarmists continue to cling to opinions of unnamed climate gurus with reverential devotion.
“It won’t be possible to determine the role of climate change until after the season has passed, experts say,” Mr. Deaton writes, without explaining how the role of climate change can be determined afterward.
“Much of the country can expect unusually high temperatures this summer,” Deaton notes, and the American northeast, “which has been hit hard by the coronavirus, faces an especially high risk of warmer weather.”
Deaton does acknowledge that “there is some preliminary evidence that sunlight, heat, and humidity could slow the spread of COVID-19,” but he immediately moves to suggest that the disadvantages must certainly outweigh the benefits.
One thing the writer fails to mention is that COVID-19 is classified as an “influenza-like disease” and as such is likely to mimic the flu in important ways. There is a “flu season,” which ends with the onset of warmer weather, and thus, relatively few people come down with the flu in the summertime.
In this case, warmer weather — whether caused by “climate change” or not — is likely to be a blessing rather than a curse.
But this would not sit well with alarmists because it flies in the face of a fundamental premise of the climate cult: “warming temperatures cannot benefit humanity and therefore must be battled.”
This axiom is not based on science, of course, but on a deeply held belief. It is a dogma that must not be questioned, rather than a conclusion that has been rationally proven.
Read more at Breitbart
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-05-13--#Insane: CNN Pandemic Town Hall Includes Climactivist Greta Thunberg

Written by Joseph Vazquez on .
Posted in Latest news In a world ransacked by the coronavirus pandemic , CNN seems to think its viewers want to hear radical lefty teen climate activist Greta Thunberg ’ s opinion on the matter .
CNN sent out a tweet May 13 announcing the news : “ Former acting CDC director Richard Besser , former HHS secretary Kathleen Sebelius , and activist Greta Thunberg join @ AndersonCooper & @ DrSanjayGupta for a live # CNNTownHall .
Coronavirus – Facts and Fears , Thursday at 8 p.m.
ET.
” The ratio that tweet got @ @ @ @ @ @ @ news appeared understandably less than approving , to say the very least .
Arguably one of the more epic takedowns of CNN ’ s absurd idea came from Daily Wire Founder and Editor-in-Chief Ben Shapiro .
In a twitter thread ripping CNN , Shapiro didn ’ t pull any punches : Shapiro continued : “ From now on , CNN just needs to feature her on every expert panel .
Just to f*** with everybody .
’ TONIGHT ON CNN : EXPERT PANEL ON PARTICLE PHYSICS , FEATURING CHILD WHO YELLS AT ADULTS @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Magazine and Huffpost contributor Yashar Ali questioned the seriousness of CNN putting Thunberg on a panel : “ What place does Greta Thunberg have in this town hall ?
” Media analyst and YouTuber Mark Dice tweeted in response : “ Cuz a teenager best known for skipping school is who CNN considers an expert virologist.
” Thanks for the laughs , CNN .

Written by Joseph Vazquez on May 13, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
In a world ransacked by the coronavirus pandemic, CNN seems to think its viewers want to hear radical lefty teen climate activist Greta Thunberg’s opinion on the matter.
CNN sent out a tweet May 13 announcing the news: “Former acting CDC director Richard Besser, former HHS secretary Kathleen Sebelius, and activist Greta Thunberg join @AndersonCooper & @DrSanjayGupta for a live#CNNTownHall. Coronavirus – Facts and Fears, Thursday at 8 p.m. ET.”
The ratio that tweet got was glorious.
The reactions to this news appeared understandably less than approving, to say the very least.
Arguably one of the more epic takedowns of CNN’s absurd idea came from Daily Wire Founder and Editor-in-Chief Ben Shapiro. In a twitter thread ripping CNN, Shapiro didn’t pull any punches:
Is there anyone at CNN with any level of self-awareness? Featuring Greta Thunberg on a covid-19 expert panel is just beyond words. I actually cannot believe they are this insane/stupid.
Shapiro continued: “From now on, CNN just needs to feature her on every expert panel. Just to f*** with everybody. ’TONIGHT ON CNN: EXPERT PANEL ON PARTICLE PHYSICS, FEATURING CHILD WHO YELLS AT ADULTS GRETA THUNBERG!’”
New York Magazine and Huffpost contributor Yashar Ali questioned the seriousness of CNN putting Thunberg on a panel: “What place does Greta Thunberg have in this town hall?”
Media analyst and YouTuber Mark Dice tweeted in response: “Cuz a teenager best known for skipping school is who CNN considers an expert virologist.”
Thanks for the laughs, CNN.
Read more at NewsBusters
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-05-13--Debunking ProPublica’s Claim That Climate Change Spreads Viruses

Written by H. Sterling Burnett on .
Posted in Latest news Google News and the climate Left are promoting a ridiculous article by ProPublica arguing that climate change , rather than wind and solar power , causes deforestation , which makes the spread of infectious diseases like coronavirus more likely .
Yesterday , I showed how solar and wind power requires massive land development and deforestation to produce just a small amount of power .
Today , let ’ s debunk the false assertion that climate change also causes deforestation .
No study has ever directly linked any single species @ @ @ @ @ @ @ change , despite many efforts to try and make such a connection .
Biologist/ecologist Jim Steele demonstrates this in his book , Landscapes & Cycles .
Climate change is not causing humanity ’ s conversion of land from forests to farms .
As detailed in Climate Change Reconsidered II : Fossil Fuels , modern agriculture , built upon and entirely dependent upon fossil fuels , is allowing farmers to produce more food than ever on less and less land .
This allows former croplands to be reclaimed by forests .
In addition , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dioxide added to the atmosphere over the past century is contributing to a general greening of the earth that , among other effects , is creating denser forests and turning desert into savanna , expanding wildlife habitat .
Contrary to the vast body of scientific literature detailed in Chapter Four of Climate Change Reconsidered II : Fossil Fuels , ProPublica ’ s article also falsely claims , “ vector-borne diseases — those carried by insects like mosquitoes and ticks and transferred in the blood of infected people — are also on the rise @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expand the geographic regions vulnerable to contagion.
” Note that ProPublica presents no scientific evidence for this wild assertion .
By contrast , in a peer-reviewed 2010 study in Nature , scientists compared historical and contemporary maps of the range and incidence of malaria and found endemic/stable malaria is likely to have covered 58 % of the world ’ s land surface around 1900 but only 30 % by 2007 .
They report , “ even more marked has been the decrease in prevalence within this greatly reduced range , with endemicity falling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two-thirds of the current range of stable transmission.
” Tying this all together , they write , “ widespread claims that rising mean temperatures have already led to increases in worldwide malaria morbidity and mortality are largely at odds with observed decreasing global trends in both its endemicity and geographic extent.
” Also , research by vector-borne disease expert Paul Reiter , a professor of medical entomology at the Pasteur Institute in Paris , and a member of the World Health Organization Expert Advisory Committee on Vector Biology and Control , reveals no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In a 2008 article in the Malaria Journal , Reiter wrote : “ Simplistic reasoning on the future prevalence of malaria is ill-founded ; malaria is not limited by the climate in most temperate regions , nor in the tropics , and in nearly all cases , ‘ new ’ malaria at high altitudes is well below the maximum altitudinal limits for transmission , [ continuing ] future changes in climate may alter the prevalence and incidence of the disease , but an obsessive emphasis on ‘ global warming ’ as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ determinants are linked to ecological and societal change , politics and economics.
” The COVID-19 pandemic is scary enough without agenda-driven rags like ProPublica hyping unwarranted fears of a climate change/infection disease link , or Google News heavily promoting such garbage as “ news .
”

Written by H. Sterling Burnett on May 13, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
Google News and the climate Left are promoting a ridiculous article by ProPublica arguing that climate change, rather than wind and solar power, causes deforestation, which makes the spread of infectious diseases like coronavirus more likely.
Yesterday, I showed how solar and wind power requires massive land development and deforestation to produce just a small amount of power. Today, let’s debunk the false assertion that climate change also causes deforestation.
No study has ever directly linked any single species loss to anthropogenic (man-made) climate change, despite many efforts to try and make such a connection. Biologist/ecologist Jim Steele demonstrates this in his book, Landscapes & Cycles.
Climate change is not causing humanity’s conversion of land from forests to farms.
As detailed in Climate Change Reconsidered II: Fossil Fuels, modern agriculture, built upon and entirely dependent upon fossil fuels, is allowing farmers to produce more food than ever on less and less land.
This allows former croplands to be reclaimed by forests.
In addition, as detailed by CO2Science.org, the carbon dioxide added to the atmosphere over the past century is contributing to a general greening of the earth that, among other effects, is creating denser forests and turning desert into savanna, expanding wildlife habitat.
Contrary to the vast body of scientific literature detailed in Chapter Four of Climate Change Reconsidered II: Fossil Fuels, ProPublica’s article also falsely claims, “vector-borne diseases — those carried by insects like mosquitoes and ticks and transferred in the blood of infected people — are also on the rise as warming weather and erratic precipitation vastly expand the geographic regions vulnerable to contagion.”
Note that ProPublica presents no scientific evidence for this wild assertion.
By contrast, in a peer-reviewed 2010 study in Nature, scientists compared historical and contemporary maps of the range and incidence of malaria and found endemic/stable malaria is likely to have covered 58% of the world’s land surface around 1900 but only 30% by 2007.
They report, “even more marked has been the decrease in prevalence within this greatly reduced range, with endemicity falling by one or more classes in over two-thirds of the current range of stable transmission.”
Tying this all together, they write, “widespread claims that rising mean temperatures have already led to increases in worldwide malaria morbidity and mortality are largely at odds with observed decreasing global trends in both its endemicity and geographic extent.”
Also, research by vector-borne disease expert Paul Reiter, a professor of medical entomology at the Pasteur Institute in Paris, and a member of the World Health Organization Expert Advisory Committee on Vector Biology and Control, reveals no links between climate change and vector-borne diseases.
In a 2008 article in the Malaria Journal, Reiter wrote:
“Simplistic reasoning on the future prevalence of malaria is ill-founded; malaria is not limited by the climate in most temperate regions, nor in the tropics, and in nearly all cases, ‘new’ malaria at high altitudes is well below the maximum altitudinal limits for transmission, [continuing] future changes in climate may alter the prevalence and incidence of the disease, but an obsessive emphasis on ‘global warming’ as a dominant parameter is indefensible; the principal determinants are linked to ecological and societal change, politics and economics.”
The COVID-19 pandemic is scary enough without agenda-driven rags like ProPublica hyping unwarranted fears of a climate change/infection disease link, or Google News heavily promoting such garbage as “news.”
Read more at Climate Realism
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-05-13--Green Extremists Threaten Labour Party With Cyberattacks

Written by Kurt Zindulka on .
Posted in Latest news Extinction Rebellion has claimed allegedly man-made climate change is “ 100 times a greater threat to humanity ” than the Chinese coronavirus while vowing to launch cyberattacks against the Labour Party for supporting a bailout of the beleaguered airline industry .
The eco-extremist group is reported to have sent a letter to Shadow Transport Secretary Jim McMahon , which threatened to launch “ direct action protests ” against the Labour party if it continued to call on the government to bail out the Virgin Atlantic airline .
The group forwarded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well .
Last week , the Labour Party called on the government to step in and bail out Virgin Atlantic after the airline company announced a plan to cut 3,150 jobs during the coronavirus crisis .
A Green Party campaigner and a spokesperson for Extinction Rebellion , Rupert Reid told The Times that the activists are full of “ rage ” over Labour backing the airline .
Reid said that in response to the perceived betrayal the group is looking into ways of creating “ difficulties digitally ” for the Labour Party as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ outside the party ’ s headquarters in London .
The climate change alarmist group has a longstanding opposition to air travel , which they claim contributes to global warming and have taken several high profile ‘ actions ’ against the industry .
In October , a member of Extinction Rebellion climbed on top of a plane at London City Airport , gluing himself to the plane as hundreds of protestors descended in order to “ occupy ” the airport and disrupt travel .
The group also threatened to protest at major British airports @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unmanned vehicles into protected spaces and thereby forcing air traffic control officials to ground planes due to safety concerns .
“ The aviation industry needs to be targeted and we are all aware of the deep , structural change that needs to come , ” the group wrote in another call to ‘ action ’ .
Extinction Rebellion rose to prominence after they conducted a series of protests in London to “ shut down ” the city .
The cost of policing the protests in London totaled over £37 million last year alone— @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Violent Crime Taskforce , which is only £15 million .

Written by Kurt Zindulka on May 13, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
Extinction Rebellion has claimed allegedly man-made climate change is “100 times a greater threat to humanity” than the Chinese coronavirus while vowing to launch cyberattacks against the Labour Party for supporting a bailout of the beleaguered airline industry.
The eco-extremist group is reported to have sent a letter to Shadow Transport Secretary Jim McMahon, which threatened to launch “direct action protests” against the Labour party if it continued to call on the government to bail out the Virgin Atlantic airline.
The group forwarded the warning to the Liberal Democrats as well.
Last week, the Labour Party called on the government to step in and bail out Virgin Atlantic after the airline company announced a plan to cut 3,150 jobs during the coronavirus crisis.
A Green Party campaigner and a spokesperson for Extinction Rebellion, Rupert Reid told The Times that the activists are full of “rage” over Labour backing the airline.
Reid said that in response to the perceived betrayal the group is looking into ways of creating “difficulties digitally” for the Labour Party as well as taking “physically-distanced actions” outside the party’s headquarters in London.
The climate change alarmist group has a longstanding opposition to air travel, which they claim contributes to global warming and have taken several high profile ‘actions’ against the industry.
In October, a member of Extinction Rebellion climbed on top of a plane at London City Airport, gluing himself to the plane as hundreds of protestors descended in order to “occupy” the airport and disrupt travel.
The group also threatened to protest at major British airports with drone attacks, by flying the unmanned vehicles into protected spaces and thereby forcing air traffic control officials to ground planes due to safety concerns.
“The aviation industry needs to be targeted and we are all aware of the deep, structural change that needs to come,” the group wrote in another call to ‘action’.
Extinction Rebellion rose to prominence after they conducted a series of protests in London to “shut down” the city.
The cost of policing the protests in London totaled over £37 million last year alone— more than double the annual budget of the Violent Crime Taskforce, which is only £15 million.
Read more at Breitbart
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-05-13--Why It’s Time To Adopt A ‘Red Team’ Approach In Science

Written by Dr. Benny Peiser on .
Posted in Latest news While tens of thousands are dying from the Covid-19 virus and hundreds of millions of people around the world are facing the loss of their jobs and livelihoods , the scientific community is deeply divided over the nature , spread , and health risks of this new coronavirus .
The evident divisions and contradictory results published in thousands of new studies in recent weeks ( and the conflicting scientific advice provided to governments ) are causing growing confusion , anger , and disarray both within the scientific community and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ predictions based on widely differing assumptions are exposed as fatally flawed as never before .
As a result , institutional science is hemorrhaging trust around the world while the way research is conducted and published is facing an existential crisis .
In many ways , the coronavirus crisis has triggered the biggest crisis of science in modern history .
In light of this evident disarray , calls for a radical reform of quality control of scientific methods and claims and the introduction of institutional Red Teaming are gaining ground .
In a compelling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Daniël Lakens sets out the arguments for a radically new way to conduct quality-control of scientific research and its methods ( see below ) .
The introduction of institutional red teams into the way science is organized and funded in open societies should be the top priority of a scientific reformation after the end of the Covid-19 crisis ( see e.g .
Red Teams Can Save Climate Science From Itself ) .
This kind of scientific paradigm shift will be absolutely essential if we want to learn the biggest lesson of the coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ensure that free nations can avoid repeating similar catastrophic mistakes and disastrous policy decisions based on fallacious modeling and flawed predictions .
To guard against rushed and sloppy science , build pressure testing into your research .
As researchers rush to find the best ways to quell the COVID-19 crisis , they want to get results out ultra-fast .
Preprints — public but unvetted studies — are getting lots of attention .
But even their advocates are seeing a problem .
To keep up the speed of research and reduce sloppiness , scientists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the process .
Finding ways to prove ourselves wrong is a scientific ideal , but it is rarely scientific practice .
Openness to critiques is nowhere near as widespread as researchers like to think .
Scientists rarely implement procedures to receive and incorporate pushback .
Most formal mechanisms are tied to the peer-review and publishing system .
With preprints , the boldest peers will still criticize the work , but only after mistakes are made and , often , widely disseminated .
[ … ] It is time to adopt a ‘ red @ @ @ @ @ @ @ criticism into each step of the research process .
A red team is a designated ‘ devil ’ s advocate ’ charged to find holes and errors in ongoing work and to challenge dominant assumptions , with the goal of improving project quality .
The team has a role similar to that of ‘ white-hat hackers ’ hired in the software industry to identify security flaws before they can be discovered and exploited by malefactors .
Similarly , teams of scientists should engage with red teams at each phase of a research project @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is similar to the Registered Report publication system — in which protocols are reviewed before the results are known — except that criticism is not organized by journals .
Ideally , there is a larger amount of speedier communication between researchers and their red team than peer review allows , resulting in higher-quality preprints and submissions for publication .
Even scientists who invite criticism from a red team acknowledge that it is difficult not to become defensive .
The best time for scrutiny is before you have fallen in love with your results @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the more scrutiny they deserve .
The scientific process needs to incorporate methods to include ‘ severe ’ tests that will prove us wrong when we really are wrong .
[ … ] This shows that assembling a red team isn ’ t enough : research teams need to commit to addressing criticism from the outset .
Sometimes , this is straightforward — items on checklists are absent from a proposal , or an independent statistical analysis yields different results , for example .
Usually , it will be less clear whether @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a caveat .
The key is that , when results are presented , the team transparently communicates the criticism that the red team raised .
( Perhaps incorporated criticism could be listed in the methods section of a paper , and unincorporated criticism in the limitations . )
This will show how severely a claim has been tested .
[ … ] With research moving faster than ever , scientists should invest in reducing their own bias and allowing others to transparently evaluate how much pushback their ideas have been subjected to .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ only the most severe criticism it has been able to withstand .
Read more at The GWPF

Written by Dr. Benny Peiser on May 13, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
While tens of thousands are dying from the Covid-19 virus and hundreds of millions of people around the world are facing the loss of their jobs and livelihoods, the scientific community is deeply divided over the nature, spread, and health risks of this new coronavirus.
The evident divisions and contradictory results published in thousands of new studies in recent weeks (and the conflicting scientific advice provided to governments) are causing growing confusion, anger, and disarray both within the scientific community and the general public.
Scientific models and predictions based on widely differing assumptions are exposed as fatally flawed as never before.
As a result, institutional science is hemorrhaging trust around the world while the way research is conducted and published is facing an existential crisis.
In many ways, the coronavirus crisis has triggered the biggest crisis of science in modern history.
In light of this evident disarray, calls for a radical reform of quality control of scientific methods and claims and the introduction of institutional Red Teaming are gaining ground.
In a compelling article in the journal Nature, Professor Daniël Lakens sets out the arguments for a radically new way to conduct quality-control of scientific research and its methods (see below).
The introduction of institutional red teams into the way science is organized and funded in open societies should be the top priority of a scientific reformation after the end of the Covid-19 crisis (see e.g. Red Teams Can Save Climate Science From Itself).
This kind of scientific paradigm shift will be absolutely essential if we want to learn the biggest lesson of the coronavirus disaster.
It would also help to ensure that free nations can avoid repeating similar catastrophic mistakes and disastrous policy decisions based on fallacious modeling and flawed predictions.
To guard against rushed and sloppy science, build pressure testing into your research. Daniël Lakens As researchers rush to find the best ways to quell the COVID-19 crisis, they want to get results out ultra-fast. Preprints — public but unvetted studies — are getting lots of attention. But even their advocates are seeing a problem. To keep up the speed of research and reduce sloppiness, scientists must find ways to build criticism into the process. Finding ways to prove ourselves wrong is a scientific ideal, but it is rarely scientific practice. Openness to critiques is nowhere near as widespread as researchers like to think. Scientists rarely implement procedures to receive and incorporate pushback. Most formal mechanisms are tied to the peer-review and publishing system. With preprints, the boldest peers will still criticize the work, but only after mistakes are made and, often, widely disseminated. […] It is time to adopt a ‘red team’ approach in science that integrates criticism into each step of the research process. A red team is a designated ‘devil’s advocate’ charged to find holes and errors in ongoing work and to challenge dominant assumptions, with the goal of improving project quality. The team has a role similar to that of ‘white-hat hackers’ hired in the software industry to identify security flaws before they can be discovered and exploited by malefactors. Similarly, teams of scientists should engage with red teams at each phase of a research project and incorporate their criticism. The logic is similar to the Registered Report publication system — in which protocols are reviewed before the results are known — except that criticism is not organized by journals. Ideally, there is a larger amount of speedier communication between researchers and their red team than peer review allows, resulting in higher-quality preprints and submissions for publication. Even scientists who invite criticism from a red team acknowledge that it is difficult not to become defensive. The best time for scrutiny is before you have fallen in love with your results. And the more important the claims, the more scrutiny they deserve. The scientific process needs to incorporate methods to include ‘severe’ tests that will prove us wrong when we really are wrong. […] This shows that assembling a red team isn’t enough: research teams need to commit to addressing criticism from the outset. Sometimes, this is straightforward — items on checklists are absent from a proposal, or an independent statistical analysis yields different results, for example. Usually, it will be less clear whether criticism merits changing a protocol or including a caveat. The key is that, when results are presented, the team transparently communicates the criticism that the red team raised. (Perhaps incorporated criticism could be listed in the methods section of a paper, and unincorporated criticism in the limitations.) This will show how severely a claim has been tested. […] With research moving faster than ever, scientists should invest in reducing their own bias and allowing others to transparently evaluate how much pushback their ideas have been subjected to. A scientific claim is as reliable as only the most severe criticism it has been able to withstand.
Read more at The GWPF
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-05-13--Poll: Most Americans Don’t Believe Climate Change Will Hurt Economy

Written by Power Eng on .
Posted in Latest news Most Americans are underestimating both the potential economic impact of climate change and the role that entrepreneurs and investors can play in rectifying it , according to Inerjys Ventures , a climate solutions investment firm .
A new survey among over 2,000 U.S. adults , conducted online by The Harris Poll on behalf of Inerjys Ventures , found fewer than two in five Americans ( 38 % ) believe that climate change will damage the U.S. economy if it is not addressed .
Also , one in five Americans ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more to solve climate change globally than it will to fix the problems that arise from it .
[ … ] A quarter ( 25 % ) of Americans don ’ t think efforts from U.S. entrepreneurs/start-up companies are important in the fight against climate change and about a third of Americans ( 35 % ) believe there is not enough money being invested in technology that could help prevent or fix climate change , the survey found .
[ … ] The survey suggests that Americans are confused about where blame and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ large corporations , entrepreneurs , individuals , or investors .
Among Americans concerned about the impacts of climate change on the future , 42 % say the U.S. government has more of a responsibility than U.S. companies to address issues in America that cause climate change .
Ouaknine disagrees , saying the government ’ s role is to encourage and enable change , but the investors and private sector should drive the implementation of climate solutions .

Written by Power Eng on May 13, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
Most Americans are underestimating both the potential economic impact of climate change and the role that entrepreneurs and investors can play in rectifying it, according to Inerjys Ventures, a climate solutions investment firm.
A new survey among over 2,000 U.S. adults, conducted online by The Harris Poll on behalf of Inerjys Ventures, found fewer than two in five Americans (38%) believe that climate change will damage the U.S. economy if it is not addressed.
Also, one in five Americans (19%) think it will cost more to solve climate change globally than it will to fix the problems that arise from it. […]
A quarter (25%) of Americans don’t think efforts from U.S. entrepreneurs/start-up companies are important in the fight against climate change and about a third of Americans (35%) believe there is not enough money being invested in technology that could help prevent or fix climate change, the survey found. […]
The survey suggests that Americans are confused about where blame and responsibility lay when looking at government, large corporations, entrepreneurs, individuals, or investors.
Among Americans concerned about the impacts of climate change on the future, 42% say the U.S. government has more of a responsibility than U.S. companies to address issues in America that cause climate change.
Ouaknine disagrees, saying the government’s role is to encourage and enable change, but the investors and private sector should drive the implementation of climate solutions.
Read rest at Power Engineering
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-05-13--REPORT: Climatologist Ocasio-Cortez Will Be Biden’s Climate Guru

Written by David Krayden on .
Posted in Latest news Democratic New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is slated to co-chair a task force to advise presumptive Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden on climate change policy , according to CNN .
A source told CNN on Tuesday that Ocasio-Cortez will help heal the rift in the Democratic Party between those who supported candidate Biden and those who preferred Independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders .
Biden confirmed Tuesday that he is “ working ” to bring Sanders ’ supporters on board for the November election and has asked Ocasio-Cortez to take an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ panel , although he did not specifically refer to her role as co-chair of the climate change task force .
“ I ’ m working with Bernie and with his people .
And so , and we ’ ve made some changes .
We ’ ve listened to Bernie supporters and , you know , for example , we have Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez , she is on one of the panels , ” Biden told CBS Las Vegas-affiliate KLAS on Tuesday .
“ I think we ’ re going to have a very united @ @ @ @ @ @ @ week , the congresswoman seemed to express some level of support for Biden accuser Tara Reade , who says Biden sexually assaulted her when she worked as a Washington staffer for the then-Democratic Delaware senator .
“ It certainly seems as though something has happened .
I ’ m not sure , ” Ocasio-Cortez told NPR about the alleged incident .
In mid-April , the congresswoman said it is legitimate to discuss Reade ’ s accusations during the election campaign .
Ocasio-Cortez spokeswoman Lauren Hitt told CNN in a statement that the congresswoman @ @ @ @ @ @ @ force “ with members of the Climate Justice community — and she will be fully accountable to them and the larger advocacy community during this process .
”

Written by David Krayden on May 13, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
Democratic New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is slated to co-chair a task force to advise presumptive Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden on climate change policy, according to CNN.
A source told CNN on Tuesday that Ocasio-Cortez will help heal the rift in the Democratic Party between those who supported candidate Biden and those who preferred Independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders.
Biden confirmed Tuesday that he is “working” to bring Sanders’ supporters on board for the November election and has asked Ocasio-Cortez to take an active role in his campaign on a panel, although he did not specifically refer to her role as co-chair of the climate change task force.
“I’m working with Bernie and with his people. And so, and we’ve made some changes. We’ve listened to Bernie supporters and, you know, for example, we have Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez, she is on one of the panels,” Biden told CBS Las Vegas-affiliate KLAS on Tuesday.
“I think we’re going to have a very united party,” Biden predicted.
Last week, the congresswoman seemed to express some level of support for Biden accuser Tara Reade, who says Biden sexually assaulted her when she worked as a Washington staffer for the then-Democratic Delaware senator.
“It certainly seems as though something has happened. I’m not sure,” Ocasio-Cortez told NPR about the alleged incident.
In mid-April, the congresswoman said it is legitimate to discuss Reade’s accusations during the election campaign.
Ocasio-Cortez spokeswoman Lauren Hitt told CNN in a statement that the congresswoman made the decision to join the task force “with members of the Climate Justice community — and she will be fully accountable to them and the larger advocacy community during this process.”
Read rest at Daily Caller
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-05-14--‘Roll Call’ Peddling Lies To Farmers About Drought, Floods, Crop Yields

Written by James Taylor on .
Posted in Latest news At the top of Google News searches this morning for “ climate change ” is a Roll Call article titled , “ Farmers are coming around on climate change.
” The article ’ s subtitle is “ Flooded fields , persistent droughts or ravaging wildfires are giving many a change of heart.
” Factual data , as well as the findings of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ( IPCC ) , establish there is no increase in drought or floods .
Moreover , crop yields set new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is simply peddling discredited climate lies dressed up into fake news .
Let ’ s first examine Roll Call ’ s claim about “ persistent droughts.
” As documented in Climate at a Glance : Drought , the United States is benefiting from fewer and less extreme drought events as the climate modestly warms .
For example , in 2017 and 2019 , the United States registered its smallest percentage of land area experiencing drought in recorded history .
Also , the United States is undergoing its longest period in recorded history with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ experiencing “ very dry ” conditions .
Globally , the IPCC reports with “ high confidence ” that precipitation has increased over mid-latitude land areas of the Northern Hemisphere ( including the United States ) during the past 70 years .
Moreover , IPCC has “ low confidence ” about any negative trends globally .
( See here , p .
191 . )
Roll Call ’ s claims about climate change causing “ persistent droughts ” are fake news and strike one .
Next , let ’ s examine Roll Call ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ As documented in Climate at a Glance : Floods , there has been no evidence of increased flooding frequency or severity as the climate modestly warms .
The IPCC admits having “ low confidence ” in any climate change impact regarding the frequency or severity of floods .
Also , IPCC admits having “ low confidence ” in even the “ sign ” of any changes .
In other words , it is just as likely that climate change is making floods less frequent and less severe .
Supporting this , a recent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ flooding for the USA and Europe , published in the Journal of Hydrology , Volume 552 , September 2017 , Pages 704-717 , found “ The number of significant trends was about the number expected due to chance alone.
” The study also reported , “ The results of this study , for North America and Europe , provide a firmer foundation and support the conclusion of the IPCC that compelling evidence for increased flooding at a global scale is lacking.
” Roll Call ’ s claims that climate change is causing “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strike two .
The claim of Declining Crop Yields Is Strike Three Finally , let ’ s examine Roll Call ’ s claim about reduced crop yields .
This , when all is said and done , is the heart of the issue regarding farmers and agriculture .
Droughts and floods are merely the climate instruments by which crop yields may be stunted , hurting farmers .
Does crop data show declining yields as Roll Call claims ?
As documented in Climate at a Glance : Crop Yields , the U.S. Department of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Agriculture Organization document that U.S. crop yields and global crop yields are setting records nearly every year as global climate modestly warms .
Thanks in large part to longer growing seasons , fewer frost events , more precipitation , and the fertilization effect of atmospheric carbon dioxide , farmers are producing more food on less land , allowing them to feed a growing global population .
Indeed , almost every important U.S. crop has set record yields per acre during the past three years , with most of the top 10 years in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Crop yields set new records virtually every year , yet Roll Call attempts to fool readers with lies claiming the contrary .
Roll Call ’ s claim about climate change causing declining crop yields is strike three .
Three strikes and you ’ re out , Roll Call .
Climate facts trump fake climate news .

Written by James Taylor on May 14, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
At the top of Google News searches this morning for “climate change” is a Roll Call article titled, “Farmers are coming around on climate change.”
The article’s subtitle is “Flooded fields, persistent droughts or ravaging wildfires are giving many a change of heart.”
Factual data, as well as the findings of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), establish there is no increase in drought or floods.
Moreover, crop yields set new records virtually every year. Roll Call is simply peddling discredited climate lies dressed up into fake news.
Drought Claims Are Strike One
Let’s first examine Roll Call’s claim about “persistent droughts.” As documented in Climate at a Glance: Drought, the United States is benefiting from fewer and less extreme drought events as the climate modestly warms.
For example, in 2017 and 2019, the United States registered its smallest percentage of land area experiencing drought in recorded history.
Also, the United States is undergoing its longest period in recorded history with fewer than 40 percent of the country experiencing “very dry” conditions.
Globally, the IPCC reports with “high confidence” that precipitation has increased over mid-latitude land areas of the Northern Hemisphere (including the United States) during the past 70 years.
Moreover, IPCC has “low confidence” about any negative trends globally. (See here, p. 191.)
Roll Call’s claims about climate change causing “persistent droughts” are fake news and strike one.
Flood Claims Are Strike Two
Next, let’s examine Roll Call’s claim about “flooded fields.” As documented in Climate at a Glance: Floods, there has been no evidence of increased flooding frequency or severity as the climate modestly warms.
The IPCC admits having “low confidence” in any climate change impact regarding the frequency or severity of floods.
Also, IPCC admits having “low confidence” in even the “sign” of any changes. In other words, it is just as likely that climate change is making floods less frequent and less severe.
Supporting this, a recent peer-reviewed study on the climate impact on flooding for the USA and Europe, published in the Journal of Hydrology, Volume 552, September 2017, Pages 704-717, found “The number of significant trends was about the number expected due to chance alone.”
The study also reported, “The results of this study, for North America and Europe, provide a firmer foundation and support the conclusion of the IPCC that compelling evidence for increased flooding at a global scale is lacking.”
Roll Call’s claims that climate change is causing “flooded fields” are fake news and strike two.
The claim of Declining Crop Yields Is Strike Three
Finally, let’s examine Roll Call’s claim about reduced crop yields. This, when all is said and done, is the heart of the issue regarding farmers and agriculture.
Droughts and floods are merely the climate instruments by which crop yields may be stunted, hurting farmers. Does crop data show declining yields as Roll Call claims?
As documented in Climate at a Glance: Crop Yields, the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization document that U.S. crop yields and global crop yields are setting records nearly every year as global climate modestly warms.
Thanks in large part to longer growing seasons, fewer frost events, more precipitation, and the fertilization effect of atmospheric carbon dioxide, farmers are producing more food on less land, allowing them to feed a growing global population.
Indeed, almost every important U.S. crop has set record yields per acre during the past three years, with most of the top 10 years in yields-per-acre occurring during the past decade.
Crop yields set new records virtually every year, yet Roll Call attempts to fool readers with lies claiming the contrary.
Roll Call’s claim about climate change causing declining crop yields is strike three.
Three Strikes, Roll Call, Yerrrrrr Out!
Three strikes and you’re out, Roll Call. Climate facts trump fake climate news.
Read more at Climate Realism
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-05-14--Biden’s Advisor Ocasio-Cortez Is Anti-Reliable Energy, Like Nuclear

Written by Kelsey Bolar on .
Posted in Latest news One of the many things we can be grateful for in this current crisis is the reliability of the U.S. power grid — and our ability to still afford it .
Unfortunately , one of those reliable energy producers has been shut down , thanks to New York Gov .
Andrew Cuomo .
Nuclear plant engineers , coal miners , natural gas producers , utility workers , and the like might not be making appearances in the viral Instagram posts that express thanks to essential employees , but these workers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the COVID-19 pandemic .
Imagine , for example , how much worse this pandemic would be without reliable electricity — no heat or AC , no computer for work , no TV for the kids , and no appliances to cook .
Keeping people at home would ’ ve been nearly impossible , and that ’ s not to mention all the families relying on electricity to keep their loved ones alive in intensive care .
Reliable electricity is something we take for granted , particularly in a pandemic .
But with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the time has passed to wise up .
If the coronavirus pandemic hit us 10 years from now and the Green New Deal was written into law , states would be mandated to phase out coal , nuclear energy , and natural gas to generate 100 percent of power demand from zero-emission energy sources , which to Democrats means renewables only .
Ironically , nuclear is already the largest source of zero-emission power , but under the Green New Deal , it isn ’ t allowed .
As a result , homes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be reliant on renewable energy sources to keep the lights on .
Hospitals relying on solar and wind energy had better hope it ’ s not cloudy and the wind is blowing .
Wind and solar account for just 10 percent of the U.S. electricity grid .
To pretend we could increase our reliance on them by two , three , or tenfold overnight , and further , rely on renewable energy sources to get us through an emergency is not just dishonest .
It ’ s dangerous .
Renewable energy sources have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ forms of energy , solar and wind depend on factors out of human control — the weather , region , or time of day .
An even bigger challenge for renewable energy sources is their inability to consistently generate enough energy to power big towns or cities .
For most renewables , what ’ s generated must be immediately used , unlike fossil power plants , which can readily be turned on and off based on demand .
Politicians who glaze over this fact are not only denying reality .
They are putting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them .
Two weeks ago in New York , the Indian Point Energy Center , a nuclear power plant that reliably provided a quarter of the electricity used in New York City and Westchester County , shut down .
Cuomo , according to the Associated Press , had “ long sought the shutdown.
” “ Closing the plant will reduce the resilience of New York ’ s electric grid and increase the state ’ s reliance on natural gas for electricity production , ” wrote Robert Bryce in The New York Post , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being “ suddenly stopped or reduced due to an accident , terrorism or a cyberattack.
” New York City and the surrounding areas now have a less diverse and less resilient power grid .
Not to mention , they have one less source of zero-emission power to use .
While it might take the unthinkable to realize what a serious threat this is during an emergency , with COVID-19 , we ’ re witnessing the unthinkable unfold .
Life Under the Green New Deal Under a Green New Deal , the fate of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the norm .
For now , Americans can be grateful we ’ re not living under the extreme mandates that would come with this plan .
But the prospect isn ’ t far off .
Joe Biden , the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee , supports the Green New Deal .
( He also supports teaching coal miners how to code . )
Remember : Biden was the so-called moderate of the bunch .
Democratic socialists such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez , the author of the Green New Deal , believe the world is going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t aggressively curtail climate change .
Just May 13 , Biden announced the freshman congresswoman from New York would co-chair his climate change task force , suggesting a version of the Green New Deal is all but inevitable under a Biden presidency .
This comes despite the coronavirus wakeup call and a clear reality check from the scientific community that it ’ s impossible to reach 100 percent renewable energy without radically transforming our economy and making our grid dangerously vulnerable .
On the bright side , there are plenty of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lower greenhouse gas emissions and protect our environment , while maintaining the reliability and diversity of the power grid .
Like a hospital ’ s different departments , the energy system works best as a team .
Before any more far-left politicians rush to shut down reliable energy sources , allow coronavirus to remind us : Energy is essential to keeping our loved ones alive and getting us through a crisis .
As exciting as renewable sources are , the United States should always have a backup plan .
Putting those backup plans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Read more at The Federalist

Written by Kelsey Bolar on May 14, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
One of the many things we can be grateful for in this current crisis is the reliability of the U.S. power grid — and our ability to still afford it.
Unfortunately, one of those reliable energy producers has been shut down, thanks to New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo.
Nuclear plant engineers, coal miners, natural gas producers, utility workers, and the like might not be making appearances in the viral Instagram posts that express thanks to essential employees, but these workers are some of the unsung heroes of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Imagine, for example, how much worse this pandemic would be without reliable electricity — no heat or AC, no computer for work, no TV for the kids, and no appliances to cook.
Keeping people at home would’ve been nearly impossible, and that’s not to mention all the families relying on electricity to keep their loved ones alive in intensive care.
Reliable electricity is something we take for granted, particularly in a pandemic. But with the Green New Deal lurking in the background, the time has passed to wise up.
If the coronavirus pandemic hit us 10 years from now and the Green New Deal was written into law, states would be mandated to phase out coal, nuclear energy, and natural gas to generate 100 percent of power demand from zero-emission energy sources, which to Democrats means renewables only.
Ironically, nuclear is already the largest source of zero-emission power, but under the Green New Deal, it isn’t allowed.
As a result, homes, businesses, and even hospitals would be reliant on renewable energy sources to keep the lights on. Hospitals relying on solar and wind energy had better hope it’s not cloudy and the wind is blowing.
Renewable Isn’t Reliable
Wind and solar account for just 10 percent of the U.S. electricity grid. To pretend we could increase our reliance on them by two, three, or tenfold overnight, and further, rely on renewable energy sources to get us through an emergency is not just dishonest. It’s dangerous.
Renewable energy sources have made great advancements. But unlike other forms of energy, solar and wind depend on factors out of human control — the weather, region, or time of day.
An even bigger challenge for renewable energy sources is their inability to consistently generate enough energy to power big towns or cities.
For most renewables, what’s generated must be immediately used, unlike fossil power plants, which can readily be turned on and off based on demand.
Politicians who glaze over this fact are not only denying reality. They are putting lives at risk. Cuomo is among them.
Increasing Risk in a Pandemic
Two weeks ago in New York, the Indian Point Energy Center, a nuclear power plant that reliably provided a quarter of the electricity used in New York City and Westchester County, shut down.
Cuomo, according to the Associated Press, had “long sought the shutdown.”
“Closing the plant will reduce the resilience of New York’s electric grid and increase the state’s reliance on natural gas for electricity production,” wrote Robert Bryce in The New York Post, pointing to the risk of gas supplies being “suddenly stopped or reduced due to an accident, terrorism or a cyberattack.”
New York City and the surrounding areas now have a less diverse and less resilient power grid. Not to mention, they have one less source of zero-emission power to use.
While it might take the unthinkable to realize what a serious threat this is during an emergency, with COVID-19, we’re witnessing the unthinkable unfold.
Life Under the Green New Deal
Under a Green New Deal, the fate of the Indian Point Energy Center would become the norm. For now, Americans can be grateful we’re not living under the extreme mandates that would come with this plan.
But the prospect isn’t far off. Joe Biden, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, supports the Green New Deal. (He also supports teaching coal miners how to code.)
Remember: Biden was the so-called moderate of the bunch. Democratic socialists such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the author of the Green New Deal, believe the world is going to end in 11 years if we don’t aggressively curtail climate change.
Just May 13, Biden announced the freshman congresswoman from New York would co-chair his climate change task force, suggesting a version of the Green New Deal is all but inevitable under a Biden presidency.
This comes despite the coronavirus wakeup call and a clear reality check from the scientific community that it’s impossible to reach 100 percent renewable energy without radically transforming our economy and making our grid dangerously vulnerable.
On the bright side, there are plenty of policy solutions that will enable us to lower greenhouse gas emissions and protect our environment, while maintaining the reliability and diversity of the power grid.
Like a hospital’s different departments, the energy system works best as a team.
Before any more far-left politicians rush to shut down reliable energy sources, allow coronavirus to remind us: Energy is essential to keeping our loved ones alive and getting us through a crisis.
As exciting as renewable sources are, the United States should always have a backup plan. Putting those backup plans out of business is a grave mistake.
Read more at The Federalist
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-05-14--More On That Billion-Dollar Solar Boondoggle In Vegas

Written by Dr. Jay Lehr on .
Posted in Latest news On May 12 the Interior Department gave approval for the largest solar power project in the U.S. to be built by Warren Buffett ’ s NV Energy company on 7100 acres of Federal lands in the Mohave Desert .
At a cost of one billion dollars , it pales into insignificance on the days we read of the trillions of dollars being spent battling the coronavirus economic destruction .
But a boondoggle by any other name remains a boondoggle .
The plan for this three-year project is very specific @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even close to its targets of 690 megawatts that are said will power 260,000 homes , provide 900 jobs , with a massive battery backup to replace the solar system at night , and emit no carbon dioxide .
Had the government seen Michael Moore ’ s brilliant new movie Planet For The Humans before approving the project they may not have approved it .
The film illustrates on the ground at various sites , how and why every major solar project in the country has failed miserably .
In just a few @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this mammoth project that will blight this great desert forever while pulling the curtain down on the futility of attempting to obtain dependable power from the sun unless it is on your rooftop .
We have been lying to ourselves about this potential for over three decades .
In a new book lightheartedly titled The Hitchhikers Journey Through Climate Change , one discovers that the renewable energy debate can be summed up with a simple Rule of Thumb .
It states “ in every communities ’ electric grid , an excess amount of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ available at the ready to go online in seconds , that is equal to the potential output of all intermittent solar energy considered a portion of the grids electric capacity.
” No batteries exist on earth that could take up the load when the sun is not shining .
If they could it would likely only be for a single night for how would then recharge them .
This is a fairy tale of absurdity being sold to Las Vegas just as the snake oil salesmen of the old west plied their trade @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , you will wonder that the pro/con arguments over solar energy have gone on for so long without facing the only reality that can ever allow solar energy to be an important part of our energy portfolio .
It must have 100 % backed up with fossil fuel or nuclear power to ensure that the communities ’ electric grid can not let them down .
Las Vegas of all places can not afford a blackout .
Thinking that some special new battery is going to maintain as much power as the absent sun @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impossibility for the foreseeable future .
The mandatory back up fossil fuel must stand by running near full out and emitting carbon dioxide and producing no electricity until the sun can not fill the bill and it must step in .
The excess cost for the excess backup power will show up in the electric bills of the residents of Las Vegas as sure as night shall follow day .
CFACT Senior Science Analyst Jay Lehr has authored more than 1,000 magazine and journal articles and 36 books .
Jay ’ s new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ written with Teri Ciccone is now available on Kindle and Amazon .

Written by Dr. Jay Lehr on May 14, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
On May 12 the Interior Department gave approval for the largest solar power project in the U.S. to be built by Warren Buffett’s NV Energy company on 7100 acres of Federal lands in the Mohave Desert.
At a cost of one billion dollars, it pales into insignificance on the days we read of the trillions of dollars being spent battling the coronavirus economic destruction.
But a boondoggle by any other name remains a boondoggle.
The plan for this three-year project is very specific and quite ambitious and will never fulfill even close to its targets of 690 megawatts that are said will power 260,000 homes, provide 900 jobs, with a massive battery backup to replace the solar system at night, and emit no carbon dioxide.
Had the government seen Michael Moore’s brilliant new movie Planet For The Humans before approving the project they may not have approved it.
The film illustrates on the ground at various sites, how and why every major solar project in the country has failed miserably.
In just a few sentences we can explain the futility of this mammoth project that will blight this great desert forever while pulling the curtain down on the futility of attempting to obtain dependable power from the sun unless it is on your rooftop.
We have been lying to ourselves about this potential for over three decades.
In a new book lightheartedly titled The Hitchhikers Journey Through Climate Change, one discovers that the renewable energy debate can be summed up with a simple Rule of Thumb.
It states “in every communities’ electric grid, an excess amount of fossil fuel or nuclear power must be available at the ready to go online in seconds, that is equal to the potential output of all intermittent solar energy considered a portion of the grids electric capacity.”
No batteries exist on earth that could take up the load when the sun is not shining. If they could it would likely only be for a single night for how would then recharge them.
This is a fairy tale of absurdity being sold to Las Vegas just as the snake oil salesmen of the old west plied their trade.
When you digest this simple rule, you will wonder that the pro/con arguments over solar energy have gone on for so long without facing the only reality that can ever allow solar energy to be an important part of our energy portfolio.
It must have 100% backed up with fossil fuel or nuclear power to ensure that the communities’ electric grid can not let them down. Las Vegas of all places can not afford a blackout.
Thinking that some special new battery is going to maintain as much power as the absent sun, has been and will be an impossibility for the foreseeable future.
The mandatory back up fossil fuel must stand by running near full out and emitting carbon dioxide and producing no electricity until the sun can not fill the bill and it must step in.
The excess cost for the excess backup power will show up in the electric bills of the residents of Las Vegas as sure as night shall follow day.
CFACT Senior Science Analyst Jay Lehr has authored more than 1,000 magazine and journal articles and 36 books. Jay’s new book A Hitchhikers Journey Through Climate Change written with Teri Ciccone is now available on Kindle and Amazon.
Read more at CFACT
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print