JoNova

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


Handbooks

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



Archives

Books

Weekend Unthreaded

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 8.8/10 (24 votes cast)
Weekend Unthreaded, 8.8 out of 10 based on 24 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/zdep4dc

154 comments to Weekend Unthreaded

  • #
  • #
    Joe Lalonde

    On May the 11, I created 10 trillion dollars Canadian and passed it on to the Canadian Minister of Finance and they are seriously looking at it…

    Our government can create a new Bank of Canada(Federal Division) and
    borrow 10 billion dollars in Bonds from the Bank of Canada. With this,
    they can have 10 Trillion dollars on the books as per the current
    banking system and now buy government debt as well as Provincial Debt.
    With the technology changes that have happened over the decades, more
    and more citizens are no longer needed for the work force and as such
    need a basic survival income per month.
    Currency is a tool and not wealth accumulation as greed as distorted
    the banking system.
    The bonds borrowed can too be paid back at the end of the year and
    borrowed again when needed.

    Why not?
    The Banks do create it this way, the only problem is that they invested into the stock and bond market that is currently ready to fail as our economy is so tied to the US as well the US being the reserve currency which has such a great export of inflation.

    60

    • #
      Pauly

      Joe, printing money is easy. Assigning it genuine value is more difficult.

      Sovereign currency essentially depends on the fiscal reputation of country upon which it is based, the size of its economy and the strength of its fiscal system. Your concept of creating more money does not change any of that.

      And governments, despite many attempts to indicate that they are important to a country’s economy, are fundamentally only a non-productive brake on the economy – in the form of taxation. Governments really only have one active role in the economy – the maintenance of a strong regulatory regime to support the country’s fiscal system.

      The fallacy in your concept is that printing money does not remove debt. Take your example. The government doesn’t “borrow” bonds. It issues bonds. The “bond” is an agreement, issued to the purchaser, guaranteeing that they will be paid a specific rate of interest, and at the termination of the bond period, the purchaser will receive all their money back.

      The example you have used actually shows how a government increases its total debt level, increasing the amount of taxpayer revenue that will need to be spent to pay the interest on the bonds, and deferring the payment of the capital amount a short distance into the future – usually 10 to 30 years.

      What technology has allowed is an international market place for these transactions to occur. The problem that you have created, by increasing the money supply without changing the size of your economy, is that the international market will devalue the worth of your currency. For loans already established using international currencies – such as the US dollar – that devaluation has a double impact: increasing the dollar amount of the interest cost to your economy, and increasing the dollar value of the repayment amount of the borrowed capital.

      So to correct your final comment, international currencies do not “export inflation”. Increasing levels of government debt and the printing of money to “kick start” a sluggish economy result in the devaluation of that country’s currency. That results in inflation in that country, but it is entirely self-inflicted.

      Perhaps you should try to address a different question: why can’t your government run a balanced budget, or better still, a surplus budget that will allow that real debt to be reduced?

      120

      • #
        Joe Lalonde

        Pauly,

        We have a great deal of propaganda put out by our government in many area when they keep saying that our economy is fine and our inflation is only a lowly 2% when many other area are not factored in.
        Our purchasing power show that it is far closer to 8 or 9% each year. This is directly tied to us importing and having the US dollar tied to our currency telling us what it is actually worth.
        We have a shortage of currency to inflation which our massive debts are due to wages not increasing with our living costs.
        We need a world trading currency that is not being constantly manipulated to devalue its worth on the world stage…that is not possible with our politicians trying to gain power over each other. Should you piss off the US, then your currency WILL be effected.

        30

  • #
    Another Ian

    Joe Aleo;

    Actual, original data have been changed so much and so often that they are almost unrecognizable from the original entries. For example, the 0.7 degree Celsius (1.3F) of cooling between 1940 and the 1970s – which had the world worried about another Little Ice Age – has simply “disappeared” in these corrupted-computer-model re-writes of history.”

    Comments and link at

    http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/2016/05/the-sound-of-se-533.html

    90

  • #
    Peter C

    Fourth Planet from the Sun

    A brief review of the film The Martian.
    “The Martian” might be the most realistic (but fictional) space movie of all time. Like Andy Weir’s book of the same name, the movie captures the culture of science — – See more at: http://www.space.com/30831-the-martian-most-realistic-space-movie-ever.html#sthash.cwDG8C9w.dpuf

    A while  back now I wrote a review of the film Interstellar, a Sci-Fi movie with underlying skeptical themes about Climate Science.  In Interstellar, humanity is gradually dying from starvation as the result of a mysterious crop  blight.  The crop blight has somehow  been unleashed by the unintended consequences of rapacious human activity and now is paying us back big time for our sins.

    Everyone is going to Church and the rationality is in short supply, except at NASA, which has become a secret organization, hidden from public view. NASA decides that the only hope for humanity is to find a new habitable planet and sends out exploratory missions to some likely candidate planets in our galaxy and eventually gets back one hopeful message.

    The settlement team, with a load of human embryos heads off by rocket to the the far off star and finds that the commander of the exploratory mission, a Dr Mann (Matt Damon) has lied about his planetary data in the hope of getting a rescue mission.

    By the time one of the team makes it back to Earth the crop blight problem seems to have been solved.  Our still young space hero gets back just in time to see his own daughter dying of very old age due to time relativity.

    With all that in the back of my mind I was looking forward to seeing the newer movie, The Martian and looking for a Climate Science angle.  

    The script writer of The Martian has quite different views and likely supports the 97% consensus. There is no skepticism here. The underlying theme is the goodness of science and scientists in general and a keyword is Sustainability.  With that in mind there seemed to be a glaring omission with relevance to Climate Science. The movie has in fact been praised for its accurate portrayal of science, but I found several deficiencies.

    NASA this time is the NASA the we know, with lots of brainy geeks and engineers and administrators etc, launching rockets, doing the math, calculating rendezvous orbits etc.  NASA is conducting a series of missions to Mars named Aries.

    On the Aries 3 mission a sand storm hits the team, while they are busy collecting some soil samples,  and they have to make an emergency blast off and return to Earth.  Unfortunately as they scramble back to the ship Mark Watney (Matt Damon again) is hit by some flying debris and disappears in the dust storm.  As there is no response from him, and his bio monitor is silent, they assume that he is dead and leave him behind.

    Watney  comes to after the storm, half buried and with his low oxygen warning beeping urgently.  He staggers to the nearby habitation module, gets his suit off and discovers he has not only been knocked out by the communications dish, which was torn from its mounting in the storm, but has also been stabbed in the liver by a metal strut. The strut went through his bio monitor  first so it did not penetrate too far.  None the less he has to surgically extract a metal fragment using a mirror, retractor and sponge forceps in the sick bay.

     Watney then records  a video message;“If the oxygenator breaks down, I’ll suffocate. If the water reclaimer breaks down, I’ll die of thirst. If the hab breaches, I’ll just kind of implode. If none of those things happen, I’ll eventually run out of food and starve to death.”
    His response is that too survive he is going to have to “Science the shit out of this” or words to that effect, which is what he does.

    His main problem, longer term, is that he only has food for about a year, but the next Mars mission is not due for 4 years. So he is going to have to grow food on a planet where nothing grows.  Fortunately, as he says, he is a botanist so he knows what is required.

    Firstly he constructs a greenhouse.  The mission planers seem to have included a large rolls of  plastic sheeting which comes in handy and rolls of duct tape, then he shovels in a lot of soil.  Plants won’t grow without water and there isn’t much of that but  he knows the recipe: “You take hydrogen, you add oxygen, and you burn. Now, I have hundreds of liters of unused hydrazine at the MDV (mars descent vehicle).  If I run the hydrazine over an iridium catalyst, it’ll separate into N2 and H2. And then if I just direct the hydrogen into a small area and burn it”.  So he does burn the fuel and soon  he has water dripping off the walls.

    Hydrazine is a rocket fuel mono propellant. Contact with iridium catalyst causes a highly exothermic decomposition into N2, H2 and NH3. So separating his hydrazine might be simple but dangerous but my problem is, how does he burn the hydrogen in a very thin Martian atmosphere with only 0.13% oxygen?

    Next he needs fertilizer which comes from the toilets.  Remarkably it has been dried and packaged in plastic bags, probably to recycle  the water, but maybe also the astronauts planned to be good  campers by taking their rubbish back home.  Mixing all the toilet waste in a big bucket with water makes a potent mix, which Prince Charles, the organic farmer, would be proud of.

    Finally he needs some seeds.  The vacuum packed potatoes in his food supplies still seem capable of germinating, so he cuts them up into pieces and plants them in rows and adds a handful of fertilizer to each one.  Weeks later he has his first crop of “All natural, organic, Martian grown potatoes”, grown from his own excrement.  What could be more natural and organic than that!

    What struck me about this improbable success is that there seems to be one more vital and missing ingredient, the evil gas CO2.  Plants won’t grow without it and a potato is solidified CO2 and water (CHO). In fact Mars has a thin atmosphere which is 95% CO2 so it is not a problem, but it was not even mentioned!

    There are other problems, including the improbabilty that a Martin dust storm could do much damage. Because of the thin atmosphere a 100knot wind on Mars has about the same effect as a 10kt breeze here on Earth.  Consequently despite its scientific credentials I give this film an F for the science.

    Finally, considering Konrad’s comments earlier in the week, I got to thinking about the Greenhouse effect on Mars.  More of that next weekend.

    121

    • #
      Peter C

      Well if you think so AZ,

      I would say that my review takes a very different approach to the linked essay and I think most readers would rather not have to go to a link to get the sense of a comment. The link was only there to support the contention that the film has been praised for its portrayal of Science culture and realism.

      It is the weekend unthreaded post and hence I thought there would be room for expounding a longer than usual comment? I can redaft it to take out the initial recap on Interstellar.

      Thanks for reading it yourself. I will await Jo’s decision.

      —-
      Peter, sorry I think the mod thought your review was the professional published one and you might be breaching copyright. Thanks for an interesting and well written review. – Jo

      60

      • #
        Peter C

        Out of moderation at last.
        Thanks Jo.

        And one red thumb already.

        50

      • #

        Thanks for that very insightful review Peter. I’m guessing it went to moderation because of the references to the, ahem, organic booster.

        60

        • #
          Peter C

          No, just tooooo long apparently and judged as of little interest to readers.

          I am glad that two people liked it.

          51

    • #
      Mike

      Great review!!

      I am waiting for a blockbuster movie about a banker who goes to another planet. When he/she arrives, manages a disguise that appears to be like the local inhabitants. Not having any other skill other than usury, the banker is able to gradually obtain to the riches of the planet and command a loyal following of those who are indebted and thus generate an economic climate similar to the one on earth. :) And a review would be great too :)

      70

  • #

    May, a good month for the wind turbines

    For the first fortnight of May the performance of the wind turbines has been impressive due to a series of low pressure systems. They have been operating up to 80-85% of capacity with some at 100% for short periods. The average capacity factor has been approx. 57% which is twice that for the previous two months.

    Actual production figures were:

    Capacity Factor——75%
    Percentage of time—–8%——–14%———-56%——–22%
    Av. Production MW——625——1357———2160——2,970

    These data portray the inherent problem of wind energy, its intermittent nature, varying between 300 MW and 3000 MW.

    The electricity system in Australia caters for demand between about 15,000 MW and 25,000 MW on a daily basis. Therefore, a target of about 12,000 MW of renewable energy allows for some extra capacity and the existing 3669 MW of wind turbines. However, to replace the existing thermal generators this 12,000 MW must be available on a 24/7 basis.

    The following projections are made:
    at max. wind speeds 12,000 x 3,669/3,000 or 14,760 MW of wind turbines would be required to produce 12,000 MW
    at min. wind speeds 12,000 x 3,6669/300 or 146,670 MW of wind turbines would be required to produce 12,000 MW

    To achieve this target of 12,000 MW between 10,480 and 104,800 sq. km. of suitable land would be required for the turbines. How one can reconcile these two estimates is difficult if not impossible. All one can really do is plan for the average conditions and use thermal generation for periods of little wind. Assume an average capacity factor of 25%, that is 48,000 MW of wind turbines on 35,000 sq. km., and accept the fact that there will be periods when production falls to 48,000 x 300/3,669 or 2,600 MW. In this case 9,400 MW of thermal generation would be required to keep the lights on. The other extreme is 39,000 MW when it is windy.

    The data and projections demonstrate the inability of wind energy to achieve the political goal of 50% renewable energy without substantial thermal generation back-up which defeats its objective.

    The other current alternatives for renewable energy are hydro and solar generation. There is little further scope for large projects such as the Snowy and Tasmanian schemes. Solar PV only provides a little low density electricity for 6 hours out of 24 and concentrated solar a little more. These cannot supply the 24/7 electricity required by our industry and cities.

    170

  • #

    Still having problems with numbers, the categories are less than 25% CF, between 25% and 50% CF, between 50% and 75% CF, and more than 75% CF.

    40

    • #
      Peter C

      That makes more sense.
      Do wind turbines achieve >75% output 22% of the time?

      30

      • #
        James Bradley

        Peter C,

        Wind Turbine 101 – The 80/20 Rule – For 80% of the time wind turbines produce 20% of their capacity.

        Have a look at http://energy.anero.id.au/wind-energy

        I watch it regularly, the last week or so is an anomaly as it is usually about 15% – 18%.

        110

      • #

        Yes, there was significant production over 2,200 MW and periods up to 3000 MW and it’s still going.

        40

        • #

          From 9 pm. yesterday until 3 am production was in the high 2000 MW’s and then it has dropped to about 1600 MW over a 9 hour period, probably will keep going south as the turbines in S. Aust. are slowing now. And yet I just heard the Labor spokesman espousing their green credentials and their 50% renewable energy target to prevent “Carbon Pollution”. Not too sure how they are going to do it as I have shown it is just not feasible unless you cover the coastal lands and waters with wind turbines, or use fossil fuel back-up generation approx. 70% of the time. Are we living on
          the same planet?

          90

          • #
            Analitik

            There will be BIG announcements/proclamations about the wind capacity for these last 2 weeks by the renewables lobby soon. Just like the 90+% renewables peak that occurred momentarily in Germany last Sunday.

            And it’s guaranteed that Mark Diesendorf will make full use of the figures when he leads the SA 100% renewables discussion in Adelaide next month

            50

  • #
    Ross

    TdeF

    I saw your mate Kroeger and Beattie on Sky the other night discussing preferences and who would make the decisions etc. The Greens were centre of the discussion and overall it confirmed your points made a few weeks ago.

    150

    • #
      TdeF

      Yes and amazingly as Andrew Bolt points out, Brownyn Bishop’s replacement has always publicly been against boat turnbacks. Malcolm is blatantly stacking the Liberal party room with Green activists. He and Kroger are gambling that conservative voters will not understand until it is too late. Hockey’s replacement is the openly gay head of the NSW Liberals. Safe seats for Liberal Greens.

      The biggest victim will be the Labor party who are currently trying to be more Green than the Greens, promising 50% renewables. Labor have endorsed Green policy to such an extent that the children of traditional blue collar people see the Greens as caring Labor. The children of conservatives also see it as the caring party. As Adam Bandt said to me when I asked him if he really believed what he said, “we tell them what they want to hear and when we get power, we do what we want”. His PhD was in communism and clearly prefers the Lenin approach to power.

      Maybe only after both Labor and the Nationals are destroyed will they realise that they have been betrayed by Malcolm’s Green Liberal coalition. It will be very interesting to see both major parties preferencing the Greens while the Greens preference the Liberals. Of course Kroger and friends will have wiped their competition and taken absolute power in both houses and can afford to thumb their noses at all the disenfranchised conservative voters. Nominally the Liberals will have won, but at the cost of every principle they hold dear. Malcolm will give people anything they want, as long as he is PM. A rich Gillard with the same path to power, assassination and a deal with the Greens.

      What is ahead is government for and by the politicians, not the people. A lawyer and banker’s and bureaucrat’s picnic, like the EU. For us the body seeking power over Australian incomes and immigration is the communist UN and even the EU. These undemocratic and unaccountable trans national bodies are really scary and it is increasingly illegal to express an opinion.

      210

      • #
        David Maddison

        Beautifully said TdeF.

        80

      • #
        Graeme No.3

        Turnbull has to win the election or he will no longer lead the Liberals. He was only put up to win the election, and will have to resign or be booted out within hours of losing.
        We can only hope that he wins narrowly and is dependent on National Party votes to stay as PM. If there are enough Green members to counter the withdrawal of the Nats, then there is still the problem of many in the Liberals who won’t tolerate being hooked up with the Greens; it would be a death spiral for the Government waiting for the Greens to pull the plug at their convenience, and many Liberals would defect, and what better choice than the Nationals.

        As it is, Turnbull has done enough to start the end of The Liberals. A conservative alternate is only a matter of time, and it may well be that the thought has all ready crossed Barnaby’s mind. Too much turmoil, the Coalition splits, and the Nationals would be free to campaign in every seat, and unlike the ALA etc. would be doing so from an established base.

        140

        • #
          TdeF

          The fundamental problem for the Liberals is control of the Senate, an undemocratic body where the population of Tasmania at 500,000 has the same vote as the population of New South Wales at 8,000,000. Ten Green senators. Now no minority senators, all gone to Greens and Labor thanks to Malcolm and the Greens? Why? Now there is no hope of a Liberal government. Tony Abbott was fantastic but he could not pass any laws.

          Malcolm can see what blind Freddy can see, that a deal with the Greens would give control of both houses. They would also guarantee his ETS, stopping the boat turnaround, more taxes on the ‘rich’, NDIS, Gonski and a Very Fast Train. What does Malcolm care about our debt. He has his cash out of the country hidden behind walls of companies.

          The problem for the Greens is that they have only 1 seat even with 10% to 25% of the primary vote, which should give 20-40 seats. However their preferences really gave Labour 47 of their 55 seats. Swap those preferences to the Liberals and Labor are finished. Plus if the Liberals preference to the Greens, they could grab a lot of inner city seats and some country seats from the Nationals.

          This is totally dependent on keeping the deal secret. Many thinking people will vote otherwise, but the Green vote will pass a lot of seats like Melbourne Ports to the Liberals. In Melbourne Ports, the Liberals win, but Labor has held the seat on Green preferences. If even half of these go to the Liberals, there is another Liberal seat, dependent on Green preferences.

          As the Herald Sun blasted last week on the front page and editorial, this is total betrayal. Michael Kroeger was on the front page like the Grinch in Green. However it will work. That is the problem. As for the Nationals getting rid of Turnbull, they have only weeks to do it and that only through dissolving a government which is being dissolved anyway.

          The point will come where there is a Liberal party vote to eject Malcolm Turnbull. Many of those who turned on Tony Abbott, like Jensen and Bishop have been removed. Others resigned. Others lost preselection and more will lose their seats without Green preferences. There are maybe ten Abbott people removed and replaced with friends of Malcolm. He is counting numbers now.

          There is increasingly little we can do to stop Malcolm Turnbull taking the whole country into a coalition with the Greens, this time with the self styled “Malcolm’s Liberals”.

          Maybe if Shorten could dump the Greens, he could stop this, but most Labor are too scared to confront their Green partners without whom they would not be elected. Then you have Di Natale denying he is preferencing the Liberals. Now why would he be doing that?

          111

          • #
            TdeF

            The real question is not whether Liberal voters will give their preferences to the Greens, it is whether even half the Green voters will give their second preference to the Liberals. If it means the Greens become the coalition partner and get all they want, why not?

            It would be vengeance on the Liberals and a disaster for Labor and the Nationals. Some Liberals will cheer! Green Power, ministries, perks, lower house seats and Di Natale as Deputy PM? Imagine a Green Minister for the Environment? A Green minister of Defence like Sarah Hansen Young who sends taxi boats to Indonesia.

            Malcolm is desperately trying to keep a lid on this with his ABC while he stacks the Liberal party and now the public service with Green politicians. They will delay the how to vote cards as long as possible, only on the day. The deal with Di Natale has been done. Barnaby and Shorten have no idea. They think it is business as usual.

            90

            • #
              Dariusz

              This describes that ultimate failure of the liberal party and abandonment of the their principals. The Faustian deal will untimately destroy not just the Libs but also Malcolm not so in the middle. He will be derided forever as the traitor to the conservative course and also by the loney left of all persuasions.
              Again in order to avoid this, I vote ALA. in the senate and in the hourse of reps: last preference green, 2nd last labor, 3rd last Libs with a local small Conservative party on top.

              50

            • #

              your paranoia is very funny. I never thought that people actually believe this conspi…y theory

              06

              • #
                TdeF

                Which conspiracy theory?

                Canberra is a hot bed of conspiracies. That is what they do.

                So the man who legally removed our Prime Minister is not capable of a conspiracy? Someone’s paranoia may in fact be someone else’s naivete.

                The conspirators planned their move in secret meetings at MP Peter Hendy’s house. Foreign Minister Julie Bishop even sent her head of staff. Lord Monckton warned about the imminent removal of the two conservative Prime Ministers by COP21. Didn’t see that coming? That’s a conspiracy, but only the first step of a long laid plan.

                Explain then the urgent double dissolution election to remove the six year independent senators and why Malcolm’s Liberals and the Greens should join forces against Labor for something which does not advantage the Liberal party? Why would Labor object when they and the Greens are the beneficiaries and it actually increases their hold on the Senate? Just study the preselections. Old guard out, new Green MPs in.

                There is a deal to be done and nothing illegal in it and after which nothing which can be done. Everything points to a deal on preferences with the Greens. It was front page news in Victoria. Conspiracy? What else?

                Your illogical faith in Malcolm’s Liberal views is unjustified. He was always Labor like his great uncle, the pacifist leader of the UK Labour party who would have surrendered the UK to Hitler. Malcolm’s partners in his banking business were Neville Wran and Nicholas Whitlam. He is no Liberal and he has no love of the Nationals. He has even appointed a Green politician to a senior position the public service advising the cabinet. This was arranged in early November in a family lunch at Kiribili house.

                No it is all obvious and legal but you will be surprised?

                80

              • #
                TdeF

                Was the removal of Tony Abbott a conspiracy?

                70

              • #
                el gordo

                ‘Was the removal of Tony Abbott a conspiracy?’

                The Chinese referred to it as an ‘internal coup’.

                40

              • #
                Gee Aye

                Tdef your answer answers itself. Are you ok?

                11

            • #
              philthegeek

              The real question is not whether Liberal voters will give their preferences to the Greens, it is whether even half the Green voters will give their second preference to the Liberals.

              FFS TdeF, you are still banging on about this??

              Greens have very little ability to direct preferences. Historically, where they do, (usually to the ALP) it makes about 0.3% difference to the final TPP. Given the Greens demographic you reckon they direct to the Libs?? Please send me some of what you have been smoking.

              1/2 of the Greens preferences going to the Libs?? Not going to happen.

              32

              • #
                TdeF

                Banging on? Read something else. The election is only six weeks away! This is incredibly important. It will determine whether we have a carbon tax and that looks like that is a certainty, but only the start.

                What is the point in being right that increased CO2 does not warm the planet significantly, the man cannot change CO2 levels significantly, that the world only warmed a tiny amount for ten years, if we are taxed on Carbon Dioxide anyway?

                Either agree or disagree. It is the duty of a scientist to talk about science when needed, but science is being utterly ignored. It is all about political deals.

                Preferences aside, when Turnbull announces a coalition with the Greens to get control of the Senate, as Gillard did, what will you do? Nothing. Then being right means nothing. We will be helpless. This blog then becomes pointless except as resistance. The previous Labor/Green government even wanted to police newspapers, the internet and blogs for just such comments. Why did Labor so desperately want an NBN, especially Stephen Conroy. The control of information is the passion of totalitarians.

                Try running a blog in China.

                51

  • #

    I can say that coal fired power has brought us many benefits, and some would agree with that, but some might also say that we would have had those benefits even without coal fired power. So, it comes down to what you believe, and there’s no real way to actually prove that coal fired power gave us the benefits we now take for granted.

    However, I have found some evidence of what coal fired power has done, and from that, those benefits have come to us.

    It always seems to happen that you’re looking for one thing, and then find another. I found this information at the Energy Information Administration site, a monumentally huge U.S. data and information base. It was hidden away in their archives, and it needed some specific input to that EIA search engine, and it was down the list of topics I was looking for. I had a look ‘on spec’, and was amazed with what I had found.

    It was American power consumption details dating back to 1949, and a second link showed power plant outputs also back to 1949 as well.

    In 1949, total power consumption was only 6.5% of what it is now, a very small amount really. Now you may think that, well, smaller population, so less power consumed, but the American population has only a little more than doubled since 1949, while that total overall power consumption has gone up by a whopping factor of 15 times.

    However, that wasn’t the only revelation. In 1949, 48% of all power being generated was going straight to Industry, and only 26% to the Residential sector. That percentage going to Industry hovered around that figure, rising to 55% in the late 50’s, and stayed high right up till the early 90’s. In 1993, so only in the last 22 years, consumption in the Residential sector final took over as the largest consumer, and then in 1998, the Commerce sector pushed Industry back to third highest consumer, as Industry in the U.S. began its decline, until now, where Industry only consumes only 26% of all that generated power, half the percentage it used to be, and only 4 times the total consumption of what it was in 1949.

    Nearly all of it across those years came from coal fired power, as construction of those plants were virtually the only concentration. As recently as 1985/7 coal fired power made up 57% of all power being generated, and that was more than three times the next highest method of power generation, Nuclear Power, and it’s only in the last ten years that coal fired power has dropped below 50%, until now, where it is only supplying 33%, as Natural Gas slowly takes over.

    First and foremost, all that power went to Industry as that ramped up considerably since those early days, and all of it was coal fired power as that technology also advanced as well, the ONLY method of power actually able at that time to provide huge amounts of constant and reliable power that Industry required. That considerable ramping up of Industry brought prosperity to Americans with all the jobs. From that, they moved to better homes, and with that came increased consumption in those homes, the residential sector, and following on from that, more power to the Commerce Sector as well, but first, all that power was directed towards Industry, which needed it the most.

    Something similar is now happening in China, so this information gives a good background on how and why that is happening, as China furiously constructs those huge new tech coal fired plants. As recently as 8 years ago, the Residential sector in China only got 8% of all generated power with as much as 75% of it going to Industry, and now that Residential sector consumption is up to 19%, and quickly rising each year. Again, firstly, all that power goes to Industry, and then comes prosperity, and from that it then flows to the homes of the people, and then to Commerce to keep all of that running.

    Now, I mentioned earlier that the population of America has only doubled since 1949. Power consumption in that Residential sector has risen by a staggering factor of 21.3, and Commerce by an even greater factor of 23.4.

    First off, it went to Industry, which gave us our jobs, and prosperity, and then came more power to our homes, and the vast bulk of it from coal fired power, the only way to generate power on a huge, constant and reliable scale.

    I have full analysis, a couple of diagrams, and links to both interactive sites at my following Post.

    The Benefits That Coal Fired Power Gave Us.

    Tony.

    150

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      Tony,

      I just saw your figures on residential power usage increase. They are staggering. Even though I’m well aware of the increase in electrically powered nearly everything in the home, I wouldn’t have guessed it was so great an increase over 1949, over 20%, because nearly everything is now low voltage solid state and a lot more efficient. It goes to show that you need to look at the numbers. Maybe also that you need to count up the number of devices you run, the number of battery chargers, what needs standby power and what doesn’t. I know reading the labels on my flat screen TVs was an eye opener. A lot more power than I would have guessed, considering no tubes and no cathode heaters.

      70

      • #

        Roy,

        here, think of the high usage devices in the modern home which have high consumption. In the main, they would be those items with electric motors running them, like the compressors in refrigerators and the electric motors driving washing machines, and more recently, electric dryers. Then there’s household hot water as well. Big consumers of electricity, all of them. Now while the technology has improved by huge amounts across the years to what we have now, think back to 1949, when very few homes would have had these things at all, and the original ones were basic compared to what they are now.

        With that huge increase in jobs for Industry came prosperity, and from that came the money availability to actually be able to afford those things in the private home, for everyone, and not just for the rich people, but right down to now every home.

        Homes then got heating as well, electric cooking ranges and ovens, and more recently, airconditioning in homes, none of these things available at the lower socio economic levels back then.

        Virtually all things electric in the home other than the original basic thing of lighting have led to the huge rise in power consumption in that residential sector.

        The same applies for Commerce, and here think Supermarkets with huge bakks of coll and cold storage, again, none of that available in 1949.

        But first there had to be Industry, and to supply Industry, huge amounts of steady reliable coal fired power. Then came the jobs, the prosperity, better homes, and those things for the homes, and then Commerce to back all that up.

        Coal fired power gave us all of that, and I’m not just saying that, because now, this data backs that up.

        When I saw those figures for 1949, I was almost dumbfounded, and I’m just glad that I did find them, because it places it all into context, not just for the U.S. and by extrapolation the rest of the already Developed World, because it all came first from the U.S. but now it gives us an idea of why places like China, India, and the Undeveloped World look at what we have, and they want it also, and because of some silly beat up, we’re telling them ….. Sorry, this is not for you! Thank heavens China is not blinking.

        But first, it has to be Industry, and thus huge amounts of steady reliable power, and the rest follows from that.

        Tony.

        160

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          Tony,

          It’s true that those things you mention are the greatest part of anyone’s electricity bill. And I know that. But they run only intermittently. Even our A/C runs only intermittently on the hottest of days. Have you ever stopped to figure out what your minimum load might be, a load that’s running 24/7/365? I have a smart meter these days. We had to ask for it because Edison was caught just guessing at our usage one time too many. That’s another story. But the smart meter reads out my instantaneous load, all compensated for power factor, the same number that’s multiplied by whatever small time interval they use to keep a running total of my usage. This morning I made sure everything was off that can be turned off and both refrigerator and freezer were not running and then read the meter’s measurement of the load. It’s over 400 Watts. And I’ve been through this before and never seen it below 400.

          You can argue that’s insignificant compared with the 4+ kW I see with the A/C running. But I sure would like to be rid of some of that. And yet I want all the electronic goodies that demand that power, all of it on standby or doing something useful like the air filters we run. And if you multiply that by the hundreds of thousand of homes running the same kind of goodies you have a big number.

          None of that stuff was around as little as 30 years ago. Some of it was possible but there was no great demand for it. It runs the whole range from computers to cordless phones and smart phones. And of course, the battery chargers for those phones.

          Hundreds of thousands of times a small load equals a big load. And most people aren’t even aware of where their electricity is actually being used. A Watt snows some people completely. A kWh is black magic. Aside from those who read this blog and are well educated, try to find someone who can explain a kWh to you.

          And now we want plug-in electric cars and even more gadgets that require electricity. And at the same time we’re made to feel like criminals because we use too much electricity. What was that term? Catch-22 has arrived.

          70

          • #
            Roy Hogue

            The smart meter is a sad reflection on the work ethic and ingenuity of the American work force, not to mention the state of corporate America. We moved into this place in 1969 and for all the time up to just several years ago, Edison manged to read the meter correctly every month. It’s a bit of a challenge because it’s on the back of the house where the power runs along the rear property line. The yard is enclosed with a wall and has always had a locked gate. I don’t know how they read the meter but they never bothered us for access to the back yard. All the houses in the area are this same way, power line along the rear of the back yard and nearly every last yard is walled in and has a gate. So they had some way of reading the meters.

            Then all of a sudden the monthly readings were identical. Oops, we caught you guessing. I don’t know how they figured they would get it all reconciled and get to a correct meter reading or when they would have done it. They were surprised that it even mattered to us. And the problem continued so they had no intention of fixing what was obviously their problem.

            Finally enough was enough and since they were talking about installing smart meters in the near future we asked for one. No more guessing. But that comes with a price too. Our bill no longer contains the prior month’s usage for comparison. When I asked about it I was given a runaround about how the new meter keeps track of usage hour by hour, etc., etc., and oh, it’s not possible to do what you want. But it certainly is because each bill has a cutoff date and the total usage since the last cutoff date a month earlier. So could they just remember the prior month’s usage and print it on the bill? Of course they could. After all, that’s what they had to do during all that time the meter was read manually. But they don’t want to.

            50

            • #
              Roy Hogue

              I keep calling things like this and many others, like the fact that a pound package of bacon no longer contains a pound of bacon but the price stayed the same, the cheapening of America.

              And if I though Donald Trump could really manage all the things he’s promised, I could be a lot happier that he’s going to be the Republican in the race because I could expect him to shove all these things back up the American left’s you know what.

              50

            • #
              sophocles

              Roy said:

              Our bill no longer contains the prior month’s usage for comparison. When I asked about it I was given a runaround about how the new meter keeps track of usage hour by hour, etc., etc., and oh, it’s not possible to do what you want.

              You’re right. It is possible and your supplier could do it easily. NZ is a small country of only 4.5 million people and we receive power consumption invoices with all the necessary information on them. We are even given (a uselessly low resolution) bar graph of the current month’s consumption and the previous five months usage for a quick eyeball comparison. If such a small country’s electricity retailers can do it, then your one has no excuse.

              You could offer to fix their computer systems for them, but you’d have to charge an enormous fee, of course, to do that. :-) (You don’t even need to know anything about computers or computing: you hire people who do.)

              Just a thought: watch them closely. When they start making BS claims, there’s money going somewhere it shouldn’t go.
              Run your own database, read your meter at convenient for you intervals and track your consumption yourself.

              I’m going to create myself a small database and put the past year or so monthly usages into it. I want to teach myself SQLite and this seems to be a suitably trivial project to get some practice with it.

              And if I though Donald Trump could really manage all the things he’s promised, I could be a lot happier that he’s going to be the Republican in the race

              Haven’t you heard? According to a statistical model there is a 97 percent chance that Trump will win the 2016 presidential election if he wins the Republican nomination. The article goes on to breathlessly tell us this

              model correctly predicted the outcome of every single presidential election since 1912 – save one, the election of 1960, which some believe was rigged.

              Interesting. There’s no such thing as time travel. I can accept it hindcasting with some accuracy but that’s not predicting outcomes which are already known. I’m amused it has the now compulsory 97% probability level. If it’s proven right, then the climate modelers should adopt it.

              Developer is a Helmut Norpoth, Professor of Political Science at Stony Brook University.

              10

              • #
                Roy Hogue

                sophocles,

                We still get the bar graph. But as you said about yours, its resolution is uselessly low for all but large differences. As for fixing their computer systems, I wouldn’t tackle that job for anything because what really needs fixing is the attitude in this country and California in particular. If that ever gets fixed we would go back to the time when the only tiered rates for power were those that reduced the price per kWh at some level as an incentive to buy more, not less. After all, aren’t they in business to sell their product? But sometimes I wonder — Edison is now owned by a publicly traded company and last time I looked, investors and certainly the directors of publicly traded companies were interested in being profitable. The objective is to make as much money as you can by legal, ethical and moral means. So you want to sell, not ration your product. The cart is not only in front of the horse, it’s now turned upside down.

                The real trouble is that Edison is regulated by the CPUC (California Public Utilities Commission) and they don’t have the backbone to stand up and fight for the benefit of their customers. Instead they go along with the system and have obviously learned to use it to stay profitable enough to satisfy investors. So my rates go up as I use more power each month and the funny thing is, the steps are not large enough to be a very compelling reason for most people to turn up the thermostat in the summer or shut down their computer when it’s not in use.

                When you think about it the word joke comes to mind. Every piece of the system is more interested in keeping itself employed than in anything else. I may be cynical about it but I got there honestly.

                20

              • #
                Roy Hogue

                Trump’s chances have been all over the map and the only way to be sure is to see who comes out the winner in November. I am encouraged some by recent polls but I keep remembering that 1948 election where Thomas Dewy was the odds on favorite to beat Harry Truman. The odds were so in favor of Dewy that a certain newspaper (I’ll protect the name of the foolish) printed up the morning after edition in advance of having the actual result with headlines saying Dewy Elected and they put that edition out on the streets.

                Unfortunately, Truman was elected instead. Oops!

                20

              • #
                KinkyKeith

                Roy @ 8.1.1.1.1

                Good outline of modern political manipulation.

                Here in Australia the power distribution was by State government using highly unionised workforce paid very well.

                To “overcome” this problem of rorting, the pollies have changed the ownership structure which is now effectively in private hands.

                Power prices have not gone down and the cream is just being skimmed by different people.

                People are fed up with political greed and through the Trump phenomenon are saying that O.K. if you are going to behave like scumbags, we will install our own a combat.

                Will they take note?

                10

              • #
                KinkyKeith

                Not combat .. “our own scumbag”

                Memo. Always check for autocorrect

                10

              • #

                KinkyKeith May 17, 2016 at 7:49 am

                “Not combat .. “our own scumbag” Memo. Always check for autocorrect”
                Your autocorrect was right on for a Brad Keys intro!! :-)

                00

        • #
          M Conroy

          The house I grew up in had a “gravity” heater – a monster of a furnace, natural-gas heat, pilot always on, giant fire ring (ok, not so huge, or giant, but I was much smaller then) in a big metal box in the basement, hot air slowly rose to the upper floors through the ducts. I believe it was the original natural gas furnace (evidence of a coal powered one was minimal, but there…) and was old when we moved to the house in 1971.

          It kept the house warm enough, and lasted well beyond my growing up, but eventually was no longer repairable. And as mom got older, she decided that the heat flow was too slow, and placed a small box fan in front of the filter area – as much as it might have helped, I think that the fan blew the heat around the basement more than through the system.

          Mom finally replaced the furnace in 2005 or 2006 with a new energy efficient forced hot air unit, tiny in comparison, decent heat flow; no more cold corners, no more always burning pilot or wee fan running, promise of reduced energy bills.

          The gas bill went down by 1/4, the electric doubled – end result was she was paying about $30 more per month in winter than before. I am sure the neighbors, a few hundred feet away, heard her swearing when she figured this out.

          I mention all this because my mom did her best to keep to a 1950s electric consumption. If I visited and turned on 1 extra light bulb I was lectured on the cost of that light, and wasted heat, for the rest of the visit. She had the lowest bills of anyone I ever knew.

          10

    • #
      Robk

      Tony,
      An interesting find. I think the main increase in domestic load is heating (and cooling). Most homes, schools etc had fuel heating of oil, gas or wood. Also, although homes are probably better insulated I expect that family sizes are smaller so we run many more gadgets per person as well as more gadgets per household. Presumably there will be a greater need for electricity if transport becomes more electrified.

      50

      • #

        RobK,

        the pie chart at this link shows the (keep in mind this is only average) power consumption in an Australian home, and that might be indicative of homes anywhere, give or take.

        Keep in mind that as some white goods (fridges, washers and dryers especially) have improved their power consumption considerably across the years, because in earlier days they would have been the biggest power consumers in the home, as I mentioned in the earlier comment. On this pie chart, washers and dryers get lumped in with other appliances like TV’s, computers, charging devices, etc, hence that level of 16% here. Note home lighting is only 7%, and standby power only 3%.

        Tony.

        60

        • #
          Robk

          Thanks Tony,
          The tricky bit is “energy” as opposed to “electricity” use. It’s no big deal but I think the clean air push in the west and now in China is tending to increase household demand especially with the convenience of reverse cycle split systems.

          10

          • #
            ROM

            As the discussion immediately above is something I got a bit interested in a couple of years back so here is some commentary and data from Aug 2013 and today in 2016, the figures will be even higher.
            ————————
            Quoted variously from the Breakthrough Institute site

            Bracing for the Cloud
            Digital Economy Requires Massive Amount of Electricity

            [ ICT = Information- Communications - Technologies ]

            They weigh less than five ounces, but according to recent data, when you count everything that matters, the average iPhone consumed more energy last year than a medium-sized refrigerator. By the numbers, a refrigerator from the Environmental Protection Agency’s Energy Star ratings list uses about 322 kWh per year. In contrast, the average iPhone used 361 kWh of electricity when you add up its wireless connections, data usage, and battery charging. Considering that a smart phone represents just one device in the ocean of the world’s Information-Communications-Technologies (ICT) ecosystem, it seems superfluous to say that the digital economy is poised to consume massive amounts of energy.

            &

            At the individual level, when you count all components of usage – not just charging – the average iPhone consumes more energy annually than a medium-sized refrigerator.

            &

            the global ICT system is now approaching 10 percent of the world’s electricity generation. By current calculations, the cloud uses about 1,500 TWh of electricity annually, which is equal to the combined electrical generation of Japan and Germany. In the near future, hourly Internet traffic will exceed the Internet’s annual traffic in the year 2000. The global ICT ecosystem now also consumes as much electricity as global lighting did circa 1985 (seen below).

            &

            The average square foot of a [cloud] data center uses 100 to 200 times more electricity than does a square foot of a modern office building. Put another way, a tiny few thousand square foot data room uses more electricity than lighting up a 100,000-square-foot shopping mall.

            Previous studies have looked into different aspects of the digital universe. A 2012 report by Greenpeace International called How Clean Is Your Cloud argued that data centers are a primary driver of electricity demand growth. Researchers estimated that one data center could require the amount of electricity used to power nearly 180,000 homes. Many more data centers (the largest one the size of seven football fields) are popping up across the globe in remote, suburban towns, and, combined, are expected to need upwards of 1,000 TWh – more than the total used for all purposes by Japan and Germany.
            But data centers alone are not responsible for the surge in ICT electricity use. A 2013 study by the Centre for Energy-Efficient Telecommunications (CEET) argued that much of the growth comes from wireless networks, such as Wi-Fi and 3G, used to access cloud services.
            According to the authors’ calculations, by 2015 the “wireless cloud” will consume up to 43 TWh, compared to only 9.2 TWh in 2012, representing a 460 percent increase.
            Wireless cloud users worldwide will grow from 42.8 million in 2008 to just over 998 million in 2014, representing a 69 percent annual growth rate. And Mills’ study extends the ICT energy accounting to include the much broader universe of wireless network connectivity beyond just the cloud./blockquote>

            &

            Based on the most recent data from NPD Connected Intelligence, the average Verizon Wireless iPhone user consumed about 1.58 GB of data per month in 2012, which equals about 19 GB per year. Multiply 19 GB by 19.1 kW, which is the amount of energy ATKearney reports is needed to power one GB, and you find that the average iPhone uses 361 kWh of electricity per year. Add to this the amount of electricity used to charge your phone annually (3.5 kWh) and the amount of electricity needed for each connection (23.4 kWh) and you have a grand total of 388 kWh per year. In Mills’ calculations, to watch an hour of video weekly on your smart phone or tablet consumes annually more electricity in the remote networks than two new refrigerators use in a year.

            And then we have this !

            “Google’s Green PPAs: What, How, and Why”:

            Neither the wind nor the sun are constantly available resources. They come and go with the weather, while Google’s data centers operate 24×7. No matter what, we’d need to be connected to the grid to access “conventional” power to accommodate our constant load. The plain truth is that the electric grid, with its mix of renewable and fossil generation, is an extremely useful and important tool for a data center operator, and with current technologies, renewable energy alone is not sufficiently reliable to power a data center.

            80

            • #
              Roy Hogue

              Right on the mark, ROM. And my point above though I didn’t have your numbers about smartphones.

              Small things may not be so small when you take a closer look and they add up.

              20

              • #
                Roy Hogue

                But what’s not said is that the iPhone user pays indirectly for what he doesn’t pay for directly to the power utility.

                And why does all this not constitute a compelling reason to build the necessary additional capacity? A smart whatever it is isn’t going to do a thing unless electrons flow when you demand that they flow.

                California already faces roving one hour blackouts in hot weather to keep the grid from self destructing. But I lucked out, which I learned by accident and it can’t happen to me the way power is routed from the nearest substation because I’m on the same high voltage lines coming out of that substation as the local hospital, which they won’t cut off unless there’s no other choice left. They black out someone else first. They don’t tell us that but knowing someone with a job at the hospital helps.

                I don’t particularly like not having to share the inconvenience but I’ll take my good luck where I find it.

                40

              • #
                Analitik

                Hey, don’t despair. Batteries and PV will save California. http://www.triplepundit.com/2016/04/california-blackouts-will-make-solar-batteries-national-story/#

                Meanwhile in the real world, the Aliso Canyon leak looks like a serious issue for the upcoming summer – http://www.dailynews.com/general-news/20160419/aliso-canyon-summer-blackout-threat-is-serious-and-credible-la-city-leaders-warn

                Or are you saying blackouts are occurring already but are not being widely reported, Roy?

                10

              • #
                ROM

                Just imagine if the power went off for a couple of days because the fossil fueled power generators were down for some reason or had ceased to operate and been forced to close down, the wind had died down to a calm because a big high pressure system had settled down over a good part of the continent for a week or so and a consequent “high pressure/ anticyclone gloom”, ie; a layer of stratus cloud had got established over the area and the solar systems just refused to provide any power.

                And shockingly and disastrously the smart phones and the communications systems they rely on ran out of battery power and it all just stopped!
                And so had everything else ran out of power but that is incidental to not being able to use your smart phone and tablet for the newest generations !

                When the power comes on again and all those phones and tablets and whatever are all charged up again, the Twitterverse and the gamers and etc will go into overdrive and go absolutely ballistic in tearing apart those responsible for the power outage debacle.
                Thats once they can identify those directly responsible after firstly blaming and attacking all the wrong people as is the usual modus operadi of the highly emotional and utterly irrational world of the Twitterverse.

                Once the root cause of any future long duration and continuing power outages are finally identified and marked by the Twitterverse and etc, those who created the policies and conditions, meaning the alarmists, the activists and the green sleaze and their assorted “running dog” politicals that led to such power outages might have a lot of trouble finding a safe haven anywhere on this planet.

                To deny the Twitterverse of its thumb twiddling and the gamers their emotional pleasures for more than a few minutes would be a disaster of immense proportions and somebody somewhere would have to pay and pay severely for denying the Twitterverse its ability to just to continue to Twitter about nothing of any value to anybody anywhere whenever and however the Twitterers wished and demanded.

                And just maybe the very unexpected social phenomenen of the moment might decide that it doesn’t in any way like the way things are going if they are going to deny the masses of their little foibles and pleasures by limiting or even eliminating for long periods, [ ten minutes or thereabouts in the twitterverse ] through the destruction of the reliability of a nation’s power generating systems, their ability to enjoy those small social pleasures that make up so much of their own little personal bubble sized intellectual outputs and inputs.

                Sometimes the future just turns out to be much stranger than one can get one’s mind and imagination around at the present!

                [ do I need a sarc/ ]

                40

              • #
                Analitik

                Wow, looking into California, things look much worse than I had thought – my impression was the duck curve was the only challenge but the Aliso Canyon leak magnifies the issue since

                Aliso Canyon helps supply gas service to 17 natural gas–fired power plants in the Los Angeles basin, in addition to a number of large hospitals and oil refineries. Those power plants total 9,503 MW in capacity and account for 70% of local capacity resources

                http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-gas-field-20160412-story.html

                And here’s a really interesting piece on how solar PV and wind rely on gas – just ignore the CAGW stuff.
                http://www.energypost.eu/wind-solars-achilles-heel-methane-meltdown-porter-ranch-means-energy-transition/

                30

              • #
                Roy Hogue

                If I was to let myself worry over the situation I’d self destruct in a clinical depression funk I couldn’t recover from. Somewhere there’s going to be a mass realization that our current direction is wrong. I can only hope it happens soon enough to save the day. Electricity and fossil fuels are so critical to modern life that a metropolitan area like Los Angeles couldn’t feed itself for more than a couple of days without the thousands of tons of food that come in each day by truck or rail, moved by that horror of horrors, diesel fuel. And then when it’s here you keep much of it refrigerated or frozen and you sell it in stores that would be in the dark, being windowless, unless the electric lights were working.

                We are amazingly ignorant of our dependence on fossil fuel and electricity.

                10

              • #
                Roy Hogue

                Or are you saying blackouts are occurring already but are not being widely reported, Roy?

                Analitik,

                Since they haven’t happened to us I’ve not looked for reports of other blackouts. And they may not be reported anyway because they show-up the foolishness of the current administration, which most of the MSM doesn’t want to do.

                We haven’t yet had a hot enough day across Southern California to have forced any blackouts but I’m sure they’ll come as they do every year. So this summer I’ll be on the lookout for them. I expect Edison’s site would list any in progress.

                00

              • #
                Roy Hogue

                I am howling with laughter at the allegation that the Porter Ranch methane leak is any sort of disaster or even a minor environmental problem of any kind. If the concentration could get high enough it might be a fire or explosion danger though. But it apparently it’s too slow for that. The huge peat bogs above the Arctic Circle all by themselves must have been putting methane into the air for millennia. And there must be thousands of other places emitting methane, all natural. I dislike being lied to by these people.

                One more scare tactic to keep the sheep in line I would say.

                Natural gas storage underground is another matter and I don’t know enough about the possible problems to make a good decision. But I can imagine several things, one of which is a blowout that would put huge amounts of that underground gas into the air around the facility. If that gas is not odorized it could not be detected by smell and would (or could) be a bomb waiting to go off. Another problem would be slow leakage.

                Life is interesting in this power thirsty world.

                10

  • #
    Ruairi

    The carbon-tax will happen post election,
    To fool the skeptics and avoid detection.

    Extremes of climate through a thousand years,
    Refutes ‘unprecedented’ warmist fears.

    A now or never vote to have their say,
    To leave the E.U. for a free U.K..

    150

  • #
    el gordo

    Potentially Redundant Church

    ‘For John Church, a leading authority on sea-level rise caused by global warming, there was much that was fitting – and yet callous – about being sacked at sea.

    ‘The veteran scientist was well into one of dozens of research voyages he had taken since joining CSIRO as a post doctoral student in 1979.

    ‘His vessel, the RV Investigator, was midway between Antarctica and New Zealand and steaming north on the 170 degree longitude when he received Thursday’s call to tell him he was “potentially redundant”.

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/global-sealevel-expert-john-church-made-to-walk-the-plank-by-csiro-20160513-gov0k9.html#ixzz48fxzCy8E
    Follow us: @smh on Twitter | sydneymorningherald on Facebook

    50

    • #
      David Maddison

      I wonder what proportion of his career he was at sea? Nice work if you can get it.

      20

    • #
      David Maddison

      More here. He was an outspoken critic of cutting other climate jobs in CSIRO.

      http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-19/award-winning-scientist-condemns-csiro-job-cuts/7184410

      10

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      At 64 the thought of retirement should surely have occurred to him.

      Speaking of ships the UK Government has rejected the popular choice for the name of its new $200 million research ship. Instead it will be named The Sir David Attenborough. A smaller vessel will get the popular name of Boaty McBoatface.

      In a separate development the Australian Antarctic Research Division ruled out ever naming a vessel as Allbull Turnbull. They indicated that the hoped for new ship might be called Antarctic Research Ship Explorer Turnbull.

      50

    • #
      James Murphy

      It says a lot about the types of people who generally inhabit HR departments that this was done by phone call, and not face to face.

      20

  • #
    Analitik

    I put this up in an earlier thread in a semi-mocking manner and then Pat carpet bombed it into obscurity. But I’m raising it again as I think this is really important.

    Queenslanders – Have your say against the state government’s planning for
    50% renewable energy target for Queensland

    This is not a proposal by some independent think tank. This is your government planning to follow South Australia down the renewables generation madness.
    Please take the time to read this – http://www.qldrepanel.com.au/issues-paper/documents/35677/download

    They do recognize that wind and solar have intermittency issues but assume that they will be manageable based on the Diesendorf report that we looked into and concluded was delusional, an AEMO report that they cannot have properly read and a CSIRO report that focuses on CAGW and costs with no consideration to the intermittency of renewables.

    You have until the 10th of June to submit your objections here – http://www.qldrepanel.com.au/issues-paper/survey_tools/submissions-to-the-renewable-energy-inquiry
    There is no format for submission documents and files can be uploaded as attachments

    There are also public forums being held. Townville’s was today. The dates and location for the others (some of which are after the submission deadline) here – http://www.qldrepanel.com.au/engagement-hub/survey_tools/expression-of-interest-for-participation-in-community-forums

    If you are in Townsville the forum is on Tuesday but you have to register (above) today.

    Later planned forums can be found here – http://www.qldrepanel.com.au/engagement-hub/survey_tools/future-forums

    There is also a (moderated) discussion forum
    http://www.qldrepanel.com.au/engagement-hub/forum_topics/what-are-the-jobs-of-the-future-how-can-queensland-build-the-skilled-workforce-that-is-required-in-a-renewable-energy-economy1

    The wording of the consultation questions shows that they assume you all want this. Tell them you don’t!

    Put up your objections. If you just assume that they won’t listen, then you haven’t given them any chance and they’ll continue to assume all Queenslanders want more renewable energy generation.

    120

    • #
      Analitik

      So has anyone registered for Tuesday’s public forum at Townsville? It would be instructive to know how things are presented and what the general feedback is.

      30

    • #

      It’s okay for a tiny State like Tasmania to hope for 50% renewables, and even for South Australia, with it’s tiny consumption, both States less than 10% of Australia’s total power consumption.

      Perhaps even the small area of Victoria. Huh! As if!

      However, look at the vast area of Queensland and the distances, and the number of Cities spread across that distance, the second highest consuming State in Australia for electricity.

      However, far and away the biggest of the problems is that Queensland has the youngest fleet of coal fired plants in the Country.

      Plant – Nameplate- Date Opened

      Callide – 460MW – 2001
      Gladstone – 1680MW – 1976
      Kogan Creek – 750MW – 2007
      Milmerran – 850MW – 2002
      Stanwell – 1445MW – 1996
      Tarong North – 443MW – 2003
      Tarong – 1400MW – 1986

      Total Nameplate 6928MW

      For Queensland to have 50% Renewables, they will have to close half of that Nameplate.

      Gladstone is the oldest, 40 years and still going strong, privately owned. Close that down. Not on your life. It’s privately owned, hence a contract to supply. Besides Gladstone, it does the Alumina Plant, the huge port, and the huge rail network to feed that port with the coal going overseas. Shut that down, and there goes Queensland, down the gurgler, literally.

      Tarong. Huh! 1400MW supplying the North. Good luck with that.

      All the rest are barely 15 years old with Stanwell at 20 the oldest of those next ones. They won’t close any of them down. Imagine the signal it sends Industry. Build something slated to operate for 40 years plus, and then we’ll legislate closure at half time or less. The lawsuits alone will bankrupt the State.

      Too right I’ll be making a submission. It will be long and detailed, and take many many hours to compile. I’ll get a thank you email, but that’s all. It will be laughed at, ignored, and buried, never to be seen or discussed. You can’t have people telling politicians the truth. They don’t want to hear it, let alone allow the general public to hear the truth.

      Every word will be the truth.

      I’ll even go along to the meeting here in Rockhampton.

      Fat lot of good any of this will ever do.

      Because ….. read my lips.

      QUEENSLAND WILL NEVER HAVE 50% RENEWABLES.

      It’s all just talk and another way to spend taxpayer dollars on a useless gabfest, with all involved being paid enormous amounts of money that will have no result whatsoever.

      Tony.

      60

  • #
    Analitik

    Mods. Please release my comment #10 – it is a serious issue that Queenslanders need to follow up

    30

    • #
      Analitik

      Too late – the saturation bombing has begun :(

      30

      • #
        Andrew McRae

        When I’m being generous I refer to it as pat pourri.
        It usually contains no original thought or analysis, but some people like it as a non-opinionated taster pack of world climate journalism. OSINT on the cheap. A news feed within a news feed.

        50

  • #
    pat

    this sounds promising:

    13 May: Reuters: Trump taps climate change skeptic as energy adviser, pushes back on taxes
    By Valerie Volcovici and Emily Flitter
    Donald Trump on Friday picked a prominent climate change skeptic to help him craft his energy policy and pushed back against renewed calls that he release his income tax returns – saying his tax rate is “none of your business.”…
    Among those he has asked for help is U.S. Republican Representative Kevin Cramer of North Dakota, one of the country’s most ardent oil and gas drilling advocates and climate change skeptics. North Dakota has been at the forefront of the U.S. shale oil and gas boom.
    Trump’s team asked Cramer, who has endorsed Trump, to write a white paper, or detailed report, on his energy policy ideas, according to Cramer and sources familiar with the matter…
    Trump will have an opportunity to float some of the ideas at an energy summit in Bismarck, North Dakota on May 26, Cramer said…
    Environmental groups, and Clinton’s campaign, quickly attacked Trump for tapping Cramer…
    “Kevin Cramer has consistently backed reckless and dangerous schemes to put the profits of fossil fuel executives before the health of the public, so he and Trump are a match made in polluter heaven,” Sierra Club Legislative Director Melinda Pierce said in an emailed statement…
    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-idUSKCN0Y41PM

    but then there’s this!

    13 May: Scientific American: Meet Donald Trump’s New Energy Adviser
    Kevin Cramer calls himself a climate-change skeptic yet he might support a carbon tax
    by Evan Lehmann, Climatewire
    Cramer, who has expressed support for a small carbon tax to replace the Clean Power Plan, said he may offer Trump advice on climate change that challenges the candidate’s assertions about it being a hoax promoted by Democrats.
    “He can do all that if he wants,” Cramer said of Trump’s climate position in a lengthy interview. “But my advice would be, while I’m a skeptic, as well, he is a product of political populism, and ***political populism believes that there needs [to be] some addressing of climate change.”
    Trump might find that Cramer occupies gray spaces on energy and climate policy. The former utility regulator acknowledges that the world is on a path to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but he calls himself skeptical of the broadly held view by scientists and Democrats that warming could cause severe economic and physical damage.
    “I’ve been skeptical, but I don’t resist the reality that we’re heading toward or our goal is a more carbon-constrained world,” Cramer said…
    “I would still tell him, ‘Yeah, we need to stop and repeal the Clean Power Plan,’” Cramer said. “If in fact he wants a more carbon-restrained energy policy, he ought to work with real scientists and work with Congress to come up with a better one.”
    But Cramer seems doubtful that can be accomplished.
    The prospects for undoing the climate regulation are remote if the rule survives legal challenges that appear bound for the Supreme Court, Cramer said. That would mean undertaking a new rulemaking that changes or reverses the Clean Power Plan, something that might take much of Trump’s first term if he manages to win the White House, Cramer said…
    “My idea of a carbon tax would be to help fund clean fossil fuel research and development, not to fund the government, not to punish fossil fuel generation, not to manipulate fuel choice,” Cramer said. “Even a neutral, a revenue-neutral, carbon tax is inappropriate, in my view. But if we can have a very, very modest carbon tax to fund, again, the solution by utilizing fossil fuels like coal, I think even the industry would support that.”…
    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/meet-donald-trump-s-new-energy-adviser/

    seems strange Cramer should be mouthing off like this to Climatewire even before presenting his paper to Trump!

    20

  • #
    pat

    TonyfromOz – the base-load stuff is at the end of this piece. at least some truths in the early part:

    13 May: RenewEconomy: Craig Morris: Germany nearly reached 100% renewable, time to retire base-load
    On Monday, both Agora Energiewende (a Berlin-based think tank) and Clean Energy Wire (an associated communications team) announced that renewable electricity “probably” covered more than 90 percent of power demand at 58 GW for a couple of hours on Sunday. Yet Agora’s press spokesperson was notably circumspect: “It is far from certain the share was above 90 percent.” He was cautious for good reason. By the end of the day, Agora’s website showed a much different estimate of power demand peaking at 68 GW.
    In contrast, Fraunhofer ISE’s Energy-Charts.de estimated peak power production of around 63 GW, but 8 GW was for export, putting domestic power demand at 58 GW – less than Agora’s initial estimate…
    Whatever the share of renewable electricity was on Sunday, let’s clear up some confusion: First, we are only talking about electricity, not energy. The power sector makes up only around 20 percent of the German energy demand. And renewables made up only 15 percent of total energy consumption last year in our best estimate (no official estimates will be published for a while).
    Second, Germany did not get 95 (or whatever) percent renewable electricity for the entire day, but only for a few hours. And third, Germany did not, as Quartz.com put it, have “so much renewable energy on Sunday that it had to pay people to use electricity.” It had so much baseload running below the must-run level that it had to pay people to consume electricity. Wind and solar will never cause negative prices on their own. (If you’re not sure what “must-run” means,read this first.)…ETC
    http://reneweconomy.com.au/2016/germany-nearly-reached-100-percent-renewable-power-on-sunday-32091

    stunning & alarming!

    13 May: RenewEconomy: Julien Vincent: AMP board’s stunning admission: They never considered climate change
    It was AMP’s turn this week to field questions from shareholders about how the company is handling issues of climate change and fossil fuel risk.
    It revealed something alarming about how Australia’s third biggest asset manager was managing what has been described by Bank of England Governor Mark Carney as a huge risk to global financial stability…
    http://reneweconomy.com.au/2016/amp-boards-stunning-admission-they-never-considered-climate-change-40065

    30

  • #
    pat

    13 May: Guardian: David Sparkes: ‘Tantalisingly close’: is solar thermal energy ready to replace coal-fired power?
    Australian projects are viable already – now the industry needs investors willing to take a risk on large-scale renewable energy
    Companies working on large-scale solar thermal projects in Australia say they are tantalisingly close to achieving the dream of building plants big enough to replace coal-fired energy in Australia.
    Experts speaking at the Australian Solar Energy Exhibition and Conference in Melbourne last week said the technology had been proven in other countries, and projects in Australia were viable, but the challenge was getting major investors to gamble on something new…
    “Right now, when it’s a first-off plant, [attracting investors] is a difficult thing, so you need an investor with a high-risk appetite,” James Fisher said.
    “That really means it’s going to need government support.
    “Once you’ve got the first plant built, then it comes to a different sort of [investor] and there is huge amounts of money out there looking for infrastructure investments that are giving a return over a 30-year plant life.
    “There is no shortage of funds once you prove the technology,” he said…
    http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2016/may/13/tantalisingly-close-is-solar-thermal-energy-ready-to-replace-coal-fired-power

    13 May: Reuters: Jim Christie: U.S. trustee says McKinsey disclosure lacking in SunEdison Chapter 11
    SunEdison Inc’s plan to retain a unit of consulting company McKinsey as its restructuring adviser should be rejected, the Office of the U.S. trustee said on Thursday, citing concerns about the unit’s undisclosed ties to creditors and other interested parties in SunEdison’s bankruptcy.
    McKinsey Recovery & Transformation Services US LLP has “vague and amorphous” connections to creditors and other interested parties in SunEdison’s Chapter 11 bankruptcy that require further disclosure, the trustee said in court papers filed in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York…
    http://www.reuters.com/article/bankruptcy-sunedison-idUSL2N18A0AF

    20

    • #

      Thanks for this one pat:

      I went to the article and thought to critique it, but it would take too many comments here, as the article is so full of spin and flat out falseh00d$.

      However, I would point out that wonderful second image and its caption below the image where it says this: (my bolding here)

      Vast Solar is gradually build up its solar thermal plant in Jemalong, New South Wales, and will soon have 6MW capacity.

      So ….. soon ….. we’ll only need 1,500 of what you see in the image equal the power generated by Bayswater, and still only get that power for (on a yearly average) 6.6 hours a day.

      Baseload!!! I think I just choked on my cup of Earl Grey.

      Unmitigated cr@p like this article is what is misleading the public to believe that a dud technology can replace what we have now, old tech coal fired power plants, let alone replace those new tech coal fired plants.

      Tony.

      70

      • #
        Andrew McRae

        Another hidden cost of solar power is to that environmental trump card called biodiversity.
        Anecdotal evidence suggests many people who get PV arrays installed on their suburban roofs have to cut down trees on the equatorial side of their house to maximise the generation capacity. Aside from the slight reduction in natural air-conditioning from the evapotranspiration in summer, there remains less habitat for birds, possums, and koalas. These critters have enough survival difficulties in the `burbs as it is without people making the evicting their former tree friends too. These champagne Greens seem to neglect biodiversity during their leap onto the eco-friendly bandwagon.
        More keen on tweeting their feed-in earnings than feeding earnest tweeters, apparently. ;-)

        80

      • #
        Analitik

        we’ll only need 1,500 of what you see in the image equal the power generated by Bayswater

        It gets better than that. The Jemalong plant being completed (construction began in 2014) is 6 MW THERMAL

        Electrical power output will only be 1.1 MW. Storage is for 3 hours.

        ‘Tantalisingly close’ indeed
        http://www.vastsolar.com/projects/6mwth-solar-station-pilot

        30

        • #
          pattoh

          There is another one just down the creek bank at Lake Cargellego:-

          http://reneweconomy.com.au/2013/solar-energy-in-the-australian-outback-at-8ckwh-44381

          You never hear too much about it. I wonder why?

          Perhaps the 8c claim needs an asterisk or two with copious footnotes & disclaimers/sarc.

          20

          • #
            Graeme No.3

            That was 3 years ago and then silence. The article is woeful except it lists solar heat processes at around 25¢ per kWh. (Its rare for the ABC to quote accurate costs). That’s $250 a MWh. The Noor (“world’s largest solar heat”) project in Morocco claims their process will deliver at $275 per MWh. They admit it will never repay the capital cost (OK with them because it is overseas money).

            Compare those figures with coal at $30 a MWh.

            His claim of $80 per MWh is rather doubtful, particularly as I can see no way that it could boost the efficiency of diesel operation. Boosting the waste exhaust heat ? If heating is required then running a diesel with heat recovery is old technology (1970′s) and gives 80-85% efficiency. There’s probably a good reason why we’ve heard no more about the process.

            10

            • #
              Analitik

              There are so many articles on RenewEconomy that tout “breakthroughs” which lead nowhere.
              The site is all about hyping renewables, not providing real information nor balanced analysis.

              The articles by David Leitch aren’t bad, though if you ignore his conclusions and draw the obvious ones from the information and analysis that he presents. His mind must be an interesting maze of self-deception – there is no way the body of his articles should be allowed by Giles as they only serve to undermine the renewables edifice.

              10

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      pat:

      to pay for Solar heat tower plants they have to charge around $275 per MWh, compared with coal fired at $30. (Figure comes from the Noor installation in Morocco). If any large company is queuing up to invest in these projects then the shareholders should be voting replacements for the board. Else the whole thing will get messy and the ‘executives’ will face legal action.

      30

  • #
    Sceptical Sam

    Is Malcolm Turnbull to be Trusted on Carbon Trading?

    Can I trust Malcolm Turnbull to not bring in an Emissions Trading Scheme or worse still a Carbon tax?

    He’s been as silent as a lamb on that since the election campaign started. Not a word from the co-called superior communicator. Nothing. It never even came up as an issue in the debate the other night.

    Yes, Tony Nutt, National Campaign Director, Liberal Party of Australia, criticized Bill Shorten’s plan for a Carbon tax in his email of 28th April when he said:

    The carbon tax is back

    At the last election, Australians made it very clear that they rejected Labor’s carbon tax.

    In office, Labor had imposed the world’s biggest carbon tax (despite promising not to) and put up electricity prices for every Australian family.

    Yesterday Bill Shorten announced that he wanted to re-introduce this tax on electricity.

    But he didn’t have the honesty to tell Australian families how much it will cost them.

    Labor’s own modelling, however, shows that to reach a target similar to Labor’s, wholesale electricity prices would need to be 78% higher in 2030.”

    Some trusting souls may argue that Tony Nutt’s criticism is a clear undertaking that the Turnbull Liberal Party won’t do the same thing. Poor trusting souls that they are.

    How can you believe them?

    Just the other day we had Scott Morrison the Treasurer, trying to tell us that his Superannuation cap of $1.6 million and his $500,000 limit on non-concessional contributions was not retrospective. Morrison has demonstrated just how dishonest the Turnbull Liberal Party can be.

    Even conservative stalwarts like John Stone and David Flint have pointed out in recent days the blatant dishonesty of the Morrison assertion. The Institute of Public Affairs (IPA), one of the clearest thinking conservative libertarian organizations in Australia, has also pointed out the dishonesty of the Morrison announcement.

    You can’t dismiss that announcement as not affecting you, just because you might not be caught up in the $1.6 million cap. You need to remember that they’ll be coming after your nest egg next. Remember when there was no limit on what could be put into Super under the Costello reforms? Then of course they brought in a limit of how much you could pay in at the Concessional rate. Their limit was $50,000 from memory. Then it was wound back to $35,000 and now it’s down to $25,000.

    What makes anybody think that the current cap of $1.6 million will stay fixed forever? It won’t. And they’ll be back for more. This time it’ll probably impact on your balance.

    But leaving that aside it just demonstrates that Turnbull and his current Liberal team can’t be trusted.

    Let them say clearly and categorically that a Turnbull Liberal government will not, under any circumstance, introduce a Carbon tax or an Emissions Trading Scheme in any shape or form.

    Let Malcolm Turnbull say it and he may go some way to retrieving a few of the votes he’s lost from the conservative and the man-made global warming sceptic community.

    111

    • #
      Dennis

      I would not trust most of what the media present, spin of advertising dressed up as news items, political beat ups a speciality and publishing anonymous briefings from politicians who are not willing to be named as the source.

      The Electronic Whorehouse by Paul Sheehan.

      Why would the Coalition plan a new carbon tax after abolishing the Union Labor carbon tax because it was so unpopular?

      Shorten Union Labor are talking about an Emissions Trading Scheme and I would believe that the left side of the Liberals led by Turnbull could be considering that option too. Both sides planning to join it into the EU ETS, as Combet admitted when he was Minister and defending Carbon Tax as a first step.

      So what better during an election campaign than to accuse the Coalition of wanting a new Carbon Tax?

      Hang that on them and talk as little as possible about Electricity Bill’s EU ETS agenda.

      50

    • #
      TdeF

      Of course Malcolm is bringing in his ETS. This is why he joined politics. It cost him his job in 2009. Now as PM, like Julia Gillard he will make it his first announcement. Then he will push his Republic.

      50

  • #
    pat

    13 May: ClimateChangeNews: Ed King: Poland’s pain: Weaning Warsaw off coal
    Brussels is in a fix. It wants to retain its mantle as an international climate policy leader, but not all member states are playing ball
    This week, energy minister Krzysztof Tchorzewski mocked the idea the country will be able to ditch coal by 2050…
    Coal accounts for nearly 90% of the country’s power generation…
    Ruling out renewables, Tchorzewski argues that Poland’s only realistic hope of cutting emissions is planting trees, although the EU is still consulting on whether this will be count towards its 2030 goal.
    It’s a massive headache for the European Commission, but one Tubiana argued can be relieved if Brussels is willing to get creative on policy formulation.
    Repeating the burden sharing trick used for the 2020 goals is unlikely to deliver, she said: “If we follow the type of political streams we have been following it will be difficult.”…
    Still, the country has plans to build 14 coal power plants. Even if not all are built, it is heavily invested in high-carbon infrastructure well beyond 2050…
    http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/05/13/polands-pain-weaning-warsaw-off-coal/

    13 May: ClimateChangeNews: Philippines climate body urges new president to ditch coal
    By Purple Romero in Manila
    The government has approved 29 coal-fired power plants and counting. It puts the polluting fuel on course to generate 56% of electricity by 2020, according to consultancy firm IHS…
    Prior to the 9 May poll, Duterte – who campaigned on a crime-cutting platform – said the country should remain open to having new coal-fired power plants.
    He described the UN and developed nations as “hypocritical” for asking all countries, including developing ones such as the Philippines, to cut their emissions…
    http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/05/13/philippines-climate-body-urges-new-president-to-ditch-coal/

    40

  • #
    pat

    have used my quota of free Tele articles this month, but think this one is probably Christopher Booker. perhaps someone could excerpt a little of it:

    The Fifth Carbon Budget – the most insane Act passed by Parliament
    Telegraph.co.uk-7 hours ago
    It has everything to do with our MPs’ obligation, under the Climate Change Act, to approve something called the “Fifth Carbon Budget”, laying down Britain’s …

    there’s this one too:

    UK emission cut may exceed the rest of EU
    Telegraph.co.uk – 14 May Emily Gosden

    14 May: Times of India: PTI: Court summons RK Pachauri in sexual harassment case, says enough material to proceed
    A court here on Saturday issued summons to environmentalist RK Pachauri, accused of sexually harassing a colleague, after taking cognisance of a chargesheet against him and holding there is enough material to proceed against him under charges dealing with stalking, words, gestures or acts intended to insult a woman’s modesty…
    The court fixed July 11 for further hearing. A set of copy of the charge-sheet will be supplied to Pachauri at the next hearing…ETC
    http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Court-summons-RK-Pachauri-in-sexual-harassment-case-says-enough-material-to-proceed/articleshow/52270681.cms

    20

    • #
      Ross

      Here is Booker’s piece Pat : ( Its a good example of why the UK needs to get out of the EU)

      By the end of next month the most insane Act ever passed by Parliament is set to land us in a quite extraordinary situation vis-à-vis the rest of the European Union. This has nothing to do with the referendum. It has everything to do with our MPs’ obligation, under the Climate Change Act, to approve something called the “Fifth Carbon Budget”, laying down Britain’s energy policy for 12 years ahead.

      “What the “Fifth Carbon Carbon Budget” proposes is terrifying”

      Not only will this be disastrous in itself. It will put us at an appalling competitive disadvantage with our EU partners. And it will make a complete mockery of pledges made by both the Chancellor, George Osborne, and our Energy and Climate Change Secretary, Amber Rudd.

      The Fifth Carbon Budget was published last year by that very odd body, the Climate Change Committee, set up by the Climate Change Act to advise the Government on how to meet the Act’s target that, by 2050, Britain must slash its “carbon emissions” by 80 per cent on their 1990 level. Although few members of this supposedly “independent” committee, headed by Lord Deben (aka John Gummer), are experts in either climate science or energy, all are dedicated climate alarmists.

      What their latest “carbon budget” proposes is that, to meet the Act’s 80 per cent target, between 2028 and 2033 Britain must raise its emissions cuts to a staggering 57 per cent. Yet this is at a time when other EU countries are at odds over whether they can agree on a much lower target of just 40 per cent by 2030, let alone whether this would be legally binding.

      What the “Fifth Carbon Carbon Budget” proposes is terrifying. It talks of how 60 per cent of our cars should by then be electric (currently these are barely half a per cent of new cars sold). We must look forward to abandoning use of gas for heating and cooking (currently supplying 90 per cent of us). As, within five years, we are due to stop using the coal that until recently supplied more than a third of our electricity (easily the cheapest way to make it), we must nevertheless double our electricity consumption, for cooking, heating and transport. And most of this will come from a huge expansion in “renewables” and new nuclear plants: only one of which is yet in the pipeline, already billed to be the most expensive power station in the world and which we were told last week will not be on stream until 2026.
      “This amazing ragbag of proposals, based entirely on wishful thinking, will next month become the law of the land”
      Even the committee is aware that, due to the intermittency of wind and solar, to keep Britain’s economy running we would need a great many new gas-fired power stations to provide backup when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine. But as this is a fossil fuel, they propose it should carry an increased “carbon tax” (four times higher than its present level, already four times higher than anywhere else in the world), which will make its power so costly that this might somehow make wind farms seem “competitive”. It must also, they repeatedly insist, be fitted with “carbon capture” to bury all their CO2: using a technology not yet developed and which probably never will be.

      So this amazing ragbag of proposals, based entirely on wishful thinking, will next month become the law of the land, to put us “ahead of the world”: at a time when the rest of the EU will still not have agreed its target of 40 per cent. Yet this flies in the face of both Osborne’s pledge to the 2011 Tory conference that “we’re going to cut our carbon emissions no slower but also no faster than our fellow countries in Europe”, and that of Ms Rudd in a speech last July, in claiming that “we have to travel in step with what is happening in the rest of the world”.

      This is why 15 MPs, including three former Cabinet ministers, have now written to Ms Rudd asking her to delay “setting the Fifth Carbon Budget” until the EU has concluded an agreement on its own target. Otherwise, they warn, this will not only put us at a severe competitive disadvantage, but other countries could even use our grossly disproportionate contribution to the EU’s general total as an excuse for contributing much less themselves. If Rudd does not ask MPs to delay, they will merely be bringing us even nearer to a catastrophe the dimensions of which few in Britain have yet woken up to.

      60

      • #
        Sceptical Sam

        Amazing.

        Then these dolts wonder why populist politics is taking off all around the democratic world. Increasingly “the people” are looking to wipe away the cronyism and the corruption around the policies implemented to deal with so-called “climate change” along with so many other ineffectual policies of the old parties and their respective establishments.

        The new populists are coming for them.

        Trump will fix the climate madness in the USA;

        Nigel Farage will fix it in the UK.

        Norbert Hofer will fix it in Austria.

        Viktor Orban will fix it in Hungary

        Miloš Zeman will fix it in the Czech Republic

        Andrzej Duda will fix it in Poland.

        Unfortunately nobody in Australia is going to fix it, unless Barnaby Joyce, the Leader of the National Party, steps up to the mark.

        51

        • #
          Dariusz

          Being populist is to promise anything to anybody. Trump and co do not do that, as they talk about fiscal responsibility, fixing security. Shorton and the Malcolm in not so middle are the populists as they will offer anything to get elected.

          50

  • #
    pat

    14 May: BusinessStandardIndia: Land, green clearances behind Coal India’s success
    by Avishek Rakshit & Shreya Jai
    When Union coal and power minister Piyush Goyal set a target of providing affordable round-the-clock electricity to all by 2019, it seemed overambitious to some. However, one public sector enterprise went into an overdrive to turn this dream into a reality.
    During 2015-16, domestic coal availability at thermal power plants was record 28 days, with no plant facing fuel scarcity. This, in turn, kept a check on India’s forex outflows as demand for imported coal remained under control. India’s power sector heavily depends on coal as over 80 per cent of the country’s electricity is generated by thermal plants…
    Coal India achieved a staggering production of 536.51 million tonnes (mt) during the financial year ended March 31, 2016.
    But how did Coal India, which faced one of its gravest production crisis during 2010-11 with nearly no production growth, manage a turnaround to live up to its reputation of being the world’s largest coal miner? The answer lies in a combination of policy-related reforms, state-Centre partnership, swift execution and close monitoring by the ministry…
    Coal India grew by 8.6 per cent in the last financial year, compared with 6.9 per cent growth in 2014-15. It has 431 operational mines with plans for further expansion. The average life of a mine is 30 years.”We established an institutional approach to work with the ministries to get necessary clearances,” Swarup said adding, “There was not a single case where any regulation was bypassed. We just fast-tracked the process.”…ETC
    http://wap.business-standard.com/article/economy-policy/land-green-clearances-behind-coal-india-s-success-116051400760_1.html

    15 May: Crisis looms as our coal-fired power stations start to break down
    By Jon Rees For The Mail On Sunday
    Coal-fired power stations are likely to break down more often as the deadline for closure approaches, leaving the UK vulnerable to power shortages.
    The warning from energy chiefs comes after seven power stations either broke down or were not available last Monday.
    On Tuesday, the UK generated no power from coal for the first time since the 19th Century. Renewable energy took up the slack…
    ‘We are replacing big, reliable pieces of kit,’ said Atherton, ‘but for every megawatt of power from coal, we need something like ten megawatts of solar power and three to four megawatts of wind power to guarantee the same amount of generating capacity.’
    http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-3590573/Crisis-looms-coal-fired-power-stations-start-break-down.html

    40

  • #
    handjive

    Fractured Climate-Fairy Tales

    Global warming won’t just change the weather—it could trigger massive earthquakes and volcanoes

    Bill McGuire is not optimistic about humanity’s future.
    In his book, Waking the Giant: How a changing climate triggers earthquakes, tsunamis, and volcanoes, he explains why.

    “We’ve almost certainly cancelled the next ice age.”

    Q. How do you sleep at night?
    A. Just like everyone else.
    That’s the problem.
    Most people don’t think about it.
    I do, but I’ve got a young family and I’m knackered.
    Nothing keeps me awake at night, maybe apart from my wife’s snoring occasionally.”
    ~ ~ ~
    “I do, but I’ve got a young family and I’m knackered. “

    Factcheck: How family planning could be part of the answer to [Global Warming] – The Conversation
    . . .
    The moral to the story:

    Imagine how many earthquakes, tsunamis, and volcanoes could have been stopped, and ice ages continue, if he had no children!

    50

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘…through careful analysis of historical records that the relationship between the weather and the “solid” earth is incontrovertible.’

      He got that right, something to do with geomagnetism.

      30

      • #
        Dariusz

        Volcanic eruptions can cause global change in climate, cause local and global extinctions.
        To suggests that the climate change can cause earthquakes is a sheer madness.
        This is just like blaming co2 for temp change when looking at temp graph vs co2 graph derived from Vostok ice cores.

        20

  • #
    pat

    13 May: AFR: Apollo gets a Thrasher in its corner for Anglo coal mine bid
    by Sarah Thompson, Anthony Macdonald, Joyce Moullakis
    Private equity giant Apollo Global Management, which along with BMA has signed non-disclosure agreements to enter the second round for the auction of the coking coal assets, suddenly became a stronger competitor.
    Street Talk can reveal that Apollo is working in a heavyweight consortium with Pennsylvania coal exporter Xcoal Energy & Resources, the largest exporter of coal in the United States and founded by coal legend Ernie Thrasher.
    It’s understood the XCoal/Apollo team toured the Moranbah North and Grosvenor mines in late April. Thrasher, who is based in the United States, was also spotted in Brisbane recently. BMA too has been seen on site in recent weeks…
    ***There is every reason to believe that this auction might end with Anglo’s mines in hands other than Australia’s existing coal majors. It is clear enough that US private equity has identified Australian fossil fuels as a field of opportunity…
    http://www.afr.com/street-talk/apollo-gets-a-trasher-in-its-corner-for-anglo-coal-mine-bid-20160511-got2te

    14 May: Breitbart: Terry Jarrett: It’s Not the Free Market that is Killing Coal
    (Terry Jarrett is an energy attorney and consultant, and a former commissioner on the Missouri Public Service Commission.)
    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/05/14/not-free-market-killing-coal/

    20

  • #
    pat

    12 May: ClimateChangeNews: Natalie Unterstell: Brazil must review its climate pledge on new data
    Emissions from farming and forestry were 28% higher than previously thought in 2005, the baseline year for Brazilian climate targets
    That affects not only the numbers from the past, but also the country’s commitments for the future. Brazil used 2005 as the baseline for emissions targets: a 37% cut by 2025 and 43% by 2030.
    If Brazil uses the new reference data without changing the targets, virtually no mitigation action is needed. So will it review its climate pledge?…READ ON
    http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/05/12/brazil-must-review-its-climate-pledge-on-new-data/

    following includes lots of CAGW spin, but…

    12 May: Scientific American: Daniel Cusick: Fossil Fuels May Not Dwindle Anytime Soon
    The U. S. Energy Information Administration foresees continued dominance for coal, gas and oil
    Rapid economic growth in China, India, Indonesia, Brazil and other emerging countries will drive global energy consumption to nearly double by 2040, according to new projections released yesterday by the Department of Energy…
    Based on its latest projections, EIA said global carbon dioxide emissions from energy activities will rise from 36 billion metric tons in 2012, the baseline year used for the 2016 outlook, to 43 billion metric tons in 2040.
    That’s a 34 percent increase in energy-related CO2, compared to a 48 percent increase in overall energy consumption from 2010 to 2040, when EIA says the world will consume a record 815 quadrillion British thermal units (Btu) of energy…
    Among non-OECD members, Asian countries like China, India and Indonesia will account for 55 percent of all new energy use through 2040, the analysis found…
    A spokesman for EIA stressed in an email that the agency did not ignore the Paris accord or other international agreements in its analysis…
    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fossil-fuels-may-not-dwindle-anytime-soon/

    10

  • #
  • #
    el gordo

    Green Army Malingerers

    ‘The federal government’s Green Army of young jobseekers enlisted to restore the environment has suffered mass casualties, including chafing “injuries”, chemical exposure and 900 recruits who were discharged or abandoned their posts.’

    SMH

    40

    • #
      Dennis

      It’s so hard to be a Green.

      And even harder to be a recruit to the Green Army of work for the dole people.

      And to leave those beaches for weekends.

      80

      • #
        el gordo

        How about Timorese guest workers on the minimum wage?

        This was Abbott’s baby and I’m sorry to see it fail. Recruiting an army of malcontents would have been a good platform for a soap opera, but in reality its not a pretty picture.

        40

    • #
      M Conroy

      It’s hard, being outside in the wild, tending to trees and soil. Insects bite, sweat pours down the body, itchiness ensues. And having to wear proper clothing is so much like wearing a uniform, gross.

      00

  • #
    Turbo

    Latest news Church has been fired By the CSIRO

    30

  • #
    David Maddison

    They are always discovering new causes for climate change. Here is the latest.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/05/10/mit-lecture-is-islamophobia-accelerating-global-warming/

    40

  • #
    PeterS

    I see a lot of tossing and turning over who will win the election. Get with the program – it doesn’t matter who wins. Sadly the totalitarian socialist agenda of one kind or another is the game and it’s coming to a town near you regardless of who wins.

    70

  • #
    Analitik

    Naomi Klein criticises lack of global action on climate change after Sydney Peace prize win

    Author and social activist says political action on climate change was lacking ‘and nowhere more so than Australia’

    Well done, Australia!!

    110

  • #

    Just got back from hiking in the majestic Flinders Ranges in South Australia, and passing the “Northern” power station at Port Augusta, I wondered how long it would be before we have power black outs here in S.A. because the power station has just closed down, with wind power supposedly replacing the shortfall. What could possibly go wrong???? Oh yes, they are also talking about a massive solar plant to replace it. The locals in the north are buying generators in anticipation for the likely failures during the coming summer. Some smart people here, I would say. While all this is going on our beloved State govt is finally talking up Nuclear power. Go figure?

    Jo, I am sure there is a bigger story here.

    70

  • #
    Joe Lalonde

    Woohoo…snowing, the new global warming here?
    Still seeing how each month is such the hottest on record in Bloombergs…

    50

    • #
      Dave in the States

      I was puzzled by all the warmest ever reporting in the western USA last month. What?? It has been about 10 degrees F below normal since mid March.

      60

  • #
    Dave in the States

    During one the threads last week, David Evans commented: that warmest hold the moral high ground, in terms of public perception, because they are seen as “saving the planet.” David is correct in that is is how it is perceived, but actually climate action is indeed rather immoral.

    All things that are presented as needed to -unnecessarily- “save the planet” are immoral:

    * Increased fuel poverty placed upon the poor.
    * High fuel costs placed upon the working class and the elderly.
    * Curtailed economic growth and loss of hope for a better future for our kids.
    * Loss of jobs now and in the future for no good reason.
    * The needless dismantling of expensive, but paid for, energy infrastructure, for unreliable, incapable, and more expensive energy systems.
    * Boiled down, it all amounts to taxes, taxes, taxes. Unneeded Taxes are immoral.
    * The loss of national sovereignty in exchange for global and unelected governmental authority.
    * The loss of represented and consensual government in exchange for governmental authority not representative of the people and without consent.
    * We are not passing on to our children a more secure and more free world.
    * Climate action requires the loss of democracy and freedom for all.
    * Real pollution is not being addressed.
    * Burning down forests instead of cleaner oil and coal.
    * Renewable energy subsidies in effect transfer wealth from the poor to the rich.
    * Energy taxes are regressive taxes.
    * Massive sums are being spent on a futile crusade, instead of on more important and much needed research and development on real science and engineering problems.
    * Excessive regulations are strangling the private sectors stifling innovation.

    I won’t include the bad effects of potentially reduced atmospheric co2 because we can not control co2 concentration even if we wanted to.

    120

  • #
    Sane Canadian

    Hi all,

    If you go to faceplant (facebook) and see SciBabe’s page, you can enjoy the true believers rallying to protect Bill Nye [snip] from those rational people who point out his hypocrisy and [[snip] errors]. Feel free to post and have some fun.
    https://www.facebook.com/scibabe/photos/a.492893197514127.1073741828.492861780850602/783880541748723/?type=3&comment_id=783883501748427&notif_t=like&notif_id=1463254868064094

    [Editorial discretion applied.] AZ

    10

  • #
    • #
      el gordo

      Humanity will have to move to Antarctica, apparently there is no CO2 there otherwise it would be getting warmer.

      50

  • #
  • #
    TdeF

    Malcolm’s greatest fear must be that the full deal with the Greens leaks before the election. The row so far has been about preselection in Victoria. The real row would be a Green coalition with “Turnbull’s Liberals” to control the Senate. There is no other reason for the unnecessary double dissolution.

    While he has removed a lot of MPs through preselection, replacing them with openly Green supporters, people like Jensen and Bishop are still Liberal MPs. Joyce still leads the Nationals. Faced with elimination by angry voters and without Green votes, turncoats like Fiona Scott could get cold feet. They could remove Turnbull, putting back Tony Abbott right on election eve. Wow. Then there would be no deal with the Greens. Worse, Tony Abbott might win.

    30

  • #
    liberator

    I’m part of the Infrastructure Victoria citizens jury. We have to consider and prepare a report on what we as citizens of Victoria should be planning to meet the requirements for Victoria and its citizens with regards to infrastructure over the next 30 years. There are two “Jury’s” One country based and one city based. Part of the options we have to consider is climate change and its impacts and how do we prepare for them. Of course the assumption is, because this is what the majority believe, is its happening what can we do to manage the effects. People have proposed guest speakers and have even gone as far as suggesting Tim Flannery as an ideal presenter to these citizens groups. Of course I’m not too sure this is a great idea. I’d love to have a knowledgeable and qualified person to present the counter argument to these Juries. They can present in Melbourne and it can be streamed to the country Jury or visa versa. Does anyone have a suggestion of a person they could recommend that can give a 1 hour presentation on the alternative? I’m not sure if there is funding for travel etc. – but there may be but I don’t know.

    30

    • #
    • #
      Rick Will

      With a 30 year time horizon there is no need to consider climate change. You only need to work through the IPCC AR5 projections to realise that there will be no significant changes within 30 years even if their models are right:
      http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_SPM_FINAL.pdf
      Note that there is a good deal of cherry picking in the charts presented. For example on page 10, the northern hemisphere snow cover chart is given for spring. If you looked at NH snow cover for winter you will find it increasing over the last 10 years. The table on page 7 is all low confidence on any changes to severity of events that have a bearing on infrastructure design. Actual data on severe weather events shows a diminishing frequency and severity across the globe.

      Unmanipulated weather data points to the IPCC climate models as being inaccurate, continually projecting greater variation than measured. It would not be sound engineering practice to use projection from climate models as the basis for infrastructure design.

      The growing inadequacy of transport infrastructure in Victoria is obvious. This will only get worse as the population increases and Melbourne continues to expand its footprint outward.

      The Victorian aged rail infrastructure is not suited to the Australian climate. The design standards likely came from the UK a century or so ago. There is some evidence of improved standards but I am uncertain of the design criteria. The iron ore railways that Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton operate in NW Australia are good examples of reliable rail lines for Australian conditions. These are the highest tonne.km rail lines in the world.

      As a Victorian citizen, my main gripe regarding infrastructure is the long parking lots that are loosely called freeways. I am fortunate that I can plan all my travel around freeways operating as such. For example if I have a guest flying in from interstate and they want me to meet them I tell them what time they should arrive. However that window is getting increasingly smaller. Peak hour seems to run all day Saturday and Sunday, including the small hours when the maintenance gangs are blocking lanes.

      40

    • #
      Rick Will

      Any improvements to transport infrastructure in Victoria will reduce carbon dioxide production. So if CO2 output is a consideration for any infrastructure project then that aspect will be a positive for funding. In fact transport efficiency, simply by changing the parking lots to freeways, will be far more cost effective in reducing carbon dioxide output than shifting power generation from Victoria’s coal power stations to renewables.

      10

      • #
        el gordo

        Decentralization, new satellite cities connected by VFT, would go a long way to ease congestion.

        00

  • #
    Analitik

    One for TonyfromOz

    Why we should keep Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant open

    Some lessons in the comments too

    10

  • #

    Detective work, and it took a while too, to get the whole story.

    A journalist called it a turbine, because had the real truth been known, there might have been protesters at the airport instead of the many hundreds to just watch the aircraft itself, that huge Antonov AN-225 which landed at Perth yesterday.

    It was an innocuous enough looking image (at this link) and straight away I knew that this was more than just a turbine.

    The word Brush on the side of the cargo was the clue for me, but under that is the plate naming it as a generator, made by the Brush Company, and this turbogenerator was made in the Czech Republic in 20 weeks from scratch.

    Took half a dozen or so links and about ten or more false leads to find out the end result.

    This is a 53MW generator (one of two at this plant, and weighing in at 117 Tonnes for this one generator) and it is bound for the Worsley Alumina plant near Collie in WA.

    The generator is to be installed at the Alumina plant there. (link one)(link two)

    The total output of this plant will be 106MW, and hey, what do you know, it’s coal fired. Who would have guessed eh! No wonder they just referred to it as a turbine, otherwise the greenies might have protested, eh!

    An Alumina plant requires immense amounts of electricity, and it must be regular, reliable and constant, something none of the renewables can do

    A new coal fired power plant in this day and age. Who would have thought?

    I can’t see one of these mounted on top of a pole with a fan out the front.

    This one generator will deliver around the same power in a full year as the Waubra wind plant in Victoria, and that wind plant has a Nameplate of 192MW.

    Tony.

    50

  • #
  • #
    Another Ian

    The well informed modern msm in action

    http://www.redpowermagazine.com/forums/topic/101347-proving-the-media-is-as-smart-as-they-think/

    The highlighted state is Wyoming if you’re not up on US geography

    30

  • #
    Mike Jowsey

    Thanks Jo. Movie watched, shared and questions asked of known Brits. “What price freedom?”

    10

  • #
  • #

    Electricity boss mistakenly sends climate skeptic handbook to Australia’s elite

    The NSW Liberal Party donor emailed a climate skeptics handbook to hundreds of contacts, including top academics, politicians and some of Australia’s wealthiest people.

    The Prime Minister’s wife Lucy Turnbull and New South Wales Premier Mike Baird were just two of them.

    The 16-page, user-friendly document explains how climate skeptics can win arguments with people who believe that climate change is caused by human activity.

    http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/programs/hack/electricity-boss-mistakenly-sends-climate-skeptic-handbook/7418740

    30

  • #
    M Conroy

    I am gobsmacked. Just when I thought the greenie bar couldn’t drop any lower (so low even a flea can’t crawl under IMO) I find this site, agitprop and patronization and just, well, wrong. If it hasn’t been on the radar here it’s only because it is a USAn construct, but may be adapted to a Country Near You soon.

    http://thenaturalhistorymuseum.org/about/

    “Launched in September, 2014, The Natural History Museum is a mobile and pop-up museum that offers exhibitions, expeditions, educational workshops, and public programming. Unlike traditional natural history museums, it makes a point to include and highlight the socio-political forces that shape nature. These forces include those affecting the atmospheric climate on Earth, as well as the political /funding climate within museums of science and natural history.

    The museum’s programs appear within existing institutions, in its 15-passenger mobile museum bus, and online at http://thenaturalhistorymuseum.org. The Natural History Museum is a dues-paying member of the American Alliance of Museums.

    The Natural History Museum establishes a space for looking at science. Such a space is necessary because science is under attack on multiple fronts. Capitalist enterprises, corporate philanthropists, and mainstream political lobbyists all look at science from the perspective of their particular interests. Capitalist enterprises fund scientific research for the sake of private profit. Scientists are faced with the option of either serving these interests or closing their labs. Corporations fund museums and exhibitions to enhance their own reputations. For them, science is little more than PR. Lobbyists try to reduce some scientific findings to opinions, while elevating other ones as they promote their privatizing agenda. Against all these tendencies, The Natural History Museum looks at science from the perspective of the common, the common knowledge at the core of science as well as the common nature science defends.”

    00

    • #
      AndyG55

      “(so low even a flea can’t crawl under IMO)”

      cockroaches can still manage , though.

      11