Resisting Climate Hysteria

[IFocus]

Mo genuine question wasn't the recent reduction in air pollution in China as a result of Covid observed by satellite due to a reduction in traffic / diesel?

 

[moXJO]

Mo genuine question wasn't the recent reduction in air pollution in China as a result of Covid observed by satellite due to a reduction in traffic / diesel?

Manufacturing shut down as well. All the smog lifted out of the cities from memory.

 

[Smurf1976]

Given a population of less than 5% of the global population (ie USA) has contributed half the additional CO2 since the industrial revolution, it is impossible for population to be the problem.

The issue is that most of the world wants that USA style of living and obtaining it ranks as a higher priority than anything about the environment.

For decades now there's been no shortage of people moving to Australia, US, Canada etc driven by what amounts to a higher energy consuming lifestyle. A freestanding house on some land is attractive enough that people will literally move to the other side of the world to get it.

Any discussion of population needs to assume that most people live in a house, they use electricity, heating, water and transport without thinking twice about it and so on. They have that US or Australian style of living and take it for granted. Only once those things are delivered does the environment tend to become a more pressing concern.

That's not to say nobody wants to live in an apartment or ride on trains but broadly speaking, people aspire to a higher energy consuming lifestyle not a lower consuming one and will remove any government which doesn't provide that.

 

[Smurf1976]

Good point but not quite all or nothing situation .

The overall issue is the impact we have on the environment and resources. Deflecting the discussion to the millions of Indians/Chinese/Africans doesn't recognise the overwhelming impact of a consume and waste culture that is the heart of modern society.

Comes back to technology versus numbers.

Give people the Western lifestyle with a lower impact and they won't object to that. Nobody's going to complain that their heating or car emits less CO2 as long as it still performs as expected.

What they won't accept is being told to sit in unheated rooms, don't drive and so on. That's not on the list of options realistically, things like cars and air-conditioning are here to stay the only question is whether we can power them with less impact.

Nobody's complaining that whatever device they're reading this on uses less energy than a desktop PC with a CRT monitor would. Nobody's complaining because whilst using less resources it's still doing the same or better job - that's the technology approach.

But then Melbourne's getting 15 degree days and Victoria's total gas consumption is up 150% above summer levels. The method of heating could be changed but having comfortable temperatures indoors isn't negotiable. If we can't do it with lower emissions then it's either don't worry about it or we have fewer people and buildings.

 

[rederob]

Comes back to technology versus numbers.

Give people the Western lifestyle with a lower impact and they won't object to that. Nobody's going to complain that their heating or car emits less CO2 as long as it still performs as expected.

What they won't accept is being told to sit in unheated rooms, don't drive and so on. That's not on the list of options realistically, things like cars and air-conditioning are here to stay the only question is whether we can power them with less impact.

Nobody's complaining that whatever device they're reading this on uses less energy than a desktop PC with a CRT monitor would. Nobody's complaining because whilst using less resources it's still doing the same or better job - that's the technology approach.

But then Melbourne's getting 15 degree days and Victoria's total gas consumption is up 150% above summer levels. The method of heating could be changed but having comfortable temperatures indoors isn't negotiable. If we can't do it with lower emissions then it's either don't worry about it or we have fewer people and buildings.

Wind, solar, hydro, battery and hydrogen properly scaled resolve every point you have raised.
The irony is that we temporarily ruined our economy to save lives, but because climate change isn’t instantaneous we are reluctant to spend on the vaccine we are sure can prevent it.

 

[moXJO]

Hydrogen feels like the replacement that works.

 

[explod]

https://weather.com/news/climate/ne...owyVrCAvo1zdKJAxr__f2F2Vc8uhljkvttPAyFdTr2Yd4

"
At a Glance

• The study focused on "wet-bulb" temperatures, which relate to both heat and humidity.
• Researchers uncovered thousands of brief outbreaks of locally rare or unprecedented heat and humidity around the world.
• Heat indexes approaching or exceeding 115 degrees Fahrenheit have doubled since 1979.

Extreme and potentially deadly combinations of heat and humidity that were not expected to blast the U.S. and other countries for decades are already happening and becoming more frequent, according to a new study.

The study, published Friday in the journal Science Advances, analyzed nearly 40 years' worth of data collected from 7,877 weather stations around the world.
It focused on "wet-bulb" temperatures, which relate to both heat and humidity and how much people can cool off from extreme heat by sweating. Wet bulb temperatures are lower than air temperatures, but present a more accurate picture of the effects of heat and humidity combined on the human body.

A wet-bulb temperature exceeding 95 degrees is considered unsurvivable if humans are exposed to it for more than a few hours.

The new research uncovered a handful of the cases of wet-bulb temperatures that could have been deadly to humans. It also found thousands of brief outbreaks of locally rare or unprecedented heat and humidity around the world between the years 1979 and 2017.

Previous studies have predicted such conditions would happen, but not for several more decades.

“It’s sort of another brick in the wall of our understanding of just how rapidly extreme heat is expanding and now we can add extreme heat and humidity together," Colin Raymond, lead author of the study who did the research as a doctoral student at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, told weather.com in a phone interview.

 

[sptrawler]

I said a long time ago, that Australia was moving toward a renewable energy grid as fast as possible, the loony left poo pahed me as usual.
Well this is a really interesting article, as i said early in the piece, I hope Australia has a hydrogen reservation policy in place.
Because it wont be long before every usable space will be taken.
https://reneweconomy.com.au/bp-look...huge-renewable-hydrogen-project-in-w-a-45931/
Yet all the naysayers scream that there isn't going to be renewables put in without a "Government" plan, what a crock of shyte, before you know it Australia's renewables will be contracted to overseas obligations.
Meanwhile the D#$k H@ds run around screaming and taking the kids out of school over climate change.
Australia your standing in it, up to your knees, the media has a lot to answer for. Puppeteer's for the muppet brigade.

OMG why wont the Government legislate and put in a plan, so the taxpayer can subsidise big industry to screw us over.
Yet from the above article :
The Australian Renewable Energy Agency, which is putting $1.7 million towards a $4.4 million feasibility study, says the potential market of renewable fuels – both for export and domestic use – is so big it is thinking in terms of Australia moving beyond “100 per cent renewables” to 700 per cent renewables.

 

[Knobby22]

Who's putting the rest of the money in?

 

[sptrawler]

Who's putting the rest of the money in?

Investment banks, China, Singapore and everyone else who wants to put in a solar wind farms, there is only so much space and all we have got will be pre sold.

 

[rederob]

I said a long time ago, that Australia was moving toward a renewable energy grid as fast as possible, the loony left poo pahed me as usual.

The reason your idea has been challenged is because we are actually a decade behind Europe in renewable grid development.
Moreover, if you read what our energy market operator reports, you will know that renewables infrastructure is a major constraint to renewables supply.

Well this is a really interesting article, as i said early in the piece, I hope Australia has a hydrogen reservation policy in place.
Because it wont be long before every usable space will be taken.
https://reneweconomy.com.au/bp-look...huge-renewable-hydrogen-project-in-w-a-45931/
Yet all the naysayers scream that there isn't going to be renewables put in without a "Government" plan, what a crock of shyte, before you know it Australia's renewables will be contracted to overseas obligations.

The massive overseas investment you link has nothing to do with Australia having an energy policy!
The question is, why isn't our government putting in place energy policies that clearly provide the framework to benefit Australian businesses and householders into the future.
Overseas investors have worked out they can bypass government to develop an export market for hydrogen. However, there needs to be a pathway for that energy to be fed into our grid, and there is not.
From a policy perspective we still have not worked out how to get rid of coal and replace it with our abundant, cheaper and cleaner gas.

OMG why wont the Government legislate and put in a plan, so the taxpayer can subsidise big industry to screw us over.

The legislation already exists for our energy market, and there is no need to subsidise renewables because they are demonstrably cheaper than fossil fuels. Big industries are being allowed to screw us over because our federal Energy Minister remains committed to more-expensive fossil fuels, so that's where most capacity remains.
For many years big industry as you call it has been seeking energy policy clarity from the government so it can safely invest in our local energy market.

 

[basilio]

The reason your idea has been challenged is because we are actually a decade behind Europe in renewable grid development.
Moreover, if you read what our energy market operator reports, you will know that renewables infrastructure is a major constraint to renewables supply.
The massive overseas investment you link has nothing to do with Australia having an energy policy!
The question is, why isn't our government putting in place energy policies that clearly provide the framework to benefit Australian businesses and householders into the future.
Overseas investors have worked out they can bypass government to develop an export market for hydrogen. However, there needs to be a pathway for that energy to be fed into our grid, and there is not.
From a policy perspective we still have not worked out how to get rid of coal and replace it with our abundant, cheaper and cleaner gas.
The legislation already exists for our energy market, and there is no need to subsidise renewables because they are demonstrably cheaper than fossil fuels. Big industries are being allowed to screw us over because our federal Energy Minister remains committed to more-expensive fossil fuels, so that's where most capacity remains.
For many years big industry as you call it has been seeking energy policy clarity from the government so it can safely invest in our local energy market.

We are actually a decade behind Europe in renewable grid development.
The question is, why isn't our government putting in place energy policies that clearly provide the framework to benefit Australian businesses and householders into the future

Excellent post Rederob. These are the key points that would ensure that a new 700% renewable energy industry worked in the interests of all our citizens and all our businesss rather than a narrow business interest often led by overseas interests.

 

[sptrawler]

We are actually a decade behind Europe in renewable grid development.
The question is, why isn't our government putting in place energy policies that clearly provide the framework to benefit Australian businesses and householders into the future

Excellent post Rederob. These are the key points that would ensure that a new 700% renewable energy industry worked in the interests of all our citizens and all our businesss rather than a narrow business interest often led by overseas interests.

As long as its Chinese owned, you guys should be happy.

 

[basilio]

As long as its Chinese owned, you guys should be happy.

How about Australian community owned ?

A National Renewable Energy Co-op that is financed by worker run superannuation funds, and run by co-operative boards. It employs a large Australian work force to provide a seamless renewable energy grid and support a reintegration of metal refining and manufacturing plant based on new cheap energy.

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...re-self-reliant-but-we-must-be-smart-about-it
https://www.theguardian.com/environ...irus-economic-recovery-to-be-tackled-together
https://www.theguardian.com/austral...ld-a-green-economy-from-the-covid-19-wreckage

 

[Smurf1976]

From a policy perspective we still have not worked out how to get rid of coal and replace it with our abundant, cheaper and cleaner gas.

We have however done our absolute best to make gas scarce, expensive and more polluting than it needs to be.

A cynic would think this was a backdoor way to keep coal in business......

Australia is one of the few (only ?) places where CCGT has become uneconomic and two facilities have been permanently downgraded to open cycle whilst various industrial users have quietly been switching from gas to coal or even oil to save on costs.

Gas should have been as you say - abundant, cheaper and cleaner than the alternatives but we've managed to turn it into the opposite.

 

[sptrawler]

How about Australian community owned ?

A National Renewable Energy Co-op that is financed by worker run superannuation funds, and run by co-operative boards. It employs a large Australian work force to provide a seamless renewable energy grid and support a reintegration of metal refining and manufacturing plant based on new cheap energy.

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...re-self-reliant-but-we-must-be-smart-about-it
https://www.theguardian.com/environ...irus-economic-recovery-to-be-tackled-together
https://www.theguardian.com/austral...ld-a-green-economy-from-the-covid-19-wreckage

The thread is about climate change, if we are producing 700% of our domestic requirements, I mistakenly thought that would be good because we will be reducing someone else's carbon footprint.
I personally think the amount of money required, would only be available from overseas and or super funds in Australia, but they don't appear to be interested.
Anyway I just thought, you would have been excited about the talk of so much clean energy being produced, obviously in your opinion it isn't as important as who owns it, I would never have guessed from your past posts.
Rob I can understand it is all about politics, climate change is just another vehicle for him, to mount his political crusade.

 

[basilio]

I personally think the amount of money required, would only be available from overseas and or super funds in Australia, but they don't appear to be interested.
Anyway I just thought, you would have been excited about the talk of so much clean energy being produced, obviously in your opinion it isn't as important as who owns it, I would never have guessed from your past posts.

Come now ... Surely it's clear to all and sundry that I'm an out and proud Red Book toting Marxist-Leninist .

Yep absolutely delighted with the possibility of a Clean Energy Superpower Australia. I'm sure I must have rattled on about the idea previously when Ross Gaurnat (that other Marxist-Leninist- Anarchist ) floated the technicalities in his book.

My "proposition" that such a energy transformation should be made under the banner of a Australian led consortium seems heretical in an era when we are lead to believe that only the Big Overseas Corporations have the gravitas and skills to extract every dollar from a such a deal.

Quite right of course. One can absolutely depend of these bodies to maximise their economic return and minimise their tax liability.

Perhaps we have other possibilities and priorities ??

 

[sptrawler]

Come now ... Surely it's clear to all and sundry that I'm an out and proud Red Book toting Marxist-Leninist .

Yep absolutely delighted with the possibility of a Clean Energy Superpower Australia. I'm sure I must have rattled on about the idea previously when Ross Gaurnat (that other Marxist-Leninist- Anarchist ) floated the technicalities in his book.

My "proposition" that such a energy transformation should be made under the banner of a Australian led consortium seems heretical in an era when we are lead to believe that only the Big Overseas Corporations have the gravitas and skills to extract every dollar from a such a deal.

Quite right of course. One can absolutely depend of these bodies to maximise their economic return and minimise their tax liability.

Perhaps we have other possibilities and priorities ??

Pretty sad really, shows how shallow the whole scam is IMO.
Neither side has a moral compass.
As with the industry super funds, not stumping up members funds, to save members jobs.
It is a sad situation in Australia IMO, you have those risking nothing, trying to encourage everyone else to risk everything.
My guess is those who shout loudest are on a public service pension, I know a mate is always writing letters to the newspapers saying how life should be, he is on an indexed public service pension for life.
So self righteous.

 

[Knobby22]

The problem SP is that It is easier for a foreign company to invest in, and own the rights once built, and avoid the taxes than it is for us Aussies to do it.

I do think the government is aware of this and is working to correct this but it is difficult.

I hope that when the hydrogen plants are built in our deserts are not owned by the Chinese, that the tech we create is not subsequently owned by the Chinese and that most of the product goes to China.

 

[wayneL]

Wondering if he who may not be named (by me at least), et al., has read the latest study from W. A. van Wijngaarden and W. Happer regarding CO2 and H2O vapour saturation?

I have to PDF but don't know how to link it here.