Resisting Climate Hysteria

[mullokintyre]

I am going to have another stab at Cyclone predicting.
Low forming along the monsoon Trough that may well end up as a cyclone forming North west of Derby Monday or Tuesday next week.

Might be a bit of rain in the next 8 days.
Lake Eyre Basin gunna get a boost, the Todd river will most likely flow again, maybe even the finke river will get some water down it.
Should be a great year for pastoralists out there.
Mick

 

[mullokintyre]

Norway is often touted as one of the Icons of the Green Energy orld.
According to Life in Norway ,97% of its Electricity generated by Renewables (mostly Hydropower).
It has decreed that all new vehicles sold after 2025 must be zero emissions (either Hydrogen or EV's), there are no import or duty taxes on RV's, all municipial and govt charges can be no higher than 50% of a gasoline powered car, such that in 2021 54% of all new car sales were EV's
However, the money that is forgone from all these generous subsidies comes from the sales of oil and gas.

Norway is the eighth largest oil exporter and third largest natural gas exporter thanks to these resources. This accounts for 40% of the country’s total exports and 17% of GDP.

Its funny how the French, the Brits and lots of others hang it on OZ for exporting fossil fuels, but somehow the ninth biggest seller of fossil fuels gets off scot free.
politics and hypocrisy go hand in hand.
Mick

 

[basilio]

Its funny how the French, the Brits and lots of others hang it on OZ for exporting fossil fuels, but somehow the ninth biggest seller of fossil fuels gets off scot free.

Interesting perspective.

The problems with our current governments attitude to fossil fuels ?

1) Despite the reality of global warming and the economic reality of collapsing fossil fuel demand the government is intent on encouraging an expansion of coal mines and gas production.

2) Unlike Norway the Australian is making relatively minimal efforts to drive a renewable energy economy. Every piece of evidence says we must rapidly reduce fossil fuel use AND that renewable energy is cleaner and cheaper. Just dumb

3) The Government has been dragging the chain on recognising how dangerous global warming is and the need for massive changes.

Norway has been clever and forward thinking in using the wealth generated by its fossil fuel to drive a clean sustainable future. Australia hasn't.

 

[mullokintyre]

Interesting perspective.

The problems with our current governments attitude to fossil fuels ?

1) Despite the reality of global warming and the economic reality of collapsing fossil fuel demand the government is intent on encouraging an expansion of coal mines and gas production.

I don't hear Norway encouraging the closure of their gas and oil fields either.

2) Unlike Norway the Australian is making relatively minimal efforts to drive a renewable energy economy. Every piece of evidence says we must rapidly reduce fossil fuel use AND that renewable energy is cleaner and cheaper. Just dumb

As it says in the accompanying article, Norway had a huge abundance of Hydro ability which they took advantage of long before they discovered their North sea gas and oil deposits, and long before the push to limit fossil fuels was even thought of.
Australia had a huge abundance of coal which they took advantage of before Fossil Fuels became a nono.
Just plain dumb luck on the part of the Norwegians.

3) The Government has been dragging the chain on recognising how dangerous global warming is and the need for massive changes.

Norway has been clever and forward thinking in using the wealth generated by its fossil fuel to drive a clean sustainable future. Australia hasn't.

Norway is clever in that they promote all their green credentials yet still get away with selling fossil fuels.
My original point was the hypocricy of the EU nations in particular on treating Australia and Norway differently.
Mick

 

[Investoradam]

Norway is often touted as one of the Icons of the Green Energy orld.
According to Life in Norway ,97% of its Electricity generated by Renewables (mostly Hydropower).
It has decreed that all new vehicles sold after 2025 must be zero emissions (either Hydrogen or EV's), there are no import or duty taxes on RV's, all municipial and govt charges can be no higher than 50% of a gasoline powered car, such that in 2021 54% of all new car sales were EV's
However, the money that is forgone from all these generous subsidies comes from the sales of oil and gas.

Its funny how the French, the Brits and lots of others hang it on OZ for exporting fossil fuels, but somehow the ninth biggest seller of fossil fuels gets off scot free.
politics and hypocrisy go hand in hand.
Mick

leftist politics! hypocrites all the way !

accuse others of doing something then only do it your self

 

[mullokintyre]

I am going to have another stab at Cyclone predicting.
Low forming along the monsoon Trough that may well end up as a cyclone forming North west of Derby Monday or Tuesday next week.
View attachment 136100
Might be a bit of rain in the next 8 days.
Lake Eyre Basin gunna get a boost, the Todd river will most likely flow again, maybe even the finke river will get some water down it.
Should be a great year for pastoralists out there.
Mick

Failed in my predictions, so now have a 50/50 record.
So I will go out on a limb and bet that a Cyclone forms in the Coral Sea by Saturday, though given the projected movement of the deepening low, its more likely to affect Vanuatu or the New Cal rather than OZ.
Mick

 

[macca]

Failed in my predictions, so now have a 50/50 record.
So I will go out on a limb and bet that a Cyclone forms in the Coral Sea by Saturday, though given the projected movement of the deepening low, its more likely to affect Vanuatu or the New Cal rather than OZ.
Mick

Yep, you were wrong, but don't get in a spin over it

 

[Sean K]

I go to Dr Roy Spencer's blog every month to check the UAH satellite temperature data, which should be one of the most reliable measurements in the World as there's less urban heat island effect, no movements in screen siting, and no homogenisation of past records, yet.

He is not a 'climate denier' and regularly fronts US senate committees to testify regarding observable data and real time effects with facts. He believes the earth is warming and humans have contributed to it.

Yet, Google have decided to demonetize his web site because he's identifying that the earth isn't warming as fast as the models have predicted.

This censorship by the big tech companies is dangerous to any scientific discussion on the nuances of our response to global warming going forward. If we're really not warming as fast as predicted by the models, we have more time to prepare and get our house in order to transition in an orderly way without destroying our way of life and energy security which has some short term significant health, economic, and geopolitical effects, as we are seeing right now.

"Unreliable and harmful claims".
January 7th, 2022

DrRoySpencer.com has been demonetized by Google for “unreliable and harmful claims”. This means I can no longer generate revenue to support the website using the Google Adsense program.

From a monetary standpoint, it’s not a big deal because what I make off of Google ads is in the noise level of my family’s monthly budget. It barely made more than I pay in hosting fees and an (increasingly expensive) comment spam screener.

I’ve been getting Google warnings for a couple months now about “policy violations”, but nowhere was it listed what pages were in violation, and what those violations were. There are Adsense rules about ad placement on the page (e.g. a drop-down menu cannot overlay an ad), so I was assuming it was something like that, but I had no idea where to start looking with hundreds of web pages to sift through. It wasn’t until the ads were demonetized that Google offered links to the pages in question and what the reason was.

Of course, I should have figured out it was related to Google’s new policy about misleading content; a few months ago Google announced they would be demonetizing climate skeptic websites. I was kind of hoping my content was mainstream enough to avoid being banned since:

1. I believe the climate system has warmed
2. I believe most of this warming is probably due to greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel burning

Many of you know that I defend much of mainstream climate science, including climate modeling as an enterprise. Where I depart of the “mainstream” is how much warming has occurred, how much future warming can be expected, and what should be done about it from an energy policy perspective.

 

[mullokintyre]

Failed in my predictions, so now have a 50/50 record.
So I will go out on a limb and bet that a Cyclone forms in the Coral Sea by Saturday, though given the projected movement of the deepening low, its more likely to affect Vanuatu or the New Cal rather than OZ.
Mick

The Coral sea Cyclone took longer to form than I expected, but it passed to the west of Vanuatu and was heading for Norfolk Island, though it may well just peter out to a low storm.
Mick

 

[Investoradam]

The price of metallurgical coal has risen to record levels as trade tensions and border problems push the cost for Chinese importers sky-high.

China, India propel Aussie coal price to record high despite global green energy push

Soaring demand for electricity in China and India has put a rocket under the coal market with prices for the fossil fuel hitting a record high despite efforts to de-carbonise the global economy.

www.abc.net.au

thats ok! as climate change is racist and only happens in white western countries and not other countries so no out rage from the usual leftist crowd

 

[mullokintyre]

the Atlantic occasionally publishes some good stuff, unfortunately it also occasionally publishes soem garbage,
From the Atlantic

But energy is not the only domain that has a direct bearing on whether we have a livable climate or not. So does foreign policy—specifically, nuclear war.

Since Russia invaded Ukraine two weeks ago, that threat has become a lot more real: Many Americans, including artists, climate-concerned progressives, and even a few lawmakers, have come out in support of a “no-fly zone.” But despite its euphemistic name, a no-fly zone means that NATO and the United States issue a credible threat that they will shoot down any enemy plane in Ukrainian territory. This would require U.S. bombing runs into Russian territory to eliminate air defenses, bringing the U.S. and Russia into open war, and it would have a reasonable chance of prompting a nuclear exchange. And it would be worse for the climate than any energy policy that Donald Trump ever proposed.

I mean this quite literally. If you are worried about rapid, catastrophic changes to the planet’s climate, then you must be worried about nuclear war. That is because, on top of killing tens of millions of people, even a relatively “minor” exchange of nuclear weapons would wreck the planet’s climate in enormous and long-lasting ways.

Read: A 10-year-old nuclear-blast simulator is popular again

Consider a one-megaton nuke, reportedly the size of a warhead on a modern Russian intercontinental ballistic missile. (Warheads on U.S. ICBMs can be even larger.) A detonation of a bomb that size would, within about a four-mile radius, produce winds equal to those in a Category 5 hurricane, immediately flattening buildings, knocking down power lines, and triggering gas leaks. Anyone within seven miles of the detonation would suffer third-degree burns, the kind that sear and blister flesh. These conditions—and note that I have left out the organ-destroying effects of radiation—would rapidly turn an eight-mile blast radius into a zone of total human misery. But only at this moment of the war do the climate consequences truly begin.

If there was a nuclear war, climate change would be the least of our worries.
I doubt the people who night consider dropping them are going to give much consideration to the climate, either now or in the future.
Mick

 

[Dona Ferentes]

If you are a hammer, everything looks like a nail.


ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate Extremes

 

[mullokintyre]

Australia has been hammered by UN and European Union countries over its lack of climate action.
And yet, when you look at who is using the dirty coal the most, we come pretty well down the list.
I guess its because they know unlike the biggest user of them all, we are not likely to fight back with sanctions, trade barriers etc.
Mick

 

[Boggo]

A dose of reality !

 

[wayneL]

A topic that comes up quite often

 

[wayneL]

Reducing UBI effect etc.

Now we're talkin'

 

[basilio]

Reducing UBI effect etc.

Now we're talkin'

Well that was interesting. The Leaf of Life Facebook page has a great range of permaculture/environment protection projects. Obviously Wayne is well into that with his new lifestyle in WA.

Greening cities to reduce the Urban Heat Island effect is a big deal as cities become hotter and hotter with global warming plus the effects of the manmade local environment. I'm (very) surprised at the suggestion that simply greening an area will drop local temperatures by the suggested amounts. I never saw that suggestion in the Video (48C to 26c) and to my knowledge none of the science would ever claim such a dramatic temperature reduction.

Facebook Leaf of Life.

 

[Sean K]

New Zealand is in trouble. If they put a price on cow farts, they're going to go broke.

 

[macca]

New Zealand is in trouble. If they put a price on cow farts, they're going to go broke.

View attachment 142666

This is the stuff that causes people to ignore the whole CC thing.

A cow eats grass, it digests the grass, farts, burps and poops while it makes milk or beef.

In the meantime, the poop fertilizes the grass, the farts are CO2, the grass also absorbs this so that it can grow again

It is basically, a closed cycle IMO

There used to be billions of herbivores before humans starting building houses etc, I think there would be less animals now than there was then so I don't see how they are part of the problem.

 

[mullokintyre]

As usual, they never explain how putting a price on ag emissions will cut the emissions, unless they expect a lot of farmers to go broke or at least cut the size of their herds.
Mick