CADMIUM : The Toxic Problem Of Not-So-Clean Energy


CADMIUM and its compounds are highly toxic and exposure
to this metal is known to cause cancer and
targets the body’s cardiovascular, renal, gastrointestinal,
neurological, reproductive, and respiratory systems.
–– United State Department of Labor

“IF Greens love nature,
why aren’t they more concerned about
carpeting pristine landscapes with industrial wind turbines and
toxic, non-renewable solar panels?
–– ‘GREEN’ Energy Future | Climatism

***

SKY News Australia’s digital editor Jack Houghton blows the myth of benign, ‘renewable’ energy.

The toxic problem of not-so-clean energy

Digital Editor Jack Houghton

As the world shuns energy sources of old in pursuit of clean alternatives a very toxic problem has been slowly building in the background.

During the construction of solar panels the soft, silver, and highly ductile metal cadmium is compressed between sheets of glass – a vital part of how sunlight is converted into electricity so that environmental leaders like Zali Steggall can charge their hypothetical electric cars.

It is a process that many – who view technology through a tribal lens – consider to be worthy of replacing coal.

The only issue is cadmium is carcinogenic and considered roughly ten times more hazardous than the lead which sits next to it in a typical photovoltaic panel.

Panels which are shattered in storms break into tiny fragments and after several months of rainfall the silver metal which once created energy is transformed into a dangerous health hazard.

Just like the 16,000 wiped out by hurricane Irma in the Virgin Islands in 2017.

The wreckage is pictured above.

If not destroyed by wild weather these panels last about two decades.

After that point much of their construct becomes useless hunks of toxic waste which will collectively weigh 1500 kilotonnes by 2050 in Australia alone.

That figure is roughly 300 times what a nuclear power plant would have created to produce the same energy.

But surely those seeking to radically reform Australia’s energy grid through a Green New Deal must have considered this looming ecological crisis?

Well, no, according to authors of a study released last year titled “Drivers, barriers and enablers to end-of-life management of solar photovoltaic and battery energy storage systems: A systematic literature review”.

As the title suggests the study provided a meta-analysis of 191 research papers into solar panel waste management.

Its findings were damning to say the least.

“Little attention has been paid to the potential environmental and human health related impacts associated with PV systems, if not managed properly at the end-of-life,” the authors wrote.

“PV panel and BESS contain hazardous materials such as lead, lithium, tin and cadmium which can harm the environment and human health if they are not properly managed at the end of life-cycle.

“Exposure of heavy metals embedded in both of these technologies will cause various negative health effects.

“For example, cadmium is associated with its impact on lung, kidney and bone damages once absorbed into the body whilst exposure to lead will cause damages to nervous system.”

The authors even went as far to suggest that the technology should not really be classified as renewable because the issues with waste and the fact many rare minerals cannot be salvaged.

They must be mined again and again.

“The current linear take-make-consume-dispose economic system practised within PV systems will inevitably undermine renewable status of this technology without an effective end of life strategy,” they said.

Questions were also raised about the true CO2 impact of solar panels considering the role mining plays in their formation.

These issues don’t mean solar won’t form a crucial part of Australia’s energy grid.

What they do mean – however – is we must be far more reasoned and cautious before rapidly seeking to switch 81 per cent of our energy grid from fossil fuel sources to emerging technologies.

What is dramatically unhelpful is failed politicians such as Malcolm Turnbull using the tragedy of bushfires to attempt to speed up this process before adequate solutions are found.

“Have we now reached the point where at last our response to global warming will be driven by engineering and economics rather than ideology and idiocy,” he wrote in the Guardian last week.

“Our priority this decade should be our own green new deal in which we generate, as soon as possible, all of our electricity from zero emission sources. 

“If we do, Australia will become a leader in the fight against global warming. And we can do it.”

This process should not be rushed and leaders in the Coalition must resist calls to do so – especially by those who wish to re-write history as environmental saviours.

There are quite incredible solutions to climate change being discussed in academic circles and according to all the science this writer has read – the climate catastrophe is still a long way away.

And there are far bigger fish to fry over in China before we should be despairing about our tiny geo-centric emissions tally.

Let’s pause and reflect before we poison the next generation with the very technology we hope will save it.

The toxic problem of not-so-clean energy | Sky News Australia

*

CONCLUSION

THE obvious question that needs to be answered by UNreliable-energy-obsessed policy makers is this …

Hey @TimWilsonMP why is the RE industry immune from EPA and work place safety regs?

If my business produced this amount of hazardous material I would be fined millions and also do time in the slammer – and rightly so.

via No longer quiet on Twitter (@matthew25496877)

***

TOXIC UNreliables related :

UNreliables related :

ENERGY POVERTY related :

•••

THE Climatism Tip Jar – Support The Fight Against Dangerous, Costly and Unscientific Climate Alarm

(Climate sceptics/rationalists still waitin’ for that “big oil” cheque to arrive in the mail!)

Help us to hit back against the bombardment of climate lies costing our communities, economies and livelihoods far, far too much.

Thanks to all those who have donated. Your support and faith in Climatism is highly motivating and greatly appreciated!

Citizen journalists can’t rely on mastheads, rather private donations and honest content. Every pledge helps, heaps!

Click link for more info…

Many thanks, Jamie.

(NB// The PayPal account linked to “Climatism” is “Five-O-Vintage”)Donate with PayPal

Screen Shot 2020-02-12 at 5.35.38 am

•••


HOW DARE HE! United States Led Entire World In Reducing CO₂ Emissions In 2019

How Dare He - CLIMATISM

United States Led Entire World In Reducing CO2 Emissions In 2019 | The Daily Wire


“Action must be powerful and wide-ranging.
After all, the climate crisis is not just about the environment.
It is a crisis of human rights, of justice, and of political will.
Colonial, racist, and patriarchal systems of oppression have created and fueled it.

We need to dismantle them all.”
–– GretaThunberg™️

***

CLIMATISM has reported here, here and here on the inconvenient fact that the United States, under the Trump administration (and reluctantly under Obama), has witnessed a decline in CO₂ emissions thanks to technology (Fracking/natural gas extraction) and private sector innovation.

THE mainstream media refuses to report ‘planet-hating’ Trump’s America reducing ‘evil’ CO₂ emissions, while the rest of the planet, in particular the ‘green’ centrally-planned EU, has seen rises in its emissions.

DON’t expect the mainstream media or GretaThunberg™️ to send Trump a congratulations anytime soon!

Hat tip @RealSaavedra

The United States led the entire world in reducing CO2 emissions last year while also experiencing solid economic growth, according to a newly released report.

“The United States saw the largest decline in energy-related CO2 emissions in 2019 on a country basis – a fall of 140 Mt, or 2.9%, to 4.8 Gt,” The International Energy Agency (IEA) reported on Tuesday. “US emissions are now down almost 1 Gt from their peak in the year 2000, the largest absolute decline by any country over that period.”

“A 15% reduction in the use of coal for power generation underpinned the decline in overall US emissions in 2019,” the IEA continued. “Coal-fired power plants faced even stronger competition from natural gas-fired generation, with benchmark gas prices an average of 45% lower than 2018 levels. As a result, gas increased its share in electricity generation to a record high of 37%. Overall electricity demand declined because demand for air-conditioning and heating was lower as a result of milder summer and winter weather.

– – – – –

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) responded to the news by writing on Twitter, “FACT you will NEVER see on the 6 o’clock news: U.S. emissions FELL 2.9%, or by 140 million tons, continuing the trend of the United States LEADING THE WORLD IN TOTAL EMISSIONS DECLINE since 2000.”

The news came after the media promoted far-left climate extremists like socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Greta Thunberg who demonized the U.S. and economic growth for polluting the world.

Thunberg attacked the U.S. last month during a speech she gave at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland for leaving the Paris Climate Accord, despite the fact that the U.S. leads the world in reducing CO2 emissions.

“The fact that the U.S.A. is leaving the Paris accord seems to outrage and worry everyone, and it should,” Thunberg said. “But the fact that we’re all about to fail the commitments you signed up for in the Paris Agreement doesn’t seem to bother the people in power even the least.”

*

MAINSTREAM MEDIA SILENCE

IMAGINE the red-faces if the mainstream media, for once, honestly reported that spending hundreds of billions of €uros, of other people’s money, on unreliable energy – wind and solar – was actually increasing CO₂ emissions, where fracking for natural gas (a “dirty” fossil fuel) was lowering them!

PARIS ACCORD – ‘BAD DEAL’

ANOTHER smart move by Trump in not signing the latest UN wealth redistribution scheme when Europe, the epicentre of draconian climate change policy and green energy madness, cannot meet its own emissions ‘commitments’ despite spending hundreds of billions of taxpayer €uros on failed ‘green’ energy.

EUROPE’S GREEN ENERGY FAILURE: CO2 EMISSIONS RISING

ENERGIEWENDE FAIL: German CO2 Emissions Higher Now Than In 2009.

*

GLOBAL CO₂ EMISSIONS

GLOBAL CO₂ emissions continue their steady climb, despite the trillions of dollars committed to green energy sources worldwide and efforts to curb CO₂ emissions.

global-co2-emissions-2017-768x382

Source: International Energy Agency (IEA).

***

BUT, AREN’T WIND AND SOLAR ‘POWER’ MEANT TO LOWER CO₂ EMISSIONS?

URELIABLE-energy propagandists claim that wind, solar and other weather-dependent ‘energy’ sources will “Save The Planet” by lowering plant-food CO₂ emissions. But, the opposite is the case.

WHY ARE CO₂ EMISSIONS RISING WHEREVER ‘GREEN’ ENERGY IS PROLIFERATED?

ONE inconvenient reason for the rise in ‘green-CO₂’ emissions that you won’t hear reported on MSM news, ever…

Marques et al., 2018

⇑ Wind Power Installation Amplifies

The Growth Of Fossil Fuel Energies

[A]s RES [renewable energy sources] increases, the expected decreasing tendency in the installed capacity of electricity generation from fossil fuels has not been found.” – Marques et al., 2018

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

*

THE unspoken truth about renewables, neatly summarised 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.”

more-renewables-more-fossil-fuels-as-backup-la-times-2012

Image Source: LA Times

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.

*

ENERGIEWENDE FAIL

WHAT’S happening in Germany is, unfortunately, a bellwether for what is to come in other CO₂-theory obsessed Western nations attempting to make UNreliables the kingpin of their electricity grids.

GERMANY’s wind and solar experiment has been exposed as a catastrophic failure with rampant energy poverty and an industrial heartland decimated, leading to an expansion of new generation HELE coal-fired power plants.

***

CONCLUSION

IT seems forever unlikely that the climate communists will ever concede and promote smart energy solutions like HELE-coal, gas or nuclear. All proven base-load technologies that reduce CO₂ emissions while maintaining a high standard of living by keeping power prices down. A far better result than ‘green’ Germany’s efforts under the 1/2 trillion Euro Energiewende debacle.

PERHAPS they don’t want solutions to their CO₂ hysteria? Perhaps it’s more lucrative to kick the climate can down the road and see how much more climate coin and political power it spits out?

•••

SEE also :

EMISSIONS Related :

SMART Energy (HELE) Related :

EXTREME WEATHER Related :

STATE Of The Climate Report :

ORIGINS Of The ClimateChange™️ Scam :

•••

THE Climatism Tip Jar – Support The Fight Against Dangerous, Costly and Unscientific Climate Alarm

(Climate sceptics/rationalists still waitin’ for that “big oil” cheque to arrive in the mail!)

Help us to hit back against the bombardment of climate lies costing our communities, economies and livelihoods far, far too much.

Thanks to all those who have donated. Your support and faith in Climatism is highly motivating and greatly appreciated!

Citizen journalists can’t rely on mastheads, rather private donations and honest content. Every pledge helps, heaps!

Click link for more info…

Many thanks, Jamie.

(NB// The PayPal account linked to “Climatism” is “Five-O-Vintage”)Donate with PayPal

Screen Shot 2020-02-12 at 5.35.38 am

•••


ELECTRICITY FUTURE : Coal, Nuclear or Chaos

A nuclear power plant under construction in China's Shandong province. Picture AAP

A nuclear power plant under construction in China’s Shandong province. Picture AAP


“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 UNEP

Giving society cheap, abundant energy would be the
equivalent of giving an idiot child a machine gun
.”
– Prof Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University / Royal Society fellow

***

IN the collective age of ClimateChange™️ eco-insanity that we currently inhabit, common sense, reason and logic have become an increasingly rare commodity, perhaps even a thing of the past, as those who dare speak truth-to-the-virtuous are heckled and jeered as “deniers”, in a calculated effort to muzzle.

THANKFULLY, a few cool and sane heads still prevail within the majority-Leftist mainstream media establishment.

WE ought listen to and evaluate their arguments, no matter how far they divert from the preferred ‘wisdom’ of the day. A preferred wisdom that emanates from a cancer of groupthink collectivism, nourished by an individuals fear of being isolated, intimidated and persecuted by the mob of feel-good intentions. But, as Henry G. Bohn first published in 1855, “the road to hell is paved with good intentions.”

A legend of Australian media, and someone who is not willing to take us down the “road to hell”, is columnist Terry McCrann.

READ his excellent summary on critical energy-security solutions hopelessly mired in politics and weak leadership.

*

via The Australian :

Go nuclear, and we must start building now

TERRY McCRANN

Australia has three electricity futures — coal, nuclear or chaos. It’s time to bring Australia into the 21st century by aggressively embracing the nuclear one.

The prime minister’s thought bubble — fathered by political ineptitude out of policy stupidity — that a future could be crafted out of some hybrid mix of gas generation and so-called renewables is an embarrassingly inefficient and unworkable dead-end.

The idea that we could go all renewables — with assorted batteries from the Tesla version in South Australia to the Turnbull one in the Snowy included — is a fantasy; it would be the embracing of the third future: chaos.

In very simple terms, unless and until the laws of physics are repealed, if we want a power grid to deliver the cheap, reliable and plentiful electricity that has been the basis of our economy, our society and indeed our very civilisation, the base-load has to be carried by coal or nuclear.

I would have no problem continuing to have it based on coal, with the next generation of coal-fired generation far more efficient and much cleaner, in the real sense, of not pumping out particulates, than our existing ageing and indeed dying pre-1980s fleet.

But you have to recognise reality. Before the bushfires that was an unlikely prospect. After the bushfires — however irrational the demonisation of our carbon dioxide emissions and our coal-fired stations — even a single coal-fired station has become impossible.

Indeed the PM who carried a lump of coal into parliament symbolically returned it to the ground in his speech midweek. Yes, to digging coal up to power the thousands of coal-fired stations in China and all the other countries; no, to powering another one in Australia.

What’s wrong with the gas-renewables mix? Isn’t it — actually, more a gas-gas mix — working in the US, to both cut CO2 emissions and deliver cheap electricity?

Well, yes, but that’s also the answer to why it wouldn’t work in Australia. That’s the US, this is Australia. Another way of putting it, they have President Trump, we have PM Morrison.

We also have a near-uniform consensus across the truncated spectrum of state political leaders against the finding — far less the development — of gas. Did anyone mention fracking?

A mainstream spectrum that runs, not exactly unimportantly, borrowing from Dorothy Parker, all the way from A to B; or borrowing from Mark Steyn, from our Labor parties which are left-of left-of centre to Liberal parties which are right-of left-of centre.

Simply, there are three things wrong with the idea that gas could replace coal in the energy mix.

Inefficient gas

We don’t have enough, absent redirecting all exports to domestic use. We are not going to find enough anytime soon, if indeed we are even allowed to look for it.

Using gas to generate electricity is a hugely inefficient use of what should be a premium fuel; only slightly less inefficient than using petrol.

And that points to the third, in the context of the (hysterical) reason we want to kill coal: it’s still a CO2 emitting, if less than coal, fossil fuel.

Now, there are three arguments presented against nuclear, which is the only means of delivering non CO2-emitting reliable base-load power.

The first is the safety aspect — both the operation and disposal of waste. The first simply does not stand up, if you look through the hysteria at each of the three major accidents over the past half-century: Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukashima.

It is the hysteria which has also created the other two objections: it takes too long to build a nuclear station and the capital cost — both over-engineering and time-value of money — makes the power too expensive.

According to the Asia Times last year, the average build-time for a nuclear reactor in China was five years. OK, this is Australia; if everything went right we could probably do it in 10. I doubt we could build a hospital in even two months, far less two weeks.

That is why we need to start now — we need at least three major stations to anchor the grid across the three eastern states, for starters, by 2030, as the coal stations continue to close with accelerating rapidity.

This can only happen with absolute bipartisan commitment from the two major parties. We also need it from the lunatic Green left.

The best, if faint, hope of “winning that”, is via bipartisan Labor-Coalition commitment not simply to nuclear, but that it is either three nuclear stations or three new coal stations.

If the left is serious about reducing our power-generated CO2 emissions, it can only happen by embracing nuclear.

And embracing it in a China-like way that allows the stations to be built in 10 years (I’d hang out for seven in my dreams), and not red-taped and green-taped or Nimby-ied away past 20 years and so into our third future of chaos.

A mix of base-load nuclear and peak-demand gas would be both efficiently viable and able to accommodate — in a fairly rational way — the vanity virtue-signalling generation by wind and solar.

Breaking the hoodoo against nuclear power might also help terminate what stands as the single most stupid decision ever by an Australian government — the purchase of the French nuclear submarines on the basis they are re-engineered back to an old (fossil fuel) technology.

Why didn’t we buy the US F-35 fighters on the same basis? That they be re-engineered to go back to propjets? And for delivery in 2050?

Yes, prime minister, go for it. You could find it liberating. Dare to be free of your predecessor and his utter, numbing across-the-board ineptitude. Try uttering the word nuclear.

And when you have uttered it a few times in connection with power generation; why, you will find it effortless to have it followed by the word submarines.

Go nuclear, and we must start building now | The Australian

***

NUCLEAR SAFETY : Reactors that Can’t Melt Down – Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR)

Nuclear Safety- Reactors that Can’t Melt Down | PA Pundits - International
Nuclear Safety: Reactors that Can’t Melt Down | PA Pundits – International

NUCLEAR power is the world’s future. Nuclear has a few inherent disadvantages. It is without doubt the cleanest, greenest and safest form of power production. Contrary to what you may have heard about the Fukushima nuclear plant that was hit by the 2011 tsunami, not one single person was killed or injured by nuclear radiation. Not one. Also, no private property was harmed by radiation.

via PA Pundits – International :

By Kelvin Kemm Ph.D.

OVER recent years, engineers have developed an innovative alternative nuclear reactor design, known as High Temperature Gas Reactors. Instead of water, they employ helium gas as a coolant. In South Africa, a similar reactor design was developed: the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR). Its fuel is small tennis-ball-sized graphite balls containing granules of uranium, rather than large metal fuel elements. The balls cannot melt.

Another major advantage of nuclear power is that it uses so little fuel. The total annual fuel usage of even a large nuclear plant can be carried in a couple of trucks. It can be airlifted-in, if need be. There is no need for long supply lines, which can be prone to weather or political disruptions. Nuclear reactors are refuelled only every 18 months.

Critics say nuclear is expensive. It’s not if you look at the total life cycle. A modern reactor is designed to last for 60 years and will probably last for 80 – versus 15-20 for wind turbines and solar panels. While money must be spent upfront in construction, benefits are reaped over many decades. What is required is an innovative approach to the project-cycle funding. Right now in South Africa, nuclear-generated electricity is the cheapest by far. The current nuclear plant, Koeberg, is over 30 years old and is now running very profitably, since the construction costs have been paid off.

Another plus is that the price of uranium is almost irrelevant. Such a little amount of uranium is used in a nuclear plant that even if the international uranium price were to double, it would make extremely little difference to the annual fuel bill. It is nothing like a variation in coal or oil prices.

Large-scale nuclear needs water cooling, which means plants must be built on a coastline or on a large inland water source. But big nuclear is probably too large for many nations to start with. There is a second solution: SMR-class Small Modular Reactors that are currently being developed. South Africa’s SMR is the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor – and a small PBMR can be only 10% the size of a large traditional reactor. A PBMR does not need large water cooling, so you can place it anywhere.

In fact, close to the point of consumption is no problem. “Modular” means that you can add extra reactors to the initial system, as you wish or need, when you wish or need. It’s something like adding extra locomotives to a large train, all controlled by one driver.

PBMRs are also considerably cheaper than large reactors. So, a very viable answer for any African country is to plan for PBMR nuclear systems. One PBMR reactor will produce 100 to 200 Megawatts, depending on its design. As the country requires more power, it simply installs more PMBRs.

An important consideration with nuclear power in Africa is for countries to work together. Africa needs a nuclear network for operations, training and general nuclear development. In the spirit of Fourth Industrial Revolution thinking, now is the time to plan an African nuclear network. Thankfully a number of African countries have already launched that process.

Dr Kelvin Kemm is a nuclear physicist and CEO of Nuclear Africa (Pty) Ltd, a project management company based in Pretoria, South Africa. He is the recipient of the prestigious Lifetime Achievers Award of the National Science and Technology Forum of South Africa. He does international consultancy work in strategic development.

Electricity In The Realm Of The Lion King | PA Pundits – International

***

MORE:

  • The PBMR design was developed to be “walk away safe,” which means that the nuclear reactor and its cooling system can be stopped dead in their tracks. The reactor cannot overheat, but will just cool down by itself.
  • Nuclear power will one day power Africa, and the world – helping to lift billions out of poverty and ensuring that billions more continue to enjoy living standards that poor nations also deserve to have.

Nuclear Safety: Reactors that Can’t Melt Down | PA Pundits – International

•••

SEE also :

EXTREME WEATHER Related :

STATE Of The Climate Report :

ORIGINS Of The ClimateChange™️ Scam :

•••

THE Climatism Tip Jar – Support The Fight Against Dangerous, Costly and Unscientific Climate Alarm

(Climate sceptics/rationalists still waitin’ for that “big oil” cheque to arrive in the mail!)

Help us to hit back against the bombardment of climate lies costing our communities, economies and livelihoods far, far too much.

Thanks to all those who have donated. Your support and faith in Climatism is highly motivating and greatly appreciated!

Citizen journalists can’t rely on mastheads, rather private donations and honest content. Every pledge helps, heaps!

Click link for more info…

Many thanks, Jamie.

(NB// The PayPal account linked to “Climatism” is “Five-O-Vintage”)Donate with PayPal

Screen Shot 2020-02-12 at 5.35.38 am

•••


ANGELA MERKEL : The New Climate Change ‘Denier’

ANGELA MERKEL - The New Climate Change 'Denier'

ANGELA MERKEL : The New Climate Change ‘Denier’ | Climatism


We get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms.
That’s the only reason to build them.
They don’t make sense without the tax credit.

–– Warren Buffett

Renewable energy technologies simply won’t work;
we need a fundamentally different approach.”

–– Top Google engineers

Suggesting that renewables will let us phase rapidly off fossil fuels
in the United States, China, India, or the world as a whole
is almost the equivalent of believing in the Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy.

James Hansen
(The Godfather of AGW alarmism / former NASA climate chief)

***

Hat tip @Panther_809

AFTER hundreds of €Billions of taxpayer’s hard-earned-money spent on sunshine and breezes, Germany’s Energiewende program has been exposed as a catastrophic failure, with carbon dioxide emissions higher now than in 2009.

SKYROCKETING ‘green energy’ power prices have decimated Germany’s once proud industrial heartland and unleashed a globally-familiar pattern of rampant energy poverty throughout the nation.

*

SOLUTION?

THE solution to the monumental mess? Install actual cheap, reliable and clean energy – HELE coal-fired power …

*

AND, before the CO2-centrics lose their collective minds, understand that HELE, supercritical coal plants guarantee an automatic 30% reduction in CO2 emissions.

A far, far better result than Germany’s efforts under the 1/2 trillion Euro Energiewende debacle!

BUT wait, there’s more …

‘GREEN’ GERMAY’S PROPOSED COAL PLANT EXPANSION

***

CONCLUSION

WHY not just install more windmills and mirrors to reduce power prices to alleviate energy poverty and resuscitate a German industry on life-support?

LOGICAL heads know the answer to that one.

*

UPDATE : Must Read

An excellent, thorough analysis of Germany’s all-renewable nightmare. Essential reading for anyone wanting other countries to follow down this drain …

 

•••

ENERGIEWENDE-fail Related :

EXTREME WEATHER Related :

STATE Of The Climate Report :

ORIGINS Of The ClimateChange™️ Scam :

•••

THE Climatism Tip Jar – Support The Fight Against Dangerous, Costly and Unscientific Climate Alarm

(Climate sceptics/rationalists still waitin’ for that “big oil” cheque to arrive in the mail!)

Help us to hit back against the bombardment of climate lies costing our communities, economies and livelihoods far, far too much.

Thanks to all those who have donated. Your support and faith in Climatism is highly motivating and greatly appreciated!

Citizen journalists can’t rely on mastheads, rather private donations and honest content. Every pledge helps, heaps!

Click link for more info…

Many thanks, Jamie.

(NB// The PayPal account linked to “Climatism” is “Five-O-Vintage”)Donate with PayPal

•••


CREDLIN : ‘Climate Cult’ Using Environmentalism As A ‘Trojan Horse’ For Marxism


“BEING stupid enough to open the gates and
let the Trojan horse in, only to find it’s nothing about
water, the sky, the bush, or indeed humanity
is madness.

Peta Credlin

“THE urge to save humanity is almost always a
false-front for the urge to rule it.”

H.L. Mencken

***

COUNTRY born-and-bred girl Peta Credlin is a political contributor for Sky News and host of (ratings killer) Credlin on Sky News Live.

CREDLIN holds a keen insight into the machinations of Australian and global politics, having served as Chief of Staff to Prime Minister Tony Abbott from September 2013 to September 2015. She was previously chief of staff to Abbott as Leader of the Opposition. Since 2016, she has been the host of Credlin and co-host of Jones & Credlin on Sky News Live.

HER reasoned and logical approach to current affairs and politics of the day, highlighted by her unique ability to speak the language of the people, have made Credlin one of Australia’s most watched, revered, highly rated and influential political commentators of our time.

*

SEE Credlin here, in this must watch 5’44”, as she identifies that “Climate Change” policies and prescriptions represent “nothing about water, the sky, the bush, or indeed humanity“, rather, are a “Trojan horse for Marxism”.

(click image to redirect to YouTube. Original YouTube video linking to another dams video)

‘Marxist-left’ using environmentalism as a ‘trojan horse’ for Marxism

06/02/2020|6min

Sky News host Peta Credlin says extreme environmentalists are using climate change as “socialism masquerading as environmentalism”.

The Sydney Morning Herald reported on Thursday electric car sales have tripled, but Ms Credlin said the “devil is always in the detail,” with sales growth increasing from 0.2 per cent to an “almost as insignificant” 0.6 per cent.

Ms Credlin said the “climate cult” argues the government must begin subsidising not only the electric car market, but also the “fast charging stations” in order to make them cheaper.

“More taxes, more subsidies, more regulations, more government control,” Ms Credlin said.

Once again, the left are arguing for “rampant taxpayer-funded subsidisation” to achieve an environmentalist agenda, but Ms Credlin said after losing the “argument over economics” the “Marxist left” are “having another go via the trojan horse of environmentalism”.

‘Marxist-left’ using environmentalism as a ‘trojan horse’ for Marxism | Sky News Australia

•••

CLIMATE ‘Marxism’ related :

ORIGINS Of The ClimateChange™️ Scam :

•••

THE Climatism Tip Jar – Support The Fight Against Dangerous, Costly and Unscientific Climate Alarm

(Climate sceptics/rationalists still waitin’ for that “big oil” cheque to arrive in the mail!)

Help us to hit back against the bombardment of climate lies costing our communities, economies and livelihoods far, far too much.

Thanks to all those who have donated. Your support and faith in Climatism is highly motivating and greatly appreciated!

Citizen journalists can’t rely on mastheads, rather private donations and honest content. Every pledge helps, heaps!

Click link for more info…

Many thanks, Jamie.

(NB// The PayPal account linked to “Climatism” is “Five-O-Vintage”)Donate with PayPal

•••

 


POLAR BEARS : The New Symbol Of Climate Change Realism And A Stable Arctic

POLAR BEARS - The New Symbol Of Climate Change Realism and A Stable Arctic | CLIMATISM

POLAR BEARS – The New Symbol Of Climate Scepticism and A Stable Arctic | CLIMATISM


“THE polar bear as an icon for climate change is dead
because the distorted predictions made by
polar bear specialists were wrong.”

“THIS is a lesson for researchers in other areas
who have failed to stop the invasion of
politics into their science.”

Dr Susan Crockford

***

Hat tip @EcologySenseUK

FOR years, the Polar Bear has been abused by climate change activists as the poster child of ClimateChange™️. They didn’t use rats or spiders to promote their misanthropic agenda. Instead, they chose the cute, cuddly, fluffy polar bear to illicit a desired emotional response.

2c30839678c3fa88005df14590e997f2

“Climate Action” Poster Child | CLIMATISM

YOU would have noticed that the polar bear is a much less common feature in science, while the fake news mainstream media has stopped using the polar bear as a propaganda tool to drive their climate agenda.

THE Arctic bear has been superseded by child soldiers and penguins …

*

*

REAL SCIENCE …

POLAR BEARS

“PUBLIC safety concerns, combined with the effects of
polar bears on other species, suggest that
in many Nunavut communities, the polar bear
may have exceeded the co-existence threshold.”
Nunavut’s polar bear population is unsafe,
government document says – The Globe and Mail

*

WITH deadly irony, polar bear numbers have grown dramatically and to “dangerous” levels as carbon dioxide emissions have risen. A CO2 correlation, at last!

INDIGENOUS Inuit’s of Northern Canada are now facing the very real task of having to cull the population as “the polar bear may have exceeded the co-existence threshold.”

“Inuit believe there are now so many bears that public safety has become a major concern,”

“Public safety concerns, combined with the effects of polar bears on other species, suggest that in many Nunavut communities, the polar bear may have exceeded the co-existence threshold.”

Nunavut’s polar bear population is unsafe, government document says – The Globe and Mail

*

POLAR BEAR POPULATION (1981 – 2015)

screen-shot-2019-01-19-at-4.26.11-am.png

Polar Bear Population (1981 – 2015)

*

POLAR BEAR POPULATION – THE LATEST COUNT

via Susan Crockford PhD :

Susan Crockford is zoologist with more than 35 years experience, including published work on the Holocene history of Arctic animals.

UNTIL last year, Dr. Crockford ‘was’ adjunct professor at the University of Victoria, British Columbia, until UVic bowed to outside pressure and rescinded her adjunct professor status.

TELLING the truth on climate change and polar bears is considered heresy in the post-normal society of climate change hysteria that we currently inhabit. Just ask Peter Ridd.

About | polarbearscience

Latest global polar bear abundance ‘best guess’ estimate is 39,000 (26,000-58,000)

It’s long past time for polar bear specialists to stop holding out for a scientifically accurate global estimate that will never be achieved and determine a reasonable and credible ‘best guess’. Since they have so far refused to do this, I have done it for them. My extrapolated estimate of 39,000 (range 26,000-58,000) at 2018 is not only plausible but scientifically defensible.

polarbear1_wikimedia_andreas-weith-photo-svalbard-sm.jpg
Latest global polar bear abundance ‘best guess’ estimate is 39,000 (26,000-58,000) | polarbearscience

In 2014, the chairman of the IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group (PBSG) emailed me to say that their global population size number ‘has never been an estimate of total abundance in a scientific sense, but simply a qualified guess given to satisfy public demand.’

In my new book, The Polar Bear Catastrophe That Never Happened, I contend that this situation will probably never change, so it’s time to stop holding out for a scientifically accurate global estimate and generate a reasonable and credible ‘best guess’. Recent surveys from several critical polar bear subpopulations have given us the information necessary to do this.

UPDATE: I have made this a sticky post for a while: new posts will appear below.

These new numbers make it possible to extrapolate from ‘known’ to ‘unknown’ subpopulations within so-called ‘sea ice ecoregions’ (defined in 2007 by polar bear scientists at the US Geological Survey, see Amstrup et al. 2007), as shown below, to update old estimates and generate new ones for never-studied areas.

usgs-polar-bear_ecoregions_icedrift.jpg

USGS – Polar Bear Ecoregions

Since the PBSG has so far refused to take this step, I took on the challenge. I contend that an estimate of about 39,000 (range 26,000-58,000) at 2018 is not only plausible but scientifically defensible. See the graph below from my new book:

population-size-estimate-graph-chapter-10-e1553617271572

Global polar bear population size estimates to 2018. From Chapter 10 of The Polar Bear Catastrophe That Never Happened (Crockford 2019).

This new estimate for 2018 is a modest 4-6 fold increase over the 10,000 or so bears that existed in the 1960s and after 25 years, a credible increase over the estimate of 25,000 that the PBSG offered in 1993 (Wiig et al. 1995).

However, my new estimate is much larger than the improbable figure of about 26,000 (range 22,000-31,000) offered by PGSG biologists in 2015 (Regehr et al. 2016; Wiig et al. 2015). The scary question is this: what do Arctic residents do if there are actually as many as 58,000?

See my new book (Crockford 2019) for the full rationale and references used to arrive at this figure.

The bottom line: it is scientifically unacceptable for the PBSG to continue to refuse to provide an extrapolated ‘best guess’ global estimate for polar bears, given that the scientifically accurate estimate they crave is essentially unattainable. An estimate of about 39,000 (range 26,000-58,000) at 2018 is not only plausible but scientifically defensible.

REFERENCES

Amstrup, S.C., Marcot, B.G. & Douglas, D.C. 2007. Forecasting the rangewide status of polar bears at selected times in the 21st century.US Geological Survey. Reston, VA. Pdf here

Crockford, S.J. 2019. The Polar Bear Catastrophe That Never Happened. Global Warming Policy Foundation, London. Available in paperback and ebook formats.

Regehr, E.V., Laidre, K.L, Akçakaya, H.R., Amstrup, S.C., Atwood, T.C., Lunn, N.J., Obbard, M., Stern, H., Thiemann, G.W., & Wiig, Ø. 2016. Conservation status of polar bears (Ursus maritimus) in relation to projected sea-ice declines. Biology Letters 12: 20160556. http://rsbl.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/12/12/20160556

Wiig, Ø., Born, E.W., and Garner, G.W. (eds.) 1995. Polar Bears: Proceedings of the 11th working meeting of the IUCN/SSC Polar Bear Specialists Group, 25-27 January, 1993, Copenhagen, Denmark. Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge UK, IUCN. http://pbsg.npolar.no/en/meetings/

Wiig, Ø., Amstrup, S., Atwood, T., Laidre, K., Lunn, N., Obbard, M., et al. 2015. Ursus maritimus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2015: e.T22823A14871490. Available fromhttp://www.iucnredlist.org/details/22823/0 [accessed Nov. 28, 2015]. See the supplement for population figures.

Latest global polar bear abundance ‘best guess’ estimate is 39,000 (26,000-58,000) | polarbearscience

*

WATCH …

TUCKER CARLSON interviews Zoologist and Polar Bear specialist Dr. Susan Crockford on the prime time ratings-killer show Tucker Carlson Tonight, in a must watch segment that demonstrates how “overpopulation”, not extinction, is now the problem :

*

PROPAGANDA RULES

THIS is what your children are being taught and ordered to say about Polar Bears and global warming climate change. Blatant lies and falsehoods …

***

THE ARCTIC

DIRE predictions of an “ice-free” Arctic remain a popular and effective fear-mongering tool in the bag of ClimateChange™️.

SOME of the Arctic sea-ice predictions made by alarmists ‘scientists’ and the mainstream media over the years. ALL of which have failed to materialise :

  • “Arctic summers ice-free by 2013” (BBC 2007)
  • “Could all Arctic ice be gone by 2012?” (AP 2007)
  • “Arctic Sea Ice Gone in Summer Within Five Years?”(National Geographic 2007)
  • “Imagine yourself in a world five years from now, where there is no more ice over the Arctic” – Tim Flannery (2008)
  • “North Pole could be ice-free in 2008” – Mark Serreze (New Scientist 2008)
  • “Gore: Polar ice cap may disappear by summer 2014” (USA Today 2009)
  • “Arctic expert predicts final collapse of sea ice within 4 years” (Guardian 2012)
  • “Say Goodbye to Arctic Summer Ice” (Live Science 2013)
  • “Ice-free Arctic in two years heralds methane catastrophe – scientist” (The Guardian 2013)
  • “Why Arctic sea ice will vanish in 2013” (Sierra Club 2013)
  • “Next year or the year after, the Arctic will be free of ice’” – Peter Wadhams (The Guardian 2016)

CLIMATE DUD-PREDICTIONS : ‘Ice-Free’ Arctic Prophesies By The ‘97% Consensus’ And Compliant Mainstream Media | Climatism

*

ARCTIC SEA-ICE EXTENT

CLAIMS that Arctic sea ice is disappearing are patently false.

THERE has been no trend in Arctic sea ice extent since the start of MASIE records in 2006.

via Real Climate Science :

*

ARCTIC SEA-ICE EXTENT TO DATE

ARCTIC sea-ice extent is within the 1981-2010 median :

*

ARCTIC SEA-ICE VOLUME

ARCTIC sea ice volume has been trending upwards for the past twelve years.

*

ARCTIC TEMPS and MELT CYCLES

ARCTIC temperatures and melt cycles correlate almost perfectly with ocean circulation cycles (AMO) driven by the sun, and show zero correlation with atmospheric CO2 levels :

Reykjavik, Iceland Temperatures Vs. The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation

Reykjavik, Iceland Temperatures Vs. The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation

***

CONCLUSION

AN old Slovak proverb states, “The truth rises to the surface like oil on water.” So too, over time, has the truth been revealed as to the actual state of polar bears and the supposed “shrinking” Arctic.

THE mainstream media and climate scientists are aware of the underlying data on polar bears and the Arctic. They simply choose not to share the truth with you or any positive ‘Climate Change’ news, for that matter.

GOOD news climate stories would only spoil their “Climate Emergency” agenda that they have worked so hard to manufacture and maintain. Not to mention, would put in jeopardy a load of reputations, egos and money now at stake. The scam, it seems, is almost too big to fail.

AS for the polar bear, it is ours now! We own it as the symbol of a stable Arctic and a ClimateChange™️ agenda on life-support, becoming more hysterical by the day, under constant siege by ‘inconvenient’ scientific data and a litany of failed predictions.

•••

SEE also :

ORIGINS Of The ClimateChange™️ Scam :

•••

THE Climatism Tip Jar – Help Keep The Good Fight Alive!

(Climate sceptics/rationalists still waitin’ for that “big oil” cheque to arrive in the mail!)

Help us to hit back against the bombardment of climate lies costing our communities, economies and livelihoods far, far too much.

Thanks to all those who have donated. Your support and faith in Climatism is highly motivating and greatly appreciated!

Citizen journalists can’t rely on mastheads, rather private donations and honest content. Every pledge helps, heaps!

Click link for more info…

Many thanks, Jamie.

(NB// The PayPal account linked to “Climatism” is “Five-O-Vintage”)Donate with PayPal

•••


CLIMATE CRISIS UNEARTHED : Adelaide’s Temperature Rose Above 38°C Fourteen Times In January (1908)


“PEOPLE have been imagining that the climate is changing,
exaggerating every weather event, getting widespread press coverage,
and blaming it on man – for as long as there have been newspapers.”
Tony Heller
Climate Change Insanity Never Changes

“IT is fortunate for the community’s peace of mind
that the Commonwealth Meteorological Office [BoM] exists as a
corrective to scare mongering and shameless prophecy.”
Mr. E. Bromley : Commonwealth Meteorological Office (BoM) 1923

***

DEEP within human nature there are certain types of people who yearn for catastrophe. They yearn to have significance in their lives believing that theirs is the time when the chickens are coming home to roost and everything is going to go tits up.

THE biggest selling environmental books in history, predict the mass destruction of the planet. Rachel Carson’s 1962 international bestseller “Silent Spring” predicted mass cancer from plant pesticides and DDT. Population freak, Paul Ehrlich’s 1968 book “The Population Bomb”, argued on Malthusian lines that population explosion would mean mass starvation around the world. People buy this stuff. They lap it up and books like this sell in droves, in a way that more reasonable books that say “hang on, lets look at the facts”, don’t.

MORE than half a century on, we still ‘yearn for catastrophe’. The perpetrator, still, ‘evil’ mankind.

The Earth has cancer
and the cancer is Man
.”
– Club of Rome
(Eco consultants to the U.N.)

THIS time around; “Climate Catastrophe, “Climate Armageddon”, “Climate Crisis”, “Climate Emergency” and every other hyperbolic descriptor of climate and weather are all blamed on mankind’s excesses, chiefly its production of trace gas carbon dioxide – the byproduct of around ninety per cent of all global energy production.

*

WHY CARBON DIOXIDE?

ATMOSPHERIC Physicist, former MIT Professor of Meteorology and IPCC lead author Richard S. Lindzen, examines the politics and ideology behind the CO2-centricity that fuels the ClimateChange™️ agenda.

LINDZEN’s enlightening summary goes to the very heart of why Carbon Dioxide has become the centre-piece of the ‘global’ climate debate :

“For a lot of people including the bureaucracy in Government and the environmental movement, the issue is power. It’s hard to imagine a better leverage point than carbon dioxide to assume control over a society. It’s essential to the production of energy, it’s essential to breathing. If you demonise it and gain control over it, you so-to-speak, control everything. That’s attractive to people. It’s been openly stated for over forty years that one should try to use this issue for a variety of purposes, ranging from North/South redistribution, to energy independence, to God knows what…”

https://youtu.be/OwqIy8Ikv-c

*

CONTROL CO2, CONTROL THE WORLD

https://twitter.com/ClimatismBlog/status/1182615029142540288?s=20

***

CLIMATE HISTORY

WITH a clearer understanding of why colourless, odourless, trace gas and plant-food carbon dioxide is demonised as “carbon pollution” by the zero-emissions-zealots, let’s wind back the clock to gain some historical perspective into the relentless bombardment of “Hottest Evahh” and “unprecedented” hyperbole that dominates the lexicon of the lazy mainstream media, deliberately fanning the flames of  ClimateChange™️ hysteria.

OVER the weekend, Adelaide, Melbourne and Sydney endured two days of January summer weather, prompting the usual suspects to default into extreme rhetoric mode.

NOTE to news.com.au author : Australia’s Bureau of Meteorology defines a “heatwave” as “unusually hot conditions over a period of four days.

THE “heatwave” that South-Eastern Australia just endured, lasted two days. A cool change arrived in Adelaide yesterday and Melbourne last night, ending the “Darwin” like climate…where humidity in Melbourne maxed at a mere 45% on Friday. Darwin’s relative humidity for January averages 71%. Wrong, wrong and deceptive again, the mainstream media.

*

WHAT A REAL “HEATWAVE” LOOKS LIKE

IN 1908, when CO was at “safe” levels, Adelaide experienced fourteen days of temperatures over 38°C (101.9°F minimum) in the month of January. The average temperature over these fourteen days was 142°C (107.3°F).

WHAT is even more astonishing is that the extreme month of heat was split into two mega-heatwaves lasting six days for the first and seven days for the second.

A cool change separated the two, though this would have brought little comfort to the population who endured the extended heatwaves without the luxury of AC!

THERE was little respite in February with another four-day heatwave delivering temps again over 100°F.

*

“CLIMATE EMERGENCY” ADELAIDE (JANUARY, 2020)

WITH current global CO levels pushing an “unprecedented” (blah, blah…) 411 ppm it would track that heatwaves should be longer and hotter during the hottest month of the Australian year – January – and temps significantly higher. That is if CO is doing its job properly.

UNFORTUNATELY for ClimateChange™️ “doomers” Adelaide max temps have been well below average for January with only three days above 38°C (101.9°F) and no consecutive days of ‘heatwave’.

MELBOURNE has been about average for January. With only two days above 38°C (101.9°F)

*

‘HISTORY IS HERESY!’

A recent tweet that compared January 2020 Adelaide max temps to those in January 1908, prompted this post.

ONE angry troll responder noted, “Wow so you presented two data points & drew a conclusion! Very scientific- did u get a science degree from a cornflakes packet???”.

SHE is right, two data points don’t necessarily ‘draw a conclusion’.

HOWEVER, just imagine if any capital city in the world, today, had two consecutive heatwaves in one month – with one lasting six days and the other, seven days with temps averaging  42°C (107.3°F) ?

THE mainstream media would have apoplexy, and @alison_rixon along with her Extinction Rebellion mates and GretaThunberg™️ in tow would be glueing themselves to the nearest sidewalk, demanding big employers be shut down, whilst pleading for global communism in order to stop the “CLIMATE CRISIS!”.

***

CONCLUSION

“The study of History
is the beginning of wisdom.”

— Jean Bodin

AN area of great success for climate change realists, in the process of hitting back against dangerous and costly ClimateChange™️ alarmism and mainstream media eco-hysteria has been in the area of historical referencing. Comparing past climate and weather events to present ones.

CLIMATE sceptics are denounced as “deniers” for daring to use the past to nullify hysterical claims of the present or even the modelled future. ‘How dare’ anyone refute claims by ‘leading scientists’ that current conditions are “unprecedented”!

THE master of historical referencing has ‘historically’ been @Tony Heller aka Steve Goddard over at Real Climate Science. I urge you to checkout his excellent and powerful work. You will even get a good laugh, too! A very clever scientist, environmentalist and humanitarian.

YE shall know the truth and the truth shall make you [and your power bills] free.  

•••

SEE also :

EXTREME WEATHER Related :

STATE Of The Climate Report :

TEMPERATURE Related :

ORIGINS Of The Global Warming Scam :

•••

THE Climatism Tip Jar – Help Keep The Good Fight Alive!

(Climate sceptics/rationalists still waitin’ for that “big oil” cheque to arrive in the mail!)

Help us to hit back against the bombardment of climate lies costing our communities, economies and livelihoods far, far too much.

Thanks to all those who have donated. Your support and faith in Climatism is highly motivating and greatly appreciated!

Citizen journalists can’t rely on mastheads, rather private donations and honest content. Every pledge helps, heaps!

Click link for more info…

Many thanks, Jamie.

(NB// The PayPal account linked to “Climatism” is “Five-O-Vintage”)Donate with PayPal

•••