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


Advertising


Australian Speakers Agency



GoldNerds

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



The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper



Archives

Why the democrats don’t want a debate about climate change

Playing with Fire! Greenpeace are calling for a climate debate among democrats in the US presidential campaign (just like they never do with the science, eh?).

There are a billion sensible reasons the Democrats don’t want a climate debate

And it’s not because they’d lose debating science. There’s no chance they would debate science — every candidate already agrees there is a climate emergency de facto, or they’d be thrown out of the party. So, any debate would start with “what should we do” and instantly turn into a high risk competition to outbid each other. Who can promise more, squander more, or cry bigger tears on stage on cue?

DNC logoThe last thing on Earth the Democrats want is public policy analysis on climate change. Lord forbid, what if one candidate suggests “going nuclear” and starts pointing out how solar and wind are less effective at reducing CO2? There’s a danger democrat voters might be paying attention (unlike when a “fossil-fueled right winger” says the same thing). Democrats might learn what money-sucking boondoggles wind turbines and solar panels are, and how many birds, bats and forests get fried? That’s a big loser for the Big Gov team — they don’t want to air the flaws of the current golden subsidy train. Firstly, it exposes the bonfire of billions of dollars already wasted on pointless plans. Secondly, the punters might decide they actually want nukes, or super critical coal, or bargain auctions like the Australian direct action plan. And none of those help industries that depend solely on Big Gov, like uneconomic renewables. A friend in need is a fellow lobbyist indeed. Big-Gov-dependents always vote left, cheer left and provide a steady stream of press releases about “emergencies” that need more Big Gov Spending.

For Democrats climate is just virtue signalling — there are no numbers allowed

With climate, the only answer is “Yes”. Should we spend $2 billion or $10 Trillion? “Yes.” Their national carbon policy is balanced on namecalling rants so if it’s debated there’s a danger the entire climate facade could unravel. Both sides of the same debate can’t say yes and yes. Nor can they both call each other fossil fueled deniers. There goes the top two debating tricks.

Democrats want voters to “say yes to climate change” but not to discuss the non-existent cost benefits. As I’ve said many times, the voters may “believe” the climate is changing but they don’t care enough to pay for it. Only 3% of Americans name “environment” as top issue. When it comes to funding, almost half, 42%, of US adults don’t even want to pay a paltry, pathetic, $12 a year to stop climate change. Globally, 63% don’t want their dollars spent on the environment…

Climate change is a badge people want to wear but not to pay or vote for. In the US, all the political types noticed what happened in Australia:

The Climate Trap for Democrats

Rich Lowey, National Review

The political experience of other advanced democracies is a flashing red light. In Australia last month, the liberal opposition lost what was supposed to be “the climate change” election, against all expectations. Pre-election polling showed that about 60 percent of Australians thought the government should address climate change “even if this involves significant costs.” It turned out that it was one thing to tell that to pollsters and another to vote to make it happen.

Umair Irfan, Vox lists some of the DNC’s better excuses:

[Paul Bledsoe, was a former climate adviser to President Bill Clinton]… He added that centering a debate entirely on climate change could carry a political cost. “To somehow make a fetish of climate change as the sine qua non of the 2020 election would in fact fall into a trap which the Republicans are trying to create, which is a view of Democrats as concerned only about non-pocketbook issues,” Bledsoe said. “I applaud the DNC for having the political common sense not to have a debate devoted to a single topic, whatever the topic.”

The DNC are so afraid of debates, they don’t want any at all. Democrats are not even allowed to organise their own debates:

The DNC has created a long list of rules to govern who qualifies for the debate stage, setting thresholds for polling and fundraising. (Vox’s Andrew Prokop put together an excellent explainer about Democratic debate rules.) Among the rules is that a candidate who appears at an unofficial debate will be barred from the official debates. So even if a candidate decides to create their own debate event, be it about the climate crisis or otherwise, they stand to be excluded from the main stage (climate change “forums” and “town halls” are still permitted

 The pincers close on the Fashion of Climate Fear.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.7/10 (40 votes cast)
Why the democrats don't want a debate about climate change, 9.7 out of 10 based on 40 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/y59hjlx2

84 comments to Why the democrats don’t want a debate about climate change

  • #
    Graeme No.3

    The price of first post is not sleeping at night.

    150

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      As you say, better than I, the Democrats have started down a slippery slope to oblivion, and with luck taking our Greens (and fellow travellers) with them.
      Their problem, apart from gullibity, lack of scientific knowledge and elementary arithmetic, is their refusal to debate because in their hearts they know that they would lose. The current orchestrated hysteria in Europe, North America and Australia is a frantic scrabble for a handhold on the edge of the cliff. Outside of the WOKE bubble the rest of the World is ignoring them, except when they disrupt the traffic or otherwise inconvenience those they claim to lead.

      260

      • #

        The Democrats seem to be following our Labor’s lead and that of many Western Leftist governments.

        They haven’t realised that the winds of climate change are not what they used to be, as apocalypse after apocalypse fails to eventuate.

        And like Labor, they won’t discuss the cost of doing ‘everything’ needed to avert the next apocalypse, because no price is too high and no initiative is too extreme. People are just over it.

        170

        • #
          el gordo

          ‘ … as apocalypse after apocalypse fails to eventuate.’

          This is their soft underbelly, all we have to argue is that extreme weather is natural and can be frightening too.

          https://cei.org/blog/bjorn-lomborg-and-john-christy-shred-climate-alarmism

          110

          • #
            scaper...

            A very good article by Bjorn, in the Australian today.

            The reality is, today, solar and wind energy together deliver only about 1 per cent of global energy. The International Energy Agency estimates that even by 2040 these will cover a little more than 4 per cent of global energy.
            [snip]

            The link is strong and clear: if you have access to lots of cheap energy, this typically means you’ve escaped poverty, you will live a long life, you have access to a good education and healthcare, you won’t starve to death or die from easily curable diseases.
            [snip]

            Yet humanity has actually never experienced an “energy transition” — a shift from one set of energy sources to another set. Rather, we have added more and more. When the world first discovered coal, we didn’t stop using wood. In fact, global wood consumption has kept increasing during the past two centuries, and since 1850 coal has kept increasing, too. The same is true with oil, gas, hydropower and nuclear.

            The only consistent development shift during the past centuries is the relative move away from ­renewables: in 1800 they provided about 94 per cent of all energy in the world, dropping to about 14 per cent by 1971 and flattening out from there. In 2017, after almost three decades of intense climate policies, the world still received 14.2 per cent of its energy from ­renewables (not only wind and solar but also hydro and biomass).
            [snip]

            Campaigners casually suggest we can capture CO2 and store it underground, disregarding the reality that even capturing a slim 15 per cent of emissions would require infrastructure larger than the world’s biggest $US2 trillion industry, the oil industry, which took 100 years and an incredibly profitable product to create.

            Promises to populate the world with electric cars have failed just as spectacularly, despite unpreced­ented subsidies. Today, fewer than 0.3 per cent of all cars are electric, and even if we could reach 200 million electric cars in 2040, the IEA estimates this would ­reduce emissions by less than 1 per cent.

            If we keep doing what we’ve done so far and make more promises to cut carbon in ineffective ways such as subsidising wind and solar, each dollar spent will avoid only 3c of climate damage.

            [snip]

            Climate economists for Copenhagen Consensus calculated the returns to society from investing in green energy R&D as $11 for every dollar invested — more than 500 times more effective than current EU climate policies.

            [Please don't copy whole articles without permission - Jo]

            91

            • #
              Annie

              Just read that in The Aus Scaper. Some interesting comments too.

              40

            • #
              Hasbeen

              That Bjorn article would make a lot of sense if he did not still believe that CO2 actually can increase global temperature by 2 C, without the fabled tipping points that are just another figment of warmists imagination, or more likely wishful thinking.

              91

      • #

        Graeme No. 3

        How can U.S. Democrats possibly “lose” a debate on climate change among themselves?

        They all think the science is settled, so climate science would not be discussed.

        The only “debate” would be on how much money to spend, and how fast to spend the money !

        I think you are looking at the climate hysteria ramping up in the past year, and concluding Democrats are getting desperate, losing the battle for public support. If so, I think you are wrong.

        The Democrats are following their long term plan to frighten and brainwash (mainly in schools and colleges) the general public.

        That brainwashing requires repetition, as in N-A-Z-I Germany in the 1930s, and gradually ramping up the imaginary climate threat, so people don’t lose interest.

        In late 2018 / early 2019, Democrats took a large step to ramp up their imaginary threat, with the Green New Deal, so expensive and comprehensive that it implied the climate change threat was HUGE.

        The fact that the Green New Deal read like a Communist Manifesto, seems to have escaped the U.S. general public — they probably don’t teach that in public schools, at least not since I gradiated with a pubic school edumaction in 1971.

        I criticized it repeatedly in my climate science blog, but there has not been much criticism elsewhere, outside of FoX News TV, and conservative talk radio, whose listeners were already convinced climate change was a grossly exaggerated problem.

        The root cause of gullibility is that too many people believe predictions of the future.

        The secondary problem is that people, especially leftists, are suckers for emotional appeals, such as “saving the planet for our children and grandchildren”.

        Democrats refuse to debate virtually all leftist positions, except over how much money to spend, and whether to move even further left on the position.

        The Green New Deal would be an example of moving further left on their prior climate change position.

        When I hear the phrase: “Democrats debate …”, I burst out laughing, just like when I hear the equally amusing phrase: ‘Scientists believe …” !

        Democrats believe character attacks ARE debate — so I suppose during a Democrat “debate” on climate change, someone could lose their temper and instinctively resort to a character attack on a fellow Democrat ?

        That would be entertaining

        Do you think Democrats would debate the fact that the US (48 contiguous states) just had the coldest October 1 through May 30 on record ?

        That “unimportant” fact would never come up in aclimate change “debate”.
        https://elonionbloggle.blogspot.com/2019/06/colkdest-and-wettest-october-2018.html

        My climate science blog:
        to supplement this GREAT website,
        from a US point of view:
        http://www.elOnionBloggle.Blogspot.com

        30

    • #
      Geoff

      None of climate change’s proponents want a proper debate about the subject of man-made global warming/cooling. Its not just a Democrat position, its global. If there was no issue they would just find something else.

      Government uses the subject to get re-elected.
      Big corporates use it to signal their virtue while holding on to monopoly positions.
      Its just another proxy to hide executive greed and incompetence.

      110

      • #
        truth

        I think it’s a lot more sinister than that and Australia will be the biggest loser….the only 1st world country that will be in the precarious position of having a completely weather-dependent electricity system….with all of our trading partners and competitors having the security of baseload electricity forever.

        Tonight RE [wind] is providing 1.4% of total NEM demand which indicates how stuffed Australia would be ..if we continue to follow the Turnbull path Scott Morrison still has Australia on.

        Roger Pielke Jr refers readers today to a recently published European interview he did wherein he explains a little of the incredible life-changing assault on his reputation …work life and credibility from the Obama and Clinton administrations …because some years ago he published his peer reviewed research that concluded there’s been no increase in frequency or severity of severe weather.

        I remember at the time how shaken he was …he was treated as a criminal or traitor.

        He still feels he can’t publish on climate-related issues.

        Podesta who was involved in the attack…seems to be targeting Australia as he and the Sandler Foundation he’s involved with reportedly funded some of the Adani protestors and he has business in Melbourne perhaps with the writers of the ridiculously alarmist Breakthrough publications.

        From the Club of Rome …who are promoting the views of Greta Thunberg and the uninformed schoolchildren…..through all of the Left wing administrations in North America and Europe…with their coverups and intimidation and sham government ‘inquiries’ …and similar flattery of schoolkids….and the Finance behemoths…the whole thing is about as sinister as anything we’ve seen in our lifetimes IMO.

        https://www.telegraaf.nl/nieuws/43802365/grotere-natuurrampen-door-meer-bezittingen?utm_source=google&utm_medium=organic

        20

    • #
      Hanrahan

      It seems Jo doesn’t sleep much at night either. So many threads open in the wee hours.

      20

  • #
    Richard Ilfeld

    Its also possible that the Dems don’t want to go on the record about how serious all this is, then face campaigning in a caravan of electric cars. Or justifying their beach houses. Or go into towns whose power plants or mines they promised to close. There are a lot of imaginary winners in the climate wars long term, but a lot of real losers who vote short term.

    140

  • #
    Travis T. Jones

    I’d pay to see that …

    A bunch of text book cases for a psychiatrist convention discussing a end of the world apocalypse that never comes …

    Will [global warming] kill everyone — or just lots and lots of people?

    “The debate over whether [global warming] will end life on Earth, explained.”

    https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/6/13/18660548/climate-change-human-civilization-existential-risk

    These people are insane.

    Wait.

    They are putting it on television? For free?

    Winning.

    91

  • #
    Yonniestone

    The only public Climate Debate I personally saw was here (Ballarat Vic) when Lord Monckton spoke on his 2011 tour, back then people still read the local paper and their anti sceptic bias generated enough public interest for many to attend including local “climate change experts” that wanted to take on Monckton and prove how foolish he was.

    Well it didn’t go very good for the experts after having each of their facts disproved by Monckton with a few math lessons thrown in for good measure and they didn’t like it, the public there however were very interested and many afterwards said they came neutral but left sceptical with an awareness of the IPCC and what became fake news.

    The second Lord Monckton address I attended here in 2013 was very different with no stories in the local paper leading up to it and no “experts” willing to go a second round in debating him, the attendance was notably smaller with Monckton pointing all this out saying if the proponents of global warming wanted to publicly prove their position an open debate is the best platform for why wouldn’t you want the opportunity to expose your opponents scientific flaws?

    The lack of willingness to debate, the protection of the MSM and the income from global GDP climate taxes has allowed this insidious rubbish to continue but the climate isn’t cooperating, with this and good people elected in power there is hope, the panicked actions of selfish zealots will be a blessing for the good and sane.

    240

  • #
    Bill in Oz

    Meanwhile here in South Australia, our dopey ( or perhaps Greenist infected ) Liberal party state government, wants to build an interconnector to NSW, supposedly to import cheap reliable coal fired power from NSW.

    However NSW cannot supply it’s own demand for cheap reliable coal fired power..It relies of buying cheap relaiabel coal fired power from Qld.

    So what are our South Australian Liberals up to ? What is their agenda ?

    I suggest it is actually to export unreliable expensive solarish & windy electrons to NSW… Where being ‘renewable’ it will have guaranteed sales.

    That this will undermine NSW own coal fired power grid and result in more expensive power for ordinary consumers, is no consequence to the SA Liberals.

    And there is NO debate within the Liberal party here in SA.

    No wonder that so many ordinary conservative minded voters gave their preferences to other parties like One Nation of Unite Australia Party or the Australian Conservative party.

    Our SA Liberal party was lead by Sir Thomas Playford for 30 odd years from the early 1940′s. It was he who created a state owned coal fired power industry in SA to provide cheap reliable electricity to South Australians. And under his leadership SA prospered.

    Where oh where have the Playford inspired Liberals disappeared to ?

    170

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      This is what happens when the older dogs in the Libs are replaced by snowflake younger ones.

      I am starting to think as a country, we have lost a whole generation of youngsters to beard grooming, SSM and other pathetic leftist cause du jour….

      180

    • #
      Hanrahan

      I was in SA in ’63 and cheerfully voted for Donny “Queen Adelaide” Dunstan. My only excuse is the oft told tale if you are not a liberal [US usage] when young you have no heart etc.

      But Dunstan wasn’t bat guano crazy like they are today, was he? I do look at all the undeveloped minerals in SA and wonder if Joh could have got them up and running. We will never know.

      60

  • #
    a happy little debunker

    If the Fonz could jump a shark – then these hopeful Democratic Presidential candidates could at least try and jump over the moon (especially given what they intend to do with cows & their farts)

    80

  • #
    Another Ian

    Around this area IMO

    ““Losing Earth”… Bad SciFi at its best! And a preview of the Green New Deal”

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/06/14/losing-earth-bad-scify-at-its-best/

    70

  • #
    Another Ian


    David Middleton
    June 14, 2019 at 7:13 am

    Stupidity should be painful and public humiliation is a great, non-violent, way to inflict pain. Unfortunately I doubt many of those in dire need of public humiliation read WUWT.
    Reply

    Phil R
    June 14, 2019 at 9:49 am

    I doubt many of those in dire need of public humiliation can be humiliated.
    Reply
    David Middleton
    June 14, 2019 at 9:53 am

    True that!”

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/06/14/losing-earth-bad-scify-at-its-best/#comment-2723370https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/06/14/losing-earth-bad-scify-at-its-best/#comment-2723370

    And the rest of the thread

    70

  • #
    OriginalSteve

    Build. That. Wall.

    I am starting to think Democrats ( indeed many on the Left ) appear to lack sufficient mental faculties to think critically, thus condemining them to promoting wibdmills and other instititionalized rank foolishness.

    Some have suggested i go for hot button topics on purpose – I disagree, I just call it how I see it…..

    80

    • #
      NB

      ‘lack sufficient mental faculties’
      This impression is compelling. There was a time when mainstream left politics provided an intellectual challenge, and was interesting. It was, broadly, wrong, but it did have a logic to it. Now it really does seem to have refined itself into a collection of fears, wishlists, and hatreds, appealing to those unable to, or unwilling to, string two facts together.

      70

  • #
    John F. Hultquist

    . . . every candidate already agrees there is a climate emergency de facto, or they’d be thrown out of the party

    So then, they are not actually stupid.
    Thanks for clearing that up.

    100

    • #
      Hanrahan

      So then, they are not actually stupid.
      Thanks for clearing that up.

      Not sure it does, No matter how intellectually impaired the individual is, the self preservation instinct is still strong. I contend it is only one capable of logical thought who will take a dangerous position based on ideology: Damn the torpedoes!

      Note: Adani protestors are not really putting themselves in danger.

      10

  • #
    el gordo

    Eric Worrall has a post at wuwt on this grass root revolt and with his tongue firmly planted he lets them have it.

    ‘In my opinion climate activists have been ruthlessly lied to and abused. The DNC has treated them like trash, useful idiots, giving them hope with grandiose climate emergency declarations, then back peddling, downplaying climate issues, using dirty political tricks like banning a presidential candidate climate debate, to avoid alienating normal people.

    ‘The solution is obvious.’

    80

    • #
      glen Michel

      In my experience it’s 5he same here. So-called “experts” who have little understanding of Earth systems and just plain common sense and empirical knowledge. Useful idiots largely to be sure.Yep told by a senior academic that his grandchildren were going to burn etc. Tears welling up.We are up against purile arguments and outright ignorance.It doesn’t look good.
      a

      80

      • #
        el gordo

        It looks good from where I’m standing, we have the facts and a sense of humour.

        Albo is chaffing at the bit to flash his climate change credentials and Morrison will need to humiliate him. Thankfully he showed good judgement in appointing Susan Ley as Environment Minister.

        60

    • #
      theRealUniverse

      ‘In my opinion climate activists have been ruthlessly lied to and abused. ‘ well they only have themselves to blame.

      70

  • #
    TdeF

    What exactly is the point of all this when China, India, Russia/USSR, Pakistan, Bangladesh (1.4, 1.4, 0.3, .2, .165 or 3.5Billion) are doing nothing? That includes #1, #3 in the coal trade and 2Billion more people than in 1960. The CO2 output of Chinese people breathing is more than all of Australia.

    China in fact is adding more CO2 output per year than Australia’s entire output and has solemnly promised to look at the problem in 2030. In the meantime China claims it is a Climate Victim and is being paid for carbon offsets for building hydro.

    Debate? With none of the major alleged polluters? This is not about science. It is not about alleged pollution. It is not about saving the planet. It is Democratic posturing, like open borders, Russian collusion, impeachment. All talk and opportunism. And when it all comes to grief, blaming Donald Trump.

    90

    • #
      TdeF

      I also feel that the phrase “THE science” is dictated by its proponents. There is only science. To suggest that there is a body of definitive work in relation to proof of man made Climate Change is to lie.

      There is proof that mankind has contributed less than 5% to CO2 levels, that 90% of the increase is natural due to warming.
      There is no proof that increased CO2 produces warming and in fact proof that it does not.
      There is no rapid sea rise and after 31 years, proof is unnecessary.

      There was never any proof that 1C would have an effect on ‘extreme events’ let alone be their sole cause.

      And there is certainly no rational science behind the latest “12 years” to live, after three decades of identical and failed predictions.

      Debate? Never happened and never will. The Socialist lobby are simply running on momentum and indoctrination of children who are being marshalled by their manipulative teachers. That is abusive and morally wrong, even for modern athiests who are themselves teaching a religion of hell fire and Climate Armageddon and creating fear in children. Is there a picture of Al Gore in every classroom?

      “The” Science? No, a manipulative phrase with no meaning. There is no science behind the Climate Change Religion, Climate Scientology.

      160

  • #
    Serge Wright

    Our own ABC hosted Q&A debate on climate change with David Suzuki a few years ago is a good example as to why the alarmist camp will do everything to avoid debates. This is obviously because the alarmist camp only have a fake consensus argument on which to stand as there is no real-world data that supports their extreme climate outcome. Thus, the more public debates you have, the more sceptics that you create.

    Below is a link to the transcript of the ABC debate where Prof Stewart Franks takes down the pathetic David Suzuki on the topic of the model divergence with observations and climate sensitivity, forcing Tony Jones to seek help from his alarmist professor Sherwood, very obviously planted in the audience in case a rescue was needed. With the floor all his and with full freedom provided to respond to any of Frank’s critiques, Sherwood briefly contemplates all of the questions asked, but heads straight to consensus and nothing else.


    STEVE SHERWOOD: There is a lot of things to respond to here. I don’t know, would you like me to respond to the slow down in warming?

    TONY JONES: You can choose.

    STEVE SHERWOOD: Okay. The consensus question is, I think, an important one and studies have been done showing that 97% of scientists who actually work on climate accept, roughly, the conclusions of the IPCC, that we have a warming and that it’s going to probably be significant. If you look in the peer reviewed literature, which is what really matters, you see even higher percentages. So I think it’s – and that doesn’t prove that we’re right, but I think it’s an important thing that people have to know, that has been hidden by the way this issue has been presented to the public.”

    https://www.abc.net.au/qanda/an-audience-with-david-suzuki/10658274

    70

  • #
    pat

    listen to the expert:

    14 Jun: Breitbart: Pope Francis Urges Carbon Penalties to Avert Climate ‘Catastrophe’
    by Thomas D. Williams PH.D
    “Dear friends, time is running out!” the pope told (LINK) a group of participants in a Vatican-sponsored conference on energy transition Friday. “We cannot afford the luxury of waiting for others to come forward or of prioritizing short-term economic benefits. The climate crisis requires decisive action from us, here and now.”…

    The pope’s words Friday went beyond sounding a general alarm and scorning climate-change skeptics. They also urged specific political action, most notably regarding penalties for carbon usage such as a carbon tax.
    “A carbon pricing policy is essential if humanity wants to use the resources of creation wisely,” he said. “The failure to manage carbon emissions has produced a huge debt that will now have to be repaid with interest from those who come after us.”…READ ON
    https://www.breitbart.com/environment/2019/06/14/pope-francis-urges-carbon-penalties-to-avert-climate-catastrophe/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+breitbart+%28Breitbart+News%29

    14 Jun: AFR: Reuters: Pope backs carbon pricing to stem global warming
    Vatican City – Pope Francis said on Friday that carbon pricing is “essential” to stem global warming – his clearest statement yet in support of penalising polluters – and appealed to climate change deniers to listen to science.
    In an address to energy executives at the end of a two-day meeting, he also called for “open, transparent, science-based and standardised” reporting of climate risk and a “radical energy transition” away from carbon to save the planet…
    Carbon pricing, via taxes or emissions trading schemes, is used by many governments to make energy consumers pay for the costs of using the fossil fuels that contribute to global warming, and to spur investment in low-carbon technology…

    The Vatican did not release the names of those who attended the closed-door meeting at its Academy of Sciences, a follow-up to one a year ago, but industry sources said the companies represented were believed to be the industry giants Eni, Exxon, Total, Repsol, BP, Sinopec, ConocoPhillips, Equinor, Chevron.
    A small group of demonstrators gathered outside a Vatican gate. One held a sign reading “Dear Oil CEOs – Think of Your Children”.
    He implicitly criticised those who, like Trump, deny that climate change is mostly caused by human activity…READ ON
    https://www.afr.com/news/policy/climate/pope-backs-carbon-pricing-to-stem-global-warming-20190614-p51xyb

    20

    • #
      pat

      forgot to post Reuters’ grand finale:

      (excerpts) Oil companies have come under growing pressure from investors and activists to meet the Paris goals.
      Companies including Royal Dutch Shell, BP and Total have laid out plans to expand their renewable energy business and reduce emissions, though many investors say they will have to do more.

      yes indeed…the activists (incl FakeNewsMSM) are the useful idiots of Big Finance. we get that, Reuters.

      40

      • #
        pat

        theirABC combines AP & Reuters to get a bigger Trump bang for taxpayers’ buck:

        15 Jun: ABC: AP/Reuters: Pope Francis backs carbon pricing and ‘radical energy transition’ to act against global warming
        Last year, Mr Trump rejected projections in a report by his own government that climate change will cause severe economic harm to the US economy.
        The US President also announced his intent to withdraw the country from the 2015 Paris deal to combat climate change, becoming the first country to do so among 200 signatories…
        https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-15/pope-backs-carbon-pricing-to-stem-global-warming/11212900

        20

  • #
    Peter Fitzroy

    And yet in a consensus move, the UK government has signed off on a plan to remove coal fired power by 2050. As Winston Churchill said, “The Americans will eventually do the right thing, after they have tried everything else” The UK Move is in line with the general move away from coal seen in Europe of late. Of course they have other, reliable, sources of energy, and their coal is just about played out anyway.

    213

    • #
      Moderated Peter Fitzroy

      AS a second class citizen on this blog, the one thing that is interesting is just how long it takes to pass through moderation

      [Peter, we don't know why you are caught in the filters. It is not that you are in moderation even Jo herself isn't able to resolve the problem. I personally have always let your comments free when ever they are found to be caught. You should not think you are anything less than first class. ] ED
      [May I add my statement to ED's, we don't try to chase anyone away. The mere fact that you disagree with someone is not grounds for treating you any differently than anyone else. That's Jo's policy, not ours. The moderation filter is a technical problem and unfortunately the moderation here is all volunteer and sometimes coverage is stretched thin.] AZ

      40

      • #
        Moderated Peter Fitzroy

        And now my comments just disappear

        11

      • #
        Annie

        MPF, a lot of us have been in moderation for varying amounts of time.
        1. It can happen to any of us for no apparent reason, you just need some patience.
        2. I don’t suppose a moderator is necessarily available at all times.
        3. Being in moderation doesn’t mean that you have been classified as a second-class citizen, even if we often disagree with what you say. Sometimes I have agreed with something you said and given you a green thumb….not often but occasionally!

        30

      • #
        AndyG55

        Cry baby, Cry !!

        20

      • #
        AndyG55

        “As a second class citizen on this blog”

        You choose the Venezuelan ideology, that is all you can ever hope to be.

        10

    • #
      toorightmate

      Drongo,
      Theresa really had to prove to the world that she was the worst British PM EVVVAAAAHHHH.
      She did that by making her stupid carbon free pledge.

      100

    • #
      el gordo

      Mr Fitz we are doing our bit too, we now have a minister who is responsible for reducing CO2.

      ‘Two wind-powered events that took place in the week Minister Taylor was sworn in as the Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction demonstrate what is possible.

      ‘First, an extraordinary arctic blast sent wind turbines across south eastern Australia into overdrive, boosting wind generation to record levels. Across a three day period, Australia got almost as much power from wind farms as we got from Victoria’s entire brown coal fleet.’

      RenewEconomy

      32

      • #
        Bill in Oz

        If the winds were so strong they would have been feathered for safety reasons EG

        70

        • #
          el gordo

          Maybe, it would be worth following up.

          A minister for energy and emissions reduction is not a good look, but Morrison must have something up his sleeve.

          30

        • #
          John F. Hultquist

          A modern facility near me: {do conversions as necessary}
          Turbines can produce electricity at wind speeds as low as 9 mph. They reach their peak of production at 31 mph and shut down at constant wind speeds above 56 mph.

          30

        • #
          el gordo

          I found this in New Scientist.

          ‘When wind speeds reach 88 km/h turbine blades of wind turbines are usually twisted, or “feathered”, so that they no longer intercept airflow properly and they stop turning. This is to both protect people on site in the event of a blade loss and to protect the turbine from structural stress. But for this blade-stalling process to work properly the turbine head must be rotated horizontally, or “yawed”, and pointed into the wind.’

          40

        • #
          Robber

          If you look at SA wind farms during June at Anero.id, you will see that some reached 100% of nameplate for brief periods. For example, Lake Bonney 2, one of the largest with nameplate 159 MW delivered 150 MW on Jun 2 at 10pm, and at 9am on Jun 10 and again on Jun 11/12 for brief periods. But on Jun 1,5,7,8,15 it delivered less than 10 MW. And even during that windy Jun 10-12 period it dropped back to less than 50 MW for 8 hours. Across the whole AEMO grid, during June wind generation has varied from a low of 500 MW to a peak of 3,600 MW from a nameplate of 6,500 MW. Now I call that unreliable.
          And in that ruinable state of SA, with a peak demand of 2,200 MW, it has 2,100 MW nameplate wind, 3,200 MW of gas/diesel, about 1,000 MW solar, and not forgetting the 500 MW Vic interconnector. Wonder why SA has the highest electricity costs? (But dangerous Dan in Vic is doing his darndest to catchup.)

          70

    • #
      Bill in Oz

      Which British government ?
      The Conservative one which only got 11% of the vote 3 weeks ago ?
      Now that is a real joke Peter.
      Or is it support for a leaderless mob seeking salvation by imitating the Greens ?

      80

      • #
        Moderated Peter Fitzroy

        It was an agreement supported by the majority of the parliamentarians from all sides. That is what differentiates our parliament, which has strong party loyalty and the British one where positions are much more fluid

        10

    • #
      Annie

      Peter F, so far as I am aware, there are still huge quantities of very good coal in the UK, not least under the Drax power station in Yorkshire. Yet we have the sheer, offensive craziness of importing wood chips/pellets from the US to run it. How stupid is that? Think of all the energy that goes into acquiring this wood, processing it, shipping it to a port in the UK, taking it by rail to Drax and then burning it, at far lower efficiency than good British coal. How much unecessary real pollution is caused by this endeavour? Just how very stupid is that?

      50

    • #
      AndyG55

      UK is going downhill towards a banana monarchy in a big hurry.

      Care to join them, PF !

      Still, a 10 hour week in more than most Venezuelans can get.

      40

      • #
        Kinky Keith

        The implications of that 10 hour working week have not been examined.
        Five two hour working days, does that suggest that electricity will only be available for that time?

        KK

        20

    • #
      AndyG55

      “Of course they have other, reliable, sources of energy, and their coal is just about played out anyway.”

      LIES upon LIES.. or just pure FANTASY.!

      They have closed or are closing the nuclear power. Hydro can only do so much.

      So NO, they do NOT have anything that is reliable and can take coal’s place.

      Wind and Solar are totally UNRELIABLE.

      30

    • #
      AndyG55

      Perhaps there is a hidden SPAM/TROLL filter !

      21

  • #
    Zane

    AOC does believe in the tooth fairy.

    50

  • #
    pat

    sounds like BBC had someone there, but perhaps not Roger himself, who was busy elsewhere – see tweet below:

    14 Jun: BBC: Pope warns oil bosses of climate threat
    By Roger Harrabin
    The Pope has told oil company bosses that climate change threatens the future of the “human family”.
    The oil executives had been invited to the Vatican in Rome for an audience with the pontiff.
    Pope Francis said a radical energy transition is needed to save what he called “our common home”.
    The head of BP agreed that the world must find urgent solutions to environmental problems – but said all must play a part.
    The Pope warned him and other bosses: “Civilisation requires energy, but energy use must not destroy civilisation.”

    The oil bosses were brought to the Vatican alongside fund managers who invest in their stocks.
    The companies represented were believed to include Eni, Exxon, Total, Repsol, BP, Sinopec, ConocoPhillips, Equinor, and Chevron…

    The executives were given a dressing down by the former Irish premier Mary Robinson.
    She said: “We should all salute the courage the Holy Father has shown on climate change when too many secular leaders have spurned their responsibilities.”
    Ms Robinson asked the oil bosses: “What could be more cynical than still seeking to exploit fossil fuel reserves when the scientific evidence is abundantly clear that we need to end all combustion of fossil fuels by 2050?”
    She said the energy transition would require a massive shift of capital to clean energy and warned: “If some industries fail to adjust to this new word, they will fail to exist.”
    In a statement, BP said its CEO Bob Dudley was “honoured to participate at the Vatican”…READ ON
    https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-48641799

    TWEET: Roger Harrabin
    I Spoke last night to 700 young insurance professionals at @GuyCarpenter conf. Amazed by how many would change diets to protect planet. But dismayed to find a small minority ignorant of climate change. Scientists must do better in new media, methinks.
    14 Jun 2019
    https://twitter.com/RHarrabin/status/1139450062726189056

    30

    • #
      WXcycles

      Um, is UN global-warming propaganda spreading Scriptural? Would Jesus give a fig about it?

      Ever get the impression this pope is a show-pony with acute relevance-derivation-deficit disorder?

      40

      • #
        Kinky Keith

        “acute relevance-derivation-deficit disorder?”

        Brilliant.

        With all the resources at his command, the fact that this person has not bothered to use them to gain the Truth of the situation is very disturbing.

        A world leader who so ably demonstrates that he isn’t.

        KK

        10

    • #
      Bobl

      The Pope is praying to a false idol in the religion of gaia worship. He should be step down. The Catholic Church needs to return to worrying about humanity, poverty and disease rather than polar bears, jellyfish or the black throated finch.

      This Pope is a disaster.

      40

  • #
    Ruairi

    Climate debates cannot be won,
    By skeptics, because there are none,
    That earnestly probe,
    The effects on our globe,
    By the cycles and spots of the sun.

    100

  • #
    pat

    TWEET: Bill McKibben
    Pope Francis @Pontifex lays down the (moral) law to oil execs in closed Vatican session–the time is now for “radical energy transformation.” LINK USA TODAY
    14 Jun 2019
    https://twitter.com/billmckibben/status/1139629066057867267

    TWEET: Bill McKibben
    Climate strike for all ages Sept 20. Word starting to spread fast. Sign up at..
    PIC GRETA
    14 Jun 2019
    (LINK REUTERS MCKIBBEN ARTICLE BELOW)
    (CHECK DATES OF UPCOMING “CLIMATE” PROTESTS IN THE FEW REPLIES)
    https://twitter.com/billmckibben/status/1139632459056865280
    ***FakeNewsMSM pushes climate strike:

    14 Jun: Reuters: ‘Tame the nightmare’: U.S. writer McKibben pushes climate strike
    by Matthew Green
    LONDON – Bill McKibben, a U.S. author and leading figure in global climate activism, has challenged adults to join a youth-led general strike in September, saying bold action may yet prevent civilization being cut off “at the knees.” …
    FILE PHOTO: Greta Thunberg

    “People have risen to crises before. It was our parents’ and grandparents’ generation who faced the crisis of fascism in Europe,” McKibben told a packed auditorium in London late on Thursday at a ***organized by the Guardian newspaper…READ ON
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climate-change-strike/tame-the-nightmare-us-writer-mckibben-pushes-climate-strike-idUSKCN1TF0S1

    11

  • #
    Robber

    Today’s Australian contains a valuable article from Bjorn Longborg on the futility of current energy policies, posted by scaper above,y and another from Perry Williams on how Eraring is struggling to cope because of the impact of midday solar.

    Currently solar provides 6% of electricity demand on average, providing 10-20% at midday, but zero to cover the morning and evening peak demands. So reliable power stations are required to respond to the whims of variable wind and solar, yet be ready to supply 100% of demand. Wonder why electricity costs keep going up? Intermittents should only be connected to the grid when they are able to guarantee dispatchable power on demand without subsidies.
    For example, in NSW, Eraring’s 4 big generators together can supply 2,800 MW of power 24×7 (that’s over 10% of total demand). Across the AEMO grid, all the large and small solar generators on average deliver just 1,400 MW, while 2000 wind towers deliver on average just 1,700 MW, but when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine, thank goodness we still have reliable coal and gas and hydro electricity generators delivering 94% of peak demand.
    The reality is that intermittent wind/solar must always be costed with full backup for when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun isn’t shining.
    So current policies result in duplicate investment. Once to build the wind/solar generators, and once more to ensure there is 100% backup with reliable coal/gas/hydro to meet peak demand.
    Oh for some pollies willing to stand up and debate.

    60

  • #
    pat

    not secret to the protesters or the AP photographer!

    14 Jun: USA Today: AP: For second year, Pope warns oil execs that ‘radical energy transition’ is needed to save the planet
    includes pic: (six guys) Activists hold up signs outside the Vatican as Pope Francis meets with oil executives, Friday, June 14, 2019. (***Photo: Claudio Peri, AP)

    Outside the summit, around ***half-a-dozen protesters held up signs urging the oil executives to listen to the pope.
    The meeting was held under ***unusual secrecy, even by Vatican standards…
    (The Pope) called for transparency…
    https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/06/14/energy-transition-needed-save-planet-pope-warns-oil-executives/1453995001/

    14 Jun: AP: Major oil companies commit to carbon pricing at Vatican
    by Nicole Winfield & Frank Jordans (Jordans reported from Berlin)
    The companies, including ExxonMobil, BP, Royal Dutch Shell, Total, Chevron and Eni, said in a joint statement at the end of a Vatican climate summit that governments should set such pricing regimes at a level that encourages business and investment, while “minimizing the costs to vulnerable communities and supporting economic growth.”
    The CEOs, as well as leaders of major asset managers such as BlackRock and BNP Paribas, also called for companies to provide investors with clarity about the risks climate change poses to their businesses and how they plan to transition to cleaner energy sources…

    In their joint statement, the CEOs said “Reliable and economically meaningful carbon pricing regimes, whether based on tax, trading mechanisms or other market-based measures, should be set by governments at a level that incentivizes business practices … while minimizing the costs to vulnerable communities and supporting economic growth.”
    The pledge comes ahead of a European Union summit next week at which leaders will discuss the bloc’s efforts to combat climate change including a proposal to stop adding carbon to the atmosphere by 2050…

    “It is important that many of the world’s largest publicly traded oil and gas companies and many of the world’s largest investors have endorsed carbon pricing regimes,” the group’s executive director, Mark Campanale (Carbon Tracker Initiative), said in a statement.
    “Critically, asset owners with trillions of dollars under management are also calling for company disclosures of meaningful and material information on plans and investments in the energy transition,” he added…

    The summit was co-organized by the University of Notre Dame, whose president, the Rev. John Jenkins, praised the commitment taken by the industry leaders…
    https://www.apnews.com/3460d18f3d414f65b9a70575a3080832

    20

  • #
    pat

    Ernest Jeffrey Moniz…is an American nuclear physicist and former United States Secretary of Energy, serving under U.S. President Barack Obama from May 2013 to January 2017.

    TWEET: Ernest Moniz
    This week we gathered in Rome to address the pressing question from @Pontifex’s encyclical “Laudato Si’”: What kind of world do we want to leave for our children and those yet unborn? Read the press release here: PRESS RELEASE
    14 Jun 2019
    https://twitter.com/ErnestMoniz/status/1139563759301791744

    TWEET: Ernet Moniz
    Honored to participate in this week’s Vatican Summit convened by His Holiness @Pontifex on “The Energy Transition and Care for Our Common Home.” Several groundbreaking commitments were made today
    PIC – CLICK TO ENLARGE
    14 Jun 2019
    10 REPLIES AT TIME OF POSTING
    https://twitter.com/ErnestMoniz/status/1139560155564171264

    20

  • #
    pat

    ***climate only moves one way?

    14 Jun: Reuters: Pope backs carbon pricing to stem global warming and appeals to deniers
    By Philip Pullella
    Pope says doomsday predictions can no longer be dismissed (Adds big oil CEOs in attendance, Notre Dame president)
    “Collectively, these leaders will influence the planet’s future, perhaps more than any in the world,” said Father John Jenkins, president of the U.S. University of Notre Dame, which organised the meeting…
    Francis, who has made many calls for environmental protection and has clashed over climate change with leaders such as U.S. President Donald Trump…
    He criticised those who, like Trump, doubt the science that shows human activity is causing the earth to heat up…

    Trump, asked in an interview if he accepted climate science, said last week: “I believe there’s a change in weather, and I think it changes ***both ways.”…

    (Additional reporting by Ron Bousso in London and Steve Jewkes in Milan; Editing by Catherine Evans, Kevin Liffey, Raissa Kasolowsky and Peter Graff)
    http://news.trust.org/item/20190614124558-n22zt

    30

  • #
    pat

    14 Jun: CatholicHeraldUK: Francis tells his ambassadors not to criticize him behind his back
    by Courtney Grogan/CNA
    PIC: Pope Francis meets with nuncios from around the world at the Vatican June 13, 2019 (CNS photo/Vatican Media)

    They also should not ‘have blogs or join groups’ hostile to him, he added.
    Pope Francis sent a message to apostolic nuncios Thursday informing his ambassadors that they have a responsibility as papal representatives not to criticize the pope or to join groups hostile to the Roman curia.
    “It is therefore irreconcilable to be a pontifical representative criticizing the pope behind his back, having blogs or even joining groups hostile to him, to the curia and to the Church of Rome,” Pope Francis said June 13 in remarks distributed to more than 100 nuncios meeting in the Vatican’s Apostolic Palace.

    Pope Francis said that he desired to share some simple precepts to help the papal diplomats live out their mission, calling the 4,000 word document a “Ten Commandments” of sorts for nuncios and their co-workers throughout the world…
    One of the ten precepts outlined in the document is titled, “The Nuncio is a man of the Pope.” The section states that “certainly every person could have reservations, likes and dislikes, but a good nuncio cannot be hypocritical.”
    “As a Pontifical Representative, the nuncio does not represent himself but the Successor of Peter and acts on his behalf at the Church … the Representative is a link, or better, a bridge of connection between the Vicar of Christ and the people to whom he was sent, in a certain area, for which he was appointed and sent by the Roman Pontiff himself,” Pope Francis said…

    Some have pointed to Pope Francis’ comments about “having a blog” as alluding to the apostolic nuncio to Switzerland and Liechtenstein, Archbishop Thomas Gullickson, because he has a blog, which was linked to a Twitter account in which he shared articles critical of some of Pope Francis’ comments…ETC
    https://catholicherald.co.uk/news/2019/06/14/pope-francis-tells-his-ambassadors-not-to-criticise-him-behind-his-back/

    guess they won’t be criticising his call for a price on CO2 emissions!

    40

    • #
      Bill in Oz

      Ever since Constantine Christian clergy have attempted to demand obedience from the ‘ flock’
      Almost all of whom were baptised as infants with no say about whether they wanted to be indoctrinated.
      So Frankie boy is following is a long tradition.
      And the only solution as in the reformation is to tell him to F^ck off
      He might have some exprtise at saving imagined souls.
      But absolutely none as a climate scientist.

      30

  • #
    TdeF

    There is another non scientific idea at work in this Phantom Menace of Climate Change, that you can save yourselves. The Preppers. In other words, that South Australia may not save the world but at least they will have the world’s lowest CO2 and so avoid the storms, the droughts, the heat and send it all overseas with the coal. That way Australian Greens can rationalize being the world’s biggest exporter of coal while prohibiting its use domestically. Utter selfishness of the Preppers. Survival at all costs. Lock the door and defend yourselves.

    Of course this is quite illogical and the problem if it exists is Global, but that is how Phantom Menaces work. Primitive unthinking fear. Save yourselves. It is an instinct for personal and tribe survival, so the Democrats are openly pushing for Americans to put local Climate Change on a war budget footing comparable to WWII, spend like there is no tomorrow and save themselves. Too bad about the rest of the world. Survival starts at home, the logic of the “preppers”. It is the hallmark of many religions like Climate Scientology.

    50

    • #
      TdeF

      To confirm Climate Scientology as the new doom and gloom religion, the latest endorsement from no less than acolyte socialist Pope Francis

      ‘“Dear friends, time is running out!” the pope told a group of participants in a Vatican-sponsored conference on energy transition Friday. “We cannot afford the luxury of waiting for others to come forward or of prioritizing short-term economic benefits. The climate crisis requires decisive action from us, here and now.”

      Despite the pontiff’s frequent denunciation of a “politics of fear,” he seemed determined to paint as frightening a picture as possible of an impending climate apocalypse in order to incite people to action.’

      70

  • #
  • #
    toorightmate

    Twenty starters for the first US Democratic Party debate.
    It will be like watching a primary school P&C meeting.

    70

  • #
    theRealUniverse

    The next US (rigged) election wont be about climate , thats a tiny part as pointed out. Itll be about OTHER geopolitical issues like war or war or more war?

    20

  • #
    Hanrahan

    Who is this Gentleman? I think he is an Aussie.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNEQo6lk9ko

    10

Leave a 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>