climatechangedispatch--2020-08-14--Australia’s Lockdowns And Green-Energy Shakedowns

Written by Viv Forbes , guest post on .
Posted in Latest news Politicians have given Australia an impossible task – fight a COVID lockup while also enduring a green-energy shakedown .
A COVID depression is already locked in .
Recovery dictates that we must reverse the lockdown and also rid our weakened economy of the Green parasites forever sucking our energy .
Australia seems to specialize in political stupidity .
Victoria ’ s scorched-earth policy has wrecked its economy .
Despite this damage , they dream of replacing their nation-building brown-coal electricity with unreliable wind and solar toys .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ while police and troops detain peaceful folk and demand papers .
COVID will only decline when populations develop immunity .
Lockups ensure that community immunity develops slowly .
South Australia has destroyed its manufacturing industry with uncompetitive employment rules and intermittent green energy .
They dream of more Big Batteries to keep the lights on .
WA is protected from many Eastern fads and viruses by the mighty Nullarbor Plain .
It quietly thanked the hard-working mining industry for funding both state and federal governments .
NT has made anti-fracking for hydro-carbons into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to waste billions erecting about 150 square km of solar panels to supply green electricity to Singapore .
This needs 720 km of land transmission feeding a 3,700 km undersea extension cord from Darwin , crossing the deep and unstable Java Trench , to Singapore Island .
And for the times that NT is not sunny , it needs humungous battery storage .
Queensland has shut its borders to millions of customers and workers from interstate and overseas while discouraging new mines and reliable power supplies .
NSW is determined to kill coal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bureaucratic obstructions .
Canberra plans to throw billions that it does not have at the Snowy 2 white elephant ( a net consumer of both water and electricity ) while endorsing industry-killing emissions targets .
The federal government is also undermining the federation with a centralizing “ National Cabinet ” and has taught a generation of youngsters that they can eat and party without working by getting onto the federal jobs replacement gravy train .
Meanwhile , orchardists , farmers , and abattoirs can not find workers .
Trusting people are mesmerized and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government debts and looming depression will haunt our children and destroy our savings .
Meanwhile , a smug cohort of people on government salaries , handouts , and safe pensions feels no pain .
This includes politicians , the bureaucracy , academia , and the scare-a-day BC .
We need a new Eureka Rebellion dedicated to slashing taxes and government expenditure , opening interstate borders , repealing red and green tape , abolishing all emissions targets , withdrawing from the Paris Climate Dreamworld , and restoring our freedoms and our federation .
Viv @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , industry , economics , finance , and politics .
He has zero vested interests in hydrocarbon fuels except as a consumer but does have a solar panel on his roof .

Written by Viv Forbes, guest post on Aug 14, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
Politicians have given Australia an impossible task – fight a COVID lockup while also enduring a green-energy shakedown.
A COVID depression is already locked in. Recovery dictates that we must reverse the lockdown and also rid our weakened economy of the Green parasites forever sucking our energy.
Australia seems to specialize in political stupidity.
Victoria’s scorched-earth policy has wrecked its economy. Despite this damage, they dream of replacing their nation-building brown-coal electricity with unreliable wind and solar toys.
Their once-free people cower in their homes while police and troops detain peaceful folk and demand papers. COVID will only decline when populations develop immunity. Lockups ensure that community immunity develops slowly.
South Australia has destroyed its manufacturing industry with uncompetitive employment rules and intermittent green energy. They dream of more Big Batteries to keep the lights on.
WA is protected from many Eastern fads and viruses by the mighty Nullarbor Plain. It quietly thanked the hard-working mining industry for funding both state and federal governments.
NT has made anti-fracking for hydro-carbons into an election issue while endorsing bizarre plans to waste billions erecting about 150 square km of solar panels to supply green electricity to Singapore.
This needs 720 km of land transmission feeding a 3,700 km undersea extension cord from Darwin, crossing the deep and unstable Java Trench, to Singapore Island. And for the times that NT is not sunny, it needs humungous battery storage.
Queensland has shut its borders to millions of customers and workers from interstate and overseas while discouraging new mines and reliable power supplies.
NSW is determined to kill coal and gas power with locked gates and bureaucratic obstructions.
Canberra plans to throw billions that it does not have at the Snowy 2 white elephant (a net consumer of both water and electricity) while endorsing industry-killing emissions targets.
The federal government is also undermining the federation with a centralizing “National Cabinet” and has taught a generation of youngsters that they can eat and party without working by getting onto the federal jobs replacement gravy train. Meanwhile, orchardists, farmers, and abattoirs cannot find workers.
Trusting people are mesmerized and traumatized by the COVID scare. Ballooning government debts and looming depression will haunt our children and destroy our savings.
Naturally, alcoholism, gambling, family violence, and mental problems are increasing.
Meanwhile, a smug cohort of people on government salaries, handouts, and safe pensions feels no pain. This includes politicians, the bureaucracy, academia, and the scare-a-day BC.
We need a new Eureka Rebellion dedicated to slashing taxes and government expenditure, opening interstate borders, repealing red and green tape, abolishing all emissions targets, withdrawing from the Paris Climate Dreamworld, and restoring our freedoms and our federation.
Viv Forbes has studied and worked in science, industry, economics, finance, and politics. He has zero vested interests in hydrocarbon fuels except as a consumer but does have a solar panel on his roof.
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-08-14--Flashback: Kamala Would End Senate Filibuster To Pass Green New Deal

Written by Chris White on .
Posted in Latest news California Democratic Sen. Kamala Harris said in 2019 that she would consider ending the Senate filibuster as president if Republican lawmakers refused to embrace legislation addressing what she and other Democrats believe is a climate crisis .
Harris , who was selected Tuesday as a running mate on former Vice President Joe Biden ’ s Democratic presidential bid , made the suggestion during a CNN climate crisis town hall in September 2019 before ending her own run for president in December .
“ If they fail to act , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ am prepared to get rid of the filibuster to pass a Green New Deal , ” Harris said , referring to potential Republican opposition to climate legislation .
Her remarks were the first time Harris expressed support for ending the filibuster , a procedural requirement that any legislation gets 60 votes to end the Senate ’ s unlimited debate .
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell warned Democrats against weakening the procedure in August 2019 .
“ The legislative filibuster is directly downstream from our founding tradition .
If that tradition frustrates the whims @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it is their half-baked proposals and not the centuries-old wisdom that needs retooling , ” McConnell , a Kentucky Republican , wrote in an August 2019 op-ed for The New York Times .
Democrats would need to flip three Republican seats in the Senate to gain control of the chamber .
They would also need 60 votes to win a filibuster-proof majority , which is unlikely given the map of Senate seats up for election .
If Democrats can not collect the requisite number of votes , then the GOP would still have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ filibuster rules were changed .
Harris backed the Green New Deal in 2019 , which sought to aggressively cut carbon emissions over the next decade .
The resolution , crafted by New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez , called for “ 10-year national mobilizations ” toward addressing climate change .
A fact sheet published alongside the proposal said the plan would “ mobilize every aspect of American society on a scale not seen since World War 2.
” Ocasio-Cortez ’ s Green New Deal would reportedly phase out fossil fuel usage within 12 years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with a hefty price .

Written by Chris White on Aug 14, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
California Democratic Sen. Kamala Harris said in 2019 that she would consider ending the Senate filibuster as president if Republican lawmakers refused to embrace legislation addressing what she and other Democrats believe is a climate crisis.
Harris, who was selected Tuesday as a running mate on former Vice President Joe Biden’s Democratic presidential bid, made the suggestion during a CNN climate crisis town hall in September 2019 before ending her own run for president in December.
“If they fail to act, as president of the United States, I am prepared to get rid of the filibuster to pass a Green New Deal,” Harris said, referring to potential Republican opposition to climate legislation.
Her remarks were the first time Harris expressed support for ending the filibuster, a procedural requirement that any legislation gets 60 votes to end the Senate’s unlimited debate.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell warned Democrats against weakening the procedure in August 2019.
“The legislative filibuster is directly downstream from our founding tradition. If that tradition frustrates the whims of those on the far left, it is their half-baked proposals and not the centuries-old wisdom that needs retooling,” McConnell, a Kentucky Republican, wrote in an August 2019 op-ed for The New York Times.
Democrats would need to flip three Republican seats in the Senate to gain control of the chamber. They would also need 60 votes to win a filibuster-proof majority, which is unlikely given the map of Senate seats up for election.
If Democrats cannot collect the requisite number of votes, then the GOP would still have the ability to block legislation unless the filibuster rules were changed.
Harris backed the Green New Deal in 2019, which sought to aggressively cut carbon emissions over the next decade.
The resolution, crafted by New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, called for “10-year national mobilizations” toward addressing climate change.
A fact sheet published alongside the proposal said the plan would “mobilize every aspect of American society on a scale not seen since World War 2.”
Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal would reportedly phase out fossil fuel usage within 12 years. Studies show the plan would come with a hefty price.
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--2020-08-14--Kamala’s Eco-Agenda Spells Doom For America’s Economy

Written by Craig Rucker on .
Posted in Latest news As Attorney General of California , Kamala Harris misused her authority to attack the First Amendment rights of climate skeptics and other “ deplorables.
” In the waning days of the Obama Administration , radicals devised plans to launch a climate inquisition against nonprofit organizations , such as CFACT , that use facts to correct the exaggerations and distortions routinely employed by the global warming campaign .
They planned to use the investigative and prosecutorial powers of attorneys general and district attorneys to make it clear that reporting facts inconvenient @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the temerity to do so , would result in legal jeopardy and terrible publicity .
In other words , when it comes to climate policy and science , one must BE COMPLIANT , BE SILENT , or BE PUNISHED .
Kamala Harris enthusiastically climbed aboard and pledged to throw the awesome power of the Golden State state behind the inquisition .
In September 2015 , Jagadish Shukla and Edward Maibach , both climate radical professors at George Mason University , spearheaded a letter to U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch and President Obama @ @ @ @ @ @ @ climate “ deniers ” and their funders .
They proposed a terrible misuse of a statute created to take down the mafia to suppress speech about the climate .
It morphed into the “ # ExxonKnew ” campaign .
Al Gore brought his “ Climate Reality Project ” into the mix .
This led to an infamous press conference on March 29 , 2016 , in which NY AG Eric Schneiderman hosted Gore and a large posse of public officials to launch “ AGs United for Clean Power ” of which California AG @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CFACT ’ s close friends at the Competitive Enterprise Institute used FOIA to uncover emails that showed rampant collusion between paid climate radicals and state attorneys general to work together to suppress free speech by climate skeptics .
New York ’ s AG filed a lawsuit against Exxon , as did Massachusetts AG Maura Healey .
Both attempted to use tortured interpretations of securities or consumer protection laws to argue that America ’ s largest oil company committed fraud by being skeptical of radical climate pronouncements .
Worse yet it consorted with climate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lawsuits have so far fared terribly .
They weren ’ t helped when New York AG Schneiderman was forced to resign .
He had embraced the “ # MeToo ” movement , but then faced serious allegations of physical abuse brought by four women .
A group of attorneys general opposed to what AGs United was up to responded writing , “ using law enforcement authority to resolve a public policy debate undermines the trust invested in our offices and threatens free speech.
” “ I ’ m suing them , ” Harris @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , then suing.
” Vowing to file suit before an investigation concluded raised a serious issue of legal ethics .
Harris , however , never filed her lawsuit but did lie and say she did at a CNN climate town hall .
Moderator Erin Burnett asked : “ So , Senator Harris , what would you do ?
Would you sue them ?
Sue Exxon Mobil ?
” “ …opened an investigation into the oil giant over allegations it was lying to the public and its shareholders about climate change .
But there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any from her campaign , that she ever filed a lawsuit against the company .
We rate her claim False.
” As a candidate for president , Kamala Harris was not embarrassed about having used her powers as California AG to chill free speech .
On the contrary .
The pursuit of her party ’ s climate radical base was so ardent , that she lied to create the appearance that she had moved beyond investigation and filed suit .
Which is more frightening , that our First Amendment found no protector in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to keep her membership in good standing with the anti-free-speech mob ?
As Attorney General , Kamala Harris used similar strong-arm tactics against nonprofits such as The Center for Competitive Politics and Americans for Prosperity .
She attempted to force both organizations to disclose the names of their donors so the Left could harass them .
In both cases , she was blocked by the federal courts .
Kamala Harris ’ conduct as California Attorney General revealed a stunning lack of concern for our First Amendment rights as well as a troubling willingness @ @ @ @ @ @ @ advance partisan ends .
As a senator and presidential candidate , she later went all-in on eco-radicalism .
Harris signed on as an enthusiastic supporter of the “ Green New Deal ” and said during her campaign , “ as president of the United States , I am prepared to get rid of the filibuster to pass a Green New Deal.
” Rounding up the votes of 60 senators to advance legislation is the only essential protection when it is Republican legislation being stalled .
If the legislation would take us Left , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Senator Harris recently partnered with Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to introduce “ The Climate Equity Act ” , which would require energy and environment policymakers to utilize an “ equity score ” that would weight the legislation based on factors of race , gender , and socio-economic background .
Their goal is “ environmental justice.
” “ Major environmental policies must be written by the black , brown , and low-income people who have been and will be disproportionately impacted by it , just like the Green New Deal envisioned , ” AOC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remember that when eco-radicals use the word “ justice ” that is code for redistribution and control .
Actual justice doesn ’ t enter into it .
Kamala Harris has also made clear that she would end the shale energy revolution that finally achieved the long-sought goal of American energy independence .
“ There is no question I am in favor of banning fracking , ” Harris told that CNN climate town hall .
If elected , 78-year-old Joe Biden would be the oldest person to assume the presidency in American history .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It is cliché to observe that any vice president lives just a heartbeat away from the presidency .
Yet , no major party has nominated a vice president with a greater chance of assuming the top job since Roosevelt ’ s fourth term .
The tried-and-true presidential strategy is to run extremely in the primary , grab hold of the base , then pivot to the center for the general .
Joe Biden is doing just the opposite .
His advisors radicalized his climate and energy agenda after Biden secured the nomination @ @ @ @ @ @ @ eco-agenda on board .
Both spell devastation for America ’ s energy economy .
Harris ’ presidential campaign put a price tag of $ 10 trillion on her climate plans and pledged to force Americans into carbon neutrality by 2030 .
Are you prepared to give up your car , energy , and for many , your job in just ten years ?
America can not afford to be force-marched into an inefficient Green energy economy in ten years , nor can we afford any further erosion of our constitutional right to free @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Robert Kennedy , Jr. and Bill Nye stand before a group of climate activists and Hollywood celebrities and call for climate skeptics to be jailed , what would Kamala Harris do ?

Written by Craig Rucker on Aug 14, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
As Attorney General of California, Kamala Harris misused her authority to attack the First Amendment rights of climate skeptics and other “deplorables.”
In the waning days of the Obama Administration, radicals devised plans to launch a climate inquisition against nonprofit organizations, such as CFACT, that use facts to correct the exaggerations and distortions routinely employed by the global warming campaign.
They planned to use the investigative and prosecutorial powers of attorneys general and district attorneys to make it clear that reporting facts inconvenient to the climate narrative or funding those with the temerity to do so, would result in legal jeopardy and terrible publicity.
In other words, when it comes to climate policy and science, one must BE COMPLIANT, BE SILENT, or BE PUNISHED.
Free speech be damned.
Kamala Harris enthusiastically climbed aboard and pledged to throw the awesome power of the Golden State state behind the inquisition.
In September 2015, Jagadish Shukla and Edward Maibach, both climate radical professors at George Mason University, spearheaded a letter to U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch and President Obama asking them to explore RICO charges against climate “deniers” and their funders.
They proposed a terrible misuse of a statute created to take down the mafia to suppress speech about the climate. It morphed into the “#ExxonKnew” campaign.
Al Gore brought his “Climate Reality Project” into the mix. This led to an infamous press conference on March 29, 2016, in which NY AG Eric Schneiderman hosted Gore and a large posse of public officials to launch “AGs United for Clean Power” of which California AG Kamala Harris was a charter member.
CFACT’s close friends at the Competitive Enterprise Institute used FOIA to uncover emails that showed rampant collusion between paid climate radicals and state attorneys general to work together to suppress free speech by climate skeptics.
New York’s AG filed a lawsuit against Exxon, as did Massachusetts AG Maura Healey. Both attempted to use tortured interpretations of securities or consumer protection laws to argue that America’s largest oil company committed fraud by being skeptical of radical climate pronouncements.
Worse yet it consorted with climate skeptical scholars and policy experts. These lawsuits have so far fared terribly.
They weren’t helped when New York AG Schneiderman was forced to resign. He had embraced the “#MeToo” movement, but then faced serious allegations of physical abuse brought by four women.
A group of attorneys general opposed to what AGs United was up to responded writing, “using law enforcement authority to resolve a public policy debate undermines the trust invested in our offices and threatens free speech.”
“I’m suing them,” Harris told an activist. “Investigating first, then suing.” Vowing to file suit before an investigation concluded raised a serious issue of legal ethics. Harris, however, never filed her lawsuit but did lie and say she did at a CNN climate town hall.
Moderator Erin Burnett asked: “So, Senator Harris, what would you do? Would you sue them? Sue Exxon Mobil?”
“I have sued Exxon Mobil,” Harris replied.
Politifact reported that Harris:
“…opened an investigation into the oil giant over allegations it was lying to the public and its shareholders about climate change. But there’s no public evidence, or any from her campaign, that she ever filed a lawsuit against the company. We rate her claim False.”
As a candidate for president, Kamala Harris was not embarrassed about having used her powers as California AG to chill free speech.
On the contrary. The pursuit of her party’s climate radical base was so ardent, that she lied to create the appearance that she had moved beyond investigation and filed suit.
Which is more frightening, that our First Amendment found no protector in Kamala Harris, or that she lied to keep her membership in good standing with the anti-free-speech mob?
As Attorney General, Kamala Harris used similar strong-arm tactics against nonprofits such as The Center for Competitive Politics and Americans for Prosperity.
She attempted to force both organizations to disclose the names of their donors so the Left could harass them. In both cases, she was blocked by the federal courts.
Kamala Harris’ conduct as California Attorney General revealed a stunning lack of concern for our First Amendment rights as well as a troubling willingness to make heavy-handed use her power to advance partisan ends.
As a senator and presidential candidate, she later went all-in on eco-radicalism.
Harris signed on as an enthusiastic supporter of the “Green New Deal” and said during her campaign, “as president of the United States, I am prepared to get rid of the filibuster to pass a Green New Deal.”
Rounding up the votes of 60 senators to advance legislation is the only essential protection when it is Republican legislation being stalled. If the legislation would take us Left, the nuclear option is ready to launch.
Senator Harris recently partnered with Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to introduce “The Climate Equity Act”, which would require energy and environment policymakers to utilize an “equity score” that would weight the legislation based on factors of race, gender, and socio-economic background. Their goal is “environmental justice.”
“Major environmental policies must be written by the black, brown, and low-income people who have been and will be disproportionately impacted by it, just like the Green New Deal envisioned,” AOC said in a press statement.
Always remember that when eco-radicals use the word “justice” that is code for redistribution and control. Actual justice doesn’t enter into it.
Kamala Harris has also made clear that she would end the shale energy revolution that finally achieved the long-sought goal of American energy independence.
“There is no question I am in favor of banning fracking,” Harris told that CNN climate town hall.
If elected, 78-year-old Joe Biden would be the oldest person to assume the presidency in American history. He would also be among the frailest.
It is cliché to observe that any vice president lives just a heartbeat away from the presidency. Yet, no major party has nominated a vice president with a greater chance of assuming the top job since Roosevelt’s fourth term.
The tried-and-true presidential strategy is to run extremely in the primary, grab hold of the base, then pivot to the center for the general. Joe Biden is doing just the opposite.
His advisors radicalized his climate and energy agenda after Biden secured the nomination. They then brought Kamala Harris’ eco-agenda on board. Both spell devastation for America’s energy economy.
Harris’ presidential campaign put a price tag of $10 trillion on her climate plans and pledged to force Americans into carbon neutrality by 2030. Are you prepared to give up your car, energy, and for many, your job in just ten years?
America cannot afford to be force-marched into an inefficient Green energy economy in ten years, nor can we afford any further erosion of our constitutional right to free speech.
In the future, when Robert Kennedy, Jr. and Bill Nye stand before a group of climate activists and Hollywood celebrities and call for climate skeptics to be jailed, what would Kamala Harris do?
Read more at CFACT
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-08-17--Spiegel’s Alarmism Exposed (Again), Greenland Ice Not ‘Doomed’

Written by Pierre Gosselin on .
Posted in Latest news German skeptic site Die Kalte Sonne here debunks a recent alarmist article appearing in Spiegel aimed at shocking its readers .
The reality , it turns out , is not shocking at all .
According to Spiegel , the Greenland ice sheet is already doomed ( that is unless we skip the usual democratic process and just act immediately ) .
Spiegel claims Greenland “ glaciers are continuously losing huge masses of ice ” and that the system there is “ dramatically off-balance.
” The leftist Hamburg-based weekly reported : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were really so , and needed only 2 mouse clicks to find a recent temperature reconstruction for Greenland ’ s past ( Lecavalier et al .
2017 , pdf here ) .
The paper ’ s Figure 4a shows the temperatures , with the temperature of 1950 at the far right which in paleo-climatology is always meant as “ present ” .
Thus , 11,000 years ago , it was up to 4°C warmer than in 1950 over long periods of thousands of years , and today the warming has been about 1°C @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an ice sheet of 2,850,000 km³ ( that is roughly Gt ) today , the “ point of no return ” can not have been exceeded 10,000 years ago .
How does the heading then come about ?
We take a look at the associated work by King et al .
2020 : Dynamic ice loss from the Greenland Ice Sheet driven by sustained glacier retreat The Greenland Ice Sheet is losing mass at accelerated rates in the 21st century , making it the largest single contributor to rising sea levels .
Faster @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to this loss , with the cause of speedup , and potential for future change , uncertain .
Here we combine more than three decades of remotely sensed observational products of outlet glacier velocity , elevation , and front position changes over the full ice sheet .
We compare decadal variability in discharge and calving front position and find that increased glacier discharge was due almost entirely to the retreat of glacier fronts , rather than inland ice sheet processes , with a remarkably consistent speedup of 4–5 % per km of retreat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that widespread retreat between 2000 and 2005 resulted in a step-increase in discharge and a switch to a new dynamic state of sustained mass loss that would persist even under a decline in surface melt .
Is there any talk of an irreversible end of the Greenland ice sheet ?
From the abstract : The authors see an acceleration in melting towards the ocean in the period 2000-2005 , with not enough snowfall to compensate for the losses .
They find a loss of about 500 Gt/year .
Only 0.15 % of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not address the highly accurate gravity measurements with satellites in their paper .
This data shows a linear mass loss of only 275 Gt/year between 2003 and 2019 ( with a gap in 2017 and 2018 due to a satellite change ) , so that in 17 years about 4,200 Gt was lost , which is 0.15 % of the total sheet .
What exactly do they say about the future ?
This is much more cautious than what is being served up to us as “ doomed ” with the usual “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is enough to unmask the media scream for what it is : low-fact propaganda .
Also , read here at Ice Age Now .
Read more at No Tricks Zone

Written by Pierre Gosselin on Aug 17, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
German skeptic site Die Kalte Sonne here debunks a recent alarmist article appearing in Spiegel aimed at shocking its readers. The reality, it turns out, is not shocking at all.
Greenland ice doomed?
According to Spiegel, the Greenland ice sheet is already doomed (that is unless we skip the usual democratic process and just act immediately).
Spiegel claims Greenland “glaciers are continuously losing huge masses of ice” and that the system there is “dramatically off-balance.” The leftist Hamburg-based weekly reported:
The melting of the glaciers on Greenland has apparently passed the point of no return. Even if the global rise in temperature were to stop immediately, the ice sheet would continue to retreat, report researchers led by Michalea King of Ohio State University report in the journal “Communications Earth and Environment“.
Read more at Spiegel
4°C warmer 11,000 years ago
But Die kalte Sonne wondered if this were really so, and needed only 2 mouse clicks to find a recent temperature reconstruction for Greenland’s past (Lecavalier et al. 2017, pdf here).
The paper’s Figure 4a shows the temperatures, with the temperature of 1950 at the far right which in paleo-climatology is always meant as “present”.
Thus, 11,000 years ago, it was up to 4°C warmer than in 1950 over long periods of thousands of years, and today the warming has been about 1°C since then.
Since we can see an ice sheet of 2,850,000 km³ (that is roughly Gt) today, the “point of no return” cannot have been exceeded 10,000 years ago.
How does the heading then come about? We take a look at the associated work by King et al. 2020:
Dynamic ice loss from the Greenland Ice Sheet driven by sustained glacier retreat The Greenland Ice Sheet is losing mass at accelerated rates in the 21st century, making it the largest single contributor to rising sea levels. Faster flow of outlet glaciers has substantially contributed to this loss, with the cause of speedup, and potential for future change, uncertain. Here we combine more than three decades of remotely sensed observational products of outlet glacier velocity, elevation, and front position changes over the full ice sheet. We compare decadal variability in discharge and calving front position and find that increased glacier discharge was due almost entirely to the retreat of glacier fronts, rather than inland ice sheet processes, with a remarkably consistent speedup of 4–5% per km of retreat across the ice sheet. We show that widespread retreat between 2000 and 2005 resulted in a step-increase in discharge and a switch to a new dynamic state of sustained mass loss that would persist even under a decline in surface melt.
Is there any talk of an irreversible end of the Greenland ice sheet? From the abstract:
We show that widespread retreat between 2000 and 2005 resulted in a step-increase in discharge and a switch to a new dynamic state of sustained mass loss that would persist even under a decline in surface melt.“
The authors see an acceleration in melting towards the ocean in the period 2000-2005, with not enough snowfall to compensate for the losses. They find a loss of about 500 Gt/year.
Only 0.15% of the total ice mass
Unfortunately, they do not address the highly accurate gravity measurements with satellites in their paper.
This data shows a linear mass loss of only 275 Gt/year between 2003 and 2019 (with a gap in 2017 and 2018 due to a satellite change), so that in 17 years about 4,200 Gt was lost, which is 0.15% of the total sheet.
What exactly do they say about the future?
Ultimately, predictions of future change will require improved understanding of the ice/ocean boundary and controls on glacier calving.“
Low-fact propaganda
This is much more cautious than what is being served up to us as “doomed” with the usual “overconfidence.” A look into the past is enough to unmask the media scream for what it is: low-fact propaganda.
Also, read here at Ice Age Now.
h/t Rúnar O.
Read more at No Tricks Zone
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-08-17--How Coal Can Help The Billions Without Electricity

Written by Todd Royal on .
Posted in Latest news Over 600 million Africans are still without energy and electricity .
The movie “ Juice ” brilliantly illustrates through a visual representation of how billions are without electricity ; and without electricity and the energy from mainly fossil fuels , life returns to the Dark Ages .
Whereas liberal documentary filmmaker Michael Moore exposes the fallacy , human misery , and environmental degradation that occurs when towns , cities , counties , states , nations , or continents rely on renewable energy to electricity from wind turbines ( enormous emitters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , or destructive biomass is used for electrical generation .
Literally , life has no purpose , happiness , and meaning without electricity and sources of energy that are abundant , scalable , reliable , affordable , and flexible .
That describes coal – but isn ’ t coal outdated , outlawed , and the worst form of energy possible ?
In fact , coal has always been and now at the forefront of what could save billions without hope , a future , and the key to environmental stewardship the West desperately @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1,600 coal-fired power plants are being planned , permitted , or currently under construction .
Hard to believe since this reliable source of electricity is under attack in western nations such as the U.S. and the entire European Union .
Elsewhere , coal is used more than ever .
China , Japan , and India are using and building newer “ high-efficiency low-emission ( HELE ) , ultra-supercritical coal-fired power plants.
” HELE electricity-generating plants operate at higher than normal temperatures and increased efficiency .
A HELE-plant additionally operates at emission and pollutant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ existing coal-fired power plants.
” Official Indian energy policy is for coal to be its main energy source of electrical generation .
Japan is working towards building 22 HELE plants to replace nuclear power after the Fukushima accident .
China wants to build 300 HELE plants domestically and internationally .
Any Green New Deals , Paris Climate Agreements , or excoriating of coal by the EPA are offset by Japan , India , China , and the EU , which is building twenty-seven coal-fired plants to counter the energy to electricity dysfunction from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The West , led by the U.S. and EU , is committing energy suicide when they refuse to embrace and regulate out of existence lower-emitting by up to forty-five percent , rich in energy density , and always firing 24/7/365 , HELE coal-fired power plants .
Countries rich in coal but unable to afford sophisticated and lower-emitting but expensive natural gas-fired power plants and billion ( s ) dollar ( s ) liquid natural gas terminals ( LNG ) could use coal to leave lives without fulfillment , and sophistication .
The book @ @ @ @ @ @ @ detail that poorer peoples , nations , and continents generally destroy their environments searching for basic necessities the U.S. and Europe take for granted .
“ If you want to minimize carbon dioxide in the atmosphere in 2070 you might want to accelerate the burning of coal in India today ( as an example ) .
It doesn ’ t sound like it makes sense .
Coal is terrible for carbon .
“ But it ’ s by burning a lot of coal that they ( India ) make themselves wealthier , ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) , and by making themselves wealthier ( any poor region of the world ) , they have fewer children , and you don ’ t have as many people burning carbon , you might be better off in 2070 .
We shouldn ’ t be forced to choose between lifting people out of poverty and doing something for the climate.
” Billions without energy or electricity who are mainly using wood and cow dung , which are the worst emitting forms of energy , could be generating sustainable energy and electricity utilizing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and lives .
HELE plants generate overwhelmingly more energy to electricity than renewables under current technological constraints .
The main factor why is “ HELE plants have a capacity factor of 86 % , while wind has a capacity factor of 35 % , and PV solar has a capacity factor of , at best , 22 % .
” Counterintuitive for today ’ s energy wisdom , and climate-change nihilism , coal can lead to cleaner air and healthier children and families .
Climates changing are about more than the Earth warming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We are living in the “ Asian century , ” and they need more energy , power , and electricity than at any point in mankind ’ s history that coal provides .
Aggressive climate change action that the U.S. Democratic Party and European Green parties advocate for are “ egregiously misleading ” when coal is demonized in favor of lowering human flourishing .
The mantra of “ coal is death ” is unbelievably exaggerated when economic reality meets an environmental movement termed a “ climate-industrial-complex.
” Nowhere is the poor kept @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than when coal-fired power plants are not allowed to be built to the detriment of billions of Chinese , Africans , and Indians .
Soul-crushing poverty the West can ’ t even imagine becomes the norm .
Multilateral development is then crushed when organizations such as the World Bank don ’ t allow the Asian century to flourish , or the second half of this century where Africa is likely to become the largest region in the world .
Asserting renewables and climate-change-mitigation programs bring “ co-benefits ” is a bald-faced lie , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ racism .
These bold souls in India , China , Africa , and elsewhere deserve the abundant , affordable , scalable , reliable , flexible , and energy-dense life-giving qualities that coal brings globally .
Coal can lay the foundation for prosperity that historically leads to clean landscapes , fresher air , and all-around better earth for all .

Written by Todd Royal on Aug 17, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
Over 600 million Africans are still without energy and electricity.
The movie “Juice” brilliantly illustrates through a visual representation of how billions are without electricity; and without electricity and the energy from mainly fossil fuels, life returns to the Dark Ages.
Whereas liberal documentary filmmaker Michael Moore exposes the fallacy, human misery, and environmental degradation that occurs when towns, cities, counties, states, nations, or continents rely on renewable energy to electricity from wind turbines (enormous emitters of greenhouse gases) and solar panels, or destructive biomass is used for electrical generation.
Literally, life has no purpose, happiness, and meaning without electricity and sources of energy that are abundant, scalable, reliable, affordable, and flexible.
That describes coal – but isn’t coal outdated, outlawed, and the worst form of energy possible?
In fact, coal has always been and now at the forefront of what could save billions without hope, a future, and the key to environmental stewardship the West desperately craves.
At this time, approximately 1,600 coal-fired power plants are being planned, permitted, or currently under construction.
Hard to believe since this reliable source of electricity is under attack in western nations such as the U.S. and the entire European Union.
Elsewhere, coal is used more than ever. China, Japan, and India are using and building newer “high-efficiency low-emission (HELE), ultra-supercritical coal-fired power plants.”
HELE electricity-generating plants operate at higher than normal temperatures and increased efficiency. A HELE-plant additionally operates at emission and pollutant levels “45% lower than from existing coal-fired power plants.”
Official Indian energy policy is for coal to be its main energy source of electrical generation. Japan is working towards building 22 HELE plants to replace nuclear power after the Fukushima accident. China wants to build 300 HELE plants domestically and internationally.
Any Green New Deals, Paris Climate Agreements, or excoriating of coal by the EPA are offset by Japan, India, China, and the EU, which is building twenty-seven coal-fired plants to counter the energy to electricity dysfunction from overreliance on the wind and sun.
The West, led by the U.S. and EU, is committing energy suicide when they refuse to embrace and regulate out of existence lower-emitting by up to forty-five percent, rich in energy density, and always firing 24/7/365, HELE coal-fired power plants.
Countries rich in coal but unable to afford sophisticated and lower-emitting but expensive natural gas-fired power plants and billion(s) dollar(s) liquid natural gas terminals (LNG) could use coal to leave lives without fulfillment, and sophistication.
The book The End of Doom describes in rich detail that poorer peoples, nations, and continents generally destroy their environments searching for basic necessities the U.S. and Europe take for granted.
MIT climate scientist Kerry Emanuel says:
“If you want to minimize carbon dioxide in the atmosphere in 2070 you might want to accelerate the burning of coal in India today (as an example). It doesn’t sound like it makes sense. Coal is terrible for carbon. “But it’s by burning a lot of coal that they (India) make themselves wealthier, (similar to America in the early 1900s), and by making themselves wealthier (any poor region of the world), they have fewer children, and you don’t have as many people burning carbon, you might be better off in 2070. We shouldn’t be forced to choose between lifting people out of poverty and doing something for the climate.”
Billions without energy or electricity who are mainly using wood and cow dung, which are the worst emitting forms of energy, could be generating sustainable energy and electricity utilizing coal to save their local environments, and lives.
HELE plants generate overwhelmingly more energy to electricity than renewables under current technological constraints.
The main factor why is “HELE plants have a capacity factor of 86%, while wind has a capacity factor of 35%, and PV solar has a capacity factor of, at best, 22%.”
Counterintuitive for today’s energy wisdom, and climate-change nihilism, coal can lead to cleaner air and healthier children and families.
Climates changing are about more than the Earth warming or not over mankind’s activities. We are living in the “Asian century,” and they need more energy, power, and electricity than at any point in mankind’s history that coal provides.
Aggressive climate change action that the U.S. Democratic Party and European Green parties advocate for are “egregiously misleading” when coal is demonized in favor of lowering human flourishing.
The mantra of “coal is death” is unbelievably exaggerated when economic reality meets an environmental movement termed a “climate-industrial-complex.”
Nowhere is the poor kept in the rotting pits of life more than when coal-fired power plants are not allowed to be built to the detriment of billions of Chinese, Africans, and Indians. Soul-crushing poverty the West can’t even imagine becomes the norm.
Multilateral development is then crushed when organizations such as the World Bank don’t allow the Asian century to flourish, or the second half of this century where Africa is likely to become the largest region in the world.
Asserting renewables and climate-change-mitigation programs bring “co-benefits” is a bald-faced lie, and justifies the worse kind of environmental racism.
These bold souls in India, China, Africa, and elsewhere deserve the abundant, affordable, scalable, reliable, flexible, and energy-dense life-giving qualities that coal brings globally.
Coal can lay the foundation for prosperity that historically leads to clean landscapes, fresher air, and all-around better earth for all.
Read more at CFACT
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-08-17--California’s Green-Energy Corruption And Those Rolling Blackouts

Written by Katy Grimes on .
Posted in Latest news The last California Governor blamed for rolling energy blackouts was recalled by voters and replaced .
In 2003 , Governor Gray Davis was recalled over leadership issues , high taxation , and inaction over a struggling California economy and rolling energy blackouts .
Gov .
Gavin Newsom is already facing a recall , and now with rolling blackouts , he may have just guaranteed it .
Most countries around the world think that it ’ s a good thing to have cheap energy .
In California , we have plenty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the political will to access it .
California depends on natural gas-driven turbines and hydroelectric generators to provide just 38 percent of its energy needs .
The state imports 12 percent of its oil from Alaska , and another 58 percent from foreign nations , relying heavily on Canada , which has 19 commercial nuclear reactors and is the world ’ s third-largest producer of hydroelectricity .
So why are California ’ s utilities cutting power , and imposing rolling blackouts again ?
The state is awash in ultra-cheap natural gas , yet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ways to create an energy shortage , and charge ratepayers the highest rates in the country .
This is one reason California electricity costs more than twice the national median—thanks to a government-created shortage .
California ’ s natural gas shale formation is one of the largest in the world .
And , California has been a pioneer in renewable energy , albeit still unreliable and unproven .
While California sits on one of the largest known deposits of recoverable oil and gas , production has steadily fallen .
The state ignores its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are fully accessible through conventional and hydraulic fracturing technologies .
Another reason is that the California Public Utilities Commission , the state ’ s energy “ regulator , ” has a historic , dubious relationship with Wall Street , making promises to keep the profits higher of the state ’ s publicly held utilities , than utility profits elsewhere .
California politicians have gloated over being the first state to enact such aggressive green energy and greenhouse gas busting policy , but have yet to produce any proof that these oppressive and business-killing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ results .
All while they ignore that natural gas is clean , less expensive to extract , natural and abundant .
It wasn ’ t that long ago that natural gas used to be the left ’ s preferred alternative to all other “ dirty fuels.
” But as the oil and gas industry found better , more affordable ways to access natural gas , it fell out of favor with emotional , whimsical environmentalists .
Many California residents have purchased expensive generators to keep refrigerators and freezers on , but generators rely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the California Legislature want to ban natural gas to homes and require only electric appliances .
So California residents won ’ t even be able to keep our power on in this “ new normal.
” With triple-digit heat in California – a typical August – rolling blackouts will not be popular among voters .
Californians are now being charged very high-tiered energy rates , with the most expensive usage during the times it is most needed – 4 pm to 8 pm .
Every which way that ratepayers turn , we are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this state .

Written by Katy Grimes on Aug 17, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
The last California Governor blamed for rolling energy blackouts was recalled by voters and replaced. In 2003, Governor Gray Davis was recalled over leadership issues, high taxation, and inaction over a struggling California economy and rolling energy blackouts.
Gov. Gavin Newsom is already facing a recall, and now with rolling blackouts, he may have just guaranteed it.
Most countries around the world think that it’s a good thing to have cheap energy. In California, we have plenty of cheap energy available, just not the political will to access it.
California depends on natural gas-driven turbines and hydroelectric generators to provide just 38 percent of its energy needs.
The state imports 12 percent of its oil from Alaska, and another 58 percent from foreign nations, relying heavily on Canada, which has 19 commercial nuclear reactors and is the world’s third-largest producer of hydroelectricity.
So why are California’s utilities cutting power, and imposing rolling blackouts again?
It’s political. And it’s corrupt.
The state is awash in ultra-cheap natural gas, yet in California, our corrupt government finds ways to create an energy shortage, and charge ratepayers the highest rates in the country.
This is one reason California electricity costs more than twice the national median—thanks to a government-created shortage.
California’s natural gas shale formation is one of the largest in the world. And, California has been a pioneer in renewable energy, albeit still unreliable and unproven.
While California sits on one of the largest known deposits of recoverable oil and gas, production has steadily fallen.
The state ignores its vast onshore and offshore deposits, which are fully accessible through conventional and hydraulic fracturing technologies.
Another reason is that the California Public Utilities Commission, the state’s energy “regulator,” has a historic, dubious relationship with Wall Street, making promises to keep the profits higher of the state’s publicly held utilities, than utility profits elsewhere.
California politicians have gloated over being the first state to enact such aggressive green energy and greenhouse gas busting policy, but have yet to produce any proof that these oppressive and business-killing laws have had any “green” results.
All while they ignore that natural gas is clean, less expensive to extract, natural and abundant. It wasn’t that long ago that natural gas used to be the left’s preferred alternative to all other “dirty fuels.”
But as the oil and gas industry found better, more affordable ways to access natural gas, it fell out of favor with emotional, whimsical environmentalists.
Many California residents have purchased expensive generators to keep refrigerators and freezers on, but generators rely mostly on natural gas.
Democrats in the California Legislature want to ban natural gas to homes and require only electric appliances. So California residents won’t even be able to keep our power on in this “new normal.”
With triple-digit heat in California – a typical August – rolling blackouts will not be popular among voters. Californians are now being charged very high-tiered energy rates, with the most expensive usage during the times it is most needed – 4 pm to 8 pm.
Every which way that ratepayers turn, we are getting seriously bilked by the politicians in this state.
Read rest at California Globe
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-08-17--Wind And Solar Can’t Keep The Lights On In California

Written by Francis Menton on .
Posted in Latest news You may have read in the past few days that residents of California have been experiencing rolling power blackouts .
This has occurred in the middle of a strong heatwave , meaning that large numbers of people have had their air conditioning , light , refrigeration , and everything else dependent on electricity , go out just when they are most needed .
The blackouts have not been the result of technical failures of the grid , but rather have been intentionally imposed by the electricity system operator ( known @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) via the various local utilities .
So what has caused these blackouts ?
The official explanation is that the heatwave is the cause .
It has just gotten so unusually hot that demand has risen beyond the capacity of the system .
Many articles in the media reporting on the situation go further to associate the unusual heat with “ climate change.
” This explanation is complete BS .
Yes , there is a strong heatwave going on , at least in certain areas of the state , but it is not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , what is occurring is that California has begun to face the consequences of replacing reliable fossil fuel and nuclear-powered electricity with the intermittent renewables wind and solar .
In the evening , approximately 7 to 9 PM , when the sun has set and the heat lingers , and when the demand for electricity from air conditioning reaches a peak , the intermittent wind and solar sources have been producing just about nothing .
With insufficient fossil fuel backup , there is not enough power to meet the demand .
In short @ @ @ @ @ @ @ almost unbelievable incompetence by the authorities in California .
As usual , the equally incompetent and corrupt media are completely giving the authorities a pass in the name of supposedly addressing “ climate change.
” First , consider the heatwave .
It is fair to call what is currently going on in some major cities like Los Angeles and San Jose a serious heatwave ( although the situation in other major California cities like San Diego and Santa Barbara is not a heatwave at all ) .
In Los Angeles , the average @ @ @ @ @ @ @ F. The highs for the past three days have been 93 , 98 , and 95 .
For the rest of the upcoming week , forecast highs are all in the 90s , with Wednesday the highest at 98 .
On the other hand , in Los Angeles , the temperature goes over 100 deg F at least once or a few times most years .
Here is a list of record-high temperatures in Los Angeles by year .
In 2018 it hit 108 ; in 2010 , 113 ; in 1990 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and so forth .
The large majority of years have temperature records at 100 or above .
In short , there is nothing unusual or unexpected in summer temperatures at the level being experienced this week .
So with temperatures at or above the current levels a regularly recurring phenomenon , why haven ’ t the authorities planned accordingly and put in place resources to meet the demand ?
The answer is that under a law enacted in 2018 , California has embarked on a crazed program to generate 50 % of its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2025 , 60 % by 2030 , and 100 % by 2045 .
Both before and after the enactment of that law , California has been ambitiously expanding its capacity for wind and solar generation of electricity .
To put this in some context , the peak electricity demand that has been causing California ’ s problems during the current heatwave is in the range of 42 – 46 GW .
( Today ’ s peak demand was about 44 GW . )
To meet this demand , you could put in place @ @ @ @ @ @ @ plants with a capacity of around 55 GW , which would give you a comfortable cushion to deal with whatever maintenance issues or mishaps might arise .
According to the U.S. government ’ s Energy Information Agency , California actually has installed electricity generation capacity of almost 76 GW .
That sounds wildly more than you would ever need .
But the problem is that of the 76 GW of capacity , some 27 GW is solar , and 6 GW is wind .
In August the solar goes into steep decline around @ @ @ @ @ @ @ PM .
The wind more or less doesn ’ t blow at all during heatwaves .
And thus you get a profile of electricity generation from the renewable sources that look like this ( this is the report of generation from renewables in California for August 14 , 2020 , per CAISO ) : As you can see , the solar generation hit zero somewhere between 7 and 7:30 PM .
The wind generation hovered somewhere between 1 and 1.5 GW through the evening hours .
The word “ useless ” is hardly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out all of the solar and wind capacity , and California has only about 43 GW of capacity to meet the demand that could well exceed that on any hot summer day .
And to get to that 43 GW , you would need all other facilities up and running at absolutely full capacity with no scheduled or unscheduled outages , which is not realistic .
Yes , you could try to import some power from the neighboring states , but at times of peak usage , they probably need all of their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have put yourself in a position where regular intentional blackouts are inevitable .
And , as more and more reliable fossil fuel and nuclear facilities get closed in favor of wind and solar , the problem looks set to worsen dramatically over the next several years .
So how does the media address this situation ?
New York Times , August 15 , “ California Could See More Rolling Outages Amid Heatwave ” : The state remained gripped by the heatwave Saturday and the power grid operator will decide whether to continue the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said California ISO spokeswoman Anne Gonzales .
“ We ’ re dealing with weather , clouds , wildfires … these are quickly evolving situations , quickly changing , ” Gonzales said .
Vox , August 15 , “ California ’ s heatwave caused rolling blackouts for millions.
” There are plenty more like these .
Try to find any mention , let alone explanation , of the role that replacing reliable with intermittent generation plays in the mess .
I guess “ gaslighting ” is as good a word for the situation as @ @

Written by Francis Menton on Aug 17, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
You may have read in the past few days that residents of California have been experiencing rolling power blackouts.
This has occurred in the middle of a strong heatwave, meaning that large numbers of people have had their air conditioning, light, refrigeration, and everything else dependent on electricity, go out just when they are most needed.
The blackouts have not been the result of technical failures of the grid, but rather have been intentionally imposed by the electricity system operator (known as CAISO — California Independent System Operator) via the various local utilities.
So what has caused these blackouts? The official explanation is that the heatwave is the cause. It has just gotten so unusually hot that demand has risen beyond the capacity of the system.
Many articles in the media reporting on the situation go further to associate the unusual heat with “climate change.”
This explanation is complete BS. Yes, there is a strong heatwave going on, at least in certain areas of the state, but it is not unusual in historical context.
In fact, what is occurring is that California has begun to face the consequences of replacing reliable fossil fuel and nuclear-powered electricity with the intermittent renewables wind and solar.
In the evening, approximately 7 to 9 PM, when the sun has set and the heat lingers, and when the demand for electricity from air conditioning reaches a peak, the intermittent wind and solar sources have been producing just about nothing.
With insufficient fossil fuel backup, there is not enough power to meet the demand.
In short, we are witnessing the results of almost unbelievable incompetence by the authorities in California.
As usual, the equally incompetent and corrupt media are completely giving the authorities a pass in the name of supposedly addressing “climate change.”
First, consider the heatwave. It is fair to call what is currently going on in some major cities like Los Angeles and San Jose a serious heatwave (although the situation in other major California cities like San Diego and Santa Barbara is not a heatwave at all).
In Los Angeles, the average daily high for mid-August is 84 deg F. The highs for the past three days have been 93, 98, and 95.
For the rest of the upcoming week, forecast highs are all in the 90s, with Wednesday the highest at 98.
On the other hand, in Los Angeles, the temperature goes over 100 deg F at least once or a few times most years.
Here is a list of record-high temperatures in Los Angeles by year. In 2018 it hit 108; in 2010, 113; in 1990, 112; in 1988, 110; and so forth.
The large majority of years have temperature records at 100 or above. In short, there is nothing unusual or unexpected in summer temperatures at the level being experienced this week.
So with temperatures at or above the current levels a regularly recurring phenomenon, why haven’t the authorities planned accordingly and put in place resources to meet the demand?
The answer is that under a law enacted in 2018, California has embarked on a crazed program to generate 50% of its electricity from “renewable” sources by 2025, 60% by 2030, and 100% by 2045.
Both before and after the enactment of that law, California has been ambitiously expanding its capacity for wind and solar generation of electricity.
To put this in some context, the peak electricity demand that has been causing California’s problems during the current heatwave is in the range of 42 – 46 GW. (Today’s peak demand was about 44 GW.)
To meet this demand, you could put in place a system of fossil fuel and nuclear plants with a capacity of around 55 GW, which would give you a comfortable cushion to deal with whatever maintenance issues or mishaps might arise.
According to the U.S. government’s Energy Information Agency, California actually has installed electricity generation capacity of almost 76 GW. That sounds wildly more than you would ever need.
But the problem is that of the 76 GW of capacity, some 27 GW is solar, and 6 GW is wind. In August the solar goes into steep decline around 4 PM and ends completely around 7 PM.
The wind more or less doesn’t blow at all during heatwaves. And thus you get a profile of electricity generation from the renewable sources that look like this (this is the report of generation from renewables in California for August 14, 2020, per CAISO):
As you can see, the solar generation hit zero somewhere between 7 and 7:30 PM. The wind generation hovered somewhere between 1 and 1.5 GW through the evening hours. The word “useless” is hardly sufficient to describe the situation.
Take out all of the solar and wind capacity, and California has only about 43 GW of capacity to meet the demand that could well exceed that on any hot summer day.
And to get to that 43 GW, you would need all other facilities up and running at absolutely full capacity with no scheduled or unscheduled outages, which is not realistic.
Yes, you could try to import some power from the neighboring states, but at times of peak usage, they probably need all of their own power.
In short, you have put yourself in a position where regular intentional blackouts are inevitable.
And, as more and more reliable fossil fuel and nuclear facilities get closed in favor of wind and solar, the problem looks set to worsen dramatically over the next several years.
So how does the media address this situation? New York Times, August 15, “California Could See More Rolling Outages Amid Heatwave” :
The state remained gripped by the heatwave Saturday and the power grid operator will decide whether to continue the rolling outages on a day-to-day basis, said California ISO spokeswoman Anne Gonzales. “We’re dealing with weather, clouds, wildfires … these are quickly evolving situations, quickly changing,” Gonzales said.
Vox, August 15, “California’s heatwave caused rolling blackouts for millions.” There are plenty more like these.
Try to find any mention, let alone explanation, of the role that replacing reliable with intermittent generation plays in the mess. I guess “gaslighting” is as good a word for the situation as any.
Read more at Manhattan Contrarian
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-08-17--COVID And Climate Hysteria Using The Same Alarmist Playbook

Written by Brian C. Joondeph , M.D .
on .
Posted in Latest news As we approach six months of lockdowns , mandates , and restrictions previously unfathomable in a free society , it is important to ask if what we are being told to do is either necessary or effective in combating this viral pandemic .
Or are these empty gestures , efforts of totalitarian wannabees serving as mayors or governors , trying to control those they are charged with leading and protecting , trying to advance a political agenda rather than preserving and protecting the Constitution ?
One @ @ @ @ @ @ @ climate policy .
Both create fear , to a frenzy level , of the world-ending , massive death and destruction , all due to a warming planet or an aggressive flu virus .
If we don ’ t wear a mask , we are murderers and should be imprisoned .
If we don ’ t believe in man-made global warming , we should also be locked away in jail .
Both movements have famous , often media-fabricated , leaders , and spokespersons to push the agenda .
Aside from politicians , the climate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ while the COVID evangelists are Drs .
Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx .
At least the latter two , on paper , have expertise in their fields unlike the former two who are self- or media-created experts .
The axiom , “ follow the money ” applies to both crusades .
The climate industry has been a cash cow for those on the politically correct side of the debate .
Government subsidies flow freely to green energy companies , often to campaign donors of those doling out the money .
Half-a-billion taxpayer dollars @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to political donors and fundraisers .
Gore has amassed hundreds of millions in green investments and carbon credits .
In the virus world , there are vaccines and therapeutics , all with royalties , patents , and potentially billions of dollars in sales .
It seems the Chinese virus doomsayers , like Fauci and Bill Gates , have a stake in whatever treatments or preventatives are pushed to get us out of this supposed public health crisis .
And both castigate hydroxychloroquine , a beneficial therapeutic when given at the proper time in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as it is generic , pennies per pill , a cash gnat rather than a cash cow .
Academic and social media scorn is heaped on those who dare question the agenda of the elites .
On the Wuhan flu side , legitimate board-certified physicians are ridiculed or fired from their jobs for questioning establishment dogma .
A recent video from “ America ’ s Frontline Doctors ” featured Dr. Stella Immanuel speaking of the benefits of hydroxychloroquine for COVID and she was immediately ridiculed and dismissed .
She is also an immigrant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gushing over Kamala Harris or Stacey Abrams lost their notions of intersectionality when attacking Dr. Immanuel .
Another doctor in that group , Dr. Simone Gold , an emergency medicine physician , was fired over her support of hydroxy .
Just as climate change skeptic Nicholas Drapela , a professor at Oregon State University , was fired for his audacity to challenge the left-wing establishment .
As was prominent Princeton University physicist Dr. Will Happer for disagreeing with non-scientist Al Gore .
Question the dogma of either the virus or climate movement and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not disrupted , then ruined .
There is only one politically correct viewpoint on both issues .
Both global warming and Wuhan flu rely on models .
Many climate models predicted rising sea levels and flooded cities , along with catastrophic storms , none of which has materialized .
Virus models predicted 2.2 million U.S. deaths , only to be scaled down as reality was nowhere close to the predictions .
Both relied on flawed models and failed to adjust their prognostications accordingly .
Climate and COVID share the commonality of government control @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mandates to the entire economy busting Green New Deal , the “ benevolent ” government seeks to control all aspects of our lives .
Similarly , the government tells us to wear a mask , gather in groups of nine but not 11 , stay at home , go to marijuana shops but not to school , and close churches but encourage large protests .
Do as we say or we will punish you , warns our compassionate and caring government .
Then there is hypocrisy , a feature of the climate and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ us to lower our carbon footprints for the sake of the planet , has a 10,000-square-foot mansion consuming over 21 times the U.S. household average of electricity .
British climatista Prince Charles flew 16,000 miles in just 11 days on three private jets and one helicopter before posing with Greta Thunberg in Davos at a climate conference .
Media cranks , constantly berating President Trump for not wearing a mask , conveniently don ’ t wear their masks when off-camera .
The baseball pitcher Dr. Fauci , demonstrating proper social distancing wearing a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pitcher ’ s mound while on camera forgot all about his mask and distancing when off-camera in the bleachers .
The funeral for your loved one is verboten but hundreds or thousands can gather to mourn George Floyd .
Graduations are bad but BLM rallies are just fine .
We can ’ t vote in person but it ’ s fine to riot and loot in person , with impunity Last is inevitability .
The climate will do what it does .
Cooling caused ice ages and warming melted the ice over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government intervention .
Hurricanes have been a feature on Planet Earth before Al Gore and long before humans even organized governments .
The virus is also inevitable .
New Zealand , after being heaped with praise for being virus-free for 100 days , despite ultra-strict immigration and quarantine rules , now has a 36-case cluster of new Wuhan virus cases .
You can run but you can ’ t hide from nature taking its course , for both climate and a virus .
Both the climate and COVID movements share these features – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , fear and false prophets , and inevitability .
This is also how dictatorships begin .
As further proof , notice how all the climate hysteria has disappeared , now conveniently replaced by virus fearmongering .
From schools to masks to voting .
It was an easy pivot as the playbook was already written , allowing the left to sashay from global warming to the virus , as a means to control the people and an upcoming election .
It ’ s predictable and obvious once you recognize the pattern .

Written by Brian C. Joondeph, M.D. on Aug 17, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
As we approach six months of lockdowns, mandates, and restrictions previously unfathomable in a free society, it is important to ask if what we are being told to do is either necessary or effective in combating this viral pandemic.
Or are these empty gestures, efforts of totalitarian wannabees serving as mayors or governors, trying to control those they are charged with leading and protecting, trying to advance a political agenda rather than preserving and protecting the Constitution?
One can see numerous parallels between COVID and climate policy. Both create fear, to a frenzy level, of the world-ending, massive death and destruction, all due to a warming planet or an aggressive flu virus.
If we don’t wear a mask, we are murderers and should be imprisoned. If we don’t believe in man-made global warming, we should also be locked away in jail.
Both movements have famous, often media-fabricated, leaders, and spokespersons to push the agenda.
Aside from politicians, the climate movement uses Al Gore and Greta Thunberg while the COVID evangelists are Drs. Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx.
At least the latter two, on paper, have expertise in their fields unlike the former two who are self- or media-created experts.
The axiom, “follow the money” applies to both crusades. The climate industry has been a cash cow for those on the politically correct side of the debate.
Government subsidies flow freely to green energy companies, often to campaign donors of those doling out the money.
Half-a-billion taxpayer dollars went to corrupt Solyndra as a thank-you to political donors and fundraisers. Gore has amassed hundreds of millions in green investments and carbon credits.
In the virus world, there are vaccines and therapeutics, all with royalties, patents, and potentially billions of dollars in sales.
It seems the Chinese virus doomsayers, like Fauci and Bill Gates, have a stake in whatever treatments or preventatives are pushed to get us out of this supposed public health crisis.
And both castigate hydroxychloroquine, a beneficial therapeutic when given at the proper time in the course of Chinese flu infection, as it is generic, pennies per pill, a cash gnat rather than a cash cow.
Academic and social media scorn is heaped on those who dare question the agenda of the elites.
On the Wuhan flu side, legitimate board-certified physicians are ridiculed or fired from their jobs for questioning establishment dogma.
A recent video from “America’s Frontline Doctors” featured Dr. Stella Immanuel speaking of the benefits of hydroxychloroquine for COVID and she was immediately ridiculed and dismissed.
She is also an immigrant woman of color and the same media gushing over Kamala Harris or Stacey Abrams lost their notions of intersectionality when attacking Dr. Immanuel.
Another doctor in that group, Dr. Simone Gold, an emergency medicine physician, was fired over her support of hydroxy.
Just as climate change skeptic Nicholas Drapela, a professor at Oregon State University, was fired for his audacity to challenge the left-wing establishment.
As was prominent Princeton University physicist Dr. Will Happer for disagreeing with non-scientist Al Gore.
Question the dogma of either the virus or climate movement and prepare to have your life, if not disrupted, then ruined. There is only one politically correct viewpoint on both issues.
Both global warming and Wuhan flu rely on models. Many climate models predicted rising sea levels and flooded cities, along with catastrophic storms, none of which has materialized.
Virus models predicted 2.2 million U.S. deaths, only to be scaled down as reality was nowhere close to the predictions. Both relied on flawed models and failed to adjust their prognostications accordingly.
Climate and COVID share the commonality of government control. From electric car and fuel efficiency mandates to the entire economy busting Green New Deal, the “benevolent” government seeks to control all aspects of our lives.
Similarly, the government tells us to wear a mask, gather in groups of nine but not 11, stay at home, go to marijuana shops but not to school, and close churches but encourage large protests. Do as we say or we will punish you, warns our compassionate and caring government.
Then there is hypocrisy, a feature of the climate and virus movements. Al Gore, telling us to lower our carbon footprints for the sake of the planet, has a 10,000-square-foot mansion consuming over 21 times the U.S. household average of electricity.
British climatista Prince Charles flew 16,000 miles in just 11 days on three private jets and one helicopter before posing with Greta Thunberg in Davos at a climate conference.
Media cranks, constantly berating President Trump for not wearing a mask, conveniently don’t wear their masks when off-camera.
The baseball pitcher Dr. Fauci, demonstrating proper social distancing wearing a huge mask standing all alone on the pitcher’s mound while on camera forgot all about his mask and distancing when off-camera in the bleachers.
The funeral for your loved one is verboten but hundreds or thousands can gather to mourn George Floyd. Graduations are bad but BLM rallies are just fine. We can’t vote in person but it’s fine to riot and loot in person, with impunity
Last is inevitability. The climate will do what it does. Cooling caused ice ages and warming melted the ice over the past billions of years, all without government intervention. Hurricanes have been a feature on Planet Earth before Al Gore and long before humans even organized governments.
The virus is also inevitable. New Zealand, after being heaped with praise for being virus-free for 100 days, despite ultra-strict immigration and quarantine rules, now has a 36-case cluster of new Wuhan virus cases.
You can run but you can’t hide from nature taking its course, for both climate and a virus.
Both the climate and COVID movements share these features – hypocrisy and hysteria, models and money, fear and false prophets, and inevitability. This is also how dictatorships begin.
As further proof, notice how all the climate hysteria has disappeared, now conveniently replaced by virus fearmongering. From schools to masks to voting.
It was an easy pivot as the playbook was already written, allowing the left to sashay from global warming to the virus, as a means to control the people and an upcoming election. It’s predictable and obvious once you recognize the pattern.
Read more at American Thinker
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-08-17--Get Serious: More C02 Isn’t Making Earth ‘Uninhabitable’

Written by David Simon on .
Posted in Latest news Former Federal Reserve Board vice chairman and Princeton University economist Alan Blinder recently wrote the following in the Wall Street Journal : “ cumulative CO2 emissions heat up the atmosphere , causing climate changes of all sorts—most of them bad .
Because this huge negative externality has been allowed to run rampant , we are gradually making the Earth an inhospitable place for humans.
” Increasing CO2 emissions have been “ making the Earth an inhospitable place for humans ?
” Really ?
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration data show @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , CO2 emissions and the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere indeed have both sharply increased .
And NASA data show that since 1920 , our planet ’ s temperature has risen by 1.25 degrees Celsius .
But the data also show that the increase in CO2 emissions and the rising temperature have not been “ making the Earth an inhospitable place for humans.
” The University of Oxford ’ s Our World in Data has reported that since 1920 , the world population has quadrupled from less than two billion to over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has reported that the share of people living in extreme poverty fell from 74 percent in 1910 to less than 10 percent by 2015 .
And EM-DAT ( The International Disaster Database ) data show that since 1920 , the number of people killed by natural disasters has declined from almost 55,000 per year to less than 10,000 per year .
Sustaining a population that has grown by about six billion people , lifting most of those people out of extreme poverty , and reducing the number of natural disaster deaths by over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CO2 emission and atmospheric levels and rising temperatures have , they are not making the planet “ an inhospitable place for humans.
” The data instead suggest that increasing CO2 emissions and atmospheric levels and rising temperatures are making the planet more , not less , hospitable for human life .
The Heartland Institute has extensively documented “ increased plant and forest growth , bigger crop yields and longer growing seasons as benefits derived from rising concentrations of carbon dioxide.
” Better yet , an extensive 2015 study found that cold kills over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Twenty-two scientists from around the world analyzed over 74 million deaths in Australia , Brazil , Canada , China , Italy , Japan , South Korea , Spain , Sweden , Taiwan , Thailand , the United Kingdom , and the United States in 1985-2012 .
The cold caused 7.29 percent of these deaths , while heat caused only 0.42 percent .
And “ moderately hot and cold temperatures ” caused 88.85 percent of the temperature-related deaths , while “ extreme ” temperatures caused only 11.15 percent .
But what about the economic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the coming decades ?
If future global warming has any negative impact on the nation ’ s economy , it is likely to be minimal .
The National Bureau of Economic Research estimated in 2019 that if the planet ’ s temperature rises by 0.01 degrees Celsius per year through 2100 , the total U.S. GDP in 2100 will be 1.88 percent lower in 2100 than it would otherwise be .
Yet based on the Congressional Budget Office ’ s estimate of a 1.4 percent annual real long-term potential labor force productivity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ per person GDP will be about 204 percent higher by 2100 .
With the reduction that NBER estimates based on global warming , GDP per person would be an almost indistinguishable 200 percent higher .
NBER ’ s extreme case projection that if the planet ’ s temperature rises by 0.04 degrees Celsius per year through 2100 ( five times the actual rate of increase since 1880 ) , total U.S. GDP will be 10.52 percent lower in 2100 than it would otherwise be , similarly would leave GDP per person about 172 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after taking account of the supposedly harmful impact of global warming , U.S. income per person in 2100 will be about triple today ’ s level .
Professor Blinder undoubtedly teaches his students that sound science depends on data .
When it comes to the impact of increasing CO2 emissions , he needs a refresher course .

Written by David Simon on Aug 17, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
Former Federal Reserve Board vice chairman and Princeton University economist Alan Blinder recently wrote the following in the Wall Street Journal: “cumulative CO2 emissions heat up the atmosphere, causing climate changes of all sorts—most of them bad. Because this huge negative externality has been allowed to run rampant, we are gradually making the Earth an inhospitable place for humans.”
Increasing CO2 emissions have been “making the Earth an inhospitable place for humans?” Really?
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration data show that over the last one hundred years, CO2 emissions and the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere indeed have both sharply increased.
And NASA data show that since 1920, our planet’s temperature has risen by 1.25 degrees Celsius.
But the data also show that the increase in CO2 emissions and the rising temperature have not been “making the Earth an inhospitable place for humans.”
The University of Oxford’s Our World in Data has reported that since 1920, the world population has quadrupled from less than two billion to over seven and half billion.
It also has reported that the share of people living in extreme poverty fell from 74 percent in 1910 to less than 10 percent by 2015.
And EM-DAT (The International Disaster Database) data show that since 1920, the number of people killed by natural disasters has declined from almost 55,000 per year to less than 10,000 per year.
Sustaining a population that has grown by about six billion people, lifting most of those people out of extreme poverty, and reducing the number of natural disaster deaths by over 80 percent show that whatever impacts increasing CO2 emission and atmospheric levels and rising temperatures have, they are not making the planet “an inhospitable place for humans.”
The data instead suggest that increasing CO2 emissions and atmospheric levels and rising temperatures are making the planet more, not less, hospitable for human life.
The Heartland Institute has extensively documented “increased plant and forest growth, bigger crop yields and longer growing seasons as benefits derived from rising concentrations of carbon dioxide.”
Better yet, an extensive 2015 study found that cold kills over 17 times more people than heat.
Twenty-two scientists from around the world analyzed over 74 million deaths in Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, Thailand, the United Kingdom, and the United States in 1985-2012.
The cold caused 7.29 percent of these deaths, while heat caused only 0.42 percent. And “moderately hot and cold temperatures” caused 88.85 percent of the temperature-related deaths, while “extreme” temperatures caused only 11.15 percent.
But what about the economic catastrophe that global warming supposedly will cause in the coming decades? If future global warming has any negative impact on the nation’s economy, it is likely to be minimal.
The National Bureau of Economic Research estimated in 2019 that if the planet’s temperature rises by 0.01 degrees Celsius per year through 2100, the total U.S. GDP in 2100 will be 1.88 percent lower in 2100 than it would otherwise be.
Yet based on the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate of a 1.4 percent annual real long-term potential labor force productivity growth rate, the nation’s per person GDP will be about 204 percent higher by 2100.
With the reduction that NBER estimates based on global warming, GDP per person would be an almost indistinguishable 200 percent higher.
NBER’s extreme case projection that if the planet’s temperature rises by 0.04 degrees Celsius per year through 2100 (five times the actual rate of increase since 1880), total U.S. GDP will be 10.52 percent lower in 2100 than it would otherwise be, similarly would leave GDP per person about 172 percent higher.
In other words, after taking account of the supposedly harmful impact of global warming, U.S. income per person in 2100 will be about triple today’s level.
Professor Blinder undoubtedly teaches his students that sound science depends on data. When it comes to the impact of increasing CO2 emissions, he needs a refresher course.
Read more at RealClearMarkets
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-08-17--Media Claim California Crop Crisis As Farmers Bemoan Huge Harvests

Written by James Taylor on .
Posted in Latest news Google News and the alarmist media are warning about climate change harming California crop production and bringing “ hard times ” to California farmers – even as California crop production sets records .
In fact , California crop production is so strong that farmers are complaining that high yields are depressing crop prices .
Among the top results today for a Google News search of “ climate change ” is an article in the Bakersfield Californian titled , “ Climate change report forecasts hard times for Kern ag.
” The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by a climate change activist group in conjunction with California state officials .
The report claims climate change is setting up harmful conditions for California agricultural production .
“ A new report warns Kern County agriculture will face tough challenges in the decades ahead as climate change makes irrigation water scarcer and weather conditions more variable and intense .
The study concludes these hurdles ‘ ultimately challenge the ability to maximize production while ensuring profitability.
’ ” The truth , however , is that a century of modest warming has brought increasingly beneficial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ setting records virtually every year in Southern California , California as a whole , the United States , and globally .
In Kern County , total crop value rose 3 percent in 2019 , setting a new record .
Other California counties are also thriving under the present climate .
Fresno County ’ s total crop value rose 12 percent in 2018 to briefly overtake Kern County as the nation ’ s top-grossing county for agricultural production .
Kern County ’ s 2019 growth reclaimed the title .
Crop production in 2020 is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new records forecast .
The Sacramento Bee , for example , published an August 5 article titled , “ This is what harvest of a 2020 record 2020 almond crop looks like.
” In fact , crop yields are so strong that some farmers are making news hoping for adverse weather to occur .
The Californian itself reported this just last month , in an article titled , “ Almond growers fret over expectations for another record harvest.
” The article noted that record almond production is causing lower almond prices , making @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the crop .
The article noted that February ’ s almond tree blooms were “ close to perfect ” under ideal temperatures and climate conditions .
Curiously , the Californian failed to mention climate change ’ s role in the close-to-perfect climate conditions and record almond production .
The national crop outlook is just as strong .
The U.S. Department of Agriculture forecasts record crop yields this year for the important corn and soybean crops , as well as other crops .
This builds upon consistent growth in U.S. crop production and records @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Globally , the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization ( FAO ) forecasts the 2020/2021 crop season will set yet another record for crop production .
FAO reports global crop production has increased more than 10 percent during the past decade .
In summary , Google News and the corrupt media are once again reporting fake news and fake science .
Global warming has brought about perfect California climate conditions and record crop production .
Even as this happens , the media are deceiving people by reporting climate change is ushering in a @ @ @ @

Written by James Taylor on Aug 17, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
Google News and the alarmist media are warning about climate change harming California crop production and bringing “hard times” to California farmers – even as California crop production sets records.
In fact, California crop production is so strong that farmers are complaining that high yields are depressing crop prices.
Among the top results today for a Google News search of “climate change” is an article in the Bakersfield Californian titled, “Climate change report forecasts hard times for Kern ag.”
The article addresses a newly published report produced by a climate change activist group in conjunction with California state officials.
The report claims climate change is setting up harmful conditions for California agricultural production.
The Californian article begins:
“A new report warns Kern County agriculture will face tough challenges in the decades ahead as climate change makes irrigation water scarcer and weather conditions more variable and intense. The study concludes these hurdles ‘ultimately challenge the ability to maximize production while ensuring profitability.’”
The truth, however, is that a century of modest warming has brought increasingly beneficial temperatures and climate.
Crop production is setting records virtually every year in Southern California, California as a whole, the United States, and globally.
In Kern County, total crop value rose 3 percent in 2019, setting a new record. Other California counties are also thriving under the present climate.
Fresno County’s total crop value rose 12 percent in 2018 to briefly overtake Kern County as the nation’s top-grossing county for agricultural production. Kern County’s 2019 growth reclaimed the title.
Crop production in 2020 is shaping up even better, with more new records forecast. The Sacramento Bee, for example, published an August 5 article titled, “This is what harvest of a 2020 record 2020 almond crop looks like.”
In fact, crop yields are so strong that some farmers are making news hoping for adverse weather to occur.
The Californian itself reported this just last month, in an article titled, “Almond growers fret over expectations for another record harvest.”
The article noted that record almond production is causing lower almond prices, making it harder for farmers to profit from the crop.
The article noted that February’s almond tree blooms were “close to perfect” under ideal temperatures and climate conditions.
Curiously, the Californian failed to mention climate change’s role in the close-to-perfect climate conditions and record almond production.
The national crop outlook is just as strong. The U.S. Department of Agriculture forecasts record crop yields this year for the important corn and soybean crops, as well as other crops.
This builds upon consistent growth in U.S. crop production and records being set on a near-annual basis.
Globally, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) forecasts the 2020/2021 crop season will set yet another record for crop production. FAO reports global crop production has increased more than 10 percent during the past decade.
In summary, Google News and the corrupt media are once again reporting fake news and fake science. Global warming has brought about perfect California climate conditions and record crop production.
Even as this happens, the media are deceiving people by reporting climate change is ushering in a California crop crisis.
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--2020-08-17--Canadian Wildlife Federation Tells A Whale Of A Lie

Written by Donna Laframboise on .
Posted in Latest news Humpback whales are thriving , but an activist fundraising campaign says they ’ re on the brink of extinction .
The Canadian Wildlife Federation has launched a new fundraising appeal .
One side of the envelope features an adult humpback whale accompanied by a juvenile .
They appear to be fleeing a large ship .
“ Time is running out… ” we ’ re told .
The other side of the envelope contains the identical image , minus the ship , flipped with photographic software so the whales appear to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
That text says : “ …their future is in your hands.
” Similar imagery on the group ’ s website talks about a “ collision course with extinction.
” But humpback whales are in no danger of extinction .
The International Whaling Commission tells us they “ occur worldwide in all major oceans.
” They are native to more than 130 countries – from the Bahamas to Bangladesh , from Nigeria to New Zealand , from Peru to Portugal .
The Commission says the humpback population has increased steadily since the 1985 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ humpbacks appear to be expanding their range into new parts of the world .
The International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources ( IUCN ) agrees these whales are not at risk .
It rates species according to seven stages : Least concern – which should really be no concern – is as good as it gets .
That has been the humpback whale ’ s rating for the past 12 years .
Even when 99 % of a species is doing well , there may be somewhere in which that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the IUCN , the “ very small ” Arabian Sea subpopulation of humpbacks appears to be declining and is , therefore “ listed separately as Endangered.
” If all the humpbacks in that corner of the world vanished tomorrow , there ’ d still be plenty left .
In the words of the IUCN , the “ current global population is estimated at 135,0000…which is higher than the level of three generations ago.
” The truth is that humpbacks are an amazing conservation success story .
Which means the Canadian Wildlife Federation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Time is not running out for humpbacks .
Their future will not be determined by people who donate money to that organization .

Written by Donna Laframboise on Aug 17, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
Humpback whales are thriving, but an activist fundraising campaign says they’re on the brink of extinction.
The Canadian Wildlife Federation has launched a new fundraising appeal. One side of the envelope features an adult humpback whale accompanied by a juvenile.
They appear to be fleeing a large ship. “Time is running out…” we’re told.
The other side of the envelope contains the identical image, minus the ship, flipped with photographic software so the whales appear to be swimming serenely in the opposite direction. That text says: “…their future is in your hands.”
Similar imagery on the group’s website talks about a “collision course with extinction.”
But humpback whales are in no danger of extinction. The International Whaling Commission tells us they “occur worldwide in all major oceans.”
They are native to more than 130 countries – from the Bahamas to Bangladesh, from Nigeria to New Zealand, from Peru to Portugal.
The Commission says the humpback population has increased steadily since the 1985 moratorium on commercial whaling. Indeed, humpbacks appear to be expanding their range into new parts of the world.
The International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) agrees these whales are not at risk. It rates species according to seven stages:
Extinct Extinct in the Wild Critically Endangered Endangered Vulnerable Near Threatened
1. Least Concern
Least concern – which should really be no concern – is as good as it gets. That has been the humpback whale’s rating for the past 12 years.
Even when 99% of a species is doing well, there may be somewhere in which that isn’t the case.
According to the IUCN, the “very small” Arabian Sea subpopulation of humpbacks appears to be declining and is, therefore “listed separately as Endangered.”
If all the humpbacks in that corner of the world vanished tomorrow, there’d still be plenty left.
In the words of the IUCN, the “current global population is estimated at 135,0000…which is higher than the level of three generations ago.” The truth is that humpbacks are an amazing conservation success story.
Which means the Canadian Wildlife Federation’s envelope is absolute fiction. Time is not running out for humpbacks. Their future will not be determined by people who donate money to that organization.
Read more at Big Pic News
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print