ENERGY rationing has always been a key feature of the Left’s misanthropic agenda of
depopulation deindustrialisation, enforced through punitive emissions controls, protected under the guise of anthropogenic ‘climate change’ – the emotionally driven eco-cause engineered by the environmental movement in the 1970’s who realised that doing something about supposed catastrophic man-made global warming would play to quite a number of the Left’s social agendas.
EHRLICH also wanted to poison black African’s in order to fight climate change. But, we’ll leave that conversation for another day. Ahem.
FORMER Australian PM Julia Gillard, who implemented Australia’s ill-fated 2011 carbon tax, was open in expressing its core function to ‘drive substantial changes in patterns of energy production and energy use.’
GILLARD’S ideology synonymous with another well known eco-doomsayer and the creator, fabricator and proponent of global warming – UNEP’s founding father Maurice Strong:
“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?” – Maurice Strong, founder of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP)
“Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class – involving high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, air-conditioning, and suburban housing – are not sustainable.” – Maurice Strong, Secretary General of the UN’s Earth Summit, 1992.
IN 2016, Victoria’s premier Dan Andrews took his State one step closer to Ehrlich and U.N. Strong’s energy-free utopia, with the closure of Hazelwood coal-fired power station, culling 22% of Victoria’s cheap, reliable energy supply and flipping the state from a power exporter to an importer.
COAL-fired power plant closures have become the order of the day for Australia’s virtue-signalling and global warming theory-obsessed political class who think that destroying the country’s industrial heartland, and imposing crippling energy-poverty on its citizens is a worthwhile price to pay for “saving the planet”.
DOE: If it weren’t for coal-fired electricity plants, the Northeast would have blacked-out during recent bomb-cyclonePosted: March 29, 2018
“New England was so desperate for natural gas to keep the heat on it took two shipments containing liquefied natural gas from Russia.”
OHH the delicious irony! The increased reliance on unreliables – wind and solar – by global warming obsessed progressive state governments is forcing them, in periods of extreme cold, to rely on fossil fuels (gas) from….”Russia, Russia, Russia”! LoL 😂
From the “when the going gets tough, renewables can’t cut it” department. Wind power generation actually dropped 5% during this period
From the Daily Caller: Coal-fired power plants kept the lights on for millions of Americans during January’s bomb cyclone, according to an Energy Department report warning future plant retirements could imperil grid security.
Energy analysts at DOE’s National Energy Technology Laboratory found that coal power kept the lights on for millions of Americans during the bomb cyclone that pummeled the eastern U.S. from late December to early January.
NETL analysts found that coal plants made up most of the incremental power utilities relied on to keep electricity flowing during the cold snap. Nuclear and oil power plants played a big role, NETL…
View original post 431 more words
“And when there is little wind, the expansion does not help, as electricity production then remains close to zero. It is like the foolish acts by the people of Schilda (Schildbürger) who tried to carry sacks of light into the windowless town hall.“
CIVILISED humans abandoned unreliables – windmills – centuries ago, for obvious reasons. They only work when the wind is not too heavy, not too light, but, just right. Even then, not at the exact time when you want your lights on.
TO repeat a technological failure in mankind’s history is either insanity or simply an opportunistic and greedy Climate Crisis Industry taking full advantage of “save the planet” virtue-signalling in a panic-driven ‘climate’ where literally trillions of dollars of taxpayers money is up for grabs in the form of massive government subsidies. Or both.
WHY wouldn’t one yell “GLOBAL WARMING” when such lucrative cash incentives, that avoid all scrutiny in the name of “saving the planet”, are literally blowing in the wind for the deceitful to corrupt?
END green central planning and the massive government subsidies for unreliables and see just how quickly the renewables sector comes crashing down to earth…
If the tech savvy Germans can’t make wind and solar power work, no one can.
The Germans love cobbling together endless, guttural syllables to create nouns longer than the Autobahn.
‘Energiewende’ roughly translates as ‘energy transition’, which Germans have taken to mean a new path with energy. Germans were told that instead of coal and nukes, they’d run on sunshine and breezes, as if by magic.
Except that it didn’t quite pan out that way.
Germany has policies in place that will squander close to €1 trillion in subsidies ladled out to wind and solar.
Years ago, its brains trust determined to shutter its safe and reliable fleet of nuclear power plants by 2022; hypocritically, Germany still imports plenty of nuclear generated electricity from France and will do for decades to come.
Coupled with its push kill off its nuclear…
View original post 731 more words
SUCH an important and informative weekly piece of (hard) work! Aside from the excellent information provided on the breakdown of energy sources used to power the Australian electrical grid, the main figure in contention is highlighted in red – the percentage of coal-fired power used per day versus all other sources of generation. Not surprising that of a day, coal-fired power generates more than 75% of all energy with wind and solar only ever supplying between 5 and 20% max of intermittent, expensive, unreliable and grid destabilising ‘power’. This despite unreliable-energy states having upwards of 50% capacity installed. It’s no wonder Australia’s electricity prices are among the highest in the world. South Australia officially ‘the highest’ with the highest penetration of highly subsidised unreliables – wind, solar….and a giant battery.
By Anton Lang ~
This is the continuing Post, where each Saturday, I will detail the power consumption for the Base Load in Australia for the previous week. This will show what is actually meant by the term Base Load, and that is the minimum daily power consumption at its lowest point. Power consumption never falls below this point.
Here in Australia, that level of power is 18,000MW. (See data for the Running Weekly Average For Base Load below)
The Bayswater Coal Fired Power Plant In New South Wales
This data I have collated below is for this last week, and is for the five States connected to the Australian grids, every State east of the Western Australian border, and here I will show that data for each of those five States, New South Wales, Queensland, Victoria, South Australia, and Tasmania.
As you can see from these…
View original post 1,832 more words
IN 2000, climate expert Dr David Viner of the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) assured us that…
NAS, NAE, and NAM will be fast-tracking their google sponsored science censorship bureau to make sure that papers like this one never, ever see the light of day!
By Paul Homewood
h/t No Tricks Zone
An important new paper from Frank Lansner and Jens Pedersen:
Temperature data 1900–2010 from meteorological stations across the world have been analyzed and it has been found that all land areas generally have two different valid temperature trends. Coastal stations and hill stations facing ocean winds are normally more warm-trended than the valley stations that are sheltered from dominant oceans winds.
Thus, we found that in any area with variation in the topography, we can divide the stations into the more warm trended ocean air-affected stations, and the more cold-trended ocean air-sheltered stations. We find that the distinction between ocean air-affected and ocean air-sheltered stations can be used to identify the influence of the oceans on land surface. We can then use this knowledge as a tool to better study climate variability on the land surface without the moderating effects of the ocean.
View original post 214 more words
“Of course, we have the usual problem, that those who read the article originally and who would have been deeply misled, won’t see the correction now.”
THE disturbing part is that the BBC knows unequivocally that they are creating alarm by distorting historical data and exaggerating future scenarios in order to push their catastrophic climate narrative.
By Paul Homewood
You may recall the above report by the BBC, which described how bad last year’s Atlantic hurricane season was, before commenting at the end:
A warmer world is bringing us a greater number of hurricanes and a greater risk of a hurricane becoming the most powerful category 5.
As I promised, I fired off a complaint, which at first they did their best to dodge. After my refusal to accept their reply, they have now been forced to back down.
The above sentence now no longer appears, and instead they now say:
Of course, we have the usual problem, that those who read the article originally and who would have been deeply misled, won’t see the correction now.
What is perhaps of most concern is that this report was written by Chris Fawkes, who is one of the BBC’s weather forecasters, and who should therefore know…
View original post 1 more word