JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).



The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



Carbon ship sinking: Barclays bank closes its carbon desk

Gillard once lauded the genius of the carbon market. That part of the “free” market which is free to move, is moving — and right out. The smart money is saying that carbon trading is a dead dog. It’s a has-been-tulip, a sick puppy, a sinking ship.

The future of global carbon trading is so “certain” that Barclays Bank is not even bothering to leave one part time guy in the US office with a post box, so they can pretend they still have an interest in it. The mood has so changed, they see an advantage in letting the world know they’re not wasting a single cent more on carbon trading in the United States of America. Well that made my day. :-) .

“That is not good news for carbon-dioxide trading, especially not in the US,”

Barclays was the first UK bank to set up a carbon trading desk, and fast to move into carbon trading: “Barclays Capital is the most active player in the emissions trading market, having traded some 300 million tonnes as at February 2007″.

Barclays Closes US Carbon Desk In Latest Cap And Trade Setback

By Simon Lomax

Published: January 20, 2012

A major European bank closed its US carbon trading business this week in a sign that 2012 is a “make-or-break” year for cap-and-trade programs designed to fight climate change.

London-based Barclays determined the US carbon market, currently comprised of a handful of states, is too small to justify the expense of a dedicated trading desk in New York, according to sources familiar with the decision. Barclays was a major player in US greenhouse-gas trading programs on the East and West coasts and remains active in Europe’s carbon market, the largest in the world. Seth Martin, a Barclays spokesman, declined to comment. “That is not good news for carbon-dioxide trading, especially not in the US,” says Gary Hart, a market analyst for ICAP Energy and a veteran pollution-rights trader. “There’s such uncertainty around the use of carbon cap-and-trade programs.”

The carbon cap-and-trade concept, which regulates the greenhouse gases linked to climate change by letting companies buy and sell pollution allowances, has suffered a major reversal of fortune since President Barack Obama’s election in 2008.

 

How times have changed. Back in 2007, Barclays said: The market fluctuated greatly during 2006, but we believe in its long-term importance.

So much for that eh?

 

H/t To Joe Bast and Willie Soon.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 8.9/10 (94 votes cast)
Carbon ship sinking: Barclays bank closes its carbon desk, 8.9 out of 10 based on 94 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/77j6gk9

144 comments to Carbon ship sinking: Barclays bank closes its carbon desk

  • #
    Bruce of Newcastle

    They probably have been done over by the hedge funds. Good shorting to be had by one and all. Reuters reports NZ carbon credits are just off their all time lows at A$5.60, EU credits are A$5.40 and the really cool number is UN backed credits fetching a princely A$2.60 last Monday.

    Breathe deep ye carbon traders while you’ve the chance.

    What? $23/t you say? Ah, the madness of us Aussies.


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Lawrie

      Great summary Bruce. I feel we should all be notifying our representatives of this great leap forward. It wouldn’t hurt to write to local newspapers and TV networks. They evidently haven’t heard the good news.

      I wrote to Rob Oakeshott to tell him the good news of cooling oceans and falling sea levels but he hasn’t replied yet. He must be busy arranging for life after politics. I hear there are several jobs at Port Macquarie council in the parks and gardens area.

      Banks may be manipulative and greedy but when push comes to shove they are good at knowing when the game is up. Barclays pulled out because they saw the future and it didn’t have carbon trading in it. The Republican debates have not mentioned carbon once although several candidates want the Canada-Texas pipeline built. Barry doesn’t talk about carbon anymore although he is funding a miniscule biogas outfit.


      Report this

      00

      • #
        Treeman

        Lawrie, I’ve been notifying the venerable representatives of the progressive demise of carbon trading since the imminent demise of the Chicago Climate Exchange and only one Labor party rep has responded. She may well be considering a role with the Libs offers better career prospects these days.


        Report this

        00

    • #
      Lawrie

      Where did you get the prices? I’m writing to tell Rob about the latest from NOAA and to fill him in on current trading. Wouldn’t want to have him query the data.


      Report this

      00

      • #
        Bruce of Newcastle

        Lawrie – I just saw the Reuters report via Tom Nelson’s site & converted to $A. Apology: I made a mistake in arthmetic for the euro carbon credits, I should’ve had $4.10/t for UN and $8.45/t for the EU credits…need to divide not multiply, sorry. Still massively less that Ms Gillard’s vampirical carbon tax.

        I haven’t looked specifically but I recall the Economist magazine always has the EU ones listed on the second last page (or you can go to the respective page on their website).


        Report this

        00

  • #
    matty

    I know I’ve said it before but at least remember our “friends” over at the BBC – whose retirement monies have been ploughed into the carbon market. Most believers will get to walk away, some go down with the ship, but very few had their money where their mouth was.


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Tom

      On the contrary, anyone who put blind faith in junk science, such as the BBC, have what’s coming to them if they encouraged their (obviously incompetent) financial planners to be reckless with their money. I do feel sorry for the BBC’s clerical and admin staff, who stood back and watched their own journalists behaving like political activists instead of doing what they were being paid for: being sceptical of everything and never taking anyone’s word for anything without evidence. Likewise, the ABC’s years of infamy (2007-?) will be remembered only for its abandonment of professional journalistic standards. At least Fairfax isn’t subsidised by the government, but popular vengeance for shoddy journalism is already showing up in the annual accounts.


      Report this

      00

      • #

        Invest with your head not your heart, as the saying says.

        “Increasingly, the MSM looks like a tired and broken down old dinosaur, limping towards extinction, while that new and nimble species, the internet, looks to be taking over its niche. You’re watching natural selection in action.”

        http://thepointman.wordpress.com/2012/01/20/oh-what-a-wonderful-msm/

        Pointman


        Report this

        10

        • #
          Lawrie

          Another good article, Pointman. Newt Gingrich’s slapdown of John King on CNN will be a turning point. Newt’s applause was left out of most reports but featured widely on Youtube; an example of the Internet winning over the MSM’s selective, biased reporting. I for one could and do quite easily live without the MSM and besides the Internet lets you “talk” directly to the “journalist”; what a wonderful thing. Corrections, addendums and updates can be made in real time as can apologies. The MSM can never compete with that. They will say that their reporters find the news but even that is challenged. Every person with a camera or camera phone is now a reporter and can file the story untouched and unspun. We are living in an exciting time. Take care to stop efforts by governments to control the net.


          Report this

          10

        • #
          Treeman

          I agree Laurie. Methinks we’re on the cusp of a major shift and those least prepared for it are administrations like Gillard’s government that is utterly MSM and poll driven. The next election in Australia will be in Queensland and I for one am relishing the disconnect between reality and what is reported as the Bligh Labor government slides into oblivion.


          Report this

          01

  • #
    pat

    another one bites the dust.

    hope geoff sherrington does his carbon fraud website, cos there is no way the MSM will report most, if any, of it. u have to go to foreign-language newspapers and google translate. more pressure needs to be placed on the carbon cowboys before pension/super funds are raided to trade in the air we breathe.


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Geoff Sherrington

      Hi Pat, Working on it. The deeper you dig, the better the tracks are covered and the slower it gets. Has anyone discovered if our ABC pension fund was/is deep into carbon like the BBC is said by some to have been?
      Here’s a snapshot from a shallow dig.
      http://annualreport.deutsche-bank.com/2009/ar/supplementaryinformation/advisoryboards.html
      Scroll down to climate change advisory board, much the same as year 2008 annual report. The climategate emails broke in 2009 September, so how did Lord Oxburgh struggle with conflict of interest when invited to head up an Inquiry, given that H J Schellnhuber had been made head of the Tyndall centre which links to UEA. Try the Climategate grepper on him to see if you think he was apponted out of the blue on merit alone (e.g. 2779.txt). I’m not suggesting he was not, but form your conclusions from the material available.
      Another recurring name is Uni of Adelaide graduate Tom Wigley, former head of CRU. His fingerprints have touched many papers, both scientific and other.


      Report this

      00

      • #
        KeithH

        Hi Geoff. If you Google iigcc and go to Members, it will come up with the list which includes BBC Pension Fund. iigcc and other similar organisations round the world control trillions of dollars of investment, all heavily dependent on the continuance of the AGW scam and massive taxpayer subsidies to renewables. This is what we are up against. As they say, follow the money!


        Report this

        00

      • #
        bananabender

        Lord Oxburgh was Chairman of Shell. Shell and BP created the CRU in 1969.

        Move along here folks. Nothing to see. [/sarc]


        Report this

        00

  • #

    In a way, Gillard/Brown et all are probably counting their lucky stars right now.

    You see, unlike everywhere else that hooked any cost on those CO2 emissions up to market price, Australia decided to place a fixed price on it for the first three years, with the cost rising each of those three years.

    So, having done it like this they are guaranteed of huge income for at least those three years before it crashes back to (dare I say it) the market based mechanism cost, which by then will be virtually nothing, if it’s not that already as everyone dumps it.

    The Labor Government is now guaranteed of making Billions on it for at least three years.

    Will they dump it in the face of this?

    Not on your life.

    Think what those Billions will buy in pre election promises.

    Tony.


    Report this

    00

    • #
      John Trigge

      And the rest of the world will gladly take the $15/tonne CO2e (it’s not just CO2 remember) from Oz industries after the first 3 years.

      IIRC, also after 3 years, only 50% of the indulgences can be purchased from overseas sources so there will still be a lot of money sloshing around in Oz, a lot being raked off in commissions but only because we will not have a ‘market price’ in reality due to the fixed minimum price.


      Report this

      00

    • #
      Treeman

      Tony, those Billions you mention have to be collected and who’s to say that the businesses in the firing line won’t do an Alan Joyce on the Gillard government? Would you cough up $23 when your competitors are paying just $5? If the carbon price continues to slide overseas and the pressure will increase on Gillard and Combet to get real about the price. The do after all have a majority of one in the lower house provided the three amigos see fit to remain friends with them….


      Report this

      00

    • #
      Gowest

      The genius of the market is that it murders those stuck on fixed prices. As a lawyer, Julia thinks the law is everything. The law of supply and demand trumps all.
      Bob and Julia are punting taxpayers money on creating a ponzi “green industry” for their followers.

      In effect the market has already issued them mandatory pre-commitment cards and they are just too pig-headed to admit it.


      Report this

      00

  • #
    wes george

    Hang on a second!

    We all know that banking is a global conspiracy which controls the world’s economy in order to enslave us all, according to Ron Paul’s mob. Right?

    But now we’re suppose to believe the “free market” powered by un-manipulated supply and demand suddenly makes a guest appearance to confirm that carbon trading is unworkable?


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Catamon

      Certainly an interesting point wes.


      Report this

      00

    • #
      memoryvault

      But now we’re suppose to believe the “free market” powered by un-manipulated supply and demand suddenly makes a guest appearance to confirm that carbon trading is unworkable?

      No.

      A better analogy would be to imagine a bunch of bank robbers tunneling into the vault, only to discover the bank was a giant Ponzi scheme and there was never any money after all.


      Report this

      00

    • #
      Ted O'Brien

      wes. There is no such thing as a free market, and never can be.

      The market is not free if it is not free for all.

      Each and every act by government is a corruption of the free market. And if we didn’t have a government organised criminals would regulate it. Indeed many would say that organised criminals in government are regulating it now. The substitution of a new report 117 is a fair indication.

      There are too few people with the mental capacity to comprehend the intricacies of all this. Although if they stuck to the fundamentals they wouldn’t be far wrong


      Report this

      00

  • #
    Kevin Moore

    Some useful information here – I think

    http://guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/jun/01/world-bank-failing-carbon-markets

    World Bank warns of ‘failing’ international carbon market. Report shows collapse in market with just $1.5bn of credits traded internationally last year.

    The UN carbon market is deeply dependent on the European emissions trading system, because European heavy industries are the biggest buyers of UN carbon credits.

    The international market in carbon credits has suffered an almost total collapse, with only $1.5bn (£916m) of credits traded last year – the lowest since the market opened in 2005, according to a report from the World Bank.

    A fledgling market in greenhouse gas emissions in the US also declined, and only the European Union’s internal market in carbon remained healthy, worth $120bn. However, leaked documents seen by the Guardian appear to show that even the EU’s emissions trading system is in danger.

    The international market in carbon credits was brought about under the Kyoto protocol, as a way of injecting much-needed investment into low-carbon technology in the developing world. Under the system, known as the clean development mechanism, projects such as windfarms or solar panels in developing countries are awarded carbon credits for every tonne of carbon avoided. These credits are bought by rich countries to count towards their emissions reduction targets.

    From its start in 2005, when the Kyoto protocol finally came into force, to 2009 the system generated a total of $25bn for developing countries. But last year’s $1.5bn was less even than the amount paid for credits in the first year of operation.

    “This bodes very badly for the countries we are trying to help,” said Andrew Steer, envoy for climate change at the World Bank. “The [carbon] market is failing us. It has done very good things in the past but it is not delivering what we feel is necessary.”

    If the poor performance continued, it would mean increasing greenhouse gas emissions, he predicted. “We are heading for a 3C or 4C world [temperature rise].”

    Part of the problem is uncertainty over the future of the Kyoto protocol. The current provisions of the 1997 treaty, which took years to come into force because of wrangling among governments, are due to expire in 2012 and there is no agreement yet on a continuation.

    The US refuses to take part in the treaty, and Russia, Japan and Canada said at the recent G8 meeting they would not continue under Kyoto.

    The UN is now trying to ensure that the trade in credits continues even if the protocol is not renewed. Christiana Figueres, the UN’s climate chief, said there was broad agreement among countries that carbon trading should continue, but said investors also needed to look beyond the carbon markets to ways of financing emissions reductions independently of the protocol – for instance through “green bonds” issued by governments or the World Bank.

    Henry Derwent, chief executive of the International Emissions Trading Association, said the relative health of the EU’s emissions trading system showed that carbon trading was still going strong. He pointed out that the total value of the carbon market was $142bn in 2010, of which 97% came from the EU. “That is 1.5% smaller than [the previous year] during a period of turmoil. That is no big deal,” he said. “The carbon market is working – it is still quite a big thing.”

    The UN carbon market is deeply dependent on the European system, because European heavy industries are the biggest buyers of UN carbon credits, which they can use to top up their own carbon quotas.

    But the future of the EU’s emissions trading system (ETS) is also in doubt, according to leaked documents. If the EU meets its target of improving energy efficiency by 20% by 2020, then the price of carbon permits under its trading system is likely to fall dramatically. This will in turn make it less financially attractive for companies to invest in low-carbon technologies.

    Under the EU system, energy-intensive companies are awarded a quota of carbon permits, each representing a tonne of CO2, and cleaner companies can sell their spares to big emitters. The current price of about €17 a tonne is regarded as too low to stimulate the investment in low-carbon technology envisaged under the system, however, and any further falls would remove even more of the incentive to clean up.

    The UN carbon market is deeply dependent on the European system, because European heavy industries are the biggest buyers of UN carbon credits, which they can use to top up their own carbon quotas.

    The European commission said: “Energy efficiency is key to reduce emissions. All energy efficiency measures are welcome. This said, we have to make sure that the energy measures are compatible with the ETS. This is why the commission proposed in the 2050 roadmap to recalibrate the ETS cap and set aside a number – to be determined – of [carbon] allowances for the next phase of the ETS from 2013 to 2020.”

    Ruth Davis, chief policy adviser at Greenpeace UK, said: “A small group of dirty companies have spent years trying to undermine the European emissions trading scheme – in the process netting billions of euros of free polllution permits. Now these same companies are arguing that Europe should ‘rescue’ the ETS by abandoning its energy-saving plans. With global climate pollution going through the roof, and the Arctic ice cap melting, only a lunatic would argue that now is the time to waste more energy. The only ‘rescue package’ the scheme needs is a new 30% emissions reduction target for the EU – a target supported by a a growing movement of Europe’s biggest businesses and employers, including Unilever, Google, Ikea and Vodaphone.”


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Eddy Aruda

    Would everybody please raise there right hand and repeat under oath and after me: it is now, always has been and always will be about the money.

    Virtue and honesty alone will not slay the green giant. It will take the human instinct for survival to bring an end to the greatest fraud ever perpetrated upon the planet.

    Carbon trading markets are but the first to fall. Next, we will see the politicians saving their worthless hides, which will require the sacrifice of Gaia herself upon the altar of political expediency. Afterwards, and with no political patrons, the funding will dry up. The law will then step in and justice, limited in its scope for the sake of “saving the world,” will be meted out to the worst offenders, and justice will be somewhat served.

    Sadly, we must then brace ourselves for the next attempt by the far left greens to save us from ourselves.

    Eternal vigilance is the only course the sane can trod. But be scared, very scared! Lest the left lead us and in the darkness bind us! In the land of Mordor, where the Goracle lies!


    Report this

    00

    • #
      memoryvault

      ” . .. repeat under oath and after me: it is now, always has been and always will be about the money.”

      Sorry Eddie, but I can’t do that.

      While it may be largely about the money these days, that it is not what got it started.

      If you go back to the original days of Maurice Strong and his fellow cohorts setting up the bureaucracy of the IPCC, the original intent [SNIP, is unknowable. We can only guess, so let's not speculate without at least some substantiation or reasoning. OK --Jo]

      And that is exactly what is now going to happen.

      Yes, a few people might end up being found guilty of some misdemeanor and paying a fine or something. A few reputations might end up little tarnished.

      But there will be no justice until the likes of Strong, Annan, Ban Ki-moon, Pachauri, Jones, Mann, Hansen, Jones, Briffa, Gillard, Brown, Turnbull, Flannery, Karoly, Chubb, half the staff at the CSIRO, plus a similar number from the BoM and the ABC, amongst others, all end up tried and convicted of genocide and/or crimes against humanity.


      Report this

      00

      • #
        jason lawrie

        Sadly, I have to agree. Except that these ‘crimes’ will go unpunished because those invovlved will never be held to scrutiny.
        In one or two decades the wind farms and solar panels will have ceased operating because the subsidies were quietly dropped, and it would be uneconomical to repair them.
        The funding for ‘climate change-anything’ will have dried up.
        The folk you mention will have deleted any connection with climate-change from their CV’s
        The ABC will continue to spread manure for whoever is paying the rent.
        The climte-change debacle is starting to look like something the rest of the world is sweeping under the carpet.
        I suspect in twenty years this will be an episode that is not mentioned in polite circles.


        Report this

        00

      • #
        Athelstan.

        Well said mv,

        If I may, I could add a few others too,ie, a few bods from Goldman Sachs, the EU climate change committee [in fact all the EU commission who work hand in hand with the UN loonies] and a few from the PIK – Schellnhuber and Rahmsdorf and arch ig-nobel liar-in-chief Al Gore.


        Report this

        00

      • #
        Eddy Aruda

        Money is power and power is control. It is no coincidence that the man behind the curtain, Maurice Strong, is filthy rich. [Snip. No. No more speculation -Jo]

        Some would argue that Margaret Thatcher, the iron lady, was, trying to break the coal Miner’s union and wanted to supplant coal burning power plants with nuclear reactors and that is why the CRU swung into action. Thatcher was bought and paid for as is EVERY politician regardless of party or country.

        Others have said that the CRU was told that their paychecks could not be guaranteed because of inadequate funding. The scientists started scaring the hell out of people and the money started flowing!

        In fact, every explanation I have ever heard regarding the genesis of this scam has something to do with…money!

        Almost everybody has a price because of the golden rule: He who has the gold makes the rules. I am sure if Forrest Gump were commenting he would say that money and power go together like peas and carrots.

        I agree that a lot of people will die if the greens have their way. In fact, they have already killed more people than Stalin, Hitler and Mao combined. Think of all the people who have died because of malaria due to the banning of DDT or the millions in the third world who die prematurely due to a lack of things we take for granted: electricity and clean, running water.

        The west takes their oil, gold, precious minerals, etc. and the greens tell them to live the peasant lifestyle for the sake of Gaia and to save the planet! The greens call it a war on globalization. I call it mass murder. In the stone age the average lifespan was 35. In present day sub Saharan Africa the average lifespan is 40!

        I respect you and always enjoy your comments, Memoryvault. Have a great and PROSPEROUS new year!—


        Report this

        00

      • #
        Eddy Aruda

        But there will be no justice until the likes of Strong, Annan, Ban Ki-moon, Pachauri, Jones, Mann, Hansen, Jones, Briffa, Gillard, Brown, Turnbull, Flannery, Karoly, Chubb, half the staff at the CSIRO, plus a similar number from the BoM and the ABC, amongst others, all end up tried and convicted of genocide and/or crimes against humanity.

        I couldn’t agree more. I have already advocated, on this site and others, trials for crimes against humanity followed by swift and [snip ... punishment].

        Unfortunately, history has taught me not to expect justice for everyone involved. After the Nuremberg trials in the European theater were concluded trials were held in Japan. For the sake of political expediency justice was meted out to very few and many went unpunished.

        I saw a documentary about the movie Bridge Over The River Kwai. They were interviewing an old man who was proud of his achievements and had no regrets about the war crimes and atrocities he had committed against the POW’s in his charge. If I could have reached through the TV, I would have strangled him with my bare hands!

        That being said, I believe we have turned the tide, and victory is within our grasp. The fortunes of these scam artists is falling faster than the ratings at CNN!


        Report this

        00

        • #
          Temp

          Eddy, are you seriously advocating the execution of people based on their scientific work/political views regardless of it’s merit? [snip no he was not]


          Report this

          00

          • #

            Eddy, don’t speculate on punishments meted out by courts. It’s unnecessarily inflammatory.

            Temp, don’t inflame it further by spinning it into something it never was. Eddy wanted legal trials and punishment.

            Furthermore, no you can’t drag topics into irrelevancies, and then, from one thread to another. I can’t move your other off-topic-and-off-thread nested comments. So I’ve removed them and recorded them here (only to show how inane most of it is). This is where it ends.

            Jo


            Report this

            00

          • #
            Eddy Aruda

            I will let Jo’s comment speak for itself. I have always appreciated the fact that Jo has allowed me and everybody else an extremely wide latitude of discretion in regards to posting comments.

            This is Jo’s site. When Jo says this is where it ends then this is where it ends.


            Report this

            00

      • #
        Andrew McRae

        Hey MV, I’m not sure what you wrote that got snipped out, but presumably it was your hunch about the ulterior motive behind these well documented methods:

        The rich must take the lead in bringing their development under control…The wasteful and destructive lifestyles of the rich cannot be maintained at the cost of the lives and livelihoods of the poor, and of nature.

        The issue of new and additional financial resources to enable developing countries to implement Agenda 21 is crucial and pervasive. This, more than any other issue, will clearly test the degree of political will and commitment of all countries to the fundamental purposes and goals of this Earth Summit.

        I hope, too, that you would agree that these new and additional funds may be channelled, at least initially, through a number of existing institutions and programmes, ….move towards a more objective and consistent system of effecting resource transfers similar to that used to redress imbalances and ensure equity within national societies.

        We also need new ways of financing environment and development objectives. For example, emission permits that are tradeable internationally offer a means of making the most cost-effective use of funds devoted to pollution control while at the same time providing a non-budgetary means of effecting resource transfers. Taxes on polluting products or activities, like the C02 taxes now being levied or proposed by a number of countries, could also be devoted to financing of international environment and development measures.

        Would you believe that is straight from the web site of the arch nemesis himself? Good ol’ Morry back in Rio 1992. This was in the opening statement. Remember there was no MBH98 yet. Morry’s carbon kleptomania was set in motion six years before Michael Mann had even tricked up his tree rings!

        Whenever any warmists complain about even the slightest suggestion that the global warming scare might just be a scam designed from the very beginning for off-balance-sheet transactions forcing wealth from every person and corporation amongst the reckless rich to be redistributed to the proletariat poor with superlative sums siphoned off by the enthusiastic Edmund de Rothschild and only a tenuous connection to the embryonic science of climate, well you can tell them that’s exactly what it is because the guy who invented the whole scam has practically said so in plain view.

        The game is saving the planet. The game behind the game is amassing money. The game behind the game behind the game is…. still fairly speculative at this point, though I’d pick “Supreme Power” as the motive unless any other evidence in the same vein as The Bohemian Grove comes to light.


        Report this

        00

        • #
          Eddy Aruda

          Thank you for the link and your spot on comments!

          I don’t want to appear “snippety” or engage in “speculation”! That being stated, these guys have so much money that if I had theirs I could burn mine! Look at what Mann and his team are trying to do by “making an example” of the heroic Timothy Ball! Does anybody really believe that Mann would have sued if Ball were a multimillionaire with a team of lawyers on retainer? Gee whiz, could it possibly be all about the money, again?


          Report this

          00

      • #
        bananabender

        While it may be largely about the money these days, that it is not what got it started.

        Sorry to ruin your conspiracy theory about wicked UN socialists creating the IPCC for the purpose of global domination.

        The fact is that the big business (the natural gas industry to be precise) originally created the AGW bogeyman. They did so for the purpose of closing the British coal industry. This would allow them to sell more gas for power generation.

        Shell and BP created the CRU way back in 1969. They are still funding it.

        The IPCC wasn’t created until 1988.


        Report this

        00

        • #
          Eddy Aruda

          Banabender, could you please provide any links you may have. This is new to me and I would love to research the matter. Thanks.


          Report this

          00

        • #
          KeithH

          bananabender. The information about, and quotes from members of long established UN Thinktank organisations like the Club of Rome are freely available on the Internet and they make no secret of what they plan for the future of the world. The UN has openly laid out their aims in Agenda 21. You can check these at any number of sites. A good one with documented references and countless numbers of relevant links is:

          http://green-agenda.com/

          I don’t think anyone will ever be able to track down the actual genesis of the whole sorry saga because the monster has so many tentacles. Unfortunately it seems you, like many others, use terms like “your conspiracy theory”, just like some use the senseless and false term “Deniers” to try and discredit people and their views.

          It is obvious and provable that many, many people have used others, their causes, their beliefs and prejudices to further their own particular agendas and that includes as you so rightly say, big business, Shell etc. There are actually some surprising examples. Take part of the disclosure statement of rabid Australian warmist David Karoly from the ABC Conversations website : David Karoly “In the past, he has received significant funding from the Williams Company, an energy company in Tulsa Oklahoma, and a Shell Australia Postgraduate Scholarship.” Who’d have thought?

          Maurice Strong’s influence is well documented and the 1992 Earth Summit where Agenda 21 was launched was the culmination of long planning. Whilst I have no doubt money lies at the base of their goals, one has to realise that many of the participants who are dragged in along the way genuinely believe that the UN’s Agenda 21 way is the only way the world as we know it, will survive.

          Why they would think that pouring endless money into a largely unaudited, completely unaccountable and arguably the most corrupt organisation in the world with an ever-expanding mountain of empire-building bureaucracies staffed by unelected, unaudited, unaccountable grossly overpaid bureaucrats splashing around any money left after “admin expenses” to be siphoned off by equally unnacountable tinpot dictators and their cronies in various countries, is beyond me! (Wow. And all that without a fullstop)!

          My point is bananabender, don’t just dismiss things by trying to wrongly label people who have a certain point of the view. Do the readily available research, arm yourself with as many facts possble, then make up your own mind. Cheers and good hunting!


          Report this

          00

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      I think we are missing the point a bit. In fact, I think we are missing several.

      All the world’s a stage,
      And all the men and women merely players:
      They have their exits and their entrances;
      And one man in his time plays many parts.

      Maurice Strong, Al Gore, Rajendra Pachauri, Phil Jones, Julia Gillard, et alia, et cetera, are just merely players. And the play they are in, appears to be a spontaneous improvisation of Faust.

      Each of them has been offered an opportunity where they have to make a choice. In Gillard’s case, I surmise that it was the Premiership, on the condition that she supported the loony Green policy on Carbon Trading. In Pachauri’s case, and through his very close association with the Tata brothers, it was the Chairmanship of the IPCC, on condition that there was some benefit to Tata (which there has been). In Phil Jones case, I presume it was the choice between the continuance of an obscure professorship, in an obscure subject, at an obscure university, or serious research funding from various foundations, that were interested in a particular perspective of that research. And so it goes on.

      Everybody is offered opportunities in life, and you either take them, or you don’t. Sometimes the opportunity is of benefit to society, and you end up a hero. Sometimes it doesn’t turn out so well, and the opportunity runs off in a direction that is different to that intended, and you end up a pariah.

      Sometimes, because everything is interconnected with everything else, pursuing your opportunity can stuff up the chances of somebody else achieving theirs, and vice versa.

      That is my view of the world – interconnected bedlam.

      There is no preconceived conspiracy, there is no secret committee darkly pulling the strings, there are only very capable people pursuing what they see as their own best interest.

      But sometimes the fates decide that all of these “best interests” will come together into something that nobody wants, but individually none can prevent, so the best they can do is to soldier on, and hope it all comes out right in the end.

      What we could do is watch, analyse, and try to slow the train before there was a serious derailment. That folks, is and has been one of our collective and individual opportunities.

      At the moment, it looks as though we are winning. But the play is not yet over; and remember, we can’t know the full script, for there is none.


      Report this

      00

      • #
        Lawrie

        Rereke,

        You are generous in spirit. I would say too generous. Everyone you mention put themselves and their wellbeing above that of everyone else. To be fair they may not of known how far reaching the scam would grow. But here is the big if; when they realised the all encompassing fraud they were participating in why didn’t at least one of them say enough is enough, we made an error. The fact that they have continued to exacerbate the error defines them as crooks. All who read these pages are aware that there are myriad contributors to climate and that some of them are very powerful and many we know little about and so we observe and report. We don’t make stuff up, we don’t massage data or lose it just to prove a point. They may have started innocently enough but now they are just crooks and deserve to be treated as such. They have had ample opportunity to fess up but they didn’t.


        Report this

        00

        • #
          BobC

          Lawrie,

          You are exactly right. Only the crooks and unscrupulous have remained in “climate science”. But, many did drop out — a number of today’s well-known skeptics were authors on the first one or two IPCC reports, but dropped out and started criticizing after they saw the political spin being put on everything.

          Rereke; Any competent scientist, when asked to come up with a specific result would know they were being asked to participate in a scam.

          OK, so the scientists that are still in the game are possibly:

          1) Completely incompetent at scientific deduction. (This is not farfetched — I have known some scientists who are.)

          2) Willing to take the money no matter what it does to civilization and human welfare. (Not too many in this catagory, I would hope, but some.)

          3) Engaging in self-delusion (or doublethink) and not letting themselves see what they are actually accomplishing. I know many people who go through their whole lives this way. I have a friend (a scientist) who jets around the world working on “green projects” multiple times per year; Also leads trips to places like Mt Blanc, Burma, and Nepal — also multiple times per year. Yet I received a letter from this person telling me that I should give Christmas presents home-made by myself in order to “reduce my impact upon the world”. DoubleThink is the only explanation for why this person’s brain doesn’t implode.


          Report this

          00

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        Lawrie, Bob,

        I don’t really want to argue with you guys.

        I accept what both of you say. You are both right when, with the total benefit of hindsight, we look at the combined results of the decisions that have been made by all of the people who have been collectively involved in this tragedy.

        I guess my points are:

        1) people always select what they see as the best option (of several), every time they must make a decision ;
        2) The options they are given may all be loosing choices, but they do not know that at the time;
        3) When making a decision, people can only go on the information they have at that time;
        4) They do not know what other decisions are being made in parallel by other people with information that may alter their choice if they did but know;
        5) They only know it is a bad decision once the combined results of lots of diverse decisions come together into a disastrous situation;
        6) By that time, it is probably too hard for them to withdraw without leaving their reputation in tatters, so they continue to tough it out, and explain the problems away; and
        7) All of the above indicates that there is no central planning for any of this stuff – if there was, the whole thing would have run more smoothly.

        Security and the desire for recognition and approbation are strong motivators. Without the benefit of hindsight, who is to say what any of us would have decided in the same circumstances?


        Report this

        00

        • #
          BobC

          Rereke,

          I agree with your points, but have two comments to add:

          5) They only know it is a bad decision once the combined results of lots of diverse decisions come together into a disastrous situation;
          6) By that time, it is probably too hard for them to withdraw without leaving their reputation in tatters, so they continue to tough it out, and explain the problems away.

          What they do in this situation is the true test of their character. The skeptics chose to leave.

          7) All of the above indicates that there is no central planning for any of this stuff – if there was, the whole thing would have run more smoothly.

          I think it possible that the people controlling the funding (why don’t we ever hear anything about them?) know what they are doing. Few scientists would have much interest in this if there weren’t so much grant money available. Perhaps this, too, could be explained by a sort of “bandwagon” effect — but we would need to know the process in more detail.


          Report this

          00

    • #
      incoherent rambler

      AGW will slowly morph into OA (Ocean acidification). This will cause the oceans to become corrosive and we won’t be able to surf.


      Report this

      00

  • #

    [...] Carbon Ship Sinking: Barclays Bank closes it’s carbon desk [...]


    Report this

    00

  • #
    KeithH

    Never mind. Al Gore no doubt made his money before his Chicago carbon trading market collapsed!

    It would be a good time and a prudent move for any investor to ask their financial adviser and/or money manager exactly how much of their money is invested in renewables heavily dependent on the continuation of taxpayer-funded subsidies.

    Time also for Union members to ask similar questions of the Board members of their Super Funds. Of course they have somewhat of an advantage with a Government in power largely made up of ex-union reps.with the power to pass advantageous legislation. No conflict of interest worries there, right?
    Like who is reaping big profits out of the white elephant desalination plant in Victoria, whether it ever becomes operational or not?

    Are renewables really a good investment now? Check the Vesta share price in 2008 and what it is now from this link provided by John Sayers at my article posted at the Jennifer Marohasy website.

    http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index.ssf/2012/01/renewable-energy_misery_spread.html


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Bob Massey

      My concern about all these renewables is when all the maintenance staff have been laid off and the behemoths become just a futuristic tourist talking point. Who will have the burden of removing them from the landscape. This has all been done before but like stupid little human beings as we are, we have decided to dabble again in a failed technology. Funnily enough the people who decided this was the right thing to do the planet was the Greens I agree with MV I can’t wait till they all charged with crimes against humanity or better still crimes against intelligence.

      This is the world we will inherit http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/02/wind_energys_ghosts_1.html


      Report this

      00

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        They won’t be removed. They will continue to be used until they fail, and then they will be left to rust, returning all of the toxic elements they are made from into the soil.

        That is the end-game of the great Green Dream.


        Report this

        00

    • #
      Wayne, s. Job

      For that very reason I instructed my super fund to put my money into the cash market. They have 60% invested in b*llshit. Thus I have been losing money


      Report this

      00

      • #
        Siliggy

        I think I have got my super down to 4 percent BS. How much of what claims to be “ethical” is directly supporting and risking your money on this scam?.


        Report this

        00

  • #
    KinkyKeith

    Great that they are wilting and in death throes but cover your backs and hold onto your wallets they will find another scheme.

    Even Papua New Guinea was involved with these carbon sink collectors.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    wes george

    OT, Incoming!

    Active sunspot 1401 erupted yesterday, Jan. 19th around 16:30 UT, producing an M3-class solar flare and a full-halo coronal mass ejection (CME). The Solar and Heliospheric Observatory recorded the cloud expanding almost directly toward Earth:

    Analysts at the Goddard Space Weather Lab say strong geomagnetic storms are possible when the cloud arrives this weekend. Their animated forecast track predicts an impact on Jan. 21st at 22:30 UT (+/- 7 hrs).

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/01/20/big-cme-headed-toward-earth/#more-55093


    Report this

    00

    • #

      This is a truly wonderful thing.

      Well, maybe for Universities everywhere anyway.

      One of the Commenters at WUWT has postulated that there might be an idea for a scientific study to investigate if the extra CO2 surrounding the Earth reacts to CME’s in a dangerous manner.

      Imagine the openings for a Government grant in this.

      Get in quick.

      If it does go close to the Northern Hemisphere, it will lead to some wonderful Aroura Borealis displays.

      Tony.


      Report this

      00

    • #
      Louis Hissink

      Australia should notice it around midday Sunday 21 Jan. Here’s hoping it won’t be a Carrington Event (1859).


      Report this

      00

    • #
      Catamon

      Yeeha! Time to head somewhere dark Sunday night and look for Aurora Australis.
      Only ever seen it once from Dyandanra but it was worth it.


      Report this

      00

  • #
    Louis Hissink

    Tony,

    Imagine the earth as a leaky capacitor that is being continually charged by the incoming polar Birkeland currents, and is part of a solar electric circuit. A localised increase in electric charge in the immediate earth environment might produce interesting phenomena – and interestingly Piers Corbyn has made some forecasts concerning weather events that are being verified.

    The southern aurora will also be a view to watch.

    And considering the millions of amperes of electrical energy coming into the earth system, and exiting via the equatorial low atmospheric pressure zones, you have a virtual inexhaustible supply of electrical energy. The trick is to figure out how to tap into it. Tesla seemed to have, so folklore has it.


    Report this

    00

    • #
      memoryvault

      Louis

      I built my first electric motor / generator nearly 50 years ago, when I was eleven. Principal components were a four inch nail, a couple of corks, a frame made of balsa wood scraps and Tarzan’s Grip glue, and a lot of copper wire recovered from a transformer salvaged from a broken TV.

      The first thing that occurred to me was that what I had created was simply a model of the earth, which, at the end of the day, is just a huge magnetic rotor turning within an electromagnetic stator. (Knowledge courtesy of the 1958 edition of Richard’s Topical Encyclopedia. Mum and dad couldn’t afford Britannica – I still have them).

      From that day to this I have pondered on why we can’t simply draw on this energy. Unfortunately, back in my day all fields of study electrical were off-limits to those of us who were colour-blind. So I went into mechanical engineering instead.

      But to this day I still wonder: it just seems so obvious.


      Report this

      00

      • #
        Louis Hissink

        MV,

        Yes, I have been asked to deliver a keynote address to the 34th IGC in Brisbane this year on the electric earth – plasma connection, and while I sort of worked out from my knowledge of kimberlite geology that these things were electrical discharges, it wasn’t until a Russian scientist rattled my cage and asked me to help get his ideas published in the anglo world – kimberlite related and until his latest gets published I can’t let the cat out of the bag, but in a general sense we know heaps about electricity passing through solid conductors, and at the other end of the scale, plasma, but SFA about its behaviour in liquid and gas states of matter. It was this realisation that made me a total climate sceptic because I realised that we had the basic physics wrong. We know that solar CME’s affect the earth’s rotation but how? One physicist mate reckons its the electric charge of the earth that is doing it, but I suspect the earth rotates via a Faraday or homopolar mechanism – and that CME’s (a lump of plasma but if electrically balanced or not is moot) must be affecting the driving current of earth Faraday Motor.

        You also learn a few things when you start questioning the Coriolis effect – its invoked to explain rotational motion in the atmosphere and, believe it or not, in the crust, or at least in one or two structural/tectonic papers I have come across. The Coriolis effect is an illusion actually, not a force, but when you realise that many scientists have deemed it to be a force, not from clear thinking but from consensus, then you start to appreciate what AGW took hold. Geology is undergoing a paradigm shift as well, and the heretics in the geological world, basically publishing under the auspices of the New Concepts in Global Tectonics Group, have moved to the position that the earth is fundamentally an electrical system.

        As a mechanical engineer you would appreciate the dimensional analysis behind the following number:

        1.000000000000000000000000001 and
        1.000000000000000000000000000000000000001

        The first number represents the Coulomb Force and the decimated bit is the gravity equivalent if we are dealing with atmospheric electric currents in the pica-ampere range. The second number is when we are using simply amperes as the electric unit. In both cases one could argue that gravity, in the presence of electrical forces, is basically zero. But climate science and gravity only science obsess about variations of the decimal bit of the number, while those of us in the plasma physics world spend time measuring and quantifying the integer portion of the number.

        My epiphany was when I realised that atmospheric winds and oceanic currents are actually electrically driven, rather than gravitationally, which only operates in one direction – vertically. Horizontal winds cannot be gravitationally driven.

        John Ray posted an interesting extract from a recent book by Daniel Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow, (I have the Kindle Version) in which one chapter deals with the problems of scientific belief, or the inability of many scientists to react to overwhelming contradictory data by denying its validity, a cognitive dissonance effect in other words.

        The problem with discovering this unlimited source of energy is the immediate effect it would have on the industrialised world, for it’s discovery would, overnight, render existing hydrocarbon based fuels worthless. So I wonder if the AGW scare is actually about forcing us to “renewables” and getting us off hydrocarbon energy in order to then make a transfer to the Tesla energy source as minimally disruptive as possible?

        What I have not factored in this comment is the ambitions of the various “states”, nation or global, vis UN, populated by people who believe, sincerely, they are superior to the rest of us, and whether that group are manipulating things behind the scenes, in an oh so altruistic way.

        I found it necessary to remind some the other day that the so called aristocrats were originally nothing other than the robber barons and things who imposed their will on rest of us by brute force. In that sense I have always interpreted the Christian New Testament as the slave management procedure manual of the Roman Empire, for the simple reason that it’s cheaper to control a population with ideas than brute military force. Ideas are cheap, of course.

        There is one other book I urge people to buy and read and take its ideas on board – a posthumous book by Velikovsky and other essayists collated in “Mankind in Amnesia”. It has just been republished (don’t know whether it’s in Kindle) but I have a hard copy from Angus and Robertson which arrived last week. My original, dog eared one, is with a friend. AGW becomes more explicable when interpreted under the light of Velikovsky’s insights as a professional psychoanalyst.


        Report this

        00

      • #
        Louis Hissink

        Oh I forgot the intrinsic nature of Leftism, and its reliance on consensus for elucidation of “truth”. That’s the other factor which is behind human events, that of rank stupidity.


        Report this

        00

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        If you want to use this energy, you will have to figure out how to attach an external load. That, I think, is the non-trivial bit.


        Report this

        00

        • #
          Louis Hissink

          Exactly, and depends on our understanding of the nature of matter and energy.

          That stated, the work by T. Henry Moray, is relevant. He managed to power lights by amplifying a “radio signal” using a “secret” element sourced from Sweden (?).

          All and well, but let me describe something a bit more prosaic – high end audiophile hobby – one in which its members listen to music produced by state of the art electronics from divers sources. The main problem is designing an amplifier that is capable of driving audiophile loudspeakers and up till now, while possible, involved amplifiers of prodigious output under low impedances, 1000 watts at 2 ohms. Valve amplifiers also run hot and have an excellent role as a primary heat source for audiophiles. Whatever, high power amplifiers usually meant enormous electricity bills, and HEAT.

          I used to own 500 WRMS Accuphase mono power amplifiers 20 years ago – magnificent units, but power hungry and expensive.

          Today I have a smaller power amplifier, wee by comparison, but producing more electrical power as a result of improved electronics (Sanders Magtech).

          This improvement in the transference of energy is specifically unpredictable, but generally predictable on the basis that science proceeds on the basis of building on prior knowledge.

          The issue then focusses on what Moray understood, (and by implication what we don’t).

          Moray’s ideas involved laying out a copper wire, earthing it, and using the output of the layed out wire into some “secret” amplifier” that managed to produce sufficient current to power a load. The clue seems to be in working out what the resonant frequency, electrically, that Moray used.


          Report this

          00

        • #
          BobC

          Antenna theory gives at least one way to couple into this energy.

          My brother and I grew up on a Colorado Ranch. We got into Ham radio and short-wave listening. Once we strung a 1/4 mile of wire antenna, held 30 feet from the ground on long posts. Any lightning storm within 10 miles would produce frightening arcs (1 – 6 in long) from the antenna terminal to ground. (Good thing we were using tubes, not transistors.)

          Even on a perfectly calm, clear day, the antenna would pick up enough charge to hurt, if you handled it carelessly.

          Later, we watched an outdoor movie theater from a nearby hill, and tried to pirate the audio by picking it up with several miles of hair-thin wire wound into a 3 ft dia coil. We not only got the audio, but also lots of bizare noises that we later learned were called “Whistlers” — EM waves, thought to be generated by lightning, that were bouncing from the Northern to Southern hemisphere and back following magnetic lines of force.

          Tesla (who had a laboratory in Colorado Springs in 1900, not too far from where our ranch was) thought that lightning also sent currents vast distances through the Earth. He wasn’t too careful about warning the city power plant when he was about to draw megawatts of power though. After the first several times he shut down the city’s power, they isolated the circuit to his lab and dedicated a separate generator for it.

          Not too much is really known about Tesla’s work in Colorado Springs, but when he went back to New York, he was fully convinced he knew how to transmit large amounts of power for long distances without connecting wires. Power companies, however, couldn’t see how they could charge for power if they didn’t know who was receiving it, so Tesla’s ideas were not developed commercially.


          Report this

          00

          • #
            KinkyKeith

            fascinating Bob.


            Report this

            00

          • #

            BobC makes an interesting point when he says:

            (Good thing we were using tubes, not transistors.)

            My original training in the RAAF was as a Radio Apprentice, and two years of that training was at RMIT. I failed out close to the end of second year, and transferred to the electrical trade.

            That (radio) training at RMIT was at the cusp of Transistor Theory, and a lot of training was still valve related. One of our Instructors, and most people now would refer to him as a dinosaur mentioned that while transistors would lead to miniturisation, valves were far more sturdy.

            Fast forward to now, and valves are virtually non existent. With the advent, of magnetic interference form these CME’s and no EMP’s as well, that move away from valves sees virtually everything now highly susceptible to those forms of interference, something valve technology would just shrug off.

            Being an ardent music fan, I’ve had numerous stereo systems over the years.

            I still affectionately remember my first amplifier, a Mullard 20 Watt black box with those large glowing valves inside. Man, could that thing handle volume, and young noisy Air Force trainees just loved it LOUD.

            Dinosaur stuff I know, but there is thinking around now that really sensitive systems may just be better protected with the use of Valves as opposed to what is in current use.

            (Even we thought that Instructor was a dinosaur then, and that was in 1967/8

            Tony.


            Report this

            00

          • #
            Mark D.

            Yah, just try to wear a tube based bluetooth headset :)


            Report this

            00

          • #
            Bobc

            Mark D.
            January 23, 2012 at 2:53 am
            Yah, just try to wear a tube based bluetooth headset

            If things had worked out slightly differently, you might just be doing that. In the early ’60s there were serious proposals for integrated circuits using cold-cathode tubes on the micron scale. The circuits would have had many similarities to semiconductor ICs, except they would have been much easier to make (why they were proposed), would have operated at higher voltages (and correspondingly higher power levels) and would have to have been in a vacuum. However, one small vacuum ‘tube’ could have contained a circuit with thousands of actual tubes (or valves, for our British Empire friends).

            Rapid progress in solving the semiconductor IC fabrication problems put these proposals to rest and they were never developed.

            BTY Mark D: Where are you getting your information on Tesla’s Colorado Springs lab? I’m interested in that stuff.


            Report this

            10

          • #
            Mark D.

            Hi BobC, I’ve read many books on Tesla, three titles I can remember are:

            Prodigal genius; the life of Nikola Tesla John J. O’Neill (1944)

            Wizard The Life and Times of Nikola Tesla: Biography of a Genius by Marc Seifer (1996?)

            Tesla: Man Out of Time by Margaret Cheney (1983)

            One of the books I read had a full chapter or more devoted to his Colorado Springs lab. It gave vivid detail about the experiments that ultimately darkened the town. I’m sorry that I can’t remember which book that was.

            Tesla has an almost cult following and some of the stuff out there is pretty much catering to that audience. Other stuff is aimed at the hobby electronics fan mostly for building Tesla coils, something that I’ve yet to complete. I do have a box with parts and pieces to build a big coil (someday) together with a Wimshurst generator and maybe a Van De graaff machine. So much to do, so little time……


            Report this

            00

          • #
            Louis Hissink

            I stopped a drilling operation late last year in the Northern Territory – the drilling rig became electrically alive simply by having 270 metres of steel tube inside the earth – but there was no lightning nor clouds – so aerial physics and resonance tuning might be the trick. Moray went to Sweden where he acquired some “material” that his tube was based on.


            Report this

            00

          • #
            Mark D.

            I confess not knowing about Moray until this thread. When Sweden was mentioned I thought; Galena. Then looking on the web saw this: http://www.nuenergy.org/alt/stone.htm It seems Moray had a problem with his “generator” immediately after the Federal Radio Commission limited the amount that could be transmitted from telegraph stations on Nov. 11, 1928.

            Methinks Moray tapped into a ground current of some sort courtesy of the local telegraph or telephone company.

            Louis, how did the energized drill rig end up? Did the charge dissipate or did you have to work it out some other way?


            Report this

            00

    • #
      theRealUniverse

      YAY Piers hes great. I agree with him entirely the weather is controlled by the solar flux and CME, solar storms etc.


      Report this

      00

    • #
      Mark D.

      From what I’ve read, Tesla didn’t “tap into” a new power source, he developed a way of transmitting it by taking advantage of what he called the earths “natural resonant frequency”. He may have noticed an amplification of his signals and for certain he was noticing some interesting phenomenon parallel to his experiments. His demonstrations of RF delivered electricity were tuned and coupled transmitter/receivers. Not really rocket science and potentially leaky and dangerous. His genius was, in my HO, his grasp of what can be done with resonant frequencies.

      Apparently he was right in a calculation of the earths (or the atmospheres) resonant frequency as his Colorado laboratory was able to send and the subsequently receive an impulse of energy after that energy wave circumnavigated the globe (or possibly through it). If I recall correctly, It was these return pulses that would sometimes over power and knock the power grid off line.

      It wouldn’t surprise me if he was pondering calculations on the resonant frequency of the solar system however……..

      Just so I can say this is on topic, I’ll add that I’m sure Tesla wasn’t thinking that a tax on carbon dioxide would be a good idea.


      Report this

      00

    • #
      Crakar24

      Louis,

      when you say “leaky capacitor” i would suggest the cap has in fact a discharge path to earth so it gets charged up and then discharges rather than simply leaks this energy.


      Report this

      00

      • #
        Louis Hissink

        Crakar24,

        I was referring to the plasma physics model for the earth system – basically electric currents from the sun enter via the polar Birkelands, and exit back into space via the equatorial low pressure features, so this current is continually passing through the earth system. If so, then the idea is to tap it, without electrocuting onself. Having it reliable 24/24 is the real problem.


        Report this

        00

        • #
          Crakar24

          Yes i understand Louis, all i meant was that the cap would not be “leaky” it would in fact have a permanent discharge path (to earth i would assume).

          Interesting that your drill rig became electrified if we imagine the atmosphere being electrically charged and of course we and the ground and in this case your drill rig would all be charged to the same potential then as you drill into the earth the drill tip would be at a slightly different potential.

          The deeper you drill the greater the potential until you get to a point where you begin to get current flow from the drill tip up to the rig (i assume the entire drill/shaft is made of conductive material).

          Is this what you believe to have happened?


          Report this

          00

  • #
    handjive

    o/t.

    Musings from the chiefo posted an interesting observation:

    Outgoing vs Land vs Water Vapor

    The “Global Warming” thesis is that the land is extra warm due to “downwelling IR” from “greenhouse gases” in the air.

    For this to work, the air has to be warm, and radiating.

    If this “downwelling radiation” is actually heating the surface, their ought to be a correlation between the “downwelling radiation” and the surface warming.

    If there isn’t, then where did the heat go?

    Basically, if “greenhouse gases” and “downwelling radiation” are causal of surface warming, their ought to be some correlation between them.

    As water vapor is a far stronger “greenhouse gas” than CO2, then variations in the water vapor ought to show as variations in surface temperatures.

    So what do the maps look like?

    Read on at chiefo’s


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Louis Hissink

      Hah,

      Consider the earth as a leaky capacitor encapsulated by an electric liquid conductor (the oceans) and a more resistant rock shell, then the hotter rock shell is explained as the heating effect of electric currents passing through a resistive load – the oceans being more conductive, producing less heat.

      Bit more complex than this, but it will do for a starting point for discussion. (>>>> David :-) )


      Report this

      00

    • #
      theRealUniverse

      Another great load of total piffel!


      Report this

      00

  • #
    Albert

    The Angel of Death is visiting.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Peter Miller

    For Barclays to make a move like this shows the carbon scam trading is nearing its final death throes – Australia excepted, of course.

    As far as energy taxes are concerned Australia’s current political leaders seem unable to move away from the classic left wing mantra of: “Don’t confuse me with the facts, my mind is made up.” Then, inevitably, when economic catastrophe/hardship strikes as a result of their actions, it immediately becomes a case of: “Don’t blame me, this wasn’t supposed to happen.”

    I like to use the analogy of a hooker for trading carbon credits:

    You have it, you sell it, but you still have it, so you sell it again, but you still have it, so……… etc., etc. Of course, the concept gets less attractive with age and use, prices drop and eventually it stops. Not surprisingly, organised crime has been attracted like flies to a honey pot in milking this gross stupidity of politicians who have never lived in the real world. Returning to the analogy of hookers (high fixed price in this instance) and Australia’s incredibly overpriced fixed priced carbon credits ‘market’, this suggests that demand (because of obvious market distortions) will be far less than the politicians anticipate as users will find ‘alternatives’, refuse to pay, or leave. In other words, a classic case of pointless social engineering, guaranteed to produce severe adverse economic consequences.

    Barclays will be very concerned about supposedly maintaining their green image; after all, it is the trendy thing to do these days – so this decision to exit carbon trading was not one which would have been taken lightly.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Mydogsgotnonose

    Sorry about this, but there is no apostrophe in ‘its’ when used as the neutral possessive pronoun!

    Thanks – Fixed! You (and emailer Clive) both helped. I know the rules, but “it’s” is a reflex, and I’m blind to reading it.Jo.


    Report this

    00

  • #

    Outstanding News.
    The only thing propping up this entire AGW Hoax is the banks.
    If you’ve lost the bankers


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Joe's World

    Jo,

    When the carbon market collapses, will the government of Australia politicians, who made the decision, be liable at all for their actions?
    Or will they be richer and walk away to their private lives?


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      If precedent is any guide, the latter will be the case.

      The argument is, of course, “I made, what I believed to be, the best decision at the time, based upon the advice I received from my officials”. So it goes back onto the faceless “officials”, who are in reality answerable to none.

      It is quite a convenient arrangement.


      Report this

      00

      • #
        Manfred

        When I write to The Minister of Climate Change, I expressly ask the Minister to answer my letter without the benefit of his ‘advisors’. Whether this happens or not I do not know, but I do try.

        Now, given a rule obsessed bureaucracy that has become in loco parentis and supported by the observation that people appear willing to accept multiple directives regarding every facet of their behaviour, it is possible that in the following instance, they many may struggle, but I would urge them to definitely try.

        In the Sunday Territorian (22.01.12, pp11) inspired columnist Kylie Stevenson opines in support of widespread cycling for all the obvious reasons. In a spasm of truly critical journalism she cites Peter Westcoast from Bicycle NT who states:

        “Cyclists are less likely to be a long-term burden on the health system, they emit no CO2, they cause less wear and tear on infrastructure.”

        Fascinating Sunday morning reading. Cycling it seems, could be an ‘ultimate solution’.


        Report this

        00

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          “Cyclists are less likely to be a long-term burden on the health system, they emit no CO2, they cause less wear and tear on infrastructure.”

          “… they emit no CO2 …”

          Do they not breath, or even pant?


          Report this

          00

          • #
            Manfred

            ‘“… they emit no CO2 …” Do they not breath, or even pant?’

            My point exactly – “Cycling it seems, could be an ‘ultimate solution’.”

            I believe ‘The Greens’ suggest that a global population of c.100M is their desirable best solution. Cycling may be the solution?


            Report this

            00

          • #
            incoherent rambler

            Do they not breath …

            Nope they stop about 3 seconds after sharing road with an NT roadtrain.


            Report this

            00

        • #

          When I write to Combet I CC Abbott.

          Got me thinking…will there be monitoring and a CO2 tax on having sex?

          Kind of off putting having someone next to the bed, couch, stairwell, floor or also swinging on the chandelier. I suppose one way to lower the population growth.


          Report this

          00

    • #
      MadJak

      I am still waiting to see a list of individual names of MPs and senators who voted for the carbon task.

      I will bookmark it and need to refer to it whenever one of these clowns try to say anything.


      Report this

      00

  • #

    Free energy from atmospheric or what ever source of electricity?

    It is a totally cracked pot idea unless and until someone builds a way to tap into it and demonstrates it without some kind of secrete sauce. Until that time, I am putting my money on the principle that there is no such thing as a free lunch.

    Every lunch has a cost and very few are worth paying for. I am betting this “free” electricity lunch is simply one of those that are not worth paying for. If it is, show me.


    Report this

    00

    • #
      BobC

      Lionell,

      Atmospheric electrical energy is “free” in the same sense that a river’s energy is free. It is there, if you can collect it, and has been used to run small motors, etc (no “secret sauce” needed).

      In fact, the reason electrical transmission lines always run a “neutral” wire (which would seem to be a waste of copper) is to prevent the buildup of dangerous voltages from inadvertantly collecting this “sky potential” (The neutral wire is periodically grounded to dump the collected energy.)

      Hydro-electric dams and generators, however, are not free — and neither would antenna and power conditioning systems capable of collecting energy from the earth-atmospheric potential difference. Nobody’s talking about a “free lunch” here. This does not stop some people from trying, however.

      A simple calculation is enough to convince that the power potential is vast.


      Report this

      00

      • #
        Kevin Moore

        Zero Point and the Schumann Resonance

        http://www.2012.com.au/SchumannResonance.html

        “…Believe it or not, the Earth behaves like an enormous electric circuit. The atmosphere is actually a weak conductor and if there were no sources of charge, its existing electric charge would diffuse away in about 10 minutes. There is a ‘cavity ‘defined by the surface of the Earth and the inner edge of the ionosphere 55 kilometers up. At any moment, the total charge residing in this cavity is 500,000 Coulombs. There is a vertical current flow between the ground and the ionosphere of 1 – 3 x 10^-12 Amperes per square meter. The resistance of the atmosphere is 200 Ohms. The voltage potential is 200,000 Volts. There are about 1000 lightning storms at any given moment worldwide. Each produces 0.5 to 1 Ampere and these collectively account for the measured current flow in the Earth’s ‘electromagnetic’ cavity.”


        Report this

        00

        • #
          Louis Hissink

          Kevin,

          Thanks for that reference to the earth’s discharge rate – I read it elswhere and never had the presence of mind to bookmark it. In that reference they talked about a couple of hours. I have also discovered that many have been experimenting with this as well – but like Moray’s work, there is always some pertinent “secret” factor that is omitted. What I haven’t understood is why the Green movement has taken it up – unless their real motivation is to send us back to a tribal subsistence existence.

          The other factor is the power of a belief system – and the hold that the fossil fuel hypothesis has over mainstream science is strong indeed – and for those interested the latest NCGT issue is out (Issue 61) – the article Storenveldt is worth reading to gain an impression of how group think throttles scientific progress. http://www.ncgt.org. Also an article by Kanzanovitch-Wulff on a possible explanation of how kimberlites might be generated by electrical interactions between the earth and a by-passing bolide or charged body. The Russians are way ahead of the Anglo-Saxon world in this area of science, and of course AGW is basically a Anglo-Saxon creation.


          Report this

          00

      • #
        Mark D.

        I would worry about building something to tap the “earth capacitor” Louis talks about. It seems to me that there is a reason nature builds things the way she does. It might end like it did for the Nazis in Indiana Jones when they opened the Ark…….


        Report this

        00

  • #
    MadJak

    Hey maybe Julia Guilleard can bail out the Barclays bank trading desk…

    I’d better shut up – she and the treasurer are so numerically illiterate, they might actually think that was a good idea….


    Report this

    00

  • #
    u.k.(us)

    When a floor on prices is set, it is not a market, it is a racket.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    MadJak

    O/T

    HAHAHA – WILKIE – what a schmuck!

    Feeling a bit suckered in mate?

    Was your support of tbe carbon based life form tax worthwhile?

    Will the termination of your ever so short political foray at the next election be worthwhile?


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Not to worry! California will carry the torch for the U.S.


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Lawrie

      Roy,

      I get the impression that Californians occupy the extremities in this AGW and all things Green debate. Many of the strongest supporters of green dreams reside in the government while the strongest critics reside on the net. Time perhaps to make representatives more net litterate perhaps.


      Report this

      10

  • #
    A C of Adelaide

    “…. has suffered a major reversal of fortune since President Barack Obama’s election in 2008.”

    Ooooh! I like that.


    Report this

    00

  • #

    [...] has the story on her blog:  Carbon Ship Sinking: Barclays Bank closes its carbon desk A major European bank closed its US carbon trading business this week in a sign that 2012 is a [...]


    Report this

    00

  • #
    val majkus

    sorry if this has been posted before
    http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/9825-germanys-100-billion-solar-fiasco?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+climatechangedispatch%2FnkcO+%28Climate+Change+Dispatch+news%29

    Solar stocks plunged around the world after Germany, the largest market for panels, said it will make quicker cuts to subsidized rates and phase out support for the industry by 2017. –Bloomberg, 20 January 2012

    The costs of subsidizing solar electricity have exceeded the 100-billion-euro mark in Germany, but poor results are jeopardizing the country’s transition to renewable energy. The government is struggling to come up with a new concept to promote the inefficient technology in the future. –Alexander Neubacher, Spiegel Online, 18 January 2012

    Germany’s exit from nuclear power could cost the country as much as 1.7 trillion euros ($2.15 trillion) by 2030, or two thirds of the country’s GDP in 2011, according to Siemens, which built all of Germany’s 17 nuclear plants. The estimate of 1.7 trillion euros assumes strong expansion of renewables, with feed-in tariffs as the biggest chunk of costs. -–Christoph Steitz, Reuters, 17 January 2012

    One fifth of every German industrial company has moved activities to foreign countries, or plans to do so, because of the uncertain energy and raw material supply. This is the result of a survey conducted by the German Chamber of Industry and Commerce (DIHK), in which 1520 companies participated. DIHK-President Hans Heinrich Driftmann finds this alarming: He fears that Germany is losing its appeal for foreign investors in the wake of it’s energy supply transformation.–Dieter Keller, Südwest Presse, 18 January 2012

    Germany’s green politicians here were too dim-witted to foresee the obvious consequences. The German electricity market is on the verge of collapse. The scale of the EEG Renewable Energy Feed-in Act is of unprecedented stupidity, a folly that will certainly go down in German history textbooks. The backpedaling away from solar subsidies in Germany is now happening so fast that it’s making people’s heads spin. Call it the reverse energy supply transition – one from fantasy back to reality. –P. Gosslin, NoTricksZone, 19 January 2012

    The European Commission could prevent new nuclear plants being built in the UK if it upholds a complaint over alleged unfair subsidies submitted to Brussels by a pro-renewables campaign group. –Business Green, 20 January 2012

    you can get to the links through the website


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Lawrie

      Val,

      Do you notice that these statements in the MSM are never followed up by asking the obvious questions regarding the basis for investing in green energy in the first place? The editors seem to accept that the fundamental facts remain the same now as they were when this garbage was first introduced. I admit that back in the 90′s I was excited about renewable energy and I supposed that CO2 could cause problems. Nowhere at that time was it broadcast that natural CO2 overwhelmed man made emissions for example. I respected the scientists and accepted their postulations; NO MORE.


      Report this

      00

    • #
      KinkyKeith

      Hi Val

      Spain has been sent almost bankrupt by its mad green binge.

      They are now facing a serious reality check.

      The moral of the story is: Never Trust A Politician, all they want is your vote.


      Report this

      00

  • #
    val majkus

    yep, KK and Lawrie – good points and what’s the CSIRO doing
    one of its clients is the government
    and if you go to its site and search for renewable energy it’s like it hasn’t been reading about Europe’s problems


    Report this

    00

  • #
    markus

    Fellow, how many of you would you invest in carbon trades if you knew this?

    Thus far, the science of atmosphere has rested on the paradigm of Greenhouse.

    It is a misinterpretation of the observations of the french scientist Baron Fourier by Arrhenius in 1896. It is that misconception, of previous known physical laws , that has polluted our perceptions of the earths atmosphere into the modern ages..

    To shift that invalid principal one has to offer a different perception born of observations and proved in the universal application of it in, within a symbolic syntax (maths).

    This is the crux of the matter
    The current paradigm demands our atmosphere is gas in an enclosed house.
    The correct principal is that the enclosure itself is the whole of the atmosphere. Consider the greenhouse roof to start at the earths surface and end at the top of our atmosphere.

    The invalid greenhouse principal is false when subjected to the principal of conservation of energy. They cannot explain why it is so except for the introduction of a new invalid principal.

    As we have always done, when our knowledge of the universe of physics reaches the end of our ability to predicate, we fear the unknown. We naturally conserve our existence and fear is a mechanism of this conservation.

    It must be so, that earth, water, air, are different forms of the manifestation of energy in mass. The perception of a greenhouse allows a supposition that the energy equation of the equilibrium of mass can be different in its different forms of manifestation.

    Baron Fourier would be aghast.


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      I believe that Arrhenius postulated that volcanoes would release enough CO2 to lift levels to 5%, which would be enough to melt all that ice, and end the Ice Age. At least until the CO2 was used up by the newly abundant plant life, so back into another ice age. Thus “explaining” the numerous icy periods.

      Quite a number of contemporary scientists were sceptical (you were allowed to be in those days), and the debate became quite heated.

      Nowadays we “know” that volcanoes don’t release CO2 (I forget who was the loonie who came up with that one), contrary to what geology I learnt walking past that laboratory.


      Report this

      00

    • #
      markus

      It is the opacity of matter that reflects light, the potentiality of it, reflects radiation. It is the ozone of atmosphere that energises the rest.

      Arrhenius, a scientists bias. Greenhouses were a tools used in cold Europe.
      Prevalent at the time of Arrhenius, they were used for the enhancement of the process of biological life.

      Why wouldn’t a man, think an analogy, could correlate to the creation of life on Earth. As the vessel of life, the atmosphere.

      The inconvenient truth of the certainty of man to err.


      Report this

      00

    • #
      Ross James

      Markus,

      The science of atmosphere has rested on the paradigm of Greenhouse.

      The above is a huge generalisation.

      It is a misinterpretation of the observations of the french scientist Baron Fourier by Arrhenius in 1896.

      The science was in the primitive state of development and certainly has moved on and become more accurate.

      It is that misconception, of previous known physical laws , that has polluted our perceptions of the earths atmosphere into the modern ages..

      It has had not. We understand better why we have global warming as a trend.

      To shift that invalid principal one has to offer a different perception born of observations and proved in the universal application of it in, within a symbolic syntax (maths).

      The “invalid” principal is your statement. The science has been validated in many ways and by multiple lines objective anlaysis.

      This is the crux of the matter
      The current paradigm demands our atmosphere is gas in an enclosed house.

      It does not.

      Please read the following to correct your perception of the science and that of the study of meteorology:

      http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=t+is+a+misinterpretation+of+the+observations+of+the+french+scientist+Baron+Fourier+by+Arrhenius+in+1896.&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCYQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.springer.com%2Fcda%2Fcontent%2Fdocument%2Fcda_downloaddocument%2F9783642176999-c1.pdf%3FSGWID%3D0-0-45-1109839-p174082558&ei=_dAbT-a-CuaNiAelzPzyCw&usg=AFQjCNEEFU2ilYlv5BPDpbadMaGBvXKlHA

      Regards

      Ross


      Report this

      00

      • #
        Popeye

        Ross James

        “We understand better why we have global warming as a trend”

        No we DON’T!!! – EVEN HANSEN ADMITS IT

        Cheers,


        Report this

        00

      • #
        markus

        Hi Ross,

        Congratulations, you are probably one, to be clinically suffering from cognitive dissonance, after this terrible episode in human history.

        Visit Tallblokes blog site.

        The latest is a experiment proving the the United Theory of Climate.


        Report this

        00

        • #
          Ross James

          Cognitive dissonance gives to everyone the chance to redeem oneself from going too deeply into insulation and isolation that is self inflicted by their own self-thought processes. It gives heed and warning that the common human condition is or can be plagued with bias. Those thereby end up forming into a “movement” or “party”. Each seek consonance among their various cognitions. Many diverse cognitions end up negatively re-enforcing the beliefs. Standard understandings are insufficient and specialised deeper insights have to be uncovered at the next twist in the bend. This bias gives their persuasions an elect feel (religious type mania) to reform and “cement” the group tighter. The derivations and conclusions from conflicting cognitions give them a religious kind of predictive prophetic power and shedding light on otherwise puzzling irrational thoughts. The end game in extremes of cognitive dissonance lead to destructive behaviours and thought.


          Report this

          01

  • #
    val majkus

    well the sad thing is I am not a scientist
    but I am a legally trained person
    and to my clients I tried to provide up to date legal advice
    why is not happening from the CSIRO


    Report this

    00

    • #
      KinkyKeith

      Hi Val,

      My wife is trained as and worked briefly as lawyer.

      I have used “Lawyers” as a whipping post here to help release some frustration but hope you haven’t taken offense if you’ve come across my rants.

      Happy New Year.

      Keith :)


      Report this

      00

      • #
        val majkus

        KK no offence at all
        in my view people have freedom to express an opinion
        But the CSIRO and their blindness to what is happening overseas in respect to renewable energy is I’m sure your wife would agree a derelection of its duty to the Federal Govt
        (if it has a duty but it does have a charter)
        BTW does your wife have any views on that point?


        Report this

        00

        • #
          KinkyKeith

          Hi Val

          “”But the CSIRO and their blindness to what is happening overseas in respect to renewable energy is I’m sure your wife would agree a derelection of its duty to the Federal Govt (if it has a duty but it does have a charter)”"

          She doesn’t think about these things, she leaves all the angry stuff to me.

          “”BTW does your wife have any views on that point?”" As above.

          CSIRO staff are brainwashed and a reflection of modern society – we are informed by important sounding media bites delivered with great sincerity by attractive people – who can resist that. That you will believe what they tell you is INEVITABLE.

          And I don’t see any easy way of changing that.


          Report this

          00

  • #
    Mydogsgotnonose

    Have a heart for newbie climate scientists. When they started this sexy study they weren’t to know that four of the five premises upon which the subject is built are fundamentally wrong.

    1. ‘Back radiation’ was a mistake by Arrhenius.

    2. The assumption of 100% thermalisation of IR absorbed by GHGs was a mistake by Tyndall.

    3. The assumption of 33 K present GHG warming was apparently a mistake by Hansen but no professional physicist should have made it.

    4. The assumption that pollution causes significant increase of cloud albedo was a mistake by Sagan but he inherited some of it from van der Hulst. To match past temperatures, the models use double real cloud optical depth and net AIE 3-6 times higher than experiment. Because this physics is broken, the experimental data are also wrong. The bottom line is that no climate model can predict climate.

    5. The assumption that part of the ‘missing heat’ is is from higher thermal diffusivity could be true [heat of mixing as recent Arctic melt water entered the N. Atlantic].

    The jury is still out about when the subject descended into fraud. The publication by NASA in 2004 of fake physics [small droplets reflect more because of higher total surface area] was when it became overt as they desperately held the line; -0.7 W/m^2 median net AIE in AR4.

    However, I suspect the fraud started in 1997 when the link between CO2 increase and the amplification of tsi change at the end of ice ages was broken. ‘The Team’ developed fake hock-sticks to exaggerate CO2 climate sensitivity but this was a hostage to fortune when the planet stopped warming.

    Hansen’s recent claim of ~50% increase of net AIE appears to be a desperate clutching of straws but he could still be right about the oceanic heat transport..


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Streetcred

    And this week we have a reported claim by a QUT ‘scientist’ associate professor working with ‘elements’ of the CSIRO, that a 2C temperature increase in Brisbane by 2050 would lead to an increase in human death … so I’m trying to work out how those refugees from NSW and Victoria living up in the Cairns area are faring. You’ll have to go a long way to find a real Cairns borne and bred local there. :)


    Report this

    00

  • #
  • #
  • #
    KeithH

    In another example of blatant hypocrisy, The Greens have made dams a dirty word and effectively “damned” any future hydroelectric development in Australia, yet they and the Government are quite happy to enable dam building in other countries and encourage the buying of carbon credits from scams such as these.

    “the emergence of trade in fake carbon credits and says the biggest source is hydroelectric power projects on the mainland.”

    http://www.internationalrivers.org/node/5265

    http://www.internationalrivers.org/blog/lori-pottinger/2011-12-22/will-holland-fuel-carbon-credit-dam-scam

    There are many other examples.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    KeithH

    O/T but relevant and apologies if anyone else has posted this link before, but if not, enter the world of CGR, Computer Generated Reality, which certain modern day scientists create and live in to provide us with “settled science” and “overwhelming consensus”.

    h/t to Spangled Drongo from Jennifer Marohasy site

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/01/20/the-birth-of-cgr-science/#more-55044


    Report this

    01

  • #
    Dave

    Why is the rate of emission factors for consumption of purchased electricity from the grid different for each state – some of the big hydro schemes were federal etc. Once again Tasmania comes out sweet! See NGAF.

    State, Territory or grid description Emission factor kg CO2-e/kWh
    New South Wales and Australian Capital Territory 0.89
    Victoria 1.21
    Queensland 0.88
    South Australia 0.68
    South West Interconnected System in Western Australia 0.80
    Tasmania 0.30
    Northern Territory 0.67

    A lot of the suppliers of power will get charged the $23.00 per tonne of CO2 – is this doubling dipping by the power distributors?


    Report this

    00

  • #

    One small correction, Jo. You have overestimated the minimum resources a bank would need to maintain a presence in a particular sector. Instead of one staffer and a post box, the minimum presence in the carbon trading sector would be about one day a week out of one employees time plus a post box. And it wouldn’t need to be a highly paid officer either. A $60k grad/trainee would be enough so, with the standard multiples we can conclude that Barclays didn’t see more than about $12k x 4 = $48k in revenue left in the business.

    Or more likely, the public liability exposure was such that the premium demanded for the indemnity cover was far more than the potential revenue.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Bruce of Newcastle

    Another big energy company bails out of carbon trading:

    RWE cancels membership with carbon bourse Bluenext

    From the article:

    “In 2009, Interpol said CO2-related VAT fraud had cost EU treasuries over 5 billion euros in lost revenue.Before the French government closed the tax loophole which led to the fraud, BlueNext was handling an average of more than 4 million spot permits daily on its exchange, but volumes later fell to 1.1 million after tax authorities took action.”

    In other words nearly 3/4′s of the trades on the exchange were fraudulent. Phew, CO2 may not cause hot weather but it can sure make hot money.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Mark

    It looks like something else just sank in the UK. Namely, UEA’s legal efforts to resist disclosure and investigation of their servers.

    http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2012/1/23/a-major-foi-victory.html

    Must be something there that they are so desperate to hide.

    An interesting aspect in the post is that at no point in the three whitewashes… err, inquiries, was Phil Jones ever compelled to give sworn evidence. Indeed, we already know that one purported inquisitor went out of his way to avoid asking good ol’ Phil any questions at all for fear he might have incriminated himself!


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Mydogsgotnonose

      What they appear to be trying to hide is their role in the deliberate destruction by the unelected EU rulers of the United Kingdom as a separate State. They’re the same people [Fabians/Marxists/Troyskyites] who are trying to get Australia controlled by the carbon traders.

      The role of Cameron’s July 22nd 2011 letter to the Gizzard supporting her carbon taxation has to be analysed very carefully. What’s happening to UK politics is that it is apparently being brought under control by the UK Establishment which now knows the windmill plan has nothing to do with saving CO2. Three recent reports show that in the absence of hydro, eventually the windmills create more CO2 than without them as the steam standby plant is used less efficiently. [it does work with hydro though.]

      So, carbon trading is a means to an end which is the destruction of nation states and putting their populations into fuel-starved serfdom to benefit the 300 families who own the Banks.

      In the UK, an all party committee has been created to oppose the windmills. Huhne looks likely to leave soon thus initiating a ministerial reshuffle. Although DECC may still survive, the amount of damage the climate fanatics have done for no scientific reason [the World is cooling] means it could be split up with Energy going into the Business Area.


      Report this

      00

      • #
        Mark

        Do you think the CRU mob is that politically savvy or are they just useful idiots?


        Report this

        00

        • #
          Mydogsgotnonose

          They’re deeply involved. A senior UEA administrator is one of Common Purpose’s top UK people. CP is the de facto EU shadow government, the aim being to create a Corporatist State with no private property, a one party state using the CAGW threat to make the people relinquish their freedom. The fascists behind it are using Marxism as cover.

          You can tell what has been happening from one observation. CRU’s PR during the investigation was reportedly organised by Neil Wallis, a News International employee. Elizabeth Murdoch is friendly with Cameron’s wife whose parents, he a Baronet meaning the title was bought, are windmill rent-seekers.

          UK landowners have been bought by windmill rents. Prince Philip, who speaks for the Queen, recently warned the aristocrats not to go down that route. The rebellion is growing fast in the UK. The latest news that windmills in a mainly steam standby grid increase CO2 emissions has galvanised opinion

          Australians should investigate the Red-Green Alliance which is a cover for Trotskyites. The windmills, a combination of Orwell’s ‘Animal Farm’ and the Easter Island Statue Cult, are actually a modern version of the Swastika, a universal symbol of the ever-present state, dominating the landscape like the Norman Castles.

          I anticipate that the windmills will be dragged down by angry mobs of the new poor. The same is happening in Denmark where the people are sick and tired of rent seekers and high electricity costs when not a single coal fired power station has been shut down and they’re run flat out to try and counter the cost of the windmills, a loss leader for Vestas.


          Report this

          00