WHEN will climate-theory-obsessed politicians and sycophant media finally call off their
global warming climate change jihad that’s punishing the poor without helping the planet?
WE were told we’d have more cyclones, not less.
WE were promised “permanent” drought, not record rains.
WE were promised less snow, not more.
WE were promised more “extreme weather”, not less.
WE were promised less crops, not record output.
WE were promised fewer polar bears, not more.
WE were promised more global warming, not a near twenty year warming “pause”.
PENSIONERS unable to pay for their heating or cooling.
IT’S time to count the shocking price we’ve paid for listening to global warming scaremongers like Tim Flannery.
SEE now what their panic-making has inspired – global warming schemes that have hurt us infinitely more than any slight global warming could ever do.
DURING the height of the global warming scare around 2007, soon after Al Gore’s science fiction movie “An Inconvenient Truth” aired, (which was swiftly shot down as a “political fiction” by the British High Court’s, Judge Michael Burton who ruled that errors had arisen “in the context of alarmism and exaggeration”) Tim Flannery infamously claimed:
“SO, even the rain that falls isn’t actually going to fill our dams and our river systems…” – Tim Flannery 2007
In 2004 Flannery said:
“I think there is a fair chance Perth will be the 21st century’s first ghost metropolis. It’s whole primary production is in dire straits and the eastern states are only 30 years behind.”
We are “one of the most physically vulnerable people on the Earth,” and “southern Australia is going to be impacted very severely and very detrimentally by global climate change.” We are going to experience “conditions not seen in 40 million years.”
In 2007 he said:
“…That’s because the soil is warmer because of global warming and the plants are under more stress and therefore using more moisture. So even the rain that falls isn’t actually going to fill our dams and our river systems, and that’s a real worry for the people in the bush. If that trend continues then I think we’re going to have serious problems, particularly for irrigation.”
“The one-in-1000-years drought is, in fact, Australia’s manifestation of the global fingerprint of drought caused by climate change.”
In May 2007 he warned that:
“Brisbane and Adelaide – home to a combined total of three million people – could run out of water by year’s end;”
and that the country was facing
“the most extreme and the most dangerous situation arising from climate change facing any country in the world right now.”
In June 2007 he said:
“Over the past 50 years southern Australia has lost about 20 per cent of its rainfall, and one cause is almost certainly global warming. Similar losses have been experienced in eastern Australia, and although the science is less certain it is probable that global warming is behind these losses too. But by far the most dangerous trend is the decline in the flow of Australian rivers: it has fallen by around 70 per cent in recent decades, so dams no longer fill even when it does rain …
In Adelaide, Sydney and Brisbane, water supplies are so low they need desalinated water urgently, possibly in as little as 18 months.”
In 2008 he warned again that:
“The water problem is so severe for Adelaide that it may run out of water by early 2009.”
AND then the rains came, as they always do in the land of “droughts and flooding rains“…
BY December 2008 Adelaide’s reservoirs were 75% full, Perth’s 40%, Sydney’s 63%, and Brisbane’s reservoir’s were 46% full.
BY 2009 dams for Brisbane, Canberra and Sydney were filled to overflowing.
MOTHBALLED DESALINISATION PLANTS
In 2005 Flannery wrote in “The Weather Makers“:
Australia’s east coast is no stranger to drought, but the dry spell that began in 1998 is different from anything that has gone before….The cause of the decline of rainfall on Australia’s east coast is thought to be a climate-change double whammy – the loss of winter rainfall and the prolongation of El Nino-like conditions.
The resulting water crisis here is potentially even more damaging than the one in the west … As of mid 2005 the situation remains critical… very little time to arrange alternative water sources such as large-scale desalination plants.
$12 BILLION worth of desalination plants built in South Australia, Queensland, NSW and Victoria have all been mothballed without producing a drop of water. All were built in preference to much cheaper dams, because of green bans and because warming alarmists claimed the rains would not return.
FIVE desal plants have been built in Australia. Only Perth’s is used.
COSTS to run each mothballed deal plant are estimated at between $500,000 to $1,000,000 per day, every day until contracts run out around 2030.
THIS is what Victoria’s mothballed desal plant is costing the taxpayer each and every year until, at least, 2030… Read the rest of this entry »
“We’re told “clean” energy is a viable and cost effective. But cut the government subsidies, and 97 percent of investors vanish…!”
UNRELIABLES, the great scam within the scam crumbling under the weight of its own BS.
(Do feel for the 80,000 now unemployed – sucked in by the lies and blatant falsehoods spread by climate change zealots – politicians, ‘green’ lobby groups and sycophant lamestream, fake news media)
Remember all those stories about the wind & solar industries providing millions of groovy, well-paid ‘green’ jobs – as secure as Fort Knox? No?
Sure, you’ll hear those pitching RE promise loads of ‘sustainable’ jobs, as they wail about dreaded ‘uncertainty’ – causing bankers to baulk and investors to flee; and as they demand (with menaces) that governments maintain essential, massive and endless subsidies until the end of time.
But, this is the same crowd who tell us that the ‘transition’ to nature’s wonder fuels is ‘inevitable’ and that they’re not really getting any subsidies at all.
There are a few inescapable truths: cut subsidies to wind and solar power and the jobs those ‘industries’ have ‘created’ evaporate like snow in Summer. Funny about that!
Bloodbath in the German solar “industry” — without subsidies 80,000 solar jobs are gone
Jo Nova Blog
View original post 438 more words
CLIMATE change bedwetters love to trash Donald Trump for pulling out of the failed Paris Climate Treaty designed to lower CO2 emissions that are apparently causing dangerous
global warming climate change.
HE has been labeled a “planet killer” amongst a plethora of standard smear and slime attacks aimed at anyone who dares question the veracity and motives of the $1.5TRILLION Climate Industrial Complex.
WHERE Trump is 100% correct and the climate bedwetters 100% wrong is that US emissions have been falling, largely thanks to the shale gas boom.
THE graph climate alarmists and unreliable-energy rent seekers don’t want you to see:
WHY on earth would Trump sign up to an economy and job-destroying Paris ‘deal’, when the two biggest ‘polluters’ on the planet – China and India – get a free pass to burn unlimited emissions until 2030?!
AND, why would Trump sign up to the latest UN wealth redistribution scam when Europe, the epicentre of punitive climate change policy and green energy madness, fail to meet their own emissions ‘commitments’ despite spending trillions of €uros of other peoples’ money on failed ‘green’ energy?
EUROPE’S GREEN FAILURE: CO2 EMISSIONS RISING
BUT, AREN’T WIND AND SOLAR ‘POWER’ MEANT TO LOWER 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, in fact, occurring…
ONE inconvenient reason for the rise in emissions, that you won’t hear reported on MSM news, ever, is because…
“Adding More Wind And Solar Power Ultimately Raises CO2 Emissions, As More Fossil Fuel Backup Capacity Must Be Built”
CLIMATE bedwetters need to take a deep, hard look at themselves through the epicentre of green central planning and draconian climate change policy overreach – Europe – where despite spending literally trillions of €uros, of other peoples’ money, on unreliable-energy – wind and solar – emissions have been rising, not falling! Read the rest of this entry »
UNRELIABLES Rip-Off: Despite $4 Billion in Annual Subsidies, Wind & Solar Delivers a Trivial 2% of Australia’s Power DemandPosted: April 30, 2018
“Ex-Nationals senator Ron Boswell wrote in “The Australian” today, (19 April 2018), making the point that the RET is failing us and forcing electricity prices through the roof, putting ordinary folk in energy poverty and destroying businesses.
Total renewable MWh for the period and the associated subsidies are:
• Wind: 74,100,000 at $80/MWh = $5.93 billion.
• Hydro: 245,800,000 at $80/MWh = $19.7 billion
• Large PV: 614,000 at $40/MWh = $24.5 million.
• Small PV: 25,300,000 at $40/MWh = $1 billion.
The total extra cost to consumers is about $27 billion for 9% of the total consumption.”
BASED solely on output and reliability, without massive subsidies and government intervention, there would be no unreliable-energy ‘revolution’ to pad the egos of the climate-theory-obsessed, virtue-signalling politicians.
PRIVATE investors will not go near large-scale wind and solar. The German’s are learning this, hard and fast, right now >> http://joannenova.com.au/2018/04/bloodbath-in-the-german-solar-industry-without-subsidies-80000-solar-jobs-are-gone/
EXPECT more ‘green’ energy meltdowns as the subsidy crutch dries up.
In any bargain, those stumping up their own cash, tend to ask what they’re getting in return. When it comes to the billions in subsidies thrown at windmills and solar panels, the answer is: not much.
Including domestic, rooftop solar annual subsidies to wind and solar add up to a staggering $4 billion. The cost of which is added directly to retail power bills. The greatest government mandated rort in the history of the Commonwealth, started in 2001 and runs until 2031.
Now, the value minded might forgive the scale and duration of that forced ‘largesse’, if there were a commensurate increase in the output said to be drawn from nature’s wonder fuels, sunshine and breezes. Except, as David Bidstrip points out, the combined contribution of wind and solar generation to Australia’s energy demand remains risible, and little more than a rounding error.
Money for nothing
View original post 834 more words
ATMOSPHERIC Physicist, MIT Professor of Meteorology and former IPCC lead author Richard S. Lindzen, examines the politics and ideology behind the demonisation of essential trace gas and plant fertiliser, carbon dioxide. A by-product of hydrocarbon energy production that “has a kind of fundamental attractiveness to bureaucratic mentality” and remains the grand patsy and key driver of the climate crisis industry…
“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…”
“CO2 for different people has different attractions. After all, what is it? – it’s not a pollutant, it’s a product of every living creature’s breathing, it’s the product of all plant respiration, it is essential for plant life and photosynthesis, it’s a product of all industrial burning, it’s a product of driving – I mean, if you ever wanted a leverage point to control everything from exhalation to driving, this would be a dream. So it has a kind of fundamental attractiveness to bureaucratic mentality.”
FOR years, unreliable-energy advocates have repeatedly claimed that wind turbines and solar panels are essential to the fight against carbon dioxide emissions and catastrophic climate change. Here’s the reality: Wind turbines and solar panels are nothing more than token gestures to the folly of green madness.
THE proliferation of
renewables unreliables over the past decade has not, and will not, result in statistically significant reductions in global carbon dioxide emissions. That point can easily be proven by analysis of the country that has poured more money into ‘green’ energy than any other – Germany…
Germany Proves That Burning Money On Green Energies Does Not Reduce CO2 Emissions … “Bitter Result”
As we have been hearing recently, global CO2 emissions continue their steady climb, despite the trillions of dollars committed to green energy sources worldwide and efforts to curb CO2 emissions.
Looking at countries individually, Germany, a self-designated “leader” for carbon free energies, saw its equivalent CO2 greenhouse gas emissions in 2017 fall only a measly half a percent. Read the rest of this entry »
INFORMATIVE piece written not by a climate change “denier” but by energy and environment expert Michael Shellenberger – a democrat and climate change activist, no less.
ALWAYS refreshing reading Shellenberger’s work and commentary on twitter. Like Bjorn Lomborg, the other well-known ‘warmist’, they both provide reasoned analysis of environmental issues, focusing on costs and outcomes of climate and energy policy, rather than blind ideology so common in mainstream media environmental reporting that only poisons and polarises the debate leading to unnecessary alarmism resulting in overarching climate policy and misguided allocation of public money.
This is a problem of bias, not just energy illiteracy. Normally skeptical journalists routinely give renewables a pass. The reason isn’t because they don’t know how to report critically on energy — they do regularly when it comes to non-renewable energy sources — but rather because they don’t want to.
That could — and should — change. Reporters have an obligation to report accurately and fairly on all issues they cover, especially ones as important as energy and the environment.
A good start would be for them to investigate why, if solar and wind are so cheap, they are making electricity so expensive.
Read on here…
If Solar And Wind Are So Cheap, Why Are They Making Electricity So Expensive?
“In order to ‘encourage’ SA’s fossil fuel fleet into action, the grid manager was forced to pay a spot price of $5,077 per MWh…”
IT’S no wonder wind ‘powered’ South Australia has, officially, the highest power prices in-the-world! 🤦♂️
Wind power outfits often claim that their particular operation ‘powers’ 30,000 homes; RE zealots even claim that South Australians get 50% of their power from the sun and wind.
Whacked with the obvious retort of ‘when?’, the wind cultist changes tack and starts mumbling about mega-batteries (non-existent and insanely costly), pumped hydro (non-existent and costly) and then starts ranting about an evil fossil fuel conspiracy.
South Australia is the shining example of the true cost and absolute chaos that comes with attempting to run on sunshine and breezes.
Set out above, courtesy of Aneroid Energy, is the output from every wind turbine in SA during the merry month of March (with a notional capacity of 1,810 MW).
Even if you add in the piddling 100 MW capacity of its $150,000,000 Elon Musk special, it’s pretty clear that collapses in the order of 700 to 1,200 MW (which occur…
View original post 1,228 more words