Resisting Climate Hysteria

[Smurf1976]

I was going to mention the Lake Pedder/ Franklin Dam/ mining the Barrier Reef proposals that were so wrong and so dangerous but still strongly supported by "the usual suspects". Glad you highlighted those.

As a real, practical example, there's an existing hydro scheme on mainland Australia which has the basic problem that (1) inflow is primarily from snow melt and (2) storage is only 31% of annual inflows. Put the two together and that results in high output during spring, very limited operation the rest of the year.

Historically that hasn't really mattered but going forward, the real issue is that of VRE (Variable Renewable Energy - wind and solar) "droughts". That is periods of typically 5 - 10 consecutive days of low yields. Those aren't hypothetical, since real world operational data shows there's been at least one every year for as long as we've had wind and solar generation and BOM (and other) data going back much further also shows it's a very real issue.

Now if we take that hydro scheme, well if the storage volume were increased then it becomes just perfect to fill those VRE droughts. Leave the hydro there filling up, run it heavily when the need arises drawing on that stored water.

And it just so happens that there is in fact a way to increase storage from the present 31% of annual inflow to 247%. Doing that provides absolute flexibility in when the water is used, allowing it to be concentrated into the period of VRE droughts, and it also provides a pretty decent drought reserve too.

Now that isn't hypothetical, since the required dam was designed over a century ago just never built, instead only a weir being at the site to divert the river into the pipelines and ultimately through to the much smaller other storage that was built. But the road's there, the pipeline's there, the power stations are there, it just needs that dam added.

In practice though it's not being proposed simply because all hell would break loose if anyone tried building it. Not because there's been some proper ecological study into it, but simply because it's a ~50m high dam on a river in a presently natural area. Burning gas or diesel is, politically, a path of far less resistance even though any engineer or climate scientist will be quick to point out the downsides of doing so.

Now my argument isn't for or against building that dam per se. Rather, it's saying that a proper scientific process should be the basis of making the decision, it shouldn't be political.

Conduct a proper ecological assessment without a pre-determined outcome, do it properly.

If it turns out that there's a unique species living there or something like that, well losing that is one hell of a price to pay in order to generate electricity. Lose too many species and ecological collapse is where it ends up.

On the other hand, if it turns out that actually there's no such issue with species loss and all we're losing is some generic land that becomes a lake, and which could ultimately be restored at some future time if it becomes obsolete, well one would have to be pretty unconcerned about the issues surrounding fossil fuels to rank saving that land as more important.

That's where I diverge strongly with the activists. They tend to take a firm "no" view that says no, you can't put that land under water, you can't put a wind farm somewhere else, you can't run a transmission line here and so on. Trouble is, the practical implication to all those no's becomes "yes, we will burn lots of fossil fuel" as the alternative.

So my argument isn't for hydro over gas or diesel but rather, it's for science over politics along with an acceptance that the scale of what's required is very much in the category of saying we're going to have to break eggs to make the omelette. If the aim's to stop using fossil fuels then it's not going to happen without being willing to sacrifice some scenic views, some generic land and so on. Harsh but true, that's the reality of the situation.

It's much like investing. You can't make a profit if you're not willing to accept losses along with it. Do nothing, because you're terrified of loss, and ultimately you lose the whole lot to inflation (or in this case climate change and running out of gas).

 

[mullokintyre]

Another overseas guest lecturing about climate change.

Meanwhile, just don't look at the increase in Co2 emissions of the Phillipines.

Mick

 

[rederob]

Australia has knocked out over 20 times more CO2 over the past 40 years than has the Philippines.
Yet some prefer to blame countries which are yet to industrialise because their emissions are increasing while Australia - which outsourced all industrial production of scale to China - is presently reducing per capita emissions.

 

[Sean K]

Australia has knocked out over 20 times more CO2 over the past 40 years than has the Philippines.
Yet some prefer to blame countries which are yet to industrialise because their emissions are increasing while Australia - which outsourced all industrial production of scale to China - is presently reducing per capita emissions.
View attachment 172048

China is reducing? Yeah, right.

China is killing the planet if you believe total CO2 emissions are causing global boiling.

 

[Smurf1976]

Australia has knocked out over 20 times more CO2 over the past 40 years than has the Philippines.
Yet some prefer to blame countries which are yet to industrialise because their emissions are increasing while Australia - which outsourced all industrial production of scale to China - is presently reducing per capita emissions.

Taking a few steps back, my observation having witnessed rather a lot of discussion on this subject is the primary concern is the bit I've bolded.

The loss of industry.

If environmental issues in general weren't used as a trigger or justification for moving industry from Australia to somewhere else, most obviously but not limited to China, then the politics of the whole issue would be radically different.

Take that bit out and the rest's an achievable technical task that rationally nobody would really oppose apart from those directly employed in coal etc, though even they'd likely grit their teeth and accept a "for the greater good" argument so long as the rest of society did likewise over various issues.

At the political level discussion about environmental issues is really discussion about industry and the fear that it'll be used as the excuse to get rid of what little is left. That's what's at the heart of most of it.

Noting that I've never heard anyone blame China for that, indeed most see them as smart to be taking advantage of the West's foolishness. Rather, the problem is the short term thinking of our own governments who fail to look ahead beyond their own term in office.

 

[IFocus]

China is reducing? Yeah, right.

China is killing the planet if you believe total CO2 emissions are causing global boiling.

View attachment 172079

Yep tell them to stop buying all our minerals and selling us cheap everything we need that will work

 

[Smurf1976]

Yep tell them to stop buying all our minerals and selling us cheap everything we need that will work

What many foresee is that's the inevitable outcome anyway so it's a moot point.

Does anyone seriously believe we can continue ramping up sales of coal and gas whilst getting young people to take on ever more debt in order to hand the money to older people?

As I see it, we're on a completely unsustainable path in all sorts of ways so whilst an alternative would surely bring considerable short term pain, ultimately there's no option indeed fixing that is a prerequisite for fixing climate in practice anyway.

 

[Sean K]

Yep tell them to stop buying all our minerals and selling us cheap everything we need that will work

We could have not sold them any FF and refused to buy anything off them I suppose.

They could have also refused to build any coal plants to make the steal etc they needed to develop their infrastructure and bring 100s of millions out of poverty over the past 30 years, and not build the World's biggest Navy and merchant fleet etc, etc. They'd still be living on $1 a day if not for FF.

But, it's all about us exporting our CO2 emissions isn't it.

 

[wayneL]

We could have not sold them any FF and refused to buy anything off them I suppose.

They could have also refused to build any coal plants to make the steal etc they needed to develop their infrastructure and bring 100s of millions out of poverty over the past 30 years, and not build the World's biggest Navy and merchant fleet etc, etc. They'd still be living on $1 a day if not for FF.

But, it's all about us exporting our CO2 emissions isn't it.

I love how leftists equivocate these things.

*It's ok for Leonardo DiCaprio to have a 400 metre yacht so long has he is telling us to live in caves huddled around a single candle.

*It's ok for China and India etc to exponentially ramp up their CO2 emissions so long as we get cheap sh*t.

Like all leftists they always imagine themselves as part of the politburo rather than the proletariat.

 

[Prepper Pete]

This is certainly not good

 

[Sean K]

This is certainly not good

Climate propaganda.

We have suffered coral bleaching events but the reef is currently in the best shape it's been for decades.

Reef snapshot 2023:

 

[Sean K]

Watching the news, you get the sense that climate change is making the planet unlivable.

We are bombarded with images of floods, droughts, storms and wildfires. We see not only the deadly events nearby but also far-flung disasters when the pictures are scary enough.

Yet the impression this barrage of catastrophe gives us is wildly misleading and makes it harder to get climate change policy right. Data shows climate-related events such as floods, droughts, storms and wildfires aren’t killing more people. Deaths have dropped precipitously. Across the past decade, climate-related disasters have killed 98 per cent fewer people than a century ago.

This should not be surprising because the trend has been obvious for many decades, although it rarely gets reported. A century ago, in the 1920s, the average death toll from weather disasters was 485,000 a year. In 1921, the New York Herald headlined its full-page coverage of droughts and famines across Europe “Deaths for Millions in 1921’s Record Heat Wave”. Since then, almost every decade there have been fewer deaths, with 168,000 average dead per year in the 1960s and less than 9000 dead per year in the most recent decade, 2014-23.

The 98 per cent drop in climate-related deaths is revealed by the most respected international disaster database, which is the gold standard in measuring these impacts. It’s reliable because very deadly catastrophes have been documented fairly consistently across the century.

It is true that smaller events – often with far fewer or no fatalities – are likelier to have been overlooked in the past because there were fewer people and less advanced technology. That is why some media and climate campaigners increasingly point to a rise in reported events (rather than the declining death toll) as evidence that climate change is ravaging the planet.

 

[Sean K]

 

[basilio]

After reading Seans extensive story telling of why we shouldn't be so concerned about CC in 2024 - here is what is happening now.
Victoria/ S.A are facing some of the most extreme weather conditions on record. And despite a wet summer there has been no significant rain for the last 6 weeks in most of Vic and SA. Tinder dry.

Melbourne’s Moomba parade cancelled due to heat as festivalgoers in Victoria advised to leave amid fire warnings ​

Pitch music and arts festival attenders urged to delay arrival, with those already on site advised to head home

• Get our morning and afternoon news emails, free app or daily news podcast

Emily Wind and Australian Associated Press
Sat 9 Mar 2024 15.28 AEDTFirst published on Sat 9 Mar 2024 11.27 AEDT


Festivalgoers at a music festival in Victoria’s Grampians have been advised to leave amid the extreme heat and fire danger, while Melbourne’s iconic Moomba Parade has been cancelled due to soaring temperatures.
Residents across four states have been experiencing stifling conditions, with high temperatures forecast over the long weekend in many parts of the country.

Moomba Parade organisers said the difficult decision was made “to ensure the health and safety” of performers, spectators, workers and volunteers. The wider festival will still go ahead, with some interruptions.
In an Instagram post, Pitch music and arts festival said the Country Fire Authority had advised the safest option for those already on site was to leave on Saturday morning due to the bushfire risk. The festival – which is due to run from 8 to 12 March – is at Moyston, where temperatures are forecast to reach 38C on Saturday and 39C on Sunday.

“If you are arriving on Saturday we recommend delaying your arrival until further notice,” the post read.
“The forecast tells us to expect hot weather each day of the festival. In addition, overnights will also be warm.”

Melbourne’s Moomba parade cancelled due to heat as festivalgoers in Victoria advised to leave amid fire warnings

Pitch music and arts festival attenders urged to delay arrival, with those already on site advised to head home

www.theguardian.com

http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/maps/rainfall/?variable=rainfall&map=totals&period=month&region=nat&year=2024&month=02&day=29

 

[mullokintyre]

After reading Seans extensive story telling of why we shouldn't be so concerned about CC in 2024 - here is what is happening now.
Victoria/ S.A are facing some of the most extreme weather conditions on record. And despite a wet summer there has been no significant rain for the last 6 weeks in most of Vic and SA. Tinder dry.

​

Extreme Weather conditions on record?
Based on what Bas?
One of your favorite websites , The Guardian, talks about hotter days back in 2016.
You do yourself no credit by your constant cries of extremism.
Its hot.
its been hot before.
And its been hot in March before.
I f you know someone really old, go and ask them about the weather in the late 1930's and 1940's.
The hottest day for the year in 1940 was March 11 when it hit 42.
The hottest day for the year 1942 was March 04 when it hit 41.
Mick

 

[Sean K]

After reading Seans extensive story telling of why we shouldn't be so concerned about CC in 2024 - here is what is happening now.
Victoria/ S.A are facing some of the most extreme weather conditions on record. And despite a wet summer there has been no significant rain for the last 6 weeks in most of Vic and SA. Tinder dry.

Melbourne’s Moomba parade cancelled due to heat as festivalgoers in Victoria advised to leave amid fire warnings ​

Pitch music and arts festival attenders urged to delay arrival, with those already on site advised to head home

• Get our morning and afternoon news emails, free app or daily news podcast

Emily Wind and Australian Associated Press
Sat 9 Mar 2024 15.28 AEDTFirst published on Sat 9 Mar 2024 11.27 AEDT


Festivalgoers at a music festival in Victoria’s Grampians have been advised to leave amid the extreme heat and fire danger, while Melbourne’s iconic Moomba Parade has been cancelled due to soaring temperatures.
Residents across four states have been experiencing stifling conditions, with high temperatures forecast over the long weekend in many parts of the country.

Moomba Parade organisers said the difficult decision was made “to ensure the health and safety” of performers, spectators, workers and volunteers. The wider festival will still go ahead, with some interruptions.
In an Instagram post, Pitch music and arts festival said the Country Fire Authority had advised the safest option for those already on site was to leave on Saturday morning due to the bushfire risk. The festival – which is due to run from 8 to 12 March – is at Moyston, where temperatures are forecast to reach 38C on Saturday and 39C on Sunday.

“If you are arriving on Saturday we recommend delaying your arrival until further notice,” the post read.
“The forecast tells us to expect hot weather each day of the festival. In addition, overnights will also be warm.”

Melbourne’s Moomba parade cancelled due to heat as festivalgoers in Victoria advised to leave amid fire warnings

Pitch music and arts festival attenders urged to delay arrival, with those already on site advised to head home

www.theguardian.com

http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/maps/rainfall/?variable=rainfall&map=totals&period=month&region=nat&year=2024&month=02&day=29

The Green Climate Alarmist Melbourne Council show their colours. High 30s is a heat wave? Wear a hat and drink some water. What a joke.

 

[Sean K]

Extreme Weather conditions on record?
Based on what Bas?
One of your favorite websites , The Guardian, talks about hotter days back in 2016.
You do yourself no credit by your constant cries of extremism.
Its hot.
its been hot before.
And its been hot in March before.
I f you know someone really old, go and ask them about the weather in the late 1930's and 1940's.
The hottest day for the year in 1940 was March 11 when it hit 42.
The hottest day for the year 1942 was March 04 when it hit 41.
Mick

Mick, are those temperature records in the current data set, or have they been homogenized?

 

[basilio]

Intriguing isn't it ? When you employ the little grey cells for a few minutes.

Sean, as is his want, cuts and pastes some analysis to show that in the 20's and 30's hundreds of thousands of people perished from natural disasters. People who never knew what hit them and almost certainly couldn't have moved even if they knew. Disasters decades before international help teams were around or even capable of alleviating such events.

None of this, zero, zilch, niente has anything to do with how hot, how intense , how dangerous current climatic conditions are creating extreme dangers to our communities. It is just another misdirection with refuses to acknowledge how our climate is moving into a state that is creating conditions that weren't seen in the good old days.

Australia here and now. In the last 10 years bushfire fighters have learnt lessons from 2009 /2019-20 in terms of how global warming has clearly made hitherto extreme fire conditions "catastrophic". The original thesis of "stay and fight" has been replaced with "get the hell out".

Melbourne faces 3 consecutive days of 38-39 C days. There will be exceptionally warm nights and gusty northerly winds. These days are coinciding in Mid March with a major outdoor festival that would attract 200-300 K people in the CBD. Meanwhile the rest of the state is going to cope with whatever these relentless temperatures and gusty winds will exacerbate. What could possibly go wrong ?

I would offer another comparison. Up until relatively recently AFL footy (and other sports) steadfastly refused to acknowledge that players getting belted in the head and then continuing to play might/could/DID result in serious brain damage. These days we protect the players head, have compulsory time out, take preventive action to stop foreseeable injury. I suggest authorities had a good hard look at the next 3 days of very hot weather and thought, on balance, cancelling Moomba was in the overall public interest.

 

[mullokintyre]

Mick, are those temperature records in the current data set, or have they been homogenized?

The data does not give any indication of being homogenised or otherwise.
It came from Here
Mick

 

[Sean K]

None of this, zero, zilch, niente has anything to do with how hot, how intense , how dangerous current climatic conditions are creating extreme dangers to our communities.

I'm sure your grandchildren are mounting trucks and gluing themselves to roads across the country. Get a grip.