The EPA Caves on Coal?

‘The Trump Effect’
Gina McCarthy – gutless ideologue.

Watts Up With That?

EPA to Withdraw Coal Killing Clean Air Act Requirements

WUWT reader Greg Staff writes:

It looks like the EPA is seeing the writing on the wall. The scuttlebut here is Houston is that this is a “face saving” maneuver, to avoid having to submit to the next administration.

“The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said it plans to voluntarily withdraw a requirement that seven Texas coal-fired power plants reduce pollution, according to a filing with a federal appeals court.

The so-called regional haze rule is part of the Clean Air Act and was proposed two years ago with the goal of cleaning up the air in national parks. The act requires states to craft a plan to address air pollution, or else be forced to implement a plan compiled by the EPA. Texas declined to create a plan, and along with power plant owners took its objections to the EPA’s plan…

View original post 5 more words


The Lessons of Lysenko

“Global warming” aka “climate change” is the virtue-signalling religion of our time.

With the decline of religion, some people need a moral signal to show that they’re good.

“Global warming” is particularly good because they don’t actually have to do anything. They don’t have to cure leppers, or feed the hungry. All they have to do is yell that the planet is warming up.

Until they find another way of signalling virtue, we’re stuck with this one!

—-

Excellent read from Roger Helmer, UKIP MEP for East Midlands…

“The main difference between Lysenkoism and Warmism, as I see it, is that the damage done by Warmism is on a far larger scale and will be far more difficult to reverse.”

Roger Helmer MEP

unnamed

Following the death of Fidel Castro, it’s perhaps a good time to think about the malign impacts of totalitarian government, and the damage that political agendas can do to science.

I was recently discussing Lysenko with a friend (as you do), and naturally we turned to Wikipedia to clarify a point.  And I came across a quote that hit me between the eyes (figuratively speaking);

“The term Lysenkoism can also be used metaphorically to describe the manipulation or distortion of the scientific process as a way to reach a predetermined conclusion as dictated by an ideological bias, often related to social or political objectives”.

Dear Reader, you’re way ahead of me.  Yes of course, I was struck immediately by the read-across to climate science.  The parallels are remarkable.

You’ll be familiar with the story of Lysenko.  He was a Russian biologist and agronomist who rejected Darwinian evolution and the…

View original post 723 more words


German Professor : NASA Has Fiddled Climate Data On ‘Unbelievable’ Scale

James-Hansen-Getty-640x480.png

CARL DE SOUZA/AFP/Getty Images

Brietbart’s James Delingpole confirming what sceptics have been observing with disgust for years and what thankfully the world is now becoming increasingly clear about – that NASA, under the directorship of climate change activist Gavin Schmidt and before him James Hansen (pictured) arrested 4 times for climate activism, is scandalously tampering with one of the four major global temperature data sets – GISS.

This is the same data set used by much of the climate science cabal, agenda-driven politicians and the alarmist mainstream media to claim the “Hottest Year Ever” meme.

See: Understanding The “Hottest Year Evah” | Climatism

•••

by JAMES DELINGPOLE24 Nov 2015

A German professor has confirmed what skeptics from Britain to the US have long suspected: that NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies has largely invented “global warming” by tampering with the raw temperature data records.

Professor Dr. Friedrich Karl Ewert is a retired geologist and data computation expert. He has painstakingly examined and tabulated all NASA GISS’s temperature data series, taken from 1153 stations and going back to 1881. His conclusion: that if you look at the raw data, as opposed to NASA’s revisions, you’ll find that since 1940 the planet has been cooling, not warming.

According to Günter Ederer, the German journalist who has reported on Ewert’s findings:

From the publicly available data, Ewert made an unbelievable discovery: Between the years 2010 and 2012 the data measured since 1881 were altered so that they showed a significant warming, especially after 1950. […] A comparison of the data from 2010 with the data of 2012 shows that NASA-GISS had altered its own datasets so that especially after WWII a clear warming appears – although it never existed.

Apart from Australia, the planet has in fact been on a cooling trend:

Using the NASA data from 2010 the surface temperature globally from 1940 until today has fallen by 1.110°C, and since 2000 it has fallen 0.4223°C […]. The cooling has hit every continent except for Australia, which warmed by 0.6339°C since 2000. The figures for Europe: From 1940 to 2010, using the data from 2010, there was a cooling of 0.5465°C and a cooling of 0.3739°C since 2000.

But the activist scientists at NASA GISS – initially led by James Hansen (pictured above), later by Gavin Schmidt – wanted the records they are in charge of maintaining to show warming not cooling, so they began systematically adjusting the data for various spurious reasons using ten different methods.

The most commonly used ones were:

• Reducing the annual mean in the early phase.
• Reducing the high values in the first warming phase.
• Increasing individual values during the second warming phase.
• Suppression of the second cooling phase starting in 1995.
• Shortening the early decades of the datasets.
• With the long-term datasets, even the first century was shortened.

Ewert’s findings echo that of US meteorologists Joseph D’Aleo and Anthony Watts who examined 6,000 NASA weather stations and found a host of irregularities both with the way they were sited and how the raw data had been adjusted to reflect such influences as the Urban Heat Island effect.

Britain’s Paul Homewood is also on NASA GISS’s case. Here he shows the shocking extent of the adjustments they have made to a temperature record in Brazil which has been altered so that a cooling trend becomes a warming trend.

station_thumb8

Unadjusted temperature record: shows cooling trend.

station_thumb9

Adjusted temperature record: shows warming trend.

For still more evidence of NASA’s adjustments, check out Alterations to Climate Data at Tony Heller’s Real Climate Science.
Truly, these people have no shame.
German Professor: NASA Has Fiddled Climate Data On ‘Unbelievable’ Scale | Brietbart
•••
Climate Fraud Resource File :
  • Climate Fraud | Climatism

See also :

  • NASA “Sea Level Rise” Fraud | Climatism
  • Another View Of NASA Temperature Data Tampering | Climatism
  • Stunning Drop In Global Temperatures As El Niño Warming Ends | Climatism

Stunning Drop In Global Temperatures As El Niño Warming Ends

Record Drop in Global Temp 11.2016.jpg

Record Drop In Global Temperatures As El Nino Warming Ends | The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)

 

The controversial global warming aka climate change “hiatus/pause”, lingering like a bad smell to climate alarmists for nearly two decades, is back in play with a record drop in global temperatures since the middle of the year.

Temperatures are heading south rapidly. The latest huge drop despite record and increasing CO2 emissions.

Must be nearing revision time for the theory of Catastrophic Global Warming with regards to CO2-sensitivity?

•••

Via GWPF :

(Bolds added by Climatism)

RECORD DROP IN GLOBAL TEMPERATURES AS EL NINO WARMING ENDS

  • Date: 27/11/16
  • David Rose, Mail on Sunday

Global average temperatures over land have plummeted by more than 1C since the middle of this year – their biggest and steepest fall on record. According to satellite data, the late 2016 temperatures are returning to the levels they were at after the 1998 El Nino.

The news comes amid mounting evidence that the recent run of world record high temperatures is about to end.

The fall, revealed by Nasa satellite measurements of the lower atmosphere, has been caused by the end of El Nino – the warming of surface waters in a vast area of the Pacific west of Central America.

Some scientists, including Dr Gavin Schmidt, head of Nasa’s climate division, have claimed that the recent highs were mainly the result of long-term global warming.

Others have argued that the records were caused by El Nino, a complex natural phenomenon that takes place every few years, and has nothing to do with greenhouse gas emissions by humans.

The new fall in temperatures suggests they were right.

Big El Ninos always have an immense impact on world weather, triggering higher than normal temperatures over huge swathes of the world. The 2015-16 El Nino was probably the strongest since accurate measurements began, with the water up to 3C warmer than usual.

It has now been replaced by a La Nina event – when the water in the same Pacific region turns colder than normal.

This also has worldwide impacts, driving temperatures down rather than up.

The satellite measurements over land respond quickly to El Nino and La Nina. Temperatures over the sea are also falling, but not as fast, because the sea retains heat for longer. 

This means it is possible that by some yardsticks, 2016 will be declared as hot as 2015 or even slightly hotter – because El Nino did not vanish until the middle of the year.

But it is almost certain that next year, large falls will also be measured over the oceans, and by weather station thermometers on the surface of the planet – exactly as happened after the end of the last very strong El Nino in 1998. If so, some experts will be forced to eat their words.

Last year, Dr Schmidt said 2015 would have been a record hot year even without El Nino.

‘The reason why this is such a warm record year is because of the long-term underlying trend, the cumulative effect of the long-term warming trend of our Earth,’ he said. This was ‘mainly caused’ by the emission of greenhouse gases by humans.

Dr Schmidt also denied that there was any ‘pause’ or ‘hiatus’ in global warming between the 1998 and 2015 El Ninos.

But on its website home page yesterday, Nasa featured a new study which said there was a hiatus in global warming before the recent El Nino, and discussed why this was so. Last night Dr Schmidt had not returned a request for comment.

However, both his own position, and his Nasa division, may be in jeopardy. US President-elect Donald Trump is an avowed climate change sceptic, who once claimed it was a hoax invented by China.

Last week, Mr Trump’s science adviser Bob Walker said he was likely to axe Nasa’s $1.9 billion (about £1.4 billion) climate research budget.

Other experts have also disputed Dr Schmidt’s claims. Professor Judith Curry, of the Georgia Institute of Technology, and president of the Climate Forecast Applications Network, said yesterday: ‘I disagree with Gavin. The record warm years of 2015 and 2016 were primarily caused by the super El Nino.’

The slowdown in warming was, she added, real, and all the evidence suggested that since 1998, the rate of global warming has been much slower than predicted by computer models – about 1C per century.

David Whitehouse, a scientist who works with Lord Lawson’s sceptic Global Warming Policy Foundation, said the massive fall in temperatures following the end of El Nino meant the warming hiatus or slowdown may be coming back.

‘According to the satellites, the late 2016 temperatures are returning to the levels they were at after the 1998 El Nino. 

The data clearly shows El Nino for what it was – a short-term weather event,’ he said.

Record Drop In Global Temperatures As El Nino Warming Ends | The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)

•••

NASA and NOAA will be tweaking their heads and data-sets overtime in order to declare 2016 as “The Hottest Year Evah”. Possibly too late in the year to wipe out this years “Super El niño”.

•••

UPDATE

Further analysis from Paul Homewood’s excellent site Not A Lot Of People Know That :

Rose uses satellite data for his graph, but the NOAA surface data for land also gives a stark picture:

noaa-temps

Climate at a Glance | National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)

Even NOAA admit that October was by far the coldest over land since 2001, despite the fact that are we still awaiting the start of La Nina.

It is also becoming increasingly apparent that this year’s El Nino event is the strongest one at least for the last 60 years, more powerful than 1983/3 and 1997/8.

Whilst it has not peaked quite as high, it has been much more longer lasting.

ENSO.png

Earth System Research Laboratory : PSD : (none)

Global Land Temperatures Plummet In October | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

Related :

  • Spectacular Drop In Global Average Satellite Temperatures | Climatism
  • Understanding The “Hottest Year Evah” | Climatism (NASA Temperature Fraud)
  • Establishing Propaganda Is Vital For Climate Action | Climatism (Peer-Reviewed “Pause” Papers via NatureMag)
  • Climate Models Don’t Work | Climatism

Doomed to the Dark Ages: No Solution for South Australia’s Wind Power Blackouts

“Household electricity prices in Australia have risen by more than 40 percent between 2007 and 2012, the same period when the government offered lucrative wind subsidies. Power prices in Australian states with a lot of wind power are almost double the rates in other states.”

North Korea would be proud of Australia’s ‘green central planning’ model, leading to energy poverty and statewide blackouts.

We are living in the “dark” age of collective eco-insanity.

STOP THESE THINGS

australia-vs-north-korea

When a mass blackout thrusts your State onto the international stage, as an outrageous possibility, there just could be a little something wrong with your energy policy. Here’s the view from the USA.

Australia Has Serious Problems With Green Energy Triggering Blackouts
The Daily Caller
Andrew Follett
23 November 2016

South Australia is still struggling to figure out how to keep green energy from triggering blackouts and crashing the electric grid, according to an article published by Inverse Tuesday.

The Australian state invested heavily in solar and wind power, but those power sources’ inherent reliability issues place a massive strain on the state’s power grid, according to the article.

Australia’s Energy Council noted in early September that increasing use of solar and wind power in the state “has not only led to a series of technical challenges” but “also increased wholesale price volatility as the state rebalances its supply from dispatchable plant to…

View original post 1,457 more words


U-Haul’s ridiculous carbon reduction scheme 

An amusingly un-subtle example of politically correct corporate “green-washing”! 🍃

Watts Up With That?

Sometimes, you just have to laugh. In the rush to become politically correct and green, some companies really don’t think their policies through very well.

Today as I was traveling back from Thanksgiving holiday I happened to notice a U-Haul vehicle trailer next to me in bumper-to-bumper traffic. Lo and behold in my face was a statement about reducing carbon emissions as you can see in the picture below. Look at the orange label on the inside fender, you may have to click the image to zoom in.

The label reads:

U-Haul Auto Transport – Reduces Carbon Emissions

So, rather than drive your car you should just tow it on this U-Haul trailer using another one.

Yeah, that’s the ticket.

While it is technically a correct statement that two engines running would produce [MORE] carbon emissions than one, this is likely offset by the fact that most uses of the…

View original post 58 more words


Five stages of climate grief

“Above all, they are outraged over what might happen to their “dangerous manmade climate change” mantra. It was supposed to be their ticket to endless extravaganzas at 5-star venues in exotic locales – their trump card for controlling the world’s energy, economy, livelihoods and living standards.

Mr. Trump, keep an open mind. But keep exercising due diligence. Trust, but verify. And fire anyone who lies or refuses to answer, or provides the climate equivalent of shoddy work and substandard concrete.”

Another Paul Driessen must-read masterpiece…

Watts Up With That?

President Trump could help – and force climate alarmists to answer questions they’ve ignored

Guest opinion by Paul Driessen

climate-grief_scr

Ever since the elections, our media, schools, workplaces and houses of worship have presented stories showcasing the stages of grief: denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance.

Liberal-progressive snowflakes are wallowing in denial, anger and depression. They cannot work, attend class or take exams. They need safe “healing” spaces, Play-Doh, comfort critters and counseling. Too many throw tirades equating Donald Trump with Adolph Hitler, while too few are actually moving to Canada, New Zeeland or Jupiter, after solemnly promising they would.

Nouveau grief is also characterized by the elimination of bargaining and acceptance – and their replacement by two new stages: intolerance for other views and defiance or even riots. Sadly, it appears these new stages have become a dominant, permanent, shameful feature of liberal policies and politics.

The Left has long…

View original post 1,298 more words


ADDING More Solar And Wind Power ‘Doubles’ CO2 Emissions

CO2.jpg

A must read analysis via NTZ reaffirming the disturbing fact that industrial windmills and solar panels remain firmly positioned as mere symbolic icons to the folly of green climate madness…

From NoTricksZone :

Analysis: Adding More Solar, Wind Power Increases Dependence On Fossil Fuels, ‘Doubles’ CO2 Emissions

As the reputed world leader in green energy policy, Germany plans to eliminate nuclear power as an energy source in the next 5 years.

A 2011 decision to phase out nuclear power by 2022  has meant that renewables like wind and solar power are expected to swiftly take the place of nuclear energy on the German power grid.  The portion of Germany’s power generation from wind and solar (renewables) has indeed risen dramatically in the last 10 years:

Germany-Power-Generation-Source-2015-copy.jpg
                                           Image  source  (cleanenergywire.org)

Germany’s “green” leadership and vociferous allegiance to renewables as a dominant power generation source has elicited controversy.  Wind and solar are very labor and material-intensive (expensive) energy sources, and the dramatic rise in solar and wind power capacity has come with great financial expense to German citizens.  Poorer households have long been the most adversely affected.  Dating back to 2000, electricity prices have risen by 80% in Germany, leaving 7 million citizens “energy poor” (meaning that more than 10% of their income has to be spent on heating and electrifying their homes).

Analysis by the European Commission indicates that “nearly 11% of the EU’s population [encompassing 54 million people] are in a situation where they live in  households in which they find themselves unable to heat their homes at an affordable cost,” which may effectively put their lives at risk.   This latter point is not an exaggeration.  In the UK, where heating costs rose 63% between 2009 and 2014, 25% of citizens over 60 are classified as “energy poor”, leaving the elderly population especially vulnerable.  During the frigid winter of 2014, the number of “excess winter deaths” reached 49,260, of which about 14,780  were due to people living in cold homes that they couldn’t afford to heat.

And despite the steep, expensive rise in power generated by renewables since about 2000, Germany still obtained about 44% of its power from coal as of 2014, which is a higher share than in the United States (33% as of 2015).  Hundreds of U.S. coal plants have been shuttered in recent years largely because of a monumental nation-wide shift to natural gas power generation, a cleaner fuel that emits much less CO2 upon combustion than does coal.

(In the U.S., in fact, there has been a 12% decline in overall CO2 emissions since 2005 despite the fact that the U.S population has risen by 30 million during those 10 years.  As mentioned above, much of the decline in emissions is directly connected to the rapid displacement of coal with natural gas power generation.  While the rise in U.S. solar power has also been substantial in the last decade, “for every ton of carbon dioxide cut by solar power, hydraulic fracturing for natural gas cut 13 tons.”)

Germany’s heavy reliance on coal — the highest in the EU —  is very likely to continue indefinitely despite the nation’s stated commitments to the Paris Agreement and CO2 emissions reductions.  The much lower power-generating capabilities of renewables due to their intermittent output (the Sun has to shine and the wind must blow) has meant that reliable backup capacity — fossil fuels or nuclear — must remain on the grid.  Since nuclear power is set to be phased out of Germany by 2022, coal necessarily has to stay, even expand.  The natural consequence is that Germany’s CO2 emissions have not declined since 2009, and instead there has been a slight emissions uptick in recent years, as the dramatic increase in renewables has not come close to offsetting the greater CO2 emissions generated from the renewed German emphasis on coal.

Adding More Wind And Solar Power Ultimately Raises CO2 Emissions, As More Fossil Fuel Backup Capacity Must Be Built

What’s happening in Germany is, unfortunately, a bellwether for what is to come in other large wealthy countries attempting to make renewables the kingpin of their power grids.  The unspoken truth about renewables was succinctly summarized in a 2012 Los Angeles Times analysis :

“As more solar and wind generators come online, … the demand will rise for more backup power from fossil fuel plants.”

The full article, entitled “Rise in renewable energy will require more use of fossil fuels”  also points out that wind turbines often produce a tiny fraction (1 percent?) of their claimed potential, meaning the gap must be filled by fossil fuels:

Wind provided just 33 megawatts of power statewide in the midafternoon, less than 1% of the potential from wind farms capable of producing 4,000 megawatts of electricity.
As is true on many days in California when multibillion-dollar investments in wind and solar energy plants are thwarted by the weather, the void was filled by gas-fired plants like the Delta Energy Center.
One of the hidden costs of solar and wind power — and a problem the state is not yet prepared to meet — is that wind and solar energy must be backed up by other sources, typically gas-fired generators. As more solar and wind energy generators come online, fulfilling a legal mandate to produce one-third of California’s electricity by 2020, the demand will rise for more backup power from fossil fuel plants.

Another observational analysis suggests that much of the power generation thought to be attributed to wind actually came from backup sources, or fossil fuels:

“More than half the electric generation nominally credited to wind power is actually produced by fossil fuels, mostly natural gas.”

Analysis from a recently published resource management paper suggests that overall CO2 emissions will actually double in the next 16 years (by 2032) in Canada (Ontario) as more wind and solar capacity is added.  Wind and solar require reliable backup when the Sun isn’t shining and/or the wind isn’t blowing…and fossil fuel energies (natural gas, coal) are the reliable backup(s) of choice.

Why Will Emissions Double as We Add Wind and Solar Plants?  [pg. 15]

Wind and Solar require flexible backup generation.  Nuclear is too inflexible to backup renewables without expensive engineering changes to the reactors.  Flexible electric storage is too expensive at the moment. Consequently natural gas provides the backup for wind and solar in North AmericaWhen you add wind and solar you are actually forced to reduce nuclear generation to make room for more natural gas generation to provide flexible backup.
Ontario currently produces electricity at less than 40 grams of CO2 emissions/kWh. Wind and solar with natural gas backup produces electricity at about 200 grams of CO2 emissions/kWh. Therefore adding wind and solar to Ontario’s grid drives CO2 emissions higher.
From 2016 to 2032 as Ontario phases out nuclear capacity to make room for wind and solar, CO2 emissions will double (2013 LTEP data).  In Ontario, with limited economic hydro and expensive storage, it is mathematically impossible to achieve low CO2 emissions at reasonable electricity prices without nuclear generation.

Scientists Increasingly Conclude Global-Scale Renewables-Driven Power Supply Will Never Happen

Scientists have increasingly weighed in on the vacuousness of the current emphasis on renewable energy generation.  For example…

Solar power is a “non-sustainable energy sink” and “will not help in any way to replace the fossil fuel” even though “many people believe renewable energy sources to be capable of substituting fossil or nuclear energy.”

 

– See more at: http://notrickszone.com/2016/11/24/analysis-adding-more-solar-wind-power-increases-dependence-on-fossil-fuels-doubles-co2-emissions/#sthash.9TGE05ql.dpuf

(Climatism embolden added)

•••

Via Climatism :

As well as the extra fossil fuel based energy plants required to backup wind and solar installations, keep in mind the additional CO2 produced and mining required to manufacture, transport and maintain windmills and solar panels.

With an average lifespan of only fifteen years, running at max 30% output, an industrial windmill could spin until it falls apart and never generate as much energy as was invested in building it.

windmill-ingredients

How Green Is My Industrial Wind Turbine? | Climatism

Because wind power fails when the wind stops blowing, 100% of its capacity has to be backed up 100% of the time by fossil fuels which run constantly in the background to balance the grid and prevent blackouts when wind power output collapses:

247365-backup

The energy required for a helicopter to de-ice all the blades on a wind farm must outweigh any supposed saving in CO2 by a factor of 100 or more. Notwithstanding that no wind farm has saved a gram of CO2 due to construction and the necessary spinning reserve.

chopper-co2

HUMAN STUPIDITY KNOWS NO LIMITS

At least all those promised “green jobs” are being realised

green-jobs

•••

Related :

  • How Green Energy Hurts the Poor… | Climatism
  • CO2 In The Atmosphere Is Not Pollution | Climatism
  • Peer-Review Study : Lessons in wasting money: Use more wind and solar and… emit just as much CO2 « JoNova
  • Wind farms — are 96% useless, and cost 150 times more than necessary for what they do « JoNova

“Unreliable” Energy Related :

  • Wind Power: A token gesture to the folly of green madness
  • Shock News : Green Energy Not Fit for the Grid
  • Wrecking The Environment To Save It | Climatism
  • “Green” Germany | Climatism
  • Shock news : UN Carbon Regime Would Devastate Humanity | Climatism

CO2 – “The Stuff of Life” – Greening The Planet :

  • CSIRO Censoring Their Own Climate Research | Climatism
  • Carbon Dioxide: The Gas of Life – Paul Driessen 
  • The global dance of carbon dioxide and spreading green flora « JoNova
  • Greening the Planet and how Fossil Fuels protect world’s Flora & Fauna | Dr. Matt Ridley | Climatism


Man Made Warming in Iceland

“Time To Drain The (Climate Change) Swamp.”

Defund Gavin Schmidt/NASA’s $1Billion/year taxpayer funded gravy train.

Put the dragnet through Tom Karl’s NOAA as well.

Disgraces to science.

Science Matters

H/t to Bill Illis and Tony Heller

As the graphs show, global warming is indeed man made. It is achieved by adjustments producing a warming trend in station records where no such trend existed.

A similar pattern is found and analyzed in my study of the highest quality US stations Temperature Data Review Project–My Submission

View original post


Surprise! Greedy Green Energy Corporatists are Clear Felling Protected Forests for Biomass

James Delingpole nailed it in his epic book on the “Green” movements true colours – “Killing the Earth to Save it.”

Watts Up With That?

Ready to clear the next protected forest Ready to clear the next protected forest

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

h/t Wayne Delbeke – the Guardian has just noticed that a rise in demand for wood chips, for “green” biomass power schemes, has led an increase in logging, including legally dubious clearances of large swathes of protected forests.

Protected forests in Europe felled to meet EU renewable targets – report

Europe’s bioenergy plants are burning trees felled from protected conservation areas rather than using forest waste, new report shows.

Protected forests are being indiscriminately felled across Europe to meet the EU’s renewable energy targets, according to an investigation by the conservation group Birdlife.

Up to 65% of Europe’s renewable output currently comes from bioenergy, involving fuels such as wood pellets and chips, rather than wind and solar power.

Bioenergy fuel is supposed to be harvested from residue such as forest waste but, under current legislation, European bioenergy plants…

View original post 116 more words