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

Germany drops carbon target

Compare the outrage: Germany abandons carbon target, but stays in Paris agreement. US  abandons Paris, but makes actual “carbon” cuts. One of these nations is a global pariah.

BERLIN (Reuters) - Germany’s would-be coalition partners have agreed to drop plans to lower carbon dioxide emissions by 40 percent from 1990 levels by 2020, sources familiar with negotiations said on Monday –

And this is a problem, how?

– a potential embarrassment for Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Oh.? Well, it’s only dates and numbers anyway:

Instead, they would aim to hit the 40 percent target in the early 2020s, the sources said, adding that both parties are still sticking to their goal of achieving a 55 percent cut in emissions by 2030.

Which is more important, paper promises you don’t keep, or lower outputs of “planet destroying gas”? Nevermind about CO2.

US Outshines other countries in CO2 emission reduction.

In other unrelated news: Wind energy is taking over the world, highly competitve and in Germany — collapsing.

The German wind market is “threatening to implode”:

In the past year alone, more than 2,000 employees in this sector have lost their jobs. Locations like Carbon Rotec in Lemwerder or Powerblades in Bremerhaven have been closed. The Hamburg wind turbine manufacturer Senvion had to go 660 full-time employees. Nordex , the second large wind power company based in the Hanseatic city, wants to cut up to 500 jobs due to eroding profits. And Enercon, the German market leader with more than 20,000 employees worldwide, recently announced “unpopular measures” to cut costs.

Read the article. Try to explain the problem in 25 words or less. As far as I can tell, for some reason, the German government cannot design enough loopholes to allow this revolutionary, cheap, technology to make a decent profit.

 h/t GWPF

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.2/10 (84 votes cast)
Germany drops carbon target, 9.2 out of 10 based on 84 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/yb24jjmq

136 comments to Germany drops carbon target

  • #
    Curious George

    The US does not want to pay billions. Unforgivable. Where should bureaucrats and dictators look for money now?

    380

  • #
    Zigmaster

    Why is the content of this article not news in MSM in Australia. We are rapidly becoming the only idiots in the world seriously trying to meet their Paris commitments. The general public here continues to remain blissfully ignorant to what is happening in the rest of the world.

    622

    • #
      Gordon

      Not true Zigmaster, come to Canada Comrade.

      360

      • #
        Graham Richards

        Gordon your reply is even more cryptic than what the MSM would dish up as fact.
        Please explain whatever is on your mind!

        30

      • #
        Geoff

        Yes Canada is worse on the GWMeter, They even have WINdmills connected to nothing except their braking devices, no genny, no grid. Just collecting C$ for political show. Extreme levels of MAD.

        However, Australia does have a HUGE problem. We are not quite at the level of Canada but we are assured of getting there. We have very large numbers of the public service who do nothing but regulate and our productive output is VERY low despite a HIGH level of original invention.

        The Germans have had enough of Merkel. Trump is forcing change across Europe. The money spigot from the Fed is off. Cracks will start appearing in the Euro. Wind and solar rent seekers are facing armageddon. The “collusion with Russia” impeachment scam is unraveling. The pay for favour Clinton payoffs are going to lead to many nations, none being Russia. Julia Gillard put Australia on the payee list. We have actually colluded with a crook and muddied our relationship with our number one ally. No doubt Canada and Germany will be on the list.

        Under Obama, Clinton ran amok. Why? What did Clinton have on Obama?

        410

    • #
      Graham Richards

      Guess we’ll have to rely on the likes of Andrew Bolt, Paul Murray, Mark Latham, Ross Cameron to get the message out there.
      Turnbull, Freydenburg & their ilk will trample you in their rush to find excuses for the German decision. The MSM will ferret out another sex offender or two to get the public to look the other way & the ABC will claim it’s fake news dreamt up by the Russians & the coal industry.

      250

      • #
        shannon

        “The MSM will ferret out another sex offender or two to get the public to look the other way”…

        Hmmm yes ..does anyone else here feel we are going through another era on par with the “Hippie Years”??
        Its ALL about sex….in various examinations…!!

        30

    • #
      yarpos

      Much angst recently because Josh F said our “carbon emissions” went up. Gasp! You mean just like most of the rest of the world. I am sure our fly speck contributions will trigger an unprecedented tipping point apocalypse thing.

      280

    • #
      PeterS

      The answer my friend is blowing in the wind. The MSM believe wind mills are the saviors of our planet. Only truly intelligent people know they are a total waste of time and money, and part of a scam. Those few in the MSM who do know the truth are too scared to expose the scam for fear of their jobs, just as is the case with those scientists who know AGW is a hoax.

      390

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        This is interesting:

        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5260111/Undercover-video-Twitter-staff-talking-censorship.html

        “Revealed – How Twitter ‘shadow bans’ users who never even realize: Engineers caught on camera ‘admitting they secretly censor people for posting content they disagree with’
        James O’Keefe, founder of Project Veritas, posted a series of videos of undercover reporters speaking to Twitter staff and former engineers

        He claims they show Twitter censoring people with views they disagree with
        Olinda Hassan, a policy manager for Twitter’s Trust and Safety team, was filmed talking about development of a system for ‘down ranking’ ‘shi**y people’

        Abhinov Vadrevu, an ex-Twitter software engineer, discussed ‘shadow banning’
        Technique means that users’ content is quietly blocked without them ever knowing about it
        One Twitter engineer suggested he social network was trying to ‘ban, like, a way of talking’ and ‘anyone found to be aggressive or negative ‘will just vanish’

        Twitter has not yet commented on claims by staff and former employees
        But they did respond to another video shot of senior network security engineer Clay Haynes
        The clip showed him saying Twitter is ‘more than happy’ to help the Department of Justice ‘in their little investigation’ and would provide all Trump’s messages

        Twitter denounced the ‘deceptive and underhanded tactics by which this footage was obtained and selectively edited’”

        90

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      SA is ground zero for the globalists, to test human gullibility wrt CAGW and “shearing/fleecing the (human) sheep”.

      Apparently the test was a success, so now its being rolled out to the rest of Oz , implemented by someone as PM the Heath Ledger would have been proud to play ( as in “Batman” ) The Joker…..let that image sink in….Ledger’s character had a certain quality…..

      And *that* is why the Collaborator MSM are so helpful…..they all slosh about in the same cesspool of evil…..

      And Oz will be the crash test dummies for the rest of the world, so the CAGW brawl really has to be won here….

      340

      • #
        PeterS

        I’ve been thinking along similar lines – Australia might have been selected as a test case to see what happens to a nation when it get rid of all its base load power plants. It sounds too much like a conspiracy theory, which I try to avoid at great pains. It could explain why Australia is alone in not only refusing to build coal fired or nuclear power plants, but deliberately allowing the closure of our existing base load power plants. Meanwhile huge numbers of coal fired power plants (as well as lots of nuclear) are being built all over the rest of the world.

        Either that or Australians are just plain stupid.

        Using Ockham’s razor I think the latter is more likely.

        170

      • #

        CAGW and “shearing/fleecing the (human) sheep”.Apparently the test was a success, so now its being rolled out to the rest of Oz , implemented by someone as PM the Heath Ledger would have been proud to play ( as in “Batman” ) The Joker…..let that image sink in….Ledger’s character had a certain quality…..

        Please elaborate on ‘certain quality…’. Is it like that of every member of the US Congress; Flush quickly and pray the stench dissipates!!? :-)
        All the best!-will-

        61

    • #
      shannon

      Ive been saying the same thing after a visit to Germany in 2012…..
      I realised back then, that the Global Warming “mania” had stalled and was indeed “back pedalling”… Meanwhile in the “backwater of Oz” the majority of our Media were just “moving into 3rd gear”..
      We have/still, are being treated as mushrooms and fools..!!

      80

  • #
    Leonard Lane

    Well, President Trump said we would win so often we would get tired of it. This a great victory of reason over the delusion and psychosis of the global warming cabal of schemers, one world socialist government advocates, and the fight to destroy the West.
    Germany seems to have recognized the truth about so-called renewable energy. I wonder how long it will take them to admit their mistakes on global warming and renewables?
    Now they need to recognize their fatal mistake on open borders.

    380

    • #
      John F. Hultquist

      The German system for selecting leaders is the current issue.
      Governing has gotten nearly impossible.

      In the USA, Trump said to the voters that if elected he would see to it that Congress does its job. Some do not like how he goes about that but instead of doing the Barry O. thing of “I’ve got a pen”, Trump forces the “law makers” to make the necessary laws. Their job, not his.
      Next up is this “dreamers” issue, festering for years — soon to be fixed. Will it be in the manner he demanded. No. He did not expect that. He made it clear that the makers of laws should do so.
      He understands the US Constitution, unlike the last guy.

      310

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        The last guy seemed to be happy to destroy the US constitution…but we expect such things from Marxists…..

        230

        • #
          Another Ian

          Somewhat o/t

          “Democrats Achieving New Levels Of Stupidity – Every Day!
          Posted on January 10, 2018 by tonyheller

          New York is suing oil/gas companies who are keeping them from freezing to death, hungry and in the dark – because Democrats believe they are overheating.”

          https://realclimatescience.com/2018/01/democrats-achieving-new-levels-of-stupidity-every-day/

          240

          • #
            OriginalSteve

            Well they could just cut off the heating supplies, and see how long the Dumb-o-crats last….

            180

            • #
              Greg Cavanagh

              For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

              The oil companies can’t just cut off the supply because there are long term contracts in place. However, contracts have a duration, we’ll have to wait to see how that plays out, but I’m betting it’ll be fun to watch and Hell to experience.

              130

              • #
                D. J. Hawkins

                They may not “cut off” supplies, but you never know when you’ll have deliver “delays”, say to the building Eric Schneiderman works in.

                20

          • #
            Popeye

            Just posted this over at Tim Blair who also carries the same storey.

            “In my opinion (de Blasio) is an absolute moron!

            BUT

            It’s GREAT to see these true climate change believers having to test their claims in court.

            I’ve got a feeling it may not work out so well for these fanatics and may well fall in favour of the sceptics.

            HILARIOUS – looking forward to the outcome

            Cheers,”

            I REALLY am looking forward to the SCAM being tested in a court of law – facts required NOT BS :-)

            Cheers,

            50

      • #

        In the USA, Trump said to the voters that if elected he would see to it that Congress does its job. Some do not like how he goes about that but instead of doing the Barry O. thing of “I’ve got a pen”, Trump forces the “law makers” to make the necessary laws. Their job, not his.

        Hurray!! The US Congress has been dysfunctional since 1945! All laws and even amendments since then need be reviewed and most rejected. The writers of the US Constitution were gifted; but unaware of the vast corruption inherent in organized greed! Banksters, unions, political parties; violent organized mercenary enemies, set out to destroy; all new folk with both skill and personal integrity, now known as ancient “WE THE PEOPLE”!
        Flush any idea of political party or any RE-erection! At every governmental level 246 years experience demonstrates a plethora of nice folk; that cannot do worse than the last guy. Please seek them out!
        All the best!-will-

        40

  • #
    Gordon

    If a big enough lie is told often enough, it becomes the truth. Old saying but still very relevant.

    190

    • #
      Lionell Griffith

      It doesn’t become the truth, it is merely treated as if it were true. To maintain that fiction, the consequences have to be blamed upon something other than what actually caused them. Thereby issuing another lie that becomes treated as if it is true but isn’t. Repeat until the collapse of everything worth keeping. Even then, that consequence will be blamed upon something other than its actual cause.

      All based upon the theory that you can have your cake and eat it too if you can feed the wish with enough human sacrifice. The theory appears to work until you run out of willing victims.

      30

  • #
    Don B

     
     “Due to the damaging effects green energy has had on Germany’s grid, the government plans to cap the total amount of wind energy at 40 to 45 percent of national capacity, according to a report published last month by the German newspaper Berliner Zeitung. By 2019, Germany will get rid of  6,000 megawatts of wind power capacity.

    “Despite the cut backs to wind power, the German government estimates that it will spend over $1.1 trillion financially supporting wind power, even though building wind turbines hasn’t achieved the government’s goal of actually reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions to slow global warming.

    “The U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) is currently investigating how green energy undermines the reliability of the electrical grid. FERC believe there is a “significant risk” of electricity in the United States becoming unreliable because “wind and solar don’t offer the services the shuttered coal plants provided.” Environmental regulations could make operating conventional coal or natural gas power plants unprofitable, which could compromise the reliability of the American power grid.”

    http://dailycaller.com/2016/05/11/germany-forced-people-to-use-traditional-electricity-to-prevent-green-energy-meltdown/

    200

    • #
      Kinky Keith

      It’s good to hear that there is recognition of reality at official government level now.

      Given the previous mindset, this is a very promising development.

      Now we wait for the next stage of the back-down.

      KK

      180

      • #
        Peter C

        Not much recognition at our Parliamentary level yet!

        On a recent drive from Bordertown to Melbourne I passed two new wind plants. South Australia is planning a new solar plant and the Victorian government wants a battery just like SA.

        170

      • #
        NB

        Kinky Keith says, above: ‘It’s good to hear that there is recognition of reality at official government level now.’

        It is weird how people who consider themselves the height of intellectual sophistication are in fact so inept. This must be exceedingly confusing for young people entering the world, looking up to people who are so strangely deluded, all patting each other on the back.

        90

  • #
    PeterS

    Perhaps when everyone eventually comes to the conclusion that wind mills are a total waste of time and money, air forces can use them for target practice.

    271

  • #
    sceptic56109

    Like Gordon I am lucky enough to live in the green Utopia of Canada (Ontario). The premier of Ontario recently sold 60% of Hydro One to private interests. I thought this may be a blessing because a privately run organization may be able to provide some push-back to the global warming cult. The new owners recently did a study of the power grid and obviously said, “Whoa, what are we looking at here?” They immediately asked for a 4.8% increase in electricity prices for 2018 to improve reliability. They were allowed an increase of 0.2%.

    I am a little bit familiar with Hydro One problems, having seen peak voltage of 127.8 Volts when standard voltage should be 120. My TV shuts down at 127.5 Volts by the way. I have also noticed that when the wind is blowing, Niagara Falls Generating Station cuts back to about 60% capacity. I have also noticed an unprecedented number of transformer failures during the past year. Could this be due to fluctuating voltage? I would not be surprised if automatic trips due to off-spec power have been partially disabled to keep the “Windfarms” operating as much as possible.

    I shall have to check my power bill this month since Kathleen Wynne (premier) has borrowed $25 Billion (only 9 zeroes) to give ratepayers an artificial discount. I used to pay $.22 per kwh (including delivery)

    210

  • #
    Dennis

    Labor MP for Port Adelaide, South Australia writes in The Australian today

    PM lets Abbott sap his energy

    MARK BUTLER
    Industry knows we need to flick the switch to renewables, but politics holds us back.

    120

  • #
    Another Ian


    don morris | January 11, 2018 4:05 PM | Reply

    I hesitate to ask,but what happens to your electricity production if your source is windmills,when there is a snowfall of this magnitude?

    Does snow cling to windmill blades,do they cease to rotate?”

    http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/2018/01/y2kyoto-end-of-1.html#comments

    70

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      Another Ian:
      The snow isn’t a problem, it is ice. That forms a sheath around the blade upsetting the balance. Should rotation continue then either the turbine damages itself (good) or the ice sheath is flung off and kills someone (bad). There has already been one fatality in Germany where a worker was nearly cut in half. These 2 reasons are why turbines aren’t allowed to work in cold weather by the Insurance companies. Another reason is that in really cold weather there is little suitable wind.
      Supposedly later turbines have a de-icing strip as per aeroplanes installed, but that requires electricity from the grid, so 100% wind turbines would be impossible (and somehow I cannot think that solar PV panels generate under 2 foot of snow.

      160

  • #
    J Martin

    In the UK wind energy saves just 2.8% of co2 and then only under ideal conditions. So wind effectively only just generated enough electricity to create another wind turbine whilst generating no surplus energy to power a modern civilisation. Same is true for solar I believe. So if the whole world switches to wind and solar we will soon be reduced to a Victorian lifestyle followed by a medieval lifestyle.

    270

  • #
    Robber

    What’s wrong with wind turbine electricity generators, after all isn’t wind free?
    1. Intermittent. Sometimes the wind doesn’t blow, so reliable generators powered by gas, coal, nuclear or hydro must be on standby.
    2. Dis-economy of scale. Wind generators have a maximum capacity of 3 MW, and on average operate at only 30% of capacity, so you need 500 of them to match the output of a steam-driven turbine in a modern power station.
    3. Maintenance. Sticking 500 wind turbines on top of 100 metre high towers makes maintenance difficult.
    4. Remoteness. The general rule-of-thumb for wind farm spacing is that turbines are spaced about 7 rotor diameters away from each other. So an 80-meter (262-foot) rotor would need to be 560 meters from adjacent turbines. And because of the noise, they must be at least 1.5 kms from houses.
    5. Asynchronous. Our electricity grid must deliver 50 cycles per second of alternating current. That is delivered by steam-driven generators through speed control. Wind generators rotate at speeds that vary with the wind, so they deliver asynchronous power – varying cycles per second. They need support from synchronous coal or gas generators to feed power into the grid.
    6. Subsidies. As well as receiving the average wholesale price of around $90/MWhr, in Australia wind generators also get issued with renewable energy certificates by the government that they sell to retailers for an average price of $85/Mwhr.
    7. Redundancy. Despite a nameplate capacity for wind generators in Australia’s National Electricity Market of 4,360 MW, on occasion they only deliver 200 MW. The market needs a minimum of 18,000 MW and a peak of over 30,000 MW. Therefore, despite the investment of about $8 billion in wind farms, reliable generators must continue to operate to meet demand when the wind doesn’t blow.
    Any other factors?

    300

    • #
      toorightmate

      You can build 6 to 8,000Mw coal power stations and get 6 to 8,000Mw 24/7 X 365.
      OR spend the dough on wind and get 1,400Mw of the 4,400Mw “capacity” which you have installed.

      170

      • #
        RickWill

        The prospect of getting 1400MW as an average from 4400MW of wind capacity is only possible with low penetration of wind. Certainly something less than total market share of 30%. This is what both South Australian and Germany are up against now. The 1600+MW of wind capacity in SA is not permitted to exceed 1200MW for stability reasons AND SA has the benefit of being able to sink 600MW into Victoria. If SA did not have the Vic link there would be times when the wind generators would be throttled to about 200MW as they require something like 300MW of gas running for stability reasons and the load can drop to 500MW through the middle of the day as non-scheduled solar generation reaches is peak.

        Once the installed capacity of wind exceeds the system minimum demand there will be times when the wind generators MUST reduce output to keep the system stable. That means the capacity factor is now being controlled by both system constraints and the actual weather. The more wind capacity that is added with the view of increasing market share to wind, the more the wind gets throttled.

        210

        • #
          Robber

          Is there a max % for wind? In SA currently wind is delivering 1200 MW and gas 750 MW, with exports to Vic of 400 MW, so wind is about 65% of supply. But last evening in SA wind was delivering less than 200 MW, and gas 1700 MW as demand peaked at 2200 MW.
          Meanwhile yesterday afternoon, SA’s little battery put 30 MW into the grid in a few short bursts.

          121

          • #
            Graeme No.3

            Robber:

            There is no reason to generate electricity from gas fired and export it to Vic. so that 400MW comes from excess wind. That means that wind is supplying SA with 800MW out of 1550MW or 52% (rounded up). That would be about the maximum percentage allowed by the AEMO who curtail wind farms at time to prevent instability (blackouts) in SA.
            The amount of surplus wind is limited by the capacity of the interconnector.
            A simple calculation Maximum Wind generation = (Demand in SA minus 750) +600 (capacity of interconnector). So assuming that the peak demand on hot summer days is 3100 then generation within SA would have to be (3100-600 = 2500MW). If the maximum supply from gas is 1900MW then wind had better supply the extra 600MW or there will be a blackout. I think you will grasp why the WeatherDILL, with a State election coming, has been throwing money at diesel generators etc.

            80

    • #
      J Martin

      One wind turbine generates enough energy over the course of its lifespan to build just one replacement wind turbine and cannot spare any energy to provide electricity for any other purpose. In other words wind turbines are a 100% waste of money.

      250

    • #

      What’s wrong with wind turbine electricity generators, after all isn’t wind free?

      No! Sailing ships were bad enough! This ‘free wind’ corruption is futzing with the ‘angular momentum balance’ of all Solar massive bodies! Earth’s bunny farts do not do that! Anthropogenic indeed; let self appointed anthropogenic governmental leadership be destroyed once and for all; please!!

      40

    • #

      Another important factor that assists wind energy economics is the capital costs which are usually heavily subsidized with free government grants of +/-50%.
      These grants are typically ignored by the wind industry when discussing the total costs of wind power which effectively reduces the capital costs by a MERE 50%.

      60

    • #
      Rod Stuart

      Environmental concerns:
      a) They are butt ugly and destroy the scenic beauty of the countryside.
      b) Devastation of faun; especially batts and raptors.
      c)Noise pollution; there is substantial evidence that the low frequencies emanating from the rotors interfere with the wellbing of animals and humans alike.

      50

  • #
    toorightmate

    As Germany, EU, Canada, Australia, etc continue to go down the gurgler at a rapid rate, the US goes from strength to strength.
    Now who was it that was saying he would make America great again?
    It could not possibly have been Donald Trump – because we hear hourly as to what a despicable man he is – from MSN, CNN, Fairfax, ABC, BBC, NYT, WaPo, etc, etc, etc, etc.
    So the DJIA, unemployment, capital expenditure, balance of payments, crime, etc are all on the improve thanks to the fairies.

    200

  • #
    RickWill

    “Enercon” provides meaning to the whole sad tale in a single word.

    The question that no politician has ever asked is “How much guaranteed power can any particular wind farm generate”. If this was asked then the Enercon’s of the world could only truthfully answer zero.

    180

  • #
  • #
    mal

    Bob Dylan (for those who remember him) wrote a song in 1962. The final line was “the answer is blowin in the wind”. Sums up the leftist movement.

    70

  • #
    ma

    The Paris agreement is to create Neo-Feudalism run by the green elite and everyone else living in poverty. Destruction of the west is their goal.

    70

    • #
      el gordo

      The green elite have only words and a change in the weather should bring the Klimatariat and their running dogs to a stop.

      My crystal ball sees no Neo-Feudalism except for the green elite who will be encouraged to go outback and live the ideal lifestyle in a village. Wind farms on a nearby hill, solar panels on every roof etc.

      20

  • #
    What Class?

    Twenty-five words or fewer? Do hyphenated words or contractions count as one word? Oh, yes. It doesn’t work. There, twenty five disregarding the aforesaid exceptions.

    40

  • #

    There are still a few ancient wind turbines clanking away by the Macleay River. That’s because they’re being used for their proper purpose, which is to slowly draw up river water into a trough or header tank.

    On my roof I have a compact solar whirly thing which is good for evacuating hot, stale air. I also have some small devices which run well on lithium batteries.

    Oh, and I also have biofuel lying around my land. Good for heating some rooms and barbecuing stuff.

    That’s what you get with old tech and diffuse, intermittent power. You get clank-clank, whoosh-whoosh, buzz-buzz and crackle-crackle. What a pity that we have spent trillions on pretend-new. Truly-new has to wait at the back of the queue and watch the green carpetbaggers hoover up all the investment.

    I guess the subsidy game will always belong to the media-savvie, the fashionista or the guy willing to hire troops of unemployed actors and students to high-five his latest tech triumph. But it’s such a pity in a world that urgently needs new ways and new tech.

    Such a waste.

    180

  • #

    Try to explain the problem in 25 words or less. As far as I can tell, for some reason, the German government cannot design enough loopholes to allow this revolutionary, cheap, technology to make a decent profit.

    Twenty five words!!!

    I only need three.

    It doesn’t work!

    Tony.

    290

    • #

      Let me (again) just highlight this about how wind power is pretty much useless.

      For the last four hours or so, wind has been going at ‘gangbusters’ and is having a really good period of generation.

      It is currently generating around 2100MW, and that’s good, running at a Capacity Factor (CF) of 50.5%. It was as high as 2800MW (CF – 64%) but again, that was just one point in time.

      Even right now, with wind power supplying so well, that still only accounts for 8% of the total power being consumed here in Australia.

      However, spread it across the last 24 hours and the average is only 1300MW. (CF – 30%, which is around the yearly average)

      So, even at the very best of times, wind power can barely be referred to as a small addition to what is actually required to keep the Country running.

      Now, compare that to coal fired power which IS actually delivering 75% of that current total power being consumed, more than nine times what wind at its best can deliver, so that’s every wind tower in Australia, multiplied by NINE.

      Currently, wind power going ‘gangbusters’ is delivering a little less power than just Bayswater on its own.

      Tony.

      240

    • #
      Greg Cavanagh

      It can not work.

      Four words because this version has more emphasis on the “can not”.

      It can never work. (four)
      Imbeciles the lot. (three)
      Oh God! (two)
      Stupid. (one)

      150

  • #
    Rupert Ashford

    And the joke is on “us” the sheeple who re-elect these people like Merkel, Weatherall who knows buggerall, Turnbull, Macron, the little pudding-face from Canada etc. Shame on us.

    240

  • #
    pat

    goodbye Merkel, hello Macron, say “oberservers” aka “experts”:

    10 Jan: ClimateChangeNews: Megan Darby: International dismay at Germany’s 2020 climate target lapse
    Reports Berlin will abandon its ambitious carbon-cutting goal with two years to go are “disheartening” and “problematic”, say ***observers
    Germany’s reputation as a green leader is slipping, after reports this week the putative government will give up on meeting its 2020 emissions target.
    ***Experts described a draft coalition agreement that defers the goal as “disheartening”, “problematic” and “very weak”…

    Maldives environment minister Thoriq Ibrahim, who chairs the alliance of small island states at UN climate talks, said: “It is disheartening to see developed parties lowering their ambition, particularly ones that had previously shown such strong leadership…

    Angela Merkel, previously dubbed the “climate chancellor” for her strong diplomatic record on the issue, is under fire for failing to heed warnings of a looming policy gap at home…
    Compared to its neighbours, Germany remains a relatively strong performer on emissions cuts…

    “Merkel will certainly come under pressure for that – she is connected to this 2020 target,” said Brigitte Knopf, head of the Berlin-based Mercator Research Institute. “In Germany, it will hurt her reputation on climate change.”…

    Some commentators contrasted the lapse with French president Emmanuel Macron’s trip to China, where he charmed the public by learning to say “make our planet great again” in Mandarin…
    Li Shuo, climate specialist with Greenpeace China: “It looks increasingly likely that Europe’s climate spokesperson will soon not be Merkel.”…
    http://www.climatechangenews.com/2018/01/10/international-dismay-germanys-2020-climate-target-lapse/

    40

  • #
    Ruairi

    The Germans were ever so keen,
    To join the renewable scene,
    Without joining the dots,
    For configuring watts,
    Their grid doesn’t work ’cause they’re Green.
    ( 25 words)

    310

  • #
    pat

    12 Jan: Reuters: Alister Doyle: Warming set to breach Paris accord’s toughest limit by mid century: draft
    Global warming is on track to breach the toughest limit set in the Paris climate agreement by the middle of this century unless governments make unprecedented economic shifts from fossil fuels, a draft U.N. report said.
    The draft, of a report due for publication in October, said governments will also have to start sucking carbon dioxide from the air to achieve the ambition of limiting temperatures to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial times…

    The draft, by the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) of leading scientists and obtained by Reuters, says average surface temperatures are about 1C above pre-industrial times and that average temperatures are on track to reach 1.5C by the 2040s…
    The current draft was sent out for comments from governments and other experts this week. Jonathan Lynn, spokesman for the IPCC, said the text was a work in progress not intended for publication. “The text can change substantially” he said…

    By contrast, the draft said that renewable energies such as solar and wind power would have to become the dominant form of primary energy by 2050 to achieve the 1.5C goal. “Coal would be phased out rapidly in most 1.5C pathways,” it said…

    The draft estimated that humanity could emit just 580 billion tonnes of greenhouse gases to give a better than 50 percent chance of limiting warming to 1.5C – roughly 12-16 years at current rates of emissions.
    The amounts could be bigger if governments let temperatures exceed 1.5C and found a way of turning down the global thermostat later in the century.
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climatechange-draft/warming-set-to-breach-paris-accords-toughest-limit-by-mid-century-draft-idUSKBN1F02RH

    40

    • #
      Robber

      “Governments will also have to start sucking carbon dioxide from the air.”
      Um, I know governments generally suck, but doesn’t vegetation do the job?

      110

      • #
        David-of-Cooyal-in-Oz

        Thanks Pat,
        So they’re still claiming that the IPCC is made up of “leading scientists”? My understanding it’s a group of each government’s jnominated people with no minimum academic qualifcations as a pre-requisite!?! (Donna Laframboise’s “The Delinquent Teenager” …)
        Get real Alister Doyle.

        Cheers,
        Dave B

        60

      • #
        Another Ian

        But if you read the dodgers on the effect of roadside vegetation in Qld you’ll be left in no doubt that biology works much better when it is in government hands. And this is in spite of government imposed management rules for landholders adjacent to these roads.

        So you have no reason to doubt the effectiveness of government sucking

        /s just in case

        40

  • #
    pat

    for some reason ABC changed this headline from:

    11 Jan: ABC: Climate change: another record year throws the heat on Australia’s Paris climate targets
    ABC Science By environment reporter Nick Kilvert
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2018-01-11/record-heat-bom-paris-targets/9310996

    to the following (text appears to remain pretty much the same from what I noted yesterday):

    11 Jan: ABC: Forget Paris: Australia needs to stop pretending we’re tackling climate change
    ABC Science By environment reporter Nick Kilvert
    Updated yesterday at 15:34
    First posted yesterday at 13:40
    As the Bureau of Meteorology confirms another record-breaking year for temperatures in Australia, we should expect a sense of urgency to be creeping into Australia’s climate policy.
    Instead, we’re seeing the opposite.

    While 2015-17 were all within the hottest six years on record, our carbon emissions also continued to increase during the same period, including an all-time peak in 2017, when unreliable land-use data was excluded from the analysis…

    For Australia’s part, getting anywhere near our Paris targets means tackling our key emissions sources — electricity, transport, industry and agriculture, and reversing alarming deforestation trends…

    Despite last financial year’s continued emissions growth, Environment and Energy Minister Josh Frydenberg remains upbeat about Australia’s commitment to the Paris Agreement…

    Certainly there needs to be radical change in Australia’s energy sector if we are to see significant progress toward our Paris target.
    Generating electricity accounts for more than 30 per cent of Australia’s emissions, and is also the area where great advances in technology are being made.
    Currently more than 80 per cent of electricity going into the National Energy Market comes from fossil fuels.

    An Australia Institute report from September last year argued that Australia could meet its 2030 Paris commitments if the electricity sector cut emissions by about 50 per cent below 2005 levels.
    The report says that would mean moving to about 70 per cent renewable energy sources by 2030…

    But the appetite to back renewables isn’t there.
    “We’re not looking at a target anywhere like that,” Mr Frydenberg said…

    As 2030 approaches and the path to achieving our Paris commitments grows steeper, getting there will require more and more difficult management decisions, ***and more inconveniences to our way of life…

    Disruptions to power supply become inevitable as the time to transition to a renewable energy market shrinks. How many power outages are people willing to put up with? How much revenue loss can we absorb?

    To achieve an emission reduction of 26-28 per cent by 2030, it’s time to admit that business as usual won’t get us there. The sooner we do this, the smoother the approach can be.
    Either that, or it’s time to stop pretending we’re on our way.

    once ABC sees the Reuters/IPCC draft report piece, there will probably be further, radical changes to the above!

    70

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      pat:

      And switching to HELE coal would have only delivered 22% reduction with cheaper and more reliable supply.
      And who the hell else has managed the reduction they want? Venezuela perhaps?
      And if Germany can install 27,000+ wind turbines without reducing overall emissions in the past 9 years why should we install more turbines?

      220

      • #
        PeterS

        why should we install more turbines?

        To make a select few more rich at the expense of the rest us and making us more poor. Nothing new – has been going on for centuries under various guises. It has nothing to do with the myth of man-made catastrophic climate change otherwise there would be a world-wide ban on new coal fired plants. Instead the rest of the world is building hundreds of them. Australia simply has an oversupply of stupid people compared to the rest of the world.

        30

    • #
      Bushkid

      For Australia’s part, getting anywhere near our Paris targets means tackling our key emissions sources — electricity, transport, industry and agriculture, and reversing alarming deforestation trends…

      This is where they spell out, perhaps not in exact words but certainly there for those who can be bothered to actually read, what they think they intend for this country of ours.

      I was once told, some 25 years ago, that the long-term plan for Australia was to turn it into a giant “nature park” for the mega-rich world elites; for it to become not a nation in its own right any more, but a possession and plaything, a resort for the likes of the UN head honchos and the mega-rich and privileged. Of course, that would have meant the de-industrialisation of the country, and the subjugation of the Australian people and their will and independence. At the time I chuckled…….

      70

      • #
        PeterS

        Again no need to get that complicated. The reason is simple – Australians tend to be more stupid that the rest of the world. We are more concerned about what mobile phone we should get next than worrying about something as boring as the cost and reliability of electricity.

        60

  • #
    pat

    12 Jan: WRAL: AP: Global warming puts millions at risk from river floods, study shows
    By FRANK JORDANS, Associated Press, Berlin
    Using computer simulations, researchers in Germany examined the impact of changing rainfall patterns by region and found that flood defenses will need to be improved particularly in the United States, parts of India and Africa, Indonesia and Central Europe.

    River floods are already one of the most widespread and damaging forms of natural disasters worldwide. Additional protective measures include enhancing dykes, better river management, improving building standards and even moving settlements, according to the study published in the journal Science Advances.

    The number of people affected by the worst 10 percent of river flooding will double from 76 million to 156 million in Asia alone by 2040, said the authors at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research. In North America the number of people at risk could increase tenfold, from 100,000 to a million…
    “The real numbers might be even higher in the future as population growth and further urbanization is not taken into account,” they said…

    ***”The time has come where mitigating future climate change must be accompanied by adapting to the climate change that we already caused,” said Anders Levermann (Potsdam & Columbia), one of the study’s authors…

    10 Jan: ScienceAdvances: Adaptation required to preserve future high-end river flood risk at present levels
    http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/4/1/eaao1914

    hilarious:

    12 Jan: AP: Seth Borenstein: US cold snap was a freak of nature, quick analysis finds
    WASHINGTON (AP) — Consider this cold comfort: A quick study of the brutal American cold snap found that the Arctic blast really wasn’t global warming but a freak of nature.
    Frigid weather like the two-week cold spell that began around Christmas is 15 times rarer than it was a century ago, according to a team of international scientists who does real-time analyses to see if extreme weather events are natural or more likely to happen because of climate change.

    The cold snap that gripped the East Coast and Midwest region was a rarity that bucks the warming trend, said researcher Claudia Tebaldi of the National Center for Atmospheric Research and the private organization Climate Central.

    The same team had connected several weather events last year to man-made global warming including Hurricane Harvey that battered the U.S. and Caribbean and the French floods.
    “It was very definitely strange, especially now,” said study co-author Gabriel Vecchi of Princeton University. A century ago “it wouldn’t have been that strange. Things like this are becoming stranger.”

    The study by the World Weather Attribution analyzed weather records dating back to 1880 and found the cold weather that hit a swath of the U.S. from Maine to Minnesota tends to happen once every 250 years. In the early 1900s, it happened about once every 17 years. Climate change has made such cold spells less common and less intense, the group said.

    That finding agrees with earlier studies, said University of Georgia meteorology professor Marshall Shepherd, who wasn’t part of the study.
    “I think the public frenzy over the recent cold snap illustrated that we are less acclimated to such events,” he said in an email.

    The study, based on observations and statistics, did not find evidence for a popular scientific theory that links melting Arctic sea ice to blasts of cold air escaping the top of the world…
    https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-cold-snap-freak-nature-quick-analysis-finds-140502572.html

    31

  • #
    NB

    ‘The study by the World Weather Attribution analyzed weather records dating back to 1880 and found the cold weather that hit a swath of the U.S. from Maine to Minnesota tends to happen once every 250 years. In the early 1900s, it happened about once every 17 years. Climate change has made such cold spells less common and less intense, the group said.’

    Does this para make sense? Am I misreading it? Does it say:
    1) we have examined data from the past 140 years
    2) During one part of that period cold events happened every 17 years.
    3) We are able to conclude that cold events occur once every 250 years?

    70

  • #
    pat

    yesterday, FakeNewsMSM jumped on the final moments of President Trump’s Press Conference Q&A with Prime Minister Erna Solberg of Norway – when he repeated what he has consistently said since June last year re the Paris Accord – as if it were a new revelation, e.g.

    10 Jan: UK Telegraph: Donald Trump: America could ‘conceivably’ return to Paris climate change agreement
    By Ben Riley-Smith
    Donald Trump has said America could “conceivably” return to the Paris climate change agreement in the strongest hint yet he is considering a turnaround…
    The comment gives hope to European leaders pushing for the United States to resign and is likely to trigger a renewed diplomatic lobbying drive…

    The Hill did make the point:

    The Hill: Timothy Cama: When announcing the exit, Trump kept the door open to rejoining the pact “on terms that are fair to the United States, its businesses, its workers, its people, its taxpayers.”

    (FULL TEXT) 1 Jun 2017: White House: Statement by President Trump on the Paris Climate Accord
    https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/statement-president-trump-paris-climate-accord/

    Donald Trump Holds a Press Conference w/ Erna Solberg of Norway – January 10, 2018. (TRANSCRIPT & VIDE CLIPS)
    Final Question from Aftenposten Norway reporter: Mr. President, Prime Minister, Norway strongly supports the Paris Agreement, and have (has) expressed regret that you’ve decided to leave it. What could persuade you to remain? And what kind of common ground did you find in your talks today on this topic?76

    Trump: Well, it wasn’t a major topic, I must tell you. We talked about other things, including mostly trade. But I will say that the Paris Agreement as drawn and as we signed was very unfair to the United States. It put great penalties on us. It made it very difficult for us to deal in terms of business. It took away a lot of our asset values. We are a country rich in gas and coal and oil, and lots of other things, and there was a tremendous penalty for using it. It hurt our businesses.

    According to some estimates, we would have had to close businesses in order to qualify by 2025. Whereas as an example China, by 2030, they don’t kick in until 2030. Russia, some place in the mid-1990′s, that was their standard, and that was never a good standard, because that was a dirty standard for the environment.

    It treated the United States very unfairly. And, frankly, it’s an agreement that I have no problem with, but I had a problem with the agreement that they signed. Because as usual, they made a bad deal.

    So we could conceivably go back in. But I say this, we are very strong on the environment, I feel very strongly about the environment. Our EPA and our EPA commissioners are very, very powerful, in the sense that they want to have clean water, clean air, but we also want businesses that can compete. And the Paris Accord really would have taken away our competitive edge, and we’re not going to let that happen. I’m not going to let that happen…

    Solberg: If I just might add, there are business opportunities in this, as — as we talked about during this. Because we have strict regulations on — to reach our Paris targets. That means that we have very strong policies for environment-friendly and climate-friendly technologies, in which (inaudible) is a known part of why the — why the United States now have a surplus in the economy to what’s Norway. So, should never miss up on a good opportunity with good environmental standards.81

    (TRUMP CALLS HER OUT, WITH HUMOUR)
    Trump: One of the great assets of Norway is a thing called water, and they have tremendous hydropower, tremendous. In fact, most of your energy or your electricity is produced by hydro (SOLBERG NODS & SMILES). I wish we’d do some of that, but hydropower is fantastic, and it’s a great asset that you have. Thank you very much, great honor. Thank you. Thank you very much. END OF PRESS C0NFERENCE & Q&A.
    https://factba.se/transcript/donald-trump-press-conference-erna-solberg-norway-january-10-2018

    one of the major anti-Trumpers at WaPo, Philip Bump, mocked Trump by equating “more than 95 percent” of electricity provided by hydropower in Norway with the “5 percent” in the US!

    10 Jan: WaPo: Philip Bump: Trump says he wishes the U.S. would use hydropower. (We do. A lot.)
    In fact, the United States produces more electricity from hydroelectric generating systems than does Norway. In October 2017, the United States produced 17.2 million megawatt-hours of electricity from hydroelectric power. The following month, Norway produced 13.7 million megawatt-hours.
    Granted, the United States is a much bigger country than Norway. But it’s still the case that hydroelectric generation makes up ***5 percent of U.S. power production. It’s the fifth-largest generation method in the country, after wind but before solar (including both residential and commercial solar generation)…

    HuffPo thought this was a clever line to take too:

    10 Jan: HuffPo: Chris York:
    Donald Trump Reveals ‘Norway Has This Thing Called Water’
    Really?
    Donald Trump appears to have revealed just how little he knows about energy and the climate during yet another bizarre press conference, this time with the Norwegian Prime Minister, Erna Solberg…
    Solberg then took the opportunity ***to push the virtues of environmentally sound technology but Trump responded with a brusque – and bizarre – answer.
    He said: “One of the great assets of Norway is a thing called ‘water’ – they have tremendous hydropower, tremendous. In fact most of your energy is produced by hydro.
    “I wish we’d do some of that.”
    This, is the Hoover Dam. (PIC)…
    Trump also referred to wind turbines as “windmills”, somehow linking it to Hillary Clinton and his election victory which he appears to not have quite gotten over yet…

    CNBC got in on the act:

    Trump says he wishes US would use hydropower. It already does
    CNBC· 4h ago

    more to follow.

    31

    • #
      Another Ian

      Pat

      When you’re interpreting what Trump said about hydro in USA don’t overlook the movement there to destroy dams and hydropower in the name of re-naturalisation. Complete with all-natural floods etc.

      IIRC “Ecofascists” mentions that something like 900-odd dams have been wiped out and some of the big ones are on the agenda.

      90

      • #
        John F. Hultquist

        Some old, small, and useless dams have been removed. By useless I mean the space upstream was filled with sediment. Example: a dam on the Elwha River in Washington State. Here is how Nat.Geo put it:
        “River Revives After Largest Dam Removal in U.S. History”

        However this was a minor dam. We went to a 2 hour long presentation about this. It was extremely interesting, but the dam was not very large and it was not any longer useful.

        As for “. . . some of the big ones are on the agenda.
        The agenda of which you write is in the minds of eco-crazies. Meanwhile, technical advances are improving the ability of salmon to move down river past big dams.
        Watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jj3OVV8jXPU

        Salmon recovery has been the “big thing” with this dam removal “agenda” and now it is being solved. But, like the dying polar bears, the eco-greens will think of something new to maintain the agenda.

        50

      • #
        pat

        Another Ian -

        agreed. I think that’s what Trump was referring to.

        10

  • #
    pat

    you have to laugh:

    10 Jan: Reuters: If subsidised, Statoil will eye Norway’s offshore wind
    OSLO (Reuters) – Norway’s Statoil (STL.OL) may take part in the country’s first tender to build floating offshore wind turbines, as long as there are sufficient long-term subsidies, Chief Executive Eldar Saetre told Reuters on Tuesday…
    “It would have to be subsidised, definitely, for a long time,” he added…
    https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-norway-statoil-renewables/if-subsidised-statoil-will-eye-norways-offshore-wind-idUKKBN1EY1SQ

    5 Jan: OffshoreEngineer: Rystad: Norway leads in project commitments
    A new report by analyst firm Rystad shows that Norway is leading the comeback after a sanctioning drought in the offshore industry in 2015 and 2016.
    Recent projects submitted to the Norwegian Petroleum Directorate (NPD) show a clear turnaround in the offshore industry and make Norway the largest contributor to offshore project commitments in 2017.
    “Oil field service companies have been squeezed quite tightly for the past few years, but the developments in 2017 in Norway and elsewhere show the future is brightening for offshore service suppliers,” says Audun Martinsen, Vice President of Oil Field Service Research at Rystad Energy.

    Seven field development plans were submitted to the NPD in December with a total value of more than US$12.5 billion (NOK100 billion) in greenfield capex. Earlier in 2017 projects like Njord Future and Bauge were also sanctioned. The December spree made Norway the largest contributor to offshore developments in 2017 with $18 billion worth of projects committed to, followed by the US and Mozambique…
    “Finally Norway’s industry is coming back to full throttle,” Martinsen says…

    On December 5, Statoil handed in the plans for approval of the Johan Castberg project valued at approximately $5.9 billion (NOK49 billion). On December 15, AkerBP handed in three plans for Aerfugl, Valhall West Flank and Skogul. And, just before Christmas three oil companies handed in plans for development: Repsol for Yme New Development, VNG for Fenja, and Statoil for the Snorre Expansion project.
    http://www.oedigital.com/component/k2/item/16823-rystad-norway-leads-in-project-commitments

    41

  • #
    Another Ian

    O/T but sounds important

    “In tomorrow’s WSJ – a tale of climate cash, collusion, and apparently, corruption”

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/01/11/in-tomorrows-wsj-a-tale-of-climate-cash-collusion-and-apparently-corruption/

    40

  • #
    rk

    Tony,

    They won’t turn too well if they get hit by lines of thunderstorms like we used to get 30 to 40 years ago when it was much hotter and the storms were much bigger. Once you get storms with heights above 40,000′ you can expect hail bigger than tennis balls and multiple lightning strikes with extreme downbursts in the front part of the storm. Severe storms would be the primary reason for gear box and bearing failures. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/307511892_Wind_Turbine_Drivetrain_Reliability_Collaborative_Workshop_A_Recap This a link to problems in this area by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Colorado. I have read that failures are 10 times higher than reported because manufacturers and wind farm operators won’t divulge the data. A gear box on a 2MW turbine and upwards costs in excess of $600,000 and the German Insurance Industry was reported some years ago to be mandating replacements every five years.
    Not too many would have been turning in that extreme cold in the US recently with high winds, ice and snow. Every wind turbine in that area would have unbalanced blades in such weather.

    60

  • #
    AndyG55

    More BOM mal-information uncovered.

    It appears BOM have sets of data that are meshed and adjusted

    BOM data for Bourke Airfield AWS is clearly shown to start in 1998.

    http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/averages/tables/cw_048245.shtml

    And BOM data for Bourke PO goes back to 1871.

    http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/averages/tables/cw_048245.shtml

    But if you hunt for the BOM data for Bourke, you get this.

    http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/acorn/sat/data/acorn.sat.maxT.048245.daily.txt

    This obviously isn’t AWS data. It turns out to be a combination of Bourke PO from 1910 – 1998 then Bourke Airfield AWS from 1998 onward, with adjustments made to the PO data around 1939.

    Funny thing is, that when you look at this ACORN data, you find that the AWS period is missing a huge slab of data (BOM efficiency I assume.)

    https://s19.postimg.org/w9qhxuwer/bourke_missing.png

    And when you analyse the trend, you get slight COOLING from 1910, even with back to 1871 chopped out, to 1998.

    And the AWS section, with its one second values, shows some warming from 1998

    https://s19.postimg.org/sq4k7xysz/Bourke_AWS.png

    It should be noted the max value in the ACORN data is 48.8 on 5/12/1981 , now look at the maximums shown here for December.

    http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/averages/tables/cw_048013_All.shtml

    The whole thing really is just one MONUMENTAL STUFF-UP !!!

    100

    • #
      PeterS

      If I did this sort of thing in my PhD it would have been rejected outright.

      70

    • #
      Kinky Keith

      Newcastle has values for temperature going back almost to the beginning of time.

      All recorded on top of a little island called Nobbys sitting in the ocean.

      Some decades ago they started reporting temperatures from the new location a few miles inland at Islington.

      The two sites are a little different but I would bet that our scientific betters at BOM would have no trouble splicing both data sets together to show one continuous timeline.

      50

  • #
    Greg in NZ

    Thredbo, NSW, Saturday 13 January 2018: “Snow flurries possible above 1900 metres at night.” Sunday 14 Jan: 0.0˚C with “snow flurries possible”.

    Falls Creek, VIC, Saturday: “Possible light snowfalls at night.” Sunday: -3˚C minimum.

    Oi, don’t send yer freezing carbon pollution (sic) our way!

    Aoraki / Mt. Cook, NZ, Tuesday 16 Jan: Snow. Wednesday 17 Jan: Snow.

    Unprecedented… except for the time before.

    Children just won’t know what summer was.

    http://www.bom.gov.au/nsw/forecasts/thredbo.shtml

    60

    • #
      el gordo

      Australia had summer snow last year and in 2013 and 2010, this is becoming a habit.

      ‘It could snow in Tasmania this weekend and the mainland alps may see their first flurries of 2018.

      ‘A relatively strong cold front will sweep over Australia’s southeast during Friday night and Saturday morning, followed by a second, weaker front on Saturday.

      ‘Cold air from the Southern Ocean will spread across Tasmania, Victoria and southern NSW behind the pair of fronts, dropping temperatures enough to produce highland snow.

      ‘The coldest air will arrive behind the second front, with the best chance of snow occurring late on Saturday in Tasmania’s central highlands and early on Sunday morning in the mainland Alps’

      Weatherzone

      50

  • #
    pat

    Another Ian posted WUWT/WSJ thread at comment #29; big story.

    also, from the comments:

    VIDEO: Accuweather: It’s so cold that oceans are freezing up
    This looks like it could be a scene from Antarctica, but this was taken in North Falmouth, Massachusetts, on Jan. 7. It has been so cold that even the ocean has frozen over.
    https://www.accuweather.com/en/videos/its-so-cold-that-oceans-are-freezing-up/y2ztv3zde6ivlij8wlztx72iaeffv-tq

    7 Jan: GWPF: Rex Murphy: Too Frigid For Global Warming? This Is Why They Rebranded It ‘Climate Change’
    Any variety of weather whatsoever can be traced, if you keep the grants flowing and the contradictions unexamined, to the One Holy Underlying Theory of All Weather
    ENDS WITH LINK TO FULL NATIONAL POST ARTICLE
    https://www.thegwpf.com/too-frigid-for-global-warming-this-is-why-they-rebranded-it-climate-change/

    40

  • #
    pat

    it doesn’t take much!

    12 Jan: ClimateChangeNews: Megan Darby: Climate Weekly: Macron grabs Merkel’s climate crown
    Emmanuel Macron is clearly eager to take up the baton for Europe. The French president took his unique brand of direct diplomacy to China, where he went viral on social media by learning to say “make our planet great again” in Mandarin.

    It remains to be seen whether the style will be followed by substance; his meeting with Xi Jinping did not yield any new climate initiatives…
    http://www.climatechangenews.com/2018/01/12/climate-weekly-macron-grabs-merkels-climate-crown/

    20

  • #
    Carbon500

    There’s been plenty of talk over the years about countries cutting their ‘carbon’ emissions.
    How is the CO2 figure for a whole continent arrived at, and how exact is it?
    Has anyone got any information on this?
    Cynical old me – I suspect that such figures are probably estimates at best.

    20

  • #

    The chart is clear
    easy to read
    and meaningless.
    .
    CO2 is always clean.
    .
    Our planet, specifically plants, need more CO2 !
    .
    .
    There are ways of generating more CO2 that are clean
    and other ways that pollute: China, India and Brazil
    are polluting too much while generating CO2.
    .
    Based on real science,
    I support a doubling to tripling
    of atmospheric CO2,
    to optimize the growth of plants,
    used for food by humans and animals
    to optimize life on our planet.

    That desire is based on real science –
    thousands of experiments –
    not silly computer game models
    used by the global warmunists,
    which are pure junk science.

    There has been absolutely
    no harm from adding CO2 to the air
    except for the nations who pollute
    while adding CO2 — the “so-called
    environmentalists” know who those nations
    are, but don’t seem to care about
    REAL pollution.

    “Environmentalists” are horrible people trying to
    keep fossil fuels away from over one
    billion people with no electricity … and
    opposing more “CO2 enrichment”
    (as done in greenhouses to spur plant growth)
    to provide more food to the poorest
    people in the world WHO NEED MORE FOOD.

    If I ruled the world, I’d throw “environmentalists” in prison
    and distribute their belongings to the poor …
    the neediest people they could not care less about !

    30

  • #
    Bodge it an scarpa

    A little OT I guess. Aside from the intermittency of wind itself, is there any scope for improving the efficiency and reliability of the actual turbines ? It would appear that gearbox overheating and blade imbalance certain conditions are the main Achilles heels of these contraptions. I would imagine that the step up ratio of those presumably Epicyclic gearboxes would be quite high. Personal experience with epicyclic reduction and overdrive transmissions on trucks(axles) and autotrans is that they generate significant heat. Would a belt and pulley step up transmission system be more a appropriate for wind turbines, as I would imagine they would be cooler running in high winds, and possibly the belt could absorb shock spikes from wind gusts.
    Next is blade balance, or inbalance in icey conditions. Do the hubs of the blades contain any self balancing devices ? Americans tend to run rather huge tyres on many of their off-road 4wheel drives. These are difficult to balance by conventional means, but apparently by adding a few hundred grams of plastic beads inside each tyre they become self balancing. Could that idea be scaled up to incorporate into the hub of wind turbines?

    00

  • #
    Robber

    The main Achilles heel of wind turbines? How about the concept of sticking a big heavy turbine on top of a 100 metre pole with 80 metre blades blowing in the wind – that’s the problem.

    20

  • #

    The energy consumed to design, manufacture, install, maintain and administer renewables exceeds the energy they produce in their lifetime.

    Without the energy provided by other sources renewables could not exist.

    10

Leave a Reply to Will Janoschka Cancel reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>