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

Japan: The precautionary principle killed more people than the Fukushima nuclear disaster

Japanese homeless woman.The panicked closure of nuclear power in Japan pushed electricity prices up. The UN agrees that no people died from radiation in the Fukushima event, but the frenzied over-evacuation killed up to 2,000 people. After that, higher electricity prices led to at least 1280 extra deaths in the 21 largest cities. That translates into 4,500 deaths if the mortality rate was similar across the rest of the country.

Japan nuclear shutdown did ‘more harm than good’, study finds

World Nuclear News

Be Cautious with the Precautionary Principle: Evidence from Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Accident, by Matthew Neidell, Shinsuke Uchida and Marcella Veronesi. A discussion paper by the Germany-based IZA Institute of Labor Economics.

“Our estimated increase in mortality from higher electricity prices significantly outweighs the mortality from the accident itself, suggesting the decision to cease nuclear production caused more harm than good.”

The authors calculated that these higher electricity prices resulted in at least an additional 1280 deaths during 2011-2014. This is higher than a previously documented estimate of 1232 deaths which occurred as a result of the evacuation after the accident, they say.

“Since our data [on mortality related to higher electricity prices] only covers the 21 largest cities in Japan, which represents 28% of the total population, the total effects for the entire nation are even larger.”

 Who would have guessed, irrational scare campaigns can be deadly:

Earlier this year, Michael Shellenberger, president of research and policy organisation Environmental Progress, told delegates at the XI International Forum Atomexpo 2019 held in Sochi, Russia that a “panicked over-evacuation” of the area had caused around 2000 deaths, with fear of radiation causing “significant psychological stress”. The United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation found there had been no deaths from radiation that escaped from Fukushima, he noted.

The Precautionary Principle turns the normal cost-benefit analysis into a binary yes or no lottery.

As a regulatory tool, the precautionary principle – that activities should not proceed when the threats of damage are not fully understood – has previously been met with mixed reactions, the authors of the IZA report say, and question why, given such “surprising” results, governments invoke this principle.

“One possible explanation is that salient events, such as a nuclear disaster, affect perceived risk, which is often based more on emotions and instincts than on reason and rationality.

On the plus side, the Precautionary Principle neutralizes numbers, appeals to simpler minds and makes good bumper-stickers. On the down side, it kills people.

 

h/t Paul Miskelly

Image: wikimedia by Comessu

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.8/10 (60 votes cast)
Japan: The precautionary principle killed more people than the Fukushima nuclear disaster, 9.8 out of 10 based on 60 ratings

122 comments to Japan: The precautionary principle killed more people than the Fukushima nuclear disaster

  • #
    Lionell Griffith

    On the down side, it kills people.

    I suggest that is the goal of the so called precautionary principle. Such “principles” have no facts behind them except fear, uncertainty, and doubt. All of which is emotionally driven. That being the case, how can it cause anything but despair, poverty, and death?

    It is nothing but “I fear the future will be a disaster, I don’t know what kind of disaster will happen, and I doubt that we can avoid it. Thus we must stop doing whatever it is that we are doing, close our eyes, duck under the desk, and hide so we can pretend we can avoid whatever happens”. Guess what? An even worse disaster happens than what was imagined because we didn’t meet it with thought, understanding, and factual based action.

    250

    • #
      RicDre

      “Such “principles” have no facts behind them except fear, uncertainty, and doubt.”

      “fear, uncertainty, and doubt” (also known as FUD) is a classic sales technique. It does seem to have gotten new life with the invocation of the “Precautionary Principle”.

      Wikipedia

      Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt

      Fear, uncertainty, and doubt (often shortened to FUD) is a disinformation strategy used in sales, marketing, public relations, politics, cults, and propaganda. FUD is generally a strategy to influence perception by disseminating negative and dubious or false information and a manifestation of the appeal to fear.

      170

    • #
      PeterW

      Funny how those who talk most about the “uncertainty principle”, tend to be politically “progressive” – demanding that we repeat the failed ideologies of the past

      The future is always uncertain. The best we can do is to tilt the odds in our favour by assessing and repeating those strategies that have more commonly succeeded in the past.

      50

    • #

      But how many things that now make life significantly better, save and have saved many lives, would we not have if this principle had been followed at every stage of modern development? Would we, for example, have penicillin, vaccines, radiation therapy etc?

      120

      • #

        Here is the perfect example of the precautionary principle in action:

        Doctors at odds over value of vaping, as study finds it’s just as harmful as cigarettes

        Vaping is just as harmful to human health as cigarettes, and even has the potential to cause lung cancer, scientists at the University of Tasmania have found.

        Dr Sohal said there was no evidence vaping was safe.

        “A doctor who’s prescribing it has no idea what these liquids have in them,” he said.

        “If someone dies tomorrow morning, who’s responsible for it?”

        Vaping has been linked to at least 18 deaths and more than 1,000 cases of lung illness in the United States. Doctors say vaping with THC, a drug found in cannabis, increases the risks.

        Given that Public Health UK fully supports vaping, who or what is actually killing smokers?

        70

        • #
          David Maddison

          The establishment in Australia is against vaping, contrary to any evidence of significant harm (when using vaping materials from reputable suppliers) because they have (1) likely been pressured to do so by government because the taxes on cancer-causing cigarettes (among the highest in the world) are a major source of government revenue and (2) there is a widespread doctrine of power and control in government and sycophantic authorities.

          40

          • #

            I agree and there’s also the taxpayer money that goes to all of these anti-smoking organisations. If smoking rates plummet, how will these dogooders flourish?

            It’s this grant money that sustains the life of all of these dogooders; be it smoking, sugar, fat, alcohol, food or any enjoyment of life.

            30

      • #
        James Hein

        Not a good example at all. All this demonstrates is that some people will just use another vector, in this case vaping, to apply the same things e.g. THC that any other delivery system can deliver e.g. a bong.

        Cigarettes contain a host of known carcinogens. Standard vaping liquids don’t. You can use a spray paint can to spray a wall or you can huff the propellant. Application of your version of the precautionary principle would indicate not selling spray cans. Forks can be used to stab people in the eye, get rid of forks etc.

        The use of the precautionary in the instance in the story was a direct reaction to FUD and fact free information pushed by activists.

        40

        • #

          It’s an absolutely relevant example. This is exactly the approach that the AMA has taken: record:

          In a joint statement, Australia’s Chief Medical Officer and all the State and Territory Chief Health Officers have urged a precautionary approach to the marketing and use of e-cigarettes…

          60

      • #
        MudCrab

        Yes. If we had ignored this important principle we may have never invented Straw Men!

        PP be praised!!

        20

    • #
      DOC

      Isn’t the entire reaction to Anthropogenic Global Warming also based on the
      precautionary principle? I wonder how many deaths will occur from cold
      around the world due to high energy prices and even scarcity, over the next 100 years.

      The argument here of course is that of Lomberg. $Trillions to get nowhere trying to ‘save
      the planet’ where adaptation is infinitely cheaper and the depth required is only
      that dependent on just how far the climate changes to necessitate any change at all.

      Activists only get their support for radical social change by getting enough loud-voiced, gullible
      people to believe their incompetent,computer generated horror stories. Its also those horror
      stories that, in scaring people, form a mental barrier to even considering alternative science-based scenarios;
      that block makes ‘sceptics’ easier to manage by government.

      Nothing explains why governments are so gung ho in destroying our energy systems and standard of
      living and even apparently accepting deaths from cold and eventually, no doubt, rotting, unrefrigerated
      food. Why are western democratic governments, apart from Trump, so blinded by this vicious climate movement?

      61

  • #

    The precautionary principle is something that’s applied when the facts don’t otherwise justify an action.

    230

    • #
      Lionell Griffith

      That also is true. More importantly, it contains no instruction as to what would be better to do. It is nothing but “We must do something, anything – except what we know that works!”

      It is interesting that the “anything” to do turns out to be the transfer of wealth from those who created it to those who didn’t. Then that stolen wealth is used to aggregated still more power over We the People in the hands of those who don’t have the foggiest notion of what to do that would make the situation better.

      That is except to demand still more transfer of wealth and an ever increasing aggregating of power over We the People. Recycled endlessly until the society built and maintained by We the People can no longer be sustained and thereby collapses. In that way, caused the catastrophe the so called principle was said to be able prevent.

      141

    • #
      PeterW

      Remember that the future is coming whether we like it or not.

      Passivity is a choice.
      Failure to prepare is a choice.
      Continuing with the status-quo IS an action. Refusal to adopt an available technology or strategy IS an action.

      50

  • #
    Carp

    We promoted diesel cars because they produce less imaginary pollution (carbon dioxide). Then we discovered they produce more real pollution (nitrogen oxides and soot).

    150

    • #
      JS

      We promoted diesel cars because they produce less imaginary pollution

      In known lab conditions with car makers fully exploiting those unrealistic conditions, if not outright cheating (I’m looking at you VW), to produce the required result.
      Meanwhile in the real world…

      120

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        I always knew the diesel thing was nonsense.

        Thd number of people who were previosly super smug greenies who owned diesels went very quiet after the VW thing.

        How can a heavy, sludgey fuel oil burn cleaner than high octane petrol? Compression and therefore combustion heat is capped in a car motor.

        Even half an ouce of common sense should have been applied to see what is the likely outcone…..

        90

        • #
        • #
          bobl

          Except that you’d be dead WRONG. Low compression engines can extract about 30% of the calorific value of the fuel while a good high compression diesel engine can extract about 40% making Diesel engines 30% more fuel efficient than petrol cars. The lower fuel use results in lower emission ( of all kinds) because less fuel is consumed overall.

          20

          • #

            come on bobl… he said super smug greenie so he must be right. I’d also like to know if Steve can name any of these noisy people who are now quiet or is it yet another piece of made up rhetoric so he could feel good about himself?

            10

    • #
      pattoh

      Yep & that diesel grows all the food & produces all the resources = 3/4 of our balance of payments.

      Our Government is So Smart that we have virtually no refining capacity left, bugger all reserves & no back-up plan.

      Thank Gaia for wind & solar!

      Yay Malcolm, Ta Kev & “There will be no Carbon Tax under a government I lead”
      /sarc.^2

      130

  • #
    RicDre

    Off topic, but interesting: They’re Gonna Need a Bigger Boat: More Climate Activists Cry for Help to Reach COP25 Climate Conference

    https://www.breitbart.com/environment/2019/11/04/theyre-gonna-need-a-bigger-boat-more-climate-activists-cry-for-help-to-reach-cop25-climate-conference/

    30

    • #
      Serp

      Deity willing there’ll be a COP26 for them to arrive at in the necessary state of emissions sanctity; in the meantime they need to lighten up and dine out on the tale of how they were thwarted by the people of Chile having selfishly refused to cooperate with enlightened governmental decarbonisation policies.

      00

  • #
    pattoh

    I wonder what will happen here in Aus when the crafted “FOMO”[*1] driven Real Estate Bubble gives way to the reality
    of Mortgage Stress & Negative Equity?

    or when the Fear of AGW gives way to the reality of load shedding closed check-outs, ATMs & fuel pumps ( water pumps- water retic- fire hydrants[?], sewerage well pumps……………….>>>>)[*2]

    I guess a rolling street party[*3] may cheer us all up.

    1. Fear Of Missing Out
    2. see Dan da Man’s Victoriastan +/- Greater Iceberg +/- Learjet Leo
    3. Tumbrel( retro Green transport vehicle) Rally?

    150

    • #

      I turned the refuse media off a couple of years ago, but I still check headlines and cop a few ads and promos when I watch footy, the main reason for having a TV still.

      The organised heavy conditioning through media becomes more apparent once you skip it and only encounter it by chance. For example, we are clearly being conditioned to bug-eating, gender confusion, autistic superheroes, undead superheroes, tiny-space living, no borders, trans-humanism, race-merging, resource-rationing, male-female role confusion, trad-shaming…I could go on. The only way to really see it is to turn the bludgers off. The less you see the more you see, for some reason. The OFF switch is my life, my sweetness and my hope.

      One thing I’ve been noticing when I scan the headlines is a furious determination to keep the property market inflated, as a kind of patriotism-cum-mateship. They don’t tell you to get into property, they just give you the optimism and fear of missing out. (As for those reno shows with their professional larrikin presenters and gender-anything couples…we get it, we get it…property, property, property!)

      The theory is if they can keep the stock market inflated for this long they can keep anything afloat. Seems they’ve finally invented the perpetual motion machine. It’s that great Australian property market. Always comes good, except now it can’t even go wrong in order to come good. Dive in!

      I’ve been listening to these guys today on the subject of conditioning and technocratic rule… https://www.podomatic.com/podcasts/tkelly6785757/episodes/2019-11-02T04_10_04-07_00

      30

  • #
    Kalm Keith

    This nuclear “disaster” was actually a government sponsored disaster.

    Government failed to insist that the plant be correctly located in relation to known issues like “big waves”.

    Government failed to require the plants closure when it reached the end of its engineered life.

    It’s not hard to imagine that money was involved in both these factors.

    KK

    110

    • #

      Government prevented a return to areas which were safe by any other standard.

      There’s more background radiation in Geneva!

      70

    • #
      dinn, rob

      the precautionary principle does not kill people. use of caution/restraint forms a major part of common sense or horse sense. that horses/people can be stampeded does not invalidate precautionary principle. logic choppers try to rule the town, try to cut every man, woman and child down. regthe precautionary principle does not kill people. use of caution/restraint forms a major part of common sense or horse sense. that horses/people can be stampeded does not invalidate
      precautionary principle. logic choppers try to rule the town, try to cut every man, woman and child down.

      00

  • #
    John F. Hultquist

    The authors calculated that these higher electricity prices resulted in at least an additional 1280 deaths during 2011-2014.

    These deaths need not have occurred (when they did). Note they might have happened 6 or 8 months
    later because of age or ill health.
    There is much wealth in Japan, world wide individuals, and foundations. Even small fry,
    such as us, could have helped with several
    months energy cost for a poor person or family.
    These deaths, if high electricity costs was the
    problem, could easily have been prevented.

    But I do agree, Japan panicked and paid a price.

    100

  • #
    Robber

    The precautionary principle: Speed kills, therefore reduce speed limits on the roads.
    100 kmph becomes 80, 60, 50, 40, 30.
    But keep producing cars that will do 180 kmph?

    80

    • #
      pattoh

      Politicians keep deceiving & we keep voting for them too.
      The MSM keeps spinning lies & we still watch them.

      As they say the definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing & expect a different outcome.

      All who come here should be grateful for the cathartic reality & common sense.
      Cheers Jo!

      80

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      Robber:

      In semi-rural South Australia the reduction in the speed limit is due more to the poor quality of the road surface than the number of accidents. So as the road deteriorates the Government reduces the speed limit and claims “in an effort to reduce the road toll” and saves money.
      Mind you, with the low driving ability of many Crow eaters that probably won’t result in any reduction in accidents. Taking at least 25% off the roads until they can pass a stringent driving test in real conditions would be the biggest improvement.

      80

      • #
        Greg in NZ

        until they can pass a stringent driving test in real conditions would be the biggest improvement

        Hear! Hear! As a professional driver (amongst other skills) I wish that was ‘law’ over here too: most of my time behind the wheel is spent avoiding f###wits going through STOP signs, running RED lights, wandering in/out of lanes, cutting corners on MY side of the road, but I digress.

        Speed doesn’t kill – poor quality roads, doofus drivers, and rocks, destroy lives:

        https://www.france24.com/en/20140103-reconstruction-bild-michael-schumacher-ski-accident-france

        Seeing “the daughter of one his friends was in difficulty, Schumacher went to help her, leaving the piste and skiing 20 metres into deep snow. It was then that the Ferrari driver hit one of the several exposed rocks in the area [and] fell with the right side of his head landing on another rock”.

        Rocks Can Kill: Ban Rocks! They’re made of carbon crisis anyway so definitely ban all rocks before the planet dies!!!

        20

  • #
    Penguinite

    Japan can’t be blamed for be cautious with anything concerning radiation. Political caution is also spoiling a Nuclear future for Australia. Our caution is inspired by overzealous and irrational scare campaigns. It the same technique used in Y2K, global warming etc. etc. I guess if you go back far enough you would include any advance that has ultimately benefited man kind.

    90

    • #
      Kalm Keith

      Good perspective.

      30

    • #
      PeterS

      Not to mention he fact we are applying a much worse version of the precautionary principle. We are focused on reducing our emissions at the expense of our existing coal fired power stations. at least Japan are building them and turning back on some of their nuclear plant. [previously posted with the wrong email]

      40

      • #
        truth

        I agree PeterS.

        Japan pays lip service to the CAGW hoax then does the rational thing…but Australian authorities have bought the hoax lock stock and barrel …abandoned reason…and made it into the country’s official religion.

        Except for a tiny handful…no one in power wants to even contemplate whether the basis of the hoax is true or not.

        Morrison doesn’t want to know …does nothing to ensure Australian children are not scared witless by dodgy politically-motivated anti-science…or to ensure that ANY of them can get a rationally-based education from here on in…IMO

        The only way to end the insanity and mass hysteria IMO is for BoM to be audited as Tony Abbott tried to do…and the scientists of CSIRO and all the universities…along with Australia’s successive Chief Scientists …to put their honesty and professional credibility as scientists on the line…all to be required to state the exact period and duration of the actual trend …that they claim is due to CO2 and not to the natural oscillations within their stated trend time frame…. within the 170 year time frame of the CO2 issue.

        They must be required to tell Australians why and by what mechanism….the natural events and powerful oscillations…the sun activity and its extrapolated impacts…orbital changes etc and the natural slight warming as the earth continues to emerge from the LIA [ did they …the scientists expect earth to be cooling all this time?]…how those powerful natural elements are all in their opinion dwarfed by the ever-present[ no matter what we do] CO2 molecule.

        These people who are the ultimate alibi for all the policy-makers of Australia and the world …the ones the politicians will blame when it comes to crunch time…need to be required to answer ordinary questions eg..

        Why have these scientists along with successive Chief Scientists…propagated the notion that a definitive consensus can be declared on the most apocalyptic issue of our time …that they could legitimately declare the science on the issue ‘settled’…’closed’…’in’…no alternative viewpoints to be welcome or tolerated…dissenting scientists to be sacked…pilloried….before the most vital science on the issue was even done…before clouds were researched…with it completely unknown as to whether cloud feedbacks were positive or negative…with temperature of 70% of the earth system..ie oceans…unable at that time to be reliably measured…with earth’s climate’s sensitivity to a doubling of CO2 still unknown…with powerful natural oscillations largely unstudied etc etc.

        Australian scientists need to put themselves out there if they believe it…tell the Australian people …loud and clear…that the science of all of these massive unknowns that are seminal to the issue of earth’s climate…was/is in their opinion of no consequence to earth’s climate…that at the time they said the science was ‘closed’ …’settled’…they genuinely believe…then and now…that all that needed to be known was already known.

        If they say yes to the above…ie they believe in the complete overturning of the tenets of science that all of the great breakthroughs in every field have been based on …they damn themselves…and a decent government would discontinue all funding for their climate ‘research’ to protect Australia from the insanity….and the rational new generation of scientists we hope for…from being savaged by the witchdoctors.

        60

  • #
    el gordo

    ‘Our caution is inspired by overzealous and irrational scare campaigns.’

    There hasn’t been a scare campaign against nuclear in Australia this century, the upfront cost to build them is prohibitive, but I agree on Y2K and AGW.

    Political thought is focussed on the law of unintended consequences, avoiding a Fukushima before it happens.

    22

  • #
    Travis T. Jones

    They were hiding in plain sight the whole time …

    ”The emerging world order will increasingly be shaped by might, rather than law”.

    The EU needs to be a power project
    https://www.ft.com/content/ff92106c-e8e0-11e9-85f4-d00e5018f061?segmentID=174b076a-8f00-ca9e-9e21-65b127e0d275

    30

  • #
    frederik wisse

    Upon applying the precautionary principle the universe does not make any sense .

    60

  • #
    PeterS

    At least Japan has figured out they went too far and have already turned back on some of their nuclear power stations with more to come. This is on top of the 40+ coal fired power plants being built. What are we doing? Still holding policies to reduce our emissions at the expense of our existing coal fired power stations. Stupid is as stupid does. Japan is light years ahead of us in terms of base load power and streaking ahead. We are going backwards.

    30

  • #
    Robert Swan

    I’d question that this is the precautionary principle in action. As Jo put it in the first paragraph, it was panic; just a kneejerk reaction which, though unfortunate, is pretty understandable.

    On the PP though, the problem is that it seems reasonable on the outside: when the potential downside is huge and the potential upside is tiny, don’t do it. Well yeah.

    The usual way we see the PP crop up is disastrous climate change vs. oil tycoons having fewer billions in the bank. Oh, easy peasy.

    It’s not so easy when it’s framed honestly as disastrous climate change vs. many millions of people trying to scrabble an existence in needless energy poverty. (and of course the disastrous climate change is very doubtful whereas those millions are already suffering)

    60

  • #

    None of the alarmists will accept responsibility.
    None will apologize.

    They are “saints” and cannot be challenged in the public sphere.

    We have to educate the public to look at facts and not the “personalities”.
    Be like Cnut: Let every day be April Fools’
    It’s a tough slog because our instinct is to follow somebody trusted.

    60

  • #
    pat

    4 Nov: Breitbart: AP: US tells UN it is pulling out of Paris climate deal
    With a hand-delivered letter, the U.S. is the first nation to pull out of the deal…
    Trump’s decision was condemned as a reckless failure of leadership by environmental experts, activists and critics such as former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

    “Donald Trump is the worst president in history for our climate and our clean air and water,” said Michael Brune, the executive director of the Sierra Club. “Long after Trump is out of office, his decision to withdraw the United States from the Paris Agreement will be seen as a historic error.”…

    This could lead to more nations turning their back on efforts to slow down an ever warming world, experts said.
    “The Trump Administration’s abandonment of action on climate change gives other countries an excuse not to act either. They ask — if the richest country, the one that has contributed the most to the load of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, isn’t willing to act, why should we?” said Michael Gerrard, who heads Columbia Law School’s climate change legal center. “If someone other than Donald Trump is elected, he or she will almost certainly rejoin Paris, and the rest of the world will welcome us back with open arms.”
    https://www.breitbart.com/news/us-tells-un-it-is-pulling-out-of-paris-climate-deal/

    5 Nov: Bloomberg: Trump Files Paperwork to Formally Exit Paris Climate Accord
    By Jennifer A Dlouhy; With assistance by Ari Natter, Nick Wadhams, Jordan Fabian, and David Wainer
    Democrats hope to use issue in 2020 election and rejoin pact…
    The one-year withdrawal timeline could draw more attention to climate change as a campaign issue…

    “It takes four years to leave. It takes 30 days to go back in,” said David Doniger, with the NRDC Action Fund. But, he said, “a three-month timeout where the U.S. is formally out is not going to be any different than the level of disrespect the president has given the previous three years” to climate change…
    (Michael R. Bloomberg, the founder and majority stakeholder of Bloomberg LP, the parent company of Bloomberg News, is the United Nations Secretary-General’s Special Envoy for Climate Action.)
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-11-04/trump-to-exit-paris-pact-having-already-forfeited-climate-fight

    31

  • #
    pat

    4 Nov: GatewayPundit: IT’S OFFICIAL! Dow Is Up 50% Since Election Day 2016! …9,125 Points!… Dow, S&P, and Nasdaq ALL HIT NEW RECORDS! – Thank You President Trump!
    by Jim Hoft
    Unemployment is at 50 year lows, wages are going up, corporate earnings are at all-time highs and expected to get higher and the markets are at all-time highs. Trump’s economy is roaring!
    Thank you, President Trump!
    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/11/its-official-dow-is-up-50-since-election-day-2016-9125-points-dow-sp-and-nasdaq-all-hit-new-records-thank-you-president-trump/

    VIDEOS: 4 Nov: GatewayPundit: BREAKING: Yale, Moody’s and Oxford Economic Polls Show President Trump Winning in Landslide in 2020 EVEN IN A RECESSION (VIDEO)
    by Jim Hoft
    In October Moody’s Analytics released shocking numbers on the 2020 presidential race.
    Moody’s found that President Trump wins the 2020 election in three different models…
    VIDEO Via Lou Dobbs Tonight (FOX):
    And Yale and Oxford have joined Moody’s in predicting a huge Trump win in 2020…
    VIDEO Via Varney and Co (FOX).
    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/11/breaking-yale-moodys-and-oxford-economic-polls-show-president-trump-winning-in-landslide-in-2020-even-in-a-recession-video/

    30

  • #
    PeterS

    At least Japan has figured out they went too far or they just wanted to be very cautious. Either way they have already turned back on some of their nuclear power stations with more to come. This is on top of the 40+ coal fired power plants being built. What are we doing? Still holding policies to reduce our emissions at the expense of our existing coal fired power stations. Stupid is as stupid does. Japan is light years ahead of us in terms of base load power and streaking ahead. We are going backwards.

    80

  • #
    truth

    IMO the precautionary principle is about herding people…usually invoked by authorities who created the perception of a danger they want the populace to fear so they…the authorities…. can deploy remedies that are infinitely more harmful and real than the perceived danger…and would otherwise have been resisted….in this case it’s used for herding the world into Global Socialism.

    The aspiration to use the climate issue this way was all spelt out.

    I believe the danger of the Precautionary Principle applies to the CAGW mass hysteria but not to Fukushima or Chernobyl.

    With the nuclear accidents whole swathes of countries become the deadliest of no-go areas forever as far as anyone alive now is concerned.

    The numbers of dead may be debatable…but not the devastation of large areas.

    IMO the very worst outcome of the precautionary principle with regard to Australia and the CAGW mass hysteria.. would be if authorities decided to make Australia a nuclear-powered country because it’s just too hard to find ways to induce scientists …in their own long-term interests….to confront and put aside whatever it is that’s making them dishonor all the tenets of their profession …even to the extent of just plain ordinary dishonesty.
    I think conservative government [which we don’t actually have at the moment…so it would have to be just conservatives] should go all out to give honorable scientists cover to tell the Australian people the truth about the science we’re being fed.

    To push for nuclear power stations in Australia now instead of for HELE coal plants and possibly use of the already-developed carbon capture and conversion process….is to condone and virtually agree with the CAGW madness and with the up-ending of scientific principle that all of the great science of the 20th century has been based on.

    It would set in concrete that there was reason in the illegitimate consensus….telling Australian kids that science is anything but objective….that it should be manipulated to fit with certain political viewpoints….activist science to go with judicial activism .

    20

    • #
      Serp

      The fact that ex-PM Malcolm Turnbull, the logical ignoramus who declared in Parliament that the law of the land trumps the laws of mathematics, appeals to the Precautionary Principle in justification of his views on carbon dioxide is sufficient grounds for any rational person to recognise it as being chicanery, the first resort of scoundrels.

      10

  • #
    PeterW

    Some of the worst examples of the supposed application of this “principle” have been in environmental management.

    A rare orchid appears after a fire? Immediately redouble efforts to suppress all fires to “protect” it ….. despite the reasonable belief that fire is an integral part of its life cycle.

    A rare bird/frog/plant is discovered in an area that has been grazed by livestock for 150 years? Immediately remove all livestock, radically altering the ecosystem in which it has hithertoo been living.

    You will say that this is not a valid application, and you would be right. Apparently it’s just another meaningless phrase that means whatever they want it to mean.

    40

  • #
    robert rosicka

    OT , I’ve never seen this before that all mainland states around $20 but tassie over $400 !

    https://www.aemo.com.au/Electricity/National-Electricity-Market-NEM/Data-dashboard#nem-dispatch-overview

    Why would this be ?

    00

    • #
      Serp

      Bizarre! Something’s broken at the AEMO site: at 13:15 all of QLD, NSW, VIC & SA are showing $0.00 and TAS is at $12882.19

      30

      • #
        robert rosicka

        Prices for NSW and Vic hit -$90 odd at one stage with huge swings , no idea what was going on and I only looked because the power went out for a second or two .
        They were redlining the extension cord into Tassie from Vic for a long time .

        00

  • #
    Peter Fitzroy

    So sadly a lot of vulnerable Japanese die, in a wealthy capitalist nation, because the can not afford the higher price of electricity. A lot of vulnerable Americans die, in a wealthy capitalist nation, because the can not afford the price of medicine, etc etc. The common thread is that the market sets the price, and that market is unconcerned with leftist issues like fairness, public health and affordability. The market cares about profit, and if a few low value consumers drop out of the market, that’s to bad, servicing their needs is not profitable anyway.

    But hey, as long as you can be persuaded by the monday morning quarterbacks that something else was the cause, carry on.

    37

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘ … unconcerned with leftist issues like fairness, public health and affordability.’

      That is not entirely true, the centre right is also interested in those virtues because its in their best interest.

      If you want to eradicate poverty and inequality then we’ll have to start thinking of a two class system. In the Australian context, how would you absorb the poorest five percent into the lower middle class? Or how do we stop the lower middle class sliding into poverty?

      51

      • #
        Peter Fitzroy

        To answer your question, why is it that in a commonwealth like ours, access to that wealth is limited to a few? I would suggest that basic needs should be supplied as a right, at minimal cost and access is universal. The rest of the goods and services would tiered to with each tier attracting more tax, and so forth. Note: I’m not saying that you can not get rich. but I’m saying that a rich nation like ours should be looking for fairness for all of its citizens

        35

        • #
          Yonniestone

          You answered your own question, the fairness is fact you can get rich, freedom to pursue,

          - Gain employment, income.
          - Create personal wealth.
          - Further education, freedom of thought.
          - Freedom of movement, work nation wide.
          - Better personal medical care due to above.

          Not saying everyone needs or wants to be super rich but comfortable would suit most, while there will always be vulnerable people in our society the more that engage in personal development and wealth creation the better off the vulnerable will be, problem is due to a welfare culture grown by successive governments we have too many takers versus makers that could work but choose not to, decades of conditioning have given a sense of entitlement to people that would be living in gutters in other countries not given free incomes and subsidised lifestyles.

          You seem to be repeating the old communist arguments used over decades by youths and union nobody’s, nice in theory terrible in practice.

          70

          • #
            Peter Fitzroy

            Yes, Yonniestone, that is what I’m saying, but when you can not afford Medical, and/or Power, and/or education. I could go on. We live in a wealthy country, there is no reason why that wealth, which is held in common should not distributed to all of our citizens. There are examples from the Scandinavian countries about how this could be done.

            Instead, we are selfishly denying basics, on some misguided principle like the protestant work ethic.

            Say at the Melbourne cup, will all the bar staff eventually become rich, like the people they are serving?

            /Pathetic simplistic twaddle from old white males who have all the breaks, none of the setbacks and think that they can tell a zero contract temp employee that the cup of riches is in their reach, if only they work harder.

            15

            • #
              James in Melbourne

              Say at the Melbourne cup, will all the bar staff eventually become rich, like the people they are serving?

              Most of them probably casual, they’re at university – they’re not going to remain bar-staff all their lives. This is the lever of aspiration, around which socialists simply cannot get their heads. I’ll do that job, get a good reference, get a better job with that, get another good reference – and onward. I will demonstrate that I have a good work ethic and I will impress the people who employ me, I will take on more responsibility, and get paid more. The simple stuff that most people do without even thinking about it. But this absolutely mystifies the socialist, for whom the state provides everything.

              50

              • #

                I’m not a socialist (I’m an actual LP member for those who might have forgotten) but I’m mystified by your just so story.

                How do you think socialism operates without promoting people with talent and endeavor? Socialism has many faults that lead to various entrenched forms of corruption and inefficiencies of management that lead to all sorts of inabilities to provide services and governance, but nowhere in its architecture is there actual or implied diminution of people’s advancement by talent and hard work.

                I guess you are coming at it from the angle of brain surgeons and street cleaners get the same pay so why go through the torture of 8 years of medical school, or some such concept? And yet the existence of these people sort of hits that idea on the head. There is more a problem of workforce planning being really inefficient and leading to too many square pegs in round holes, compared with letting the market decide what sorts of jobs people train in.

                20

              • #
                Peter Fitzroy

                Ah, the side hustle. There are many more service jobs than there are those which pay a good wage. If you want to see the left behinds, the never had a fair chance, etc, just catch any public transport in the afternoon peak.

                23

              • #

                I’m neither hard-working nor ambitious, but I was doing jobs like cleaning dunnies into my 60s so I could keep living in the scrub and do the rough travelling I wanted to do. The sheer strenuousness of it all (no car for ten years, just MTB or walk up to 12 k) made it possible to do the big hike across Europe I could never have done even with lots of money.

                But the biggest plus, coming late in life, was dealing with the impatient public in great numbers and in a hurry when my clock was wanting to slow. Those who serve are being served, if only they will recognise it.

                40

              • #
                AndyG55

                “just catch any public transport in the afternoon peak.”

                And how many of them do YOU invite back to your home to give them a bed and breakfast

                You are a steaming load of EMPTY HYPOCRITE, PF !

                Everyone has to GIVE, except you.. right !

                You have been seriously “left behind” when it comes to integrity and honesty, PF

                21

            • #
              el gordo

              ‘ … there is no reason why that wealth, which is held in common should not distributed to all of our citizens.’

              The whole system would collapse without the free enterprise model, individual incentive must be rewarded.

              Our public hospital system, along with the PBS, takes care of the poor, but in America they treat the bottom rung like dirt.

              21

              • #
                Peter Fitzroy

                Yep, el gordo, you and I are just discussing how much medical, eduction, and so forth should be given as a right to a citizen. If you want to be rich, and have the connections and the skill and the drive, go right ahead. As I said, the scandinavian countries manage it.

                25

              • #
                el gordo

                Forget the Scandinavian model, apples and pears, better to face reality and go with the new form of capitalism.

                Speaking on behalf of the utopian socialists, the elites may stay in place, but we demand a peaceful village life in the country for those Australians pushed out of the capital cities.

                30

            • #
              AndyG55

              Wow, your self-wallowing self-pity is really disgusting, PF !!

              21

            • #

              Just curious Peter F, are you an old white male?

              50

              • #
                el gordo

                Looking around … this place is full of them.

                20

              • #
                Peter Fitzroy

                yep, and a beneficiary of free education, well paid work, good housing and so on. (and it was in answer to EG’s question)

                What I was originally saying is that if there are foreseeable and preventable deaths due to high electricity charges – it is either by design, or by neglect that this happened. Since there was no intervention, these non-productive economic units have been removed.

                We benefit from subsidised public transport, road and rail infrastructure, but have blind spot for education and most health care (dentistry I’m looking at you), as in your example yesterday. As Bill (I think was), suggested, if more old farts like me went to the gym, there would be less strain on the healthcare system, and reduced costs all round. I would therefore make sense to subsidise it. (it might need a stick as well – like unless you make some effort, and this is recorded on your fitbit, you forsake some tax benefit, just as an example)

                I’m arguing that we are a wealthy country and we should be able to avoid needless and preventable death.

                25

              • #
              • #
                AndyG55

                “and a beneficiary of free education”

                Yet all you learnt was how to wallow in self-pity and marxist malaise.

                So sad. !!

                20

              • #
                el gordo

                ‘ … like unless you make some effort, and this is recorded on your fitbit, you forsake some tax benefit, just as an example).

                Similar to the Beijing model for minor misdemeanours, certain privileges are taken away from individual citizens, like being forced to travel on slow trains instead of very fast trains. This fascist approach seems to work and makes for a compliant society.

                10

            • #
              Yonniestone

              You’re just trolling as usual Peter, the use of race baiting is as ugly as it is useless, considering the global population of white people is ~10% I’d say the demographic you are attempting to deride here are made up of many racial backgrounds, older yes uncaring no.

              60

              • #
                Peter Fitzroy

                Race?

                13

              • #
                Yonniestone

                Yes ethnicity, not the one you got all those participation ribbons in.

                20

              • #
                AndyG55

                PF HATES old white men, because he is one of them.

                His INNER HATRED of anything to do with his pitiful life is palpable.

                21

              • #
                el gordo

                ‘ … the use of race baiting is as ugly …’

                Fitz didn’t say anything about race, you are being a little bit too precious.

                On the other hand Jo’s question could be interpreted as ageist, racist and sexist.

                10

        • #
        • #
          AndyG55

          Poor PF is feeling hard done by, as always.

          You poor pathetic Marxist/socialist retch, PF. !!

          42

        • #
          el gordo

          ‘ … a rich nation like ours should be looking for fairness for all of its citizens.’

          The rich are heavily taxed and although it may appear as an obscenity to us, elites have been around for millennia and won’t be disappearing anytime soon.

          The Beijing model has promise, even with four classes, they have devised a scheme to drag the whole world out of poverty and only the ugly face of capitalism stands in the way.

          This same old world capitalism is exporting gas to North China and pushing my gas bill higher.

          31

        • #
          BoyfromTottenham

          PF: Access to wealth? Whose wealth? How? We don’t ‘access’ wealth, we create it by performing productive work, like farming, manufacturing, building stuff. Non-productive activities consume wealth created by others or themselves. Please let us know a way to ‘access’ wealth without productive work.

          40

          • #
            Peter Fitzroy

            Who owns the mineral resources? who owns the rivers? who owns the natural wonders like the Great Barrier Reef? Who built the Snowy?
            I’ve never said that work does not need to be done, so do not try to tar me with that brush.

            16

    • #
      PeterW

      The common thread in PF’s utterances is that we can kill the goose that laid the golden eggs.

      That being a “wealthy” nation has nothing to do with wealth creation and permitting people to keep and enjoy the results of their effort and input. That incentive has nothing to do with outcomes.

      The other lie is claiming that “fair” means taking from people who have earned, and giving to those who have not.

      10

  • #
    pat

    behind paywall:

    3 Nov: UK Telegraph editorial: The government must tell voters where Britain’s energy future lies
    When significant quantities of gas-producing shale were identified in Britain, one of the great cheerleaders for its exploitation was Boris Johnson…
    A few years later, when public opposition to fracking proved hard to break down, Mr Johnson suggested communities with reserves beneath their land should have a commercial interest in its exploitation.

    Now Mr Johnson presides over a Government that has just announced a ban on fracking. Green campaigners are overjoyed, but the majority of the population are entitled to feel somewhat perplexed. Here was a great opportunity to emulate America’s success in cutting prices for consumers, reducing dependence on imports and creating hundreds of thousands of jobs. But now it has been abandoned on what look to be as much political as scientific grounds.
    The likelihood of the Conservatives reviving the idea if they win the election and earthquakes can be eliminated seems remote.

    The Government and the other parties contesting the election now owe it to voters to spell out where Britain’s energy future – especially the security of supply – now lies. They are keen to tell us what they are against, whether it be shale, nuclear, oil, gas or even wood. What we want to know is how they propose to keep the lights on…
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2019/11/03/government-must-tell-voters-britains-energy-future-lies/

    40

    • #
      Serp

      Boris is a bigger disappointment than our own Scott Morrison. Brexit Party winning on December 12 and no deal withdrawal is the best possible outcome notwithstanding that Farage is not standing himself. Boris’s tongue has more forks in it than a cutlery drawer and it would be a condign punishment for him to lose his seat.

      50

  • #
    mem

    Here’s one for agricultural scientists. Spot the flaw in this new piece of hype from the the climate goblins!
    Thirsty future ahead as climate change explodes plant growth
    Rising CO2 levels and a warmer earth means plants will grow bigger and have longer to suck the land dry. That’s bad news for human water supplies.

    https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2019/10/plants-consume-more-water-climate-change-thirsty-future/

    60

  • #
    pat

    TWEET: Jonathan Ford, City editor of FT
    One person died from radiation exposure due to the Fukushima disaster. Yet thousands may have died because of the later decision to switch off all Japan’s reactors. My piece on why we need to conquer our irrational fear of nuclear. LINK FT
    https://twitter.com/Grepsul/status/1191038399601422337
    3 Nov 2019
    behind paywall – excerpts found on No2NuclearPower bog:

    3 Nov: Financial Times: Net-zero world must conquer its irrational fear of nuclear power.
    by Jonathan Ford
    Geraldine Thomas, a professor at Imperial College who has extensively studied the impact of nuclear accidents, argues that part of the problem is “our excessive fear of one risk: radiation”. It stems from the conflation of civil atomic power with nuclear bombs. Yet this is entirely erroneous. Power plants do not blow up like atomic bombs. (The explosions at Chernobyl and Fukushima were steam explosions caused by overheating). Nor do they emit anywhere near the same levels of radiation on the occasions when they do fail.

    An inhabitant of Pripyat, the now-abandoned city next to Chernobyl, might have absorbed 30 millisieverts (mSv) of radiation prior to evacuation. To put that in context, its equivalent to six years living in Chicago (where background radiation is about 6 mSv), or roughly three CT scans.

    All of this matters because of the need to decarbonise the world’s energy production. In this massive task we have relatively few proven technologies aside from nuclear to draw on. Renewables produce no carbon, but have other drawbacks such as intermittency. Carbon capture and storage remains unproven at scale and costly.

    Of course, nuclear is not without its drawbacks too. Reactors can be very expensive, and also slow to build. Just look at Britain’s £20bn-plus Hinkley Point scheme, already drifting over time and with its costs steadily rising. If nuclear power is to play a major role in decarbonisation, plants will have to come in faster and at lower cost.
    But what we should not do though is reject nuclear power out of irrational fears about its riskiness. That would be to repeat on a grander scale the mistakes made after Fukushima. Decarbonisation will be hard enough without zapping our one concentrated and reliable zero-carbon source…
    https://www.ft.com/content/32e052e2-fcca-11e9-a354-36acbbb0d9b6

    30

  • #
    pat

    Wikipedia: Leo Varadkar is an Irish Fine Gael politician who has served as Taoiseach, Minister for Defence and Leader of Fine Gael since June 2017…
    Varadkar was born in Dublin and studied medicine at Trinity College Dublin. He spent several years as a non-consultant hospital doctor, eventually qualifying as a general practitioner in 2010…

    behind paywall:

    4 Nov: UK Times: Varadkar branded irresponsible for saying climate change has benefits
    by Brian Mahon
    Leo Varadkar’s comments regarding supposed benefits of climate change have been criticised by activists as “totally irresponsible”.
    Speaking on Thursday at the launch of the government’s first progress report on its climate action plan, Mr Varadkar said that climate change could have some positive effects.

    He said: “One thing we definitely face as a result of climate change is a warmer winter. We’re already experiencing warmer winders and that actually means using less energy because it’s warmer and people need less heating and it also means fewer deaths as a result of cold weather.
    “It’s interesting that when you do look at those things there is a ledger, and there are benefits and there are downsides. The downsides outweigh the benefits but we need to…
    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/varadkar-branded-irresponsible-for-saying-climate-change-has-benefits-tdsh6cgh6

    Irish Post: Leo Varadkar condemned for saying there are “benefits” to climate change
    by Rachael O’Connor
    TAOISEACH LEO Varadkar has faced derision after commenting that the climate emergency could result in “benefits” for Ireland, including lower heating bills and fewer deaths due to warmer winters…

    TAOISEACH LEO Varadkar has faced derision after commenting that the climate emergency could result in “benefits” for Ireland, including lower heating bills and fewer deaths due to warmer winters…
    “After lives have been lost in climate change related natural disasters, our Taoiseach still finds benefits to this crisis. These comments come just days after MEPs voted to cease search and rescue operations in the Mediterranean.
    “When our government acts with such levels of negligence and hypocrisy, we have no choice but civil disobedience.
    “We have no choice but to rebel.”
    https://www.irishpost.com/news/leo-varadkar-condemned-saying-benefits-climate-change-173426

    5 Nov: Guardian: Irish PM under fire for extolling benefits of climate crisis
    Activists critical of Leo Varadkar over claim warmer winters lead to fewer deaths
    by Rory Carroll
    Environmentalists have heaped scorn on Leo Varadkar, Ireland’s prime minister, after he said the climate crisis could have benefits such as warmer winters, lower heating bills and fewer deaths.
    Some called the comments silly and weird, others branded them irresponsible…

    Irish Doctors for the Environment, an advocacy group, wrote to Varadkar on Monday saying the climate crisis had an “overwhelmingly negative effect on human health”. It asked him to retract and “address the errors” in his speech.
    Other environmental campaigners expressed anger and disbelief…

    Green party: “Millions are dying or being displaced right now. That will rise to hundreds of millions if the complacency of governments around the world continues. Our milder winters are punctuated by cold snaps that threaten our most vulnerable, including the thousands of people now homeless.”…

    Oisín Coghlan, the director of Friends of the Earth Ireland, acknowledged Ireland could benefit in a narrow way but said the climate emergency’s wider impacts on the country and the rest of the world were overwhelmingly negative…

    Cara Augustenborg, an environmental scientist at University College Dublin, echoed that view, saying the few lives that might be spared from winter-related deaths paled in comparison to wider suffering.

    Extinction Rebellion Ireland called the comments shocking. “It’s time for civil disobedience,” the group said…

    In recent days the singer Cher and the actor Mark Ruffalo have added their voices to a campaign to stop Ireland becoming an entry point for fracked US gas.
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/nov/04/irish-pm-leo-varadkar-under-fire-for-extolling-benefits-of-climate-crisis

    how dare he speak?

    20

    • #
      pat

      right on cue, here come the CAGW clowns:

      4 Nov: TheJournalIreland: Protesters plan ‘bikini & shorts’ protest over Taoiseach ‘positive’ climate change remarks
      Varadkar said one of the benefits to climate change is warmer winters
      EXTINCTION REBELLION PROTESTERS are to stage a protest outside Leinster House this lunchtime wearing bikinis and Bermuda shorts…
      The Taoiseach’s comments followed Health Minister Simon Harris warning that climate change “will result in an increased exposure to UV rays”.
      “We know that currently at least 11,000 people a year are diagnosed with skin cancer in Ireland, but obviously this could rise,” he said, adding that “extreme heat” has resulted in 294 deaths in Ireland, while cold snaps have also caused fatalities,” said the health minister…
      Extinction Rebellion climate activists will today stage a protest at the entrance to Dáil Eireann where they will sunbathe on sun loungers.
      Beach balls, snorkels, flippers, a body board, a sun parasol are also set to feature in today’s demonstration, where protesters will also hold up a large sign that will read “Leo’s Fantasy Island”.

      People Before Profit TD and member of the Oireachtas Climate Action Committee, Bríd Smith has slammed the comments, stating that the “ignorance of the science and implications of climate change is breathtaking and depressing”.
      She said the mask has slipped on the government’s actual climate policy measures, and pointed to the attempts by the government to import liquefied natural gas from the US, despite banning fracking here.
      “Ireland and this government remain laggards in the fight against climate change. Comments by the Taoiseach show that he and his government are not able to deal with the massive climate crisis we face because they just don’t understand the crisis and they are wedded to the fossil fuel industry,” said Smith.
      https://www.thejournal.ie/climate-change-positives-varadkar-4878186-Nov2019/

      what’s “bizarre”?

      3 Nov: Sun Ireland: LEO’S HOT AIR Varadkar slammed after claiming climate change will result in fewer deaths, warmer winters and cheaper energy bills
      by Craig Farrell
      THE Taoiseach has been slammed after claiming climate change will result in fewer deaths, warmer winters and cheaper energy bills.
      Leo Varadkar made the ***bizarre comments during the launch of the government’s first progress report on its Climate Action Plan – which sets out its climate commitments to 2030…

      4 Nov: DublinLive: Dublin TDs slam Leo Varadkar’s ‘dangerous’ and ‘shocking’ climate change comments
      The Taoiseasch said there were ‘pluses and minuses’ to climate change
      By Ian Mangan & Ciara Phelan
      The Taoiseach has come under scrutiny for saying there are “pluses and minuses” to climate change and it could lead to “fewer deaths” due to cold weather…
      The Fine Gael leader’s comments which were first reported in The Sunday Business Post have been met with widespread backlash from fellow politicians and members of the public…

      Speaking last night, Green Party leader Eamon Ryan said the Taoiseach should be focusing on our rising emissions.
      He added: “It might be the case in Ireland there are fewer deaths but it won’t be the case in other parts of the world.
      “And to say to those people that ‘we’ll be alright thank you because it’ll be slightly warmer in our country’ is no comfort to people whose livelihoods are threatened.”…
      https://www.dublinlive.ie/news/dublin-news/dublin-tds-slam-leo-varadkars-17194305

      20

    • #
      Serp

      A link to the taoiseach’s heretical utterance was provided in Weekend Unthreaded and I express again my hope that he stays resolute and faces down the bellicose green nutters and pray that ScoMo follows suit soonish after first countermanding the preposterous billion dollar grant to the CEFC.

      00

      • #
        pat

        Serp -

        just saw the link and your reply on “weekend unthreaded”. i’d missed it previously.

        what is bizarre is how saying the obvious attracts such vitriol.

        20

  • #
    Brian

    As the Earth rotates on its axis half of the globe is always exposed to radiated energy from a huge fusion reactor that we call the sun. Most of the dangerous radiation is diverted by the Earth’s magnetic field but sufficient gets through to inflict radiation burns and people, wearing skimpy protection designed to mostly conceal their private parts, regularly bath themselves in this radiation to “get a tan”, often suffering radiation burns as a result. The existence of that radiation is the only reason that life evolved in the first place and we accept its bounty without fear. Yet for some the concept of nuclear generated power is anathema.

    50

  • #
    WXcycles

    Freezing into Florida, and all the way to Gulf and Atlantic coast line on 13th of Nov. Very early start to Winter.
    https://on.windy.com/2vrn5

    30

  • #
    Wayne Job

    This nonsense about radiation and its threat,needs to be addressed. A woman in Japan a few years ago celebrated a birthday I think her ninetieth. She lived a mile from ground zero at the bombing of Hiroshima.

    They started rebuilding the city almost straight after, I have not heard of any major problems and it was a very dirty bomb?

    50

  • #
    pat

    5 Nov: MirageNews: Have your say on Walla Walla solar farm
    The Department of Planning, Industry and Environment is asking for community feedback on a development application for the proposed Walla Walla Solar Farm, 35km north of Albury…
    “The Walla Walla Solar Farm is proposed to be constructed on private land approximately four kilometres north east of Walla Walla and approximately 35km north of Albury,” (Executive Director, Energy and Resource Assessments, Mike Young) said.
    “The proposed solar farm would consist of about 900,000 solar panels installed across the 605-hectare site.

    “The solar farm would have a 300-megawatt (MW) capacity of clean, renewable energy – enough to supply around 112,000 NSW homes and save approximately 635,000 tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions per annum.”
    The solar farm would be connected to the electricity network via the existing transmission line that runs parallel to Schneiders Road.
    The Department will be holding a community information session regarding proposed solar developments in the region at the Jindera Community Hub, 83 Urana Street, Jindera on Thursday 7 November 2019 from 6pm to 8pm…

    “Once the exhibition closes on 2 December, the Department will consider all community submissions received, along with advice and feedback from government agencies, including Council.”
    https://www.miragenews.com/have-your-say-on-walla-walla-solar-farm/

    4 Nov: BBC: Building wind farms ‘could destroy Welsh landscape’
    The Welsh landscape could be destroyed if more wind farms are built, campaigners have warned.
    They accept the need for renewable energy but are concerned about the impact on tourism in some areas…

    The Welsh Government’s consultation document said it “supports large scale on-shore wind and solar energy development in the identified priority areas” and there would be an “acceptance of landscape change” in future…

    The Campaign for the Protection of Rural Wales said the NDF could lead to the “widespread industrialisation and irrational destruction of our landscapes”.
    A spokesman added: “Acceptance of landscape change cannot be assumed, it must be democratically mandated.
    “In England, on-shore wind farms require majority local approval and Welsh communities should have no lesser rights.”…

    A spokesman (for the Welsh Govt) said it would not be appropriate to respond to comments while the NDF consultation was ongoing.
    The consultation is open until 15 November.
    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-politics-50264159

    20

    • #
      PeterW

      The Walla proposal is to be built on highly productive farming land and is REALLY angering the locals who receive no benefit and hav to live with absentee landlords for neighbours and the eyesore of square kilometres of black glass.

      It is more “economic” to destroy good agricultural land close to pr-existing transmission lines than it is to build on unproductive land and connect to the grid. Not to mention transmission losses.

      10

  • #
    pat

    4 Nov: UK Times: Ministers were warned that a fossil fuel exploration ban would have a high cost
    by Paul O’Donoghue
    The government was told that the state would have to spend a “significant” amount of money defending legal actions if a bill aimed at banning oil and gas exploration was passed.
    A letter from a senior official at the Department of Communications, Climate Action and the Environment to Richard Bruton, the minister of the department, also said that banning fossil fuel exploration in Irish waters could cause the state to lose out on billions of euro in tax revenue.

    In July, the government blocked the Climate Emergency Bill, which would have effectively halted the issuing of new licences for oil and gas exploration.
    It would have made Ireland only the fifth country in the world to ban fossil fuel exploration in its waters…
    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ban-on-fossil-fuel-exploration-will-have-high-cost-official-warns-vs387k0d9

    3 Nov: TheNationalScotland: North Sea oil projects to breach Paris Agreement climate targets
    By The Ferret
    TEN oil companies are planning to invest £6.8 billion in six major new projects in the North Sea in breach of international targets to cut climate pollution, according to an expert analysis.
    In the next three years, big oil multi-nationals from the UK, the US, Canada, Norway, Japan and Korea want to start exploiting new oil and gas fields off Scotland. But the carbon emissions that would result would accelerate dangerous global warming, experts say.
    The financial think tank Carbon Tracker also warns that the new North Sea projects would be “deeply loss-making”. Multi-million pound investments wouldrisk becoming “stranded assets”, it says.

    The investors include the £218bn British oil multinational BP, the £193bn US Chevron corporation and the £86bn Norwegian state company Equinor. The Korean National Oil Corporation, Canada’s Suncor and Japan’s Sumitomo are also involved.
    Campaigners are demanding a halt to new oil developments in the North Sea to prevent a “climate disaster”. But the offshore oil industry insists that continued investment is “fully compatible” with the UK government’s aim to reach “net zero” climate emissions by 2050…READ ON
    https://www.thenational.scot/news/18010981.north-sea-oil-projects-breach-paris-agreement-climate-targets/

    10

  • #

    As a regulatory tool, the precautionary principle – that activities should not proceed when the threats of damage are not fully understood –

    That is exectly the cause of the present economic shutdown in the Netherlands. Soil and sand cannot be transported because of the fear for exceedance of strict PFAS limits. Building activities are halted because of strict NOx limits. Farners are threatened with close down because of strict NH3 limits.

    30

  • #
    pat

    4 Nov: CleanEnergyWire: Mass dismantling of old wind turbines could overburden Germany’s recycling capacities
    by Benjamin Wehrmann
    The expected dismantling of thousands of old wind turbines in Germany could overburden the country’s recycling capacities and lead to financial difficulties for the turbines’ operators as reserves set aside might have been calculated too low, the Federal Environment Agency (UBA) has found (LINK) in a study.
    “The federal government and the states quickly ought to come up with guidelines for turbine deconstruction,” UBA head Maria Krautzberger said. “We need clear rules for the scope and procedures to protect people and the environment and to recycle the valuable materials.”

    While the turbines’ steel and concrete can be disposed of without greater problems, the UBA found that the rotor blades will pose particular problems as the materials they are made of are difficult to separate properly. By 2024, about 70,000 tonnes of old blades could pile up annually in Germany alone. Moreover, the reserves set aside by operators could fall short of covering the financial needs by hundreds of millions of euros by 2038, which is why the UBA recommends reviewing the reserves’ calculation base and have them reviewed by independent experts on a regular basis.

    There are currently nearly 30,000 onshore wind turbines operating in Germany. The first installations will reach the end of their 20-year guaranteed remuneration period by 2021, meaning that many turbines will likely be taken offline…ETC
    https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/mass-dismantling-old-wind-turbines-could-overburden-germanys-recycling-capacities

    30

    • #
      pat

      Japan picks up the Bloomberg article:

      4 Nov: JapanTimes: Germany’s windmills are wildly unpopular
      by Leonid Bershidsky, Bloomberg
      Local regulations are getting stricter. Bavaria decided back in 2014 that the distance between a wind turbine and the nearest housing must be 10 times the height of the mast, which, given the density of dwellings, makes it hard to find a spot anywhere…

      A recent study carried out for the engineering lobby group VDMA predicted that, if the current obstacles persist, employment in the onshore wind industry, which stands at 64,200 people today, will drop by 27 percent by 2030…

      But it’s hard to say whether building up solar energy production, which accounts for about 10 percent of the German energy mix today, can make up for the lagging wind development. Germany, after all, isn’t one of the world’s sunnier countries…
      https://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2019/11/04/commentary/world-commentary/germanys-windmills-wildly-unpopular/#.XcEWRuR7nIU

      10

  • #

    Antidotes: The Health Hazards of NOT Going Nuclear, by Petr Beckmann (Amazon)
    Commonsense in nuclear energy [Fred Hoyle, Geoffrey Hoyle] on Amazon.com
    These are the best sources to this day.

    20

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>