Two important papers have recently been published that question the extent to which humans are causing global warming by burning fossil fuel and releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. The works will of course be ignored by mainstream media outlets, but they represent further evidence that a more nuanced view of human-caused or anthropogenic warming is gaining traction among scientists, tired of working within the political constraints of ‘settled’ science.
In a paper to be published next month in the journal Health Physics, three physics professors led by Kenneth Skrable from the University of Massachusetts examine the atmospheric trail left by CO2 isotopes and conclude that the amount of CO2 released by fossil fuel burning between 1750 and 2018 was “much too low to be the cause of global warming”.
Three carbon isotopes are found in the atmosphere, 12C, 13C and 14C. The latter is produced by cosmic rays and is in a constant state of activity but the other two are contained in the gas entering the atmosphere. The carbon in living matter has a slightly higher proportion of 12C. Although only about 4% of CO2 entering the atmosphere every year is produced by human activity, it is said very slightly to alter the balance of the other atmospheric isotopes. As a result it is often used as ‘proof’ that rising CO2 levels are primarily the result of fossil fuel burning.
But the Massachusetts team found that claims of the dominance of anthropogenic fossil fuel in the isotope record have involved the ‘misuse’ of 12C and 13C statistics to validate such suggestions. They conclude that the assumption that the increase in atmospheric CO2 is dominated by or equal to the anthropogenic component is “not settled science”.
Furthermore, they go on to state: “Unsupported conclusions of the dominance of the anthropogenic fossil component of CO2 and concerns of its effect on climate change and global warming have severe potential societal implications that press the need for very costly remedial actions that may be misdirected, presently unnecessary, and ineffective in curbing global warming.”
The “remedial” net zero political agenda is driven by the unproven hypothesis that humans are causing catastrophic heating and climate breakdown by using once-living plant and animal matter and releasing CO2 into the atmosphere. But there is little or no correlation between temperature and CO2 levels on a current, historical or geological timescale. Recent global warming, which replaced the global cooling scare of the 1970s, ran out of steam almost two decades ago. Green activists keep the doomsday tales going by highlighting natural bad weather, quoting massaged surface temperatures (don’t mention the far more accurate and cooler satellite data) and citing increasingly fanciful forecasts from the hottest ticket in town – the Always Goes Wrong Climate Model Show.
The unproven science hypothesis that humans cause most or all climate change is now under increasing attack on a number of fronts in scientific circles. Professor Happer of Princeton University has suggested that CO2 becomes “saturated” once it reaches a certain level, since it reflects heat back to Earth only within certain bands of the infrared spectrum. Under this hypothesis, which was given some credence by former Obama Administration Energy Under-secretary Steve Koonin in his book Unsettled, CO2 becomes “saturated” once it reaches a certain level, with most of the Sun’s heat that is going to be trapped having already been radiated back to Earth.
Ascribing all climate change to just one cause – the burning of fossil fuel – is given short shrift by recent work published by the German physicist Dr. Frank Stefani. In a paper published last year, the researcher at the Helmholtz Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf dismisses the “illusionary claims of an overwhelming scientific consensus”. He cautions it is essential to support such settled conclusions, “before embarking on drastic, perilous and perhaps misguided plans for global action”.
Much of Dr. Stefani’s research looks at the effect of solar influences and geomagnetic forces on the planet. He suggests that the Sun accounts for between 30-70% of recent planetary warming. He further suggests that it is likely that solar activity will continue its two decade decline – at the end of the 20th century it was likely at its highest level for 8,000 years – and geomagnetic activity as measured by the aa-index will fall. In Dr. Stefani’s work, he use the aa-index as a proxy for solar activity. So far as CO2 is concerned, he argues that even if there is an annual rise of 2.5 parts per million into the atmosphere, this will lead to only “a mild additional temperature rise” of less than 1°C by 2100. Other scenarios could result in flatter temperature curves “in which the heating effect of increasing CO2 is widely compensated by the cooling effect of a decreasing aa-index”.
There are countless factors that influence the climate in the short, medium and long term. Dr. Stefani concludes his work by noting that the huge “Milankovitch drivers” [changes in the Earth’s axis and orbit] will eventually “cool down mankind’s hubris of being able to significantly influence the terrestrial climate (in whatever direction)”.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
I for one have not forgotten that the global warming expert from two decades ago who said that children would grow up never seeing snow.
I happen to live in south Alabama (two hours from the Florida border) and my two children saw snow with our own eyes this weekend. And this isn’t the first time these small children in the South have seen snow.
A lugenpresse Newspaper called The “independent” (of reality) had a headline “Snowfalls are now a thing of the past” which has been so regularly ridiculed, they deleted the article.
It’s nice when someone produces a link that confirms that I’m just not making up statements! Thanks. I even got the timeline right.
LOL! That’s funny. Here in Canada, Eastern Ontario, we just had over 50 cm (20 inches) of snow in 72 hours.
you should try living in montreal!
That’s strange Snoots, did you ever meet Ewloe and St Piots Cafe when you were there ?
Shudder!
It took SEVENTY TWO HOURS?!? ARRGGHH! All is lost! The universe is BOILING!
/ <– (that happens to be a sarc tag)
I was 14, looking out the front window early one morning in Worcester, Massachusetts. My parent’s 1956 Hudson was parked on the curb, but all I could see was an enormous mound of snow extending up to the front steps, and half-way across the street. IIRC, it’d begun snowing after sundown the previous night.
It’s the beginning of a novel. I want more.
I bet David Viner has been promoted and raked in the “research” money. No flies on him.
Edit: here’s his account of his career. What a f*cker. Does anyone think this guy has even on a single occasion felt dirty about what he does?
Count me out of “debating” with such types.
Plenty of snow here on the western coast of Finland, and the sea is, as usual, frozen. I haven’t noticed any ‘climate change’ in the past 60 years – summers are warm/hot, winters are cold/freezing.
‘Climate Change’ is a subject that can keep people entertained for hours but, ultimately, not a lot can be proved one way or t’other. All it takes is for the Sun to have a ‘hiccup’ and we’re toast. 8 light minutes away. What is really amazing, is that there is so little change as regards the earth’s climate.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wupToqz1e2g
I call it “Global Staying the Same.”
Or Climate Stasis.
I call it a scam to extract as much money from people as possible and implement debilitating controls.
Climate Change should be relabelled Regime Change (Well Regime Legitimisation); it is all about allowing our covert World Government, WEF, Black Rock, etc, coming out into the open and being officially endorsed by their puppet national governments.
Why the World Economic Forum IS VERY POWERFUL | Glenn TV Preview
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5OJfwaVFzgM
Glenn Beck
Please come and join our friendly peaceful events.
Thursday 20th January 5pm
Silent lighted walk behind one simple sign
“No More Lockdown”
Bring torches, candles and other lights
Meet by the Town Hall, Market Place,
Henley-on-Thames, Oxfordshire, RG9 2AQ
Stand in the Park Sundays 10am make friends, ignore the madness & keep sane
Wokingham Howard Palmer Gardens Cockpit Path car park Sturges Rd RG40 2HD
Henley Mills Meadows (at the bandstand) Henley-on-Thames RG9 1DS
Telegram Group
http://t.me/astandintheparkbracknell
That was snow that was hauled down from the North and South Poles by Right-wing climate- and vaxx-deniers bigot irreligious sinful Biden hating scuzbags. It’s also why the global supply chains are fu*ked-up, these Right-wing gits hijacked all the cargo ships to haul snow from the Poles to Dixie Land.
Trump and Tucker Carlson are funding this. Poor ole (falsely accused pervert and general paedo) Biden and 210 IQ Greta Thunberg fight this denial and fake snow, but with no help from Daily Sceptic readers.
This egregious theft of the last remaining flakes of snow from the Poles has caused devastation for polar bears and penguins. These poor animals now need sombreros and parasols in order to stay chilled, but they can’t afford them, and the few that can afford them, can’t get them because the supply chains are fu*ked-up.
Our only hope is that the Rockefeller’s and the Federal Reserve print enough fiat currency to put large parasols in space to protect the earth. Now that I’ve mentioned this, they’ll probably offer to do so, on condition we all take their gene serums.
If in the next few days you hear Greta Thunberg shouting “A parasol in space for every vaccine you take”, tell me, because I’ll be wanting her to pay me royalties.
Ŝăřć
Excellent Comrade Fireweasel.
Your digital credit is in the post.
xx Bill Bak-Butta
The hockey stick graph, image below, was used by the UN, among many others, to show that temperatures suddenly shot up in the late 20th century.
This graph, though, which was created by Michael E. Mann has on numerous occasions been totally debunked by mathematicians and scientists as being modelled on badly flawed data. This graph is a fraud.
The proof of Michael E. Mann’s fraud was when he (Mann) filed a libel claim against Dr. Tim Ball for criticising this graph. Dr. Tim Ball had publicly made allegations that Mann was guilty of criminal fraud in purporting that his graph showed a rise in temperature.
At the libel hearing, though, Dr. Tim Ball turned the tables on Mann by demanding that he produce the raw data that he had modelled the graph on. Michael E. Mann would not produce this data. This led to his case against Dr. Tim Ball being dismissed – with Mann being ordered [:-)] to pay Ball’s legal fees.
If Michael E. Mann had produced the raw data, it would either prove he was highly incompetent or a criminal liar. Mann brings to mind professor Ferguson and his fraudulent COVID-19 predictions, who also refused to release the raw data on which his modelling was based on.
We are largely where we are with the climate hoax based on this fraudulent hockey stick graph. It is a piece of lying propaganda, on the strength of which billions of pounds, dollars and euros of taxpayer’s money have been pumped into fatuous “sustainable” power generating schemes.
Then there’s people like Dr. Susan Crockford, who is one of the world’s foremost experts on polar bears. She debunked all the lies about these bears dying off. She proved that they were flourishing, high in numbers and breeding like proverbial rabbits, with no shortage of food.
For telling the truth, Dr. Susan Crockford lost her job.
Totally unconnected with that graph (which is a fraud) … the word “hockey” has been used for generations to refer to the substance coming from a male bovine’s nether orifice.
When I was a kid, we’d say “bull hockey” (but still keeping one wary eye on Dad’s right hand.)
in the US the temperatures have shot up according to modelled data, but not according to the dwindling number of thermometers…
i.e. the whole of the warming is modelled warming!
Sounds familiar!
TaDa!
Looks and sounds like shit. So I’m hazarding a risk here, Red, it’s…
Great post, and every word of it true.
One of the key driver’s of global warming is the depopulator and vaccinator in chief Bill Gates. Bill has been investing billions in new ways of doing things, all being done in order to make our lives duller more expensive and a lot less healthy. If Bill’s backing something, then it’s almost a given, that’s it’s a scam.
Bollocks, i’m so tired of this depop-enviro justice crap.
Bill Gates only cares about one thing Bill Gates, same as the rest of the one percent, they could empty & buy a country if they wanted (they probably already have).
These fuckers want control because it gives them power, if there were no people what could they control?
Motives = greed & ego, want to know who’s behind it? Follow the money! The rest is politics, two factions competing for dominance, ultimately trying to destroy each other, it’s a class war,but don’t let anyone tell you the left right divide is finished.
The left are winning, when I say left I mean liberal middle class.
You mean the educated professionals. The laptop class. Those comfortable enough that status dominates their life, not putting a roof over their heads. People who will sacrifice an entire culture to demonstrate they get the complexities of climate models while the plebs bang on about the weather not actually changing because the great unwashed trust their lying eyes.
Those who get a warm glow from demonstrating their support for mass immigration because to them it means cheap nannies and a fascinating diversity of culinary choices and not a cultural shift we may not survive. Those people?
Pretty close
It’s a helluva lot easier controlling 500 million peeps than 8 billion.
What’s your point? That the parasites running this shitshow couldn’t possibly be dreaming of creating a built back better new world to their liking?
Out of chaos comes order. Coronabollocks is just foreplay. The doorbell’s rung and the guests have arrived – party’s just getting started.
This ain’t left or right, this is us and them.
My point is they couldn’t give a toss about the environment, they can afford not to have daily contact with the unwashed, & if they’re killing people its for shits & giggles not to manage the population.
The liberal left are doing mr globals bidding because they’re naive idiots, this is about competition & dominance, the only side i’m on is mine.
Because no globalist ever mentioned overpopulation since Malthus /s
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/tyranny/the-stupid-will-believe-it-and-ask-to-be-treated-pandemic-to-depopulate-1981/
If Billy is backing something it’s not just a scam, it’s a dangerous scam. Dangerous as in, not very good for our health.
Same dog, different gravy. First unscramble the Covid lies, “science”, agendas and hysteria, and then the Climate stuff.
If I ever get to the UK with time on my hands, I want to go to St. Julian’s Church in Norwich.
I will, though, ask the taxi driver to make certain he doesn’t drive past the Climatic Research Unit at the university. There are many loos in town. I’m sure I won’t need access to that one.
Not that many in town. Tombland loo now gone, as is St Andrews, foot of Grapes Hill. Progress in Labour-run Norwich is all green stuff, destroy the past etc. Usual stuff.
I am surprised they haven’t demolished the Castle, as a reminder of the feudal past when the mass of white British people were exploited by the ruling classes just like people of all colours around the world throughout time.
You will kindly note the terminology I applied to the CRU … ‘in loo of’ other descriptors.
Yes, shortly our attention will move from UCL to the University of East Anglia and some other prick with a 500,000 deaths a day scenario if we don’t lockdown immediately, harder, faster etc,etc
George Santayanna said, those who do not remember history are doomed to repeat it.
Back in the 60s, there was Zero Population Growth, predicting hundreds of millions of people starving to death within a decade.
I’m certain Neil Ferguson’s old enough to know about that.
It’s a fine city – you’d love it. The cathedral is gorgeous, although it was a bit Covid one way systemy when I last visited.
Operation save big dog
Operation red meat
Operation pork pie
All just cuntery from the regime
Look i’ve got 20 good years in me left, if i’m lucky, I couldn’t give a shit what “the science” says either way.
I care profoundly about the natural world, but it’s fucked whilst there’s still a liberal left walking this planet!
Another scientismist
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iic_N_OfXl0
Member Of Independent SAGE Exposed
I appreciate this story being published at a site that will get a lot of views. However, it doesn’t matter. Just like with COVID, the “science is settled.” And the “settled science crowd” (mob) is more committed to fighting climate change than they are to fighting airborne viruses.
This said, I do expect the Law of Opposite Effects to kick in some time in the next decade or so. That is, I am convinced that Global Cooling can’t be too far away. I guess that’s why “global warming” was changed to “climate change.”
We seem to be entering a well understood cooling phase. But the people who initiate these things rarely retain control. That’s the problem with getting in bed with politicians and the media. Most populist understanding of climate change is “the world will be an unliveable inferno if we don’t do something.”
So if it does cool over the next 20 years they are in trouble. Plus, it’s too slow. No one cares what the Earth’s temp will be in 2100. Hence Covid
I haven’t noticed and snowdrops or daffodils yet this year. I wonder why.
That’s easy, systemic racism
if
global coolingglobal warmingclimate changeclimate armaggeddonwhatever was actually a real problem then those pushing it wouldn’t beholding pissups at number tenflying around the world in private jets, living in houses with the carbon footprint of a small village and certainly not buying those same houses bang on the waterfront that’s supposed to flood them in a few years time.There are hundreds of study papers showing no relationship between levels of CO2 and temperature. But as with the covid narrative, facts make no difference to those in positions of power pushing the anthropogenic warming hoax to further their long term political and ideological objectives..
I agree. All that matters is the faux scientific consensus. That will continue to be protected.
He’s dead as a dodo, right?
These tyrant fools always forget about dying…
I won’t even think about the climate change untill I see that ozone layer threat I was promised long time ago come true.
You can get behind my earlier claim of the coming ice age!
Man of the people:
To Punish Poor People Creepy Bill Gates Proposes Carbon Taxes at World Economic Forum.
Upvote just for the Nazi puppy
Surely everyone now knows that climate change is caused by transphobia?
Oh, for crying out loud.
There is no correlation between the levels of CO2 and the warming of the planet.
Everyone should read Dr Patrick Moore’s ”Fake Invisible Catastrophes and Threats of Doom” (an easy read) to inform themselves.
https://antigreen.blogspot.com/
Try this, redrawn with an true temperature scale. Not exactly scarey.
I’m still waiting for the ice age prediction to come to fruition. I’ve been waiting 40+ years since the science said it was a certainty. What’s going on?
A guess: all climate sky-enz was 1960s and 1970s hippie-shit. Now they’re in charge, and hey presto… hippie shit’s the truth!
This is Peter Hitchens’ view of the UK. All the Marxist nutjobs he went to uni with didn’t outgrow their hatred of the west and are now in charge of the BBC, GCHQ, major corporations etc. So. Pretty much.
Simple enough to be plausible. How else did this utter crap float to the surface and start scaling the walls of the water closet?
It does have elements of religious fervour. For most their flirtation with hard left ideas doesn’t survive their first mortgage payment.
But the wholesale embrace of wokeism is difficult to explain.
Most religions at least have some internal logic and aspire to a synthesis of faith and reason. Climate and wokery are fake religions perpetuated by top dogs acting just like they claim religious leaders always do (exploitative, cynical).
I’m still waiting for the first miracle, word of wisdom, spiritual insight, or heroic virtue of a climatist, however.
True. But it fills a void for some.
I’ll second this motion. Our promised ice age must come first.
Yeah, but Prince Charlie said there’s no more ‘bergs by these 12 years past. And if you look hard around youse, you can’t see any!
Helga? Erika? Wotser face child also says climate’s rising up, like. So it must be true, like.
You gotta believe in the true skience, innit?
I think you mean Heidi Thunderberg. How dare you!
When she hits age 36 and realises her whole life has been a sham from start to finish, will she top herself, carry on regardless, or join the edgy denialists?!
Difficult to say. She does seem quite a troubled young woman.
Someone with her difficulties should really keep out of the limelight for her own sanity.
She is a stage managed prop, nothing more. It is the parents who need their head’s examined.
Hello BBC why is this not in your Climate section, oh because it doesn’t fit your narative.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-60045153
Snow-like heat-balls are an increasingly worrying sign of climate change, don’t-you-know?
A very useful site which lists all the failed predictions of the climate doomsayers so far. A consistent 100% failure rate.
https://extinctionclock.org/
Top tip, thanks.
What kind of retard believes the authorities and their paid scribes when they shout out that humanity has to pull together – paupers and billionaires alike – in the war to control the climate, because if we don’t all do our bit for the Great Cause then there will be mass extinction of many of the little clothes-wearing apes and even the Goddess Terra herself?
Who’d have thought Terra would be on the side of Tesco and (yes) Bill Gates?
This f***ing bullsh*t is precisely what you’d expect in social conditions where there is wall-to-wall mind control and you have a type of exploitative society that is intrinsically based on profiteering. It doesn’t make it to first base.
It’s a mistake to think it makes it to first base. All who believe it does have been indoctrinated, and they don’t understand what being indoctrinated means – which isn’t exactly uncommon nowadays. Trying to be a counter-expert is akin to headbutting a tarbaby, as well as a real turnoff for anybody who is on the brink of putting two and two together or who does it habitually.
A question for those who want to “argue” against the loonies who believe there is Anthropogenic Climate Change – why don’t you “argue” against Daesh? Or maybe the Scientologists?
ACC looniness is a total mindf*ck – supporting a loony call for everyone to help the rulers control the climate on the premise that they’re not really doing that, because it’s “everyone” who is changing the climate in the first place, and really they in their great Wisdom are only serving Nature – and we had better do what they say, if we know what’s good for us. See how it’s like Daesh?
Most people are too distracted to examine anything. Things change only when people are personally affected by something. When they can’t feed their kids they’ll begin to pay attention. Most are not moved by ideas, visions or plans from the great and the good. In that sense they are distracted rather than brainwashed.
Climate’s another Covid, just Cuddlier. Because it sounds so mad, we go through the same mental reptitions: scam? truly held? conspiracy?
Corporations set all agendas now. A mate of mine got an electric car because it was ‘the next big thing’ and he can ‘do his bit for the environment’.
The same logic applies to transhumanism, polygamy, whatever the next big thing they say is – that’s what ‘you have to do now’.
One thing’s certain, as far as I’m concerned: we’re God’s, not Gaia’s.
And I’ll not serve this bitch of earth (avoiding egregious needless pollution aside).
COVID has had its day. They are pivoting toward the “climate crisis”. Though I think the elite will struggle to pull it off
Rising waters, and climate oscillations, have been a prime factor in Covid’s spread and lethality, says Dr. Nasser Bigee, University of Connecticut.
Isn’t carbon dioxide a good thing? Plants need CO2… Humans need O2… Am I missing something here?
You can buy it on Amazon for use in the greenhouse.
It’s a great week when both the Dreaded C and the Dreaded CC get a kick in the ‘nads.
Like the pandemic -climate change was never about the science.
5G might not be a hot topic here, but for those who want hard data instead of hard ejaculations, study through the posts on the linked-to thread on PPruNe:
https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/644134-faa-ads-re-5g-interference.html
The comments by Sallyann1234, beginning about 2/3 of the way down, will be technically very helpful to understand what’s going on. It’s a matter of adjacent bands for 5G and an older version of radar altimeter. 5G transmissions from ground towers (not phones) might (might) overlap into the radar altimeter’s band and interfere with operation while an aircraft’s landing in fog or inclement weather.
It is not known for certain that disaster is looming for the airline industry, but it does appear that certain bureaucracies have been playing ostrich. There might be a “737 MAX” scenario if the worst case comes to pass.
———————–
PPRuNe is an extremely interesting aviation blog, consisting of threads posted by members. In the event of an aviation disaster, I head for there first-off. In those events, the place to go is the “Rumors & News” link at the top of the left-hand column.
The membership (no, I’m not one) isn’t limited to professional pilots, but a majority seem to be. Darn near everyone has something to do with aviation or the airlines. “SLF” means self-loading freight, referring to the member as a frequent-flying passenger.
“Willow Run” who started the linked-to thread is a SLF attorney with a great deal of savvy about aviation matters, laws and regulatory-whatever. He’s danged reliable.
Another member who is exceptionally reliable is “DaveReidUK”.
Enjoy
Yes PPrune is worth following for aviation stuff. Except in relation to vaccine injuries. That topic is censored just as much there as in any of the mainstream media.
The only reason I’m here is because I found this blog to be the most reliable re: COVID.
Apart from that, I’ve backed almost all the way off the Web over the past seven years.
I happen to know a bit about the modern history of South Asia. I occasionally toss in a comment on DAWN’s website, probably for the delight of making their moderators screech and flush it. Back in 2009, I had the cheek to call Asif Ali Zardari, “Mr. 10 Percent”. Since then, I’m the spawn of the devil.
It’s all a big ‘may’ that is easily avoided by the proper actions that are going on, primarily checking the various aircraft systems and limiting phone transmitter power near airfields.
PPRuNe is a useful site for aviation matters. As an aviation professional in a former life, I’m a member and comment on issues where I have specialist knowledge. I wouldn’t put any emphasis on individual members as every one has their foibles and most are inconsistent. Furthermore, be wary of technical discussions as the pilots are often touchy when a non-aircrew specialist disagrees with them, leading to both overt and involuntary censorship of expert knowledge (it’s their site and their rules, but their attitude often grates).
I think that the powers that be have made an epic miscalculation. I coincidentally woke up to the CO2 scam a few months before the scamdemic began. For the people that weren’t awake to this, after exposing us to the horrific covid lies of governments and their paymasters, they have created a big enough group of the population (>5%) who will not believe a single thing they ever say again without checking it for themselves, and will recheck everything they previously believed. That is a big enough group to scupper any future plans. So they are either going to have to reluctantly take us back to the old normal, or they are going to have to put a tender out for some new industrial “shower blocks”.
It’s not about what ‘they’ say it’s about, though.
The general theme makes sense to me. As ever, there is a lot of obsessive behaviour masquerading as “science” – which might be of interest to psychologists, perhaps? While there are some activities that do seem to be worthwhile to us, it’s almost certainly true that we are somewhat limited compared with what the earth does on it’s own, climate wise.
That said, a full-on cynic might ask whether Dr. Stefani has any financial interests in firms that do surface mining of lignite coal, given the part of Germany that he appears to be based!
well I never: you mean they are lying to us? I didn’t have to save the planet by going bankrupt to buy an e-car?
The evidence against the so-called “science” has been around for years. Had it not suited government and their globalist chums as yet another step on the way to totalitarian rule then the Great Global Warming scam would never have happened.
Let’s just suppose that all the commenters here are correct, and the fact that they have seen snow proves that anthropogenic climate change isn’t happening.
Does that mean we should not switch to renewable energy sources? The alternative is to continue using non-renewable sources, which (should I have to explain this?) will run out.
Electricity from wind and solar is cheaper than from gas.
The more wind and solar we have the less gas we use and the lower our bills.
The more wind and solar we have the less we are under the thumb of Vladimir Putin.
The more wind and solar we have the more predictable our energy costs will be.
We have a crazy situation right now where the government have decreed that energy companies must charge less for energy than they pay for it. Consequently 26 energy companies have gone bust – all that hard work and investment down the drain.
The price of gas will only go up as gas supplies inevitably dwindle, and there will be more unpredictable spikes along the way.
Regardless of one’s views on climate change it is sensible to go for cheaper energy and energy independence, which right now means more wind, solar and storage.
Almost everything you say is wrong – go and read the wattsupwiththat (dot com) website regularly and you might stop making a complete idiot of yourself!
Not to mention Dr Patrick Moore’s ”Fake Invisible Catastrophes” – an easy read even for someone with tunnel vision.
Only “almost” everything? Which bit did I get right?
I took your advice and went to https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/12/14/germanys-new-government-plans-to-use-10-of-countrys-land-area-for-wind-turbines/
“Germany’s New Government Plans To Use 10% Of Country’s Land Area For Wind Turbines”
This is physically impossible. Have you ever visited a wind turbine? When you do, you’ll find that the land can be used right up the the base of the tower, which is typically 4m diameter. As you can see from the picture used in the article, wind turbines take up very little land area.
If this article is typical then I’m not sure wattsupwiththat.com is a very reliable source of information.
Can you also give us your take on the enormous carbon footprint from wind turbines alone. Or is that a price worth paying?
”Energy independence” to many people means the fracking and nuclear options.
Wind turbines do not have an enormous carbon footprint. Yes, obviously there are carbon emissions during manufacture, but that is amortised over their 25 year life which means that the emissions per kWh are tiny.
And if you are concerned about carbon footprint then clearly you would reject fracking, your argument doesn’t make sense.
I am not talking about carbon here, I’m talking about energy security and energy cost. These are practical matters that we need to get right.
Not everyone is keen on nuclear, which is understandable given the problem of managing waste and the few accidents that have occurred. Wind and solar don’t have these problems.
Yes, you’re right, fracking may provide energy independence, but only for a limited time, then we’ll have to switch to renewables, so why not just get on with it now?
Fracking is just kicking the can down the road.