7.9 out of 10 based on 13 ratings


8.1 out of 10 based on 13 ratings

Skeptics visit the poster-child of severely bleached reefs, and it’s just fine 18 months later…

By Jo Nova

18 months ago the coral on John Brewer Reef was dead according to The Guardian, but Jennifer Marohasy, Peter Ridd and Rowan Dean took the risk of going back to the same dead reef to make a short documentary on it and found the same coral, 80 kilometers offshore and it, and the whole area around it, is flourishing.

According to the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park authority, the area was surveyed in April 2022 and the damage was classed as “severe”. According to them, 60-90% of the reef was bleached. It was so bad that when the Sydney Morning Herald wrote about “500 kilometers of severe bleaching” it was John Brewer Reef that they picked for the feature photo.

Just like The Guardian:

Scientists, apparently, were dreading the damage to come (of the reef that recovered):

Widespread bleaching during the cooler temperatures of La Niña has left scientists dreading the damage that could be caused by the next El NiñoIf the John Brewer reef was sick, most of the Great Barrier Reef was bound to be sick too, said Graham Readfearn:

“This is one of the healthiest reefs off Townsville and one of the best reefs on the whole Great Barrier Reef. So for these corals to be stressed and damaged … well, it’s likely it’s the same at other reefs down here.”

The John Brewer Reef was so symbolic of the man-made apocalypse one British artist was planning to install a 100 ton “coral” greenhouse out there, because corals need artistic playhouses.

Art on The John Brewer Reef

But here in the real world, the formerly bleached coral now is a normal “cafe latte” brown color, showing it has recovered from the bleaching. The growing tips are always white, apparently, so it’s all good. Jennifer wrote all the details up on her blog.

The coral threw out the zooxanthellae last year, but this year it has new ones…

Coral, John Brewer Reef.

The John Brewer reef, right now, is full of colorful fish and very alive corals.

Coral, John Brewer Reef.

As Jennifer Marohasy says, it was a risk to return to the “The centre of the sixth mass coral bleaching”. The 15 minute video of the trip to John Brewer Reef is below.

How to create a coral crisis

When divers scan the Great Barrier Reef under the water, they find it’s been in record good health for the last two years.

Coral, John Brewer Reef.

But some official agencies that diagnose the doomed reefs do it from a plane. Here’s an example of the same reef from 120 meters above sea level. For some reason nearly everything deeper than 2 meters is hard to see, and vertical walls of coral are, invisible.

Coral, John Brewer Reef.

The Australian government gave $1 billion dollars to save the reef in January 2022. Perhaps it worked? You’d think The Guardian might want to tell the world, but they don’t seem to want to give a healthy reef the same attention they gave to a momentarily bleached one.

It’s not an accident that  97% of Australians don’t know the Great Barrier Reef is in record good health.

Though alarmists are losing the head,
John Brewer reef is anything but dead,
With its colourful coral,
Spread like bouquets floral,
Where parrot fish swim and are fed.


10 out of 10 based on 118 ratings


8.6 out of 10 based on 9 ratings

Big Car Data: Insurance insider warns they want to force you into an EV, ban insurance for petrol cars, and track you

Data wave, Big brother

By Jo Nova

Insurance companies just want to save the world right?

An anonymous insurance insider warns the plan is to force people to buy a digital car, and claims the push is so strong we won’t even be able to get insurance for a combustion engine vehicle. It sounds like a conspiracy theory except that insurers themselves admit Big Data from cars is worth a fortune, and they’ve have been lobbying to get your car data out of the hands of the car manufacturers (purely for your own good), and they’re already “involved in negotiations with the European digitalization and data protection manager”. Righto. Just six weeks ago, a Managing Director of Allianz insurance said he wants to track your car data so he can be “your invisible Guardian Angel.” Creepy, yes?

Wouldn’t you love to have your insurer, the police and the IRS as your back seat drivers?

Imagine a world in which the insurer acts as an invisible guardian angel to drivers, warning them of upcoming weather hazards or accident hotspots to avoid.

Managing Director, Allianz Center for Technology

According to GeoffBuysCars an insider at a large European insurance company has spilled the beans. Being a car lover himself, the insider wants to warn the world that the plans are well advanced. The insurance giants want to collect all your data as you drive so they can adjust the premiums accordingly and instantly. If you drive a bit too fast, it’ll cost you (especially when 20-mile-an-hour-zones spread to everywhere). Your EV will report your offenses to the police and the insurance company. How good with that be?

GeoffBuysCars has translated the insider report “doing the rounds of Europe” into English (hear him below). I’ve searched for any news reports or confirmation and of course, found almost nothing at all about the insider. But a story from Allianz on October 17th suggests he’s right on the money.

It’s a new era of Big Data from cars:

Allianz seem awfully very excited about the tidal wave of big car data that is about to arrive, which they warn was being “monopolized” and “hoarded” (just not by them). Luckily for us, they lobbied the EU and now there’s a new law. Insurers are salivating at the thought of getting their hands on this data, and Big Bankers, and Big Bureaucrats are hardly going to stand in their way are they? They want that data too:

As the world in which we live becomes increasingly digital, every day, more and more data is being generated, monitored and analyzed. It’s also being transferred and monetized, and in some cases, monopolized. The power and insights that can be drawn from data is not lost on corporations and industry players, and while data can improve the competitive position of those with access, the hoarding of it can stifle competition and progress.

Connected vehicles already churn out several terabytes of data per day, but this is nothing compared to what’s to come – an estimated 30 terabytes of data per day by 20251. This is the data equivalent of over 7,000 high-definition movies2! In today’s cars, hundreds of high-tech sensors record everything from driving behavior to fuel consumption and seatbelt status.

…a coalition of parties including insurers, leasing companies, and repair shops have been lobbying the European Commission to intervene when it comes to accessing valuable vehicle data.

Data wave, Big brother

All the terabytes of car data was owned and “hoarded” by the car manufacturers like VW and Volvo but the new EU Data Act “gives that back to the car owner”. Which all sounds good, but wait half a nanosecond for the insurance companies and government agencies who will “offer discounts” to people who sign away their data so they can be spied on legally. Obviously the skiing billionaires at Davos won’t need the discount, so only the riff raff and the poor will be tracked every second of their driving day.

..the new EU Data Act will be a game changer, putting car owners back in the driver’s seat when it comes to who accesses their vehicles’ data. “This move is an important first step in order to enhance data sharing and competition, and for us as insurers to be able to implement new and improved products, claims processes, and effective prevention measures for our customers,” says Christoph Lauterwasser, Managing Director of the Allianz Center for Technology.

“We are about to enter a new era in the world of automotive insurance and solutions, thanks to the power of data from connected cars.”

Imagine being able to sell that data? Say, the insurers give you the discount and collect the bytes and then the tyre guys, the media, the phone companies, the police, the FBI, the shopping centres, the electricity companies and the CCP are happy to pay…

The Government will of course, just offer you a discount on your registration if you agree to be tracked.

“I worked in the IT department of a very large insurer…”

Hear his words. They are already setting this up… it will be connected to police, insurance and national security agencies…. in cooperation with Google and Microsoft.

Since the Luton airport fires, my favourite car commentator is GeoffBuysCars. This is a depressing story, but forewarned is forearmed. Get the word out so we can cut them off at the pass…

Partial transcript cobbled together —

A mix of the anonymous insider and Geoff’s interjections:

Keep reading  →

9.9 out of 10 based on 71 ratings


Sorry we ran out of Unthreadeds for a while.

9.6 out of 10 based on 7 ratings

Your clean green future *needs* another 80 million km of high voltage lines

High voltage Transmission lines, Photo

By Jo Nova

Did they forget to mention a clean green planet is full of steel transmission lines?

Recently the International Energy Agency (IEA) told the world off for not preparing the Earth for the transition they want to force upon us. Apparently, we should have paid attention and built the right grid and now, due to our laziness, we will have to rush in another 80 million kilometers of interconnectors by 2040. Just like that.

All the high voltage lines we built in the last century, we have to build again in the next 17 years.

Remember, it’s not their fault that renewables need far more land, more space, more back up and more infrastructure — it’s our  fault we didn’t build a world ready for their holy energy. Those sacred wind and solar gifts cannot be bestowed upon us! We are unworthy:

IEA Lack of ambition and attention risks making electricity grids the weak link in clean energy transitions

First-of-its-kind global study finds the world must add or replace 80 million km of grids by 2040, equal to all grids globally today, to meet national climate targets and support energy security.

Notice how these changes “are essential” girls and boys, and you should have paid for them already. It’s only half a trillion dollars a year for the next 7 years…

Achieving all national climate and energy goals will require adding or replacing 80 million kilometres of power lines by 2040 – an amount equal to the entire existing global grid – according to a detailed country-by-country analysis carried out for the report. Major changes to how grids operate and are regulated are also essential, while annual investment in grids, which has remained broadly stagnant, needs to double to more than USD 600 billion a year by 2030.

Issues are already emerging. The report identifies a large and growing queue of renewables projects waiting for the green light to be connected to the grid, pinpointing 1 500 gigawatts worth of these projects that are in advanced stages of development. This is five times the amount of solar PV and wind capacity that was added worldwide last year.

Just bill it to the wind and solar investors, says Jo Nova, and make them pay to put the lines underground so they don’t pollute the forests and farms and start fires.

As Henry Geraedts said in the Financial Post — 80 million kilometers by 2040 is is enough to wrap around the globe 2,000 times. It’s all so utterly improbable.

And as Australian farmers say when AusNet wants to build interconnectors across their farms:

Farmers protest at Transmission lines

Western Victorian Farmer

Tell the children they’ve been lied to. The Green future is an industrial wasteland of concrete and steel built to line the pockets of billionaires and bankers.

Photo: Interconnectors by Frans Berkelaar


9.8 out of 10 based on 105 ratings

NZ Whistleblower finds death rate from one batch of injections was 21%, gets arrested

Tombstone. Angel.

By Jo Nova

In the last couple of weeks a New Zealand whistleblower came forward with detailed, but anonymized data showing that certain batches of the experimental you-know-what, were associated with shockingly high mortality rates. As this news started to spread, the government could have responded to correct or explain this, instead they arrested him, thus accidentally verifying that the data he showed was not wrong, but real. His crime apparently was not faking-up the data, but “accessing a computer system for dishonest purposes” which seems like a very strange crime given that, as he describes it, he was paid to work with the data, and the results of public health data is —  in a free society — supposed to be public.

In the world we thought we lived in, we would assume that the NZ government would already know and track the mortality of all the batches they forced the citizens to take. Unless they were grossly incompetent or inherently corrupted by, hypothetically say, large multinational entities earning a hundred billion dollars  —  authorities would have the real death rates at their fingertips, surely? So if he faked the data, or misinterpreted it, or he made an honest but calamitous error with the spreadsheet, then surely the government could have told us that?

Perhaps there is some legitimate explanation (for example if the worst batches went to nursing homes with 104 year old patients at deaths door, or were only given to wards of Stage 4 cancer patients).  The Minister of Health could have explained that. But check these numbers: The batch labelled “1” here had a death rate of 21%. Out of 711 injections, 152 people died. (Apparently over a long timespan, so some of these deaths are months afterwards.) This needs explaining.

The ten worst batches:

NZ death rate per batch.

This needs some explanation.

Batch 62, which went out to 18,000 people was associated with an extraordinary 4.6% death rate. Does the Minister know the average age of these people, or their risk factors? If not, why not? Isn’t this one of the most important questions in the country today?

In this short video below, Barry Young is interviewed by Liz Gunn,  and referred to as “Winston Smith”. The man is a hero. In court he received a standing ovation from the packed public gallery. This interview was a few days ago, before his name was revealed and he was arrested.

The New Zealand Ministry of Health says that only four people have died because of vaccination. Steve Kirsch has analyzed the data, and claims it (and other data he has) shows an overall mortality rate of around 1 in 1,000 doses. He calls for people to prove he is wrong and points out no nation has ever released their record-level data publicly, which would be easy to do if they wanted to prove their programs were safe.

This new whistleblower data comes from the “Pay per dose” program in New Zealand and applies to about 4 million of the 12 million total doses. While one critic claimed these were doses for people in nursing homes, Kirsch claims that nearly 900 million days of data in people under 60 in the dataset. Kirsch also says the mortality peaks around six months after the last injection.

He pointedly asks why other countries don’t release their record-level data (which could show the injections are safe, right?) I don’t know if Steve Kirsch is right, but I do know the governments are acting guilty.

Keep reading  →

9.8 out of 10 based on 124 ratings

The fall of Academia: half of US companies are reducing requirements for Bachelors degrees

Fantasy Towers. Clouds.

Image by Donna Kirby from Pixabay

By Jo Nova

University degrees aren’t what they used to be

After years of universities turning out smug self-obsessed graduates of Woke ideology, Big Business has realized they might be better off hiring people with experience in the real world instead. They are also doing their own testing — with 2 out of 3 setting their own test assignments for candidates.

This year more than half of the 800 employers surveyed had already dropped bachelor degree requirements for at least some of their roles. It must have worked out, because next year almost all of those same companies plan on dropping the requirement for even more roles. That looks like a trend…

This surely must be ringing some warning bells in a few Ivory Towers? Fewer students, means less income, less influence, and fewer alumni:

How the college degree lost its value: Nearly half of US companies plan to ax Bachelor’s degree requirements – after Walmart, Accenture and IBM led the charge


Nearly half of US companies intend to eliminate Bachelor’s degree requirements for some job positions next year, a new survey has revealed.

And 55 percent said they’d already eliminated degree requirements this year, according to an survey of 800 US employers, carried out in November.

In October, Walmart eliminated college degrees as a requirement for hundreds of its corporate roles… suggests that this move will help increase diversity by giving marginalized applicants more of a chance. But employers are conducting their own tests and they’re talking about finding a good fit for their culture. Perhaps what the employers want is a better attitude, not a virtue signalling Marxist? Or perhaps, since universities don’t like to fail anyone anymore, employers have to run tests to assess the merits:

80% of hiring managers favor experience over education in job applicants

“Assessments are important for many jobs, even if a student seems to have a relevant degree,” Gayeski says. “Employers use assessments to get a handle on whether candidates will be a good fit for their specific culture or the challenges of a certain job – such as the ability to handle conflict or to take on unfamiliar tasks and take risks. They’re also a way for applicants to demonstrate their interest in a job and how accurately and quickly one can perform tasks.”

The majority of test assignments, 81%, take two hours or less to complete.

This is what you get when you take a great institution, try to make it fit half the population, and spurn free speech and the pillars of its success. Alas, at the bleeding edge of societies intellectual fashion parades, and in protected government zones, the adulation of academic degrees will continue.



9.9 out of 10 based on 89 ratings

Forced EV Transition customers won’t buy EV’s say 3,882 car dealers to Joe Biden

Car Crash, Fantasy, city of doom.

By Jo Nova

Joe Biden wants half of all cars to be EV’s by 2030 to stop the storms, but customers have other plans

Such is the dour mood in sales yards, it only took three weeks to get nearly 4,000 dealers across the USA to sign on. Their joint letter to Joe Biden informs him electric vehicles are piling up in their sale yards. And even though the prices have been cut and subsidies applied — it’s still not enough. They plead with him to slow down with the EV mandates.

Rich Democrats buy EV’s but the poor and middle class can’t afford them, the charging infrastructure is not there and the grids can’t cope. If the price of traditional cars is forced up artificially to effectively subsidize and “meet” the EV Diktat, presumably most customers just won’t buy new cars at all.

Right now in the EV vision, sales are supposed to be accelerating:

Car Dealers to Biden: EVs Aren’t Selling

The Editorial Board, Wall Street Journal

Dealers have a 103-day supply of EVs compared to 56 days for all cars. It takes them on average 65 days to sell an EV, about twice as long as for gas-powered cars. EV sales are slowing though manufacturers have slashed prices and increased discounts. Consumers paid on average $50,683 for an EV in September, compared to $65,000 a year ago.

A new study from the University of California, Berkeley’s Energy Institute at Haas finds a “strong and enduring correlation between political ideology and U.S. EV adoption.” About half of EVs registered as of last year were to “the 10% most Democratic counties, and about one-third to the top 5%,” the study notes. This suggests “it may be harder than previously believed to reach high levels of U.S. EV adoption.”

From the car dealers:

A Letter to the President: Let our customers voices be heard!

Today, the supply of unsold BEVs is surging, as they are not selling nearly as fast as they are arriving at our dealerships — even with deep price cuts, manufacturer incentives, and generous government incentives…

With each passing day, it becomes more apparent that this attempted electric vehicle mandate is unrealistic based on current and forecasted customer demand. Already, electric vehicles are stacking up on our lots which is our best indicator of customer demand in the marketplace.

Mr. President, no government agency, no think tank, and no polling firm knows more about the automobile customer than us. We talk to customers every day. As retail automotive dealerships, we are agnostic as to what we sell. Our business is to provide customers with vehicles that meet the needs of their budgets and lifestyles.

The Inflation Reduction Act offers $7,500 in credits to qualifying households, and it’s still not enough. The EV market share is still growing, but has dramatically slowed in the second half of 2023. Joe Biden wants half of all cars to be EV’s by 2030, but even though EV sales hit a record “high” in the US, the market share is still only 7.9% of new car sales.

h/t OldOzzie, Kim, Maurice.

Image by Anwarul Quddus Sikder

9.9 out of 10 based on 92 ratings


StopTheseThings — a well known Australian blog opposing wind turbines has been suspended from WordPress.

Anyone have a contact email?

h/t Jock, and Nick C.


8.8 out of 10 based on 29 ratings


8.4 out of 10 based on 14 ratings

New study of consensus entrails shows 67% of papers don’t accept Man-made-climate-catastrophe

By Jo Nova

Witch doctorsA new paper tries to clean up the chicken entrail decrees of Mark Lynas  (and earlier of John Cook) and concludes that their methodology is so bad, a 99.85% consensus could just as easily have been 32%.

All the papers in between 32 and 99% were neutral on the cause of man-made climate catastrophes, but Lynas et al bundled them in with the believer pack and made hay in the global media. This was even though many of the “neutral” papers showed results that didn’t fit the consensus. But who cares about results eh?  If an abstract was neutral, it was therefore a “sign” the authors believed — like reading their tea leaves, or laying out the entrails. (Either that or it was a sign scientists who question the dogma get sacked, lose funding, and get uninvited to laboratory barbeques, but, shh! We won’t mention that.) So Lynas assumes that as long as a scientist doesn’t specifically say they disagree, they de facto endorse the “consensus”.

Why do people who call themselves scientists even talk about a “consensus”?

Obviously if believers had evidence, they’d talk about that instead.

Climate thought is 99% pure todayDentelski et al do an admirable job of pointing out galactic level bias, grand flaws and wild assumptions of Lynas, but the central fallacy of The Global Industry of Sciencery is barely mentioned. Why do people who call themselves scientists even talk about using consensuses as an instrument of “Truth Seeking”? The whole idea that truth can be figured out by interpreting the first paragraph of industry publications is a parody of science. It’s a fallacy of science (or three at once).

We might as well add up the funding offered to each side of a theory and declare the issue settled.  99% of climate funding is paid to scientists who don’t rock the boat, therefore climate sensitivity on the third rock from the sun is 3.3 degrees…

If the opinions of scientists counted in science, we’d just survey them directly anyway instead of conducting seances on abstracts. But when we do, the consensus blows away. Outside the star chamber of the IPCC junkets, half of Meteorologists and two thirds of Engineers and Geologists flatly didn’t agree. There’s nothing remotely like a consensus in the world of science in the hideously complex and immature world of climate prophesies. Those polling results were done in 2017 and 2012, but the results scared the science pollsters so much, they have been too frightened to ask them ever since.

Consensus is the problemIf the magic wand of “consensus” worked, research could be so much cheaper. Who needs the satellites and thermometers, when opinions cost so little?

As Kenneth Richards says at No Tricks Zone: 67% Of Scientific Papers Can Be Said To Reject The AGW Hypothesis…

Of the 3,000 papers analyzed in Lynas et al., 282 were deemed not sufficiently “climate-related.” Another 2,104 papers were placed in Category 4, which meant either the paper’s authors took “no position” or the position on AGW was deemed “uncertain”…in the abstract. So, exploiting the “if you are not against, you are for” classification bias, Lynas and colleagues decided that the authors of these 2,104 scientific papers in Category 4 do indeed agree with AGW, as what is written in the abstract does not explicitly state they do not agree.

Interestingly, if this classification bias had not been utilized and the thousands of Category 4 (“no position” or “uncertain”) papers were not counted as supporting AGW, only 892 of the 2,718 (climate-related) papers, or 32%, could be said to have affirmatively stated they support AGW. So, simply by assuming one cannot divine the AGW opinions of authors of scientific papers by reading abstracts, it could just as facilely be said that 67% (1,826 of 2,718) of climate-related papers reject AGW.

As I’ve said before, these junk consensus studies are merely sociological surveys of the purity of government funding:

Given the $7 billion in funding from the US government for the 2015 financial year, marked for climate science and clean energy, it is hardly surprising that there are a lot of papers about “climate change” and “global warming”. There are a lot of people studying how big the crisis might be, how to solve the crisis we might be having, and what the effects of this crisis might be (if we are having one). What there is not, are institutions of people specifically tasked to investigate how minor CO2 is, how beneficial it is, or to assess if the Sun controls most of our climate. Around the Western world there is no government funding specifically to audit or find problems with the man-made global warming theory. There are no programs with the sole purpose of finding natural causes to provide the counter arguments ($0). The purity is near complete. Skeptics mostly have to fund themselves. That’s a very high barrier to publication.

In a complex science, purity of opinion is a bad sign.


Dentelski, David, Ran Damari, Yanir Marmor, Avner Niv, Mor Roses, and Yonatan Dubi. (2023) “Ninety-Nine Percent? Re-Examining the Consensus on the Anthropogenic Contribution to Climate Change” Climate 11, no. 11: 215.

Lynas, M.; Houlton, B.Z.; Perry, S. Greater than 99% consensus on human caused climate change in the peer-reviewed scientific literature. Environ. Res. Lett. 2021, 16, 114005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Cook, J.; Nuccitelli, D.; Painting, R.; Honeycutt, R.; Skuce, A.; Jacobs, P.; Green, S.A.; Lewandowsky, S.; Richardson, M.; Way, R.G. Reply to ‘Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature: A re-analysis’. Energy Policy 2014, 73, 706–708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Cook, J.; Nuccitelli, D.; Green, S.A.; Richardson, M.; Winkler, B.; Painting, R.; Way, R.; Jacobs, P.; Skuce, A. Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature. Environ. Res. Lett. 2013, 8, 024024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Cook, J.; Cowtan, K. Reply to Comment on ‘Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature’. Environ. Res. Lett. 2015, 10, 039002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Art: Witchdoctors: US CDC



10 out of 10 based on 90 ratings


10 out of 10 based on 14 ratings

Auroras possible tonight as Cannibal CME arrives

Paul Hoelen, Mortimer Bay, Hobart, Tasmania

UPDATE: I want to see an aurora, but living at 32S in Perth, Australia, this is like hoping to see the NorthernLights in Jerusalem or San Diego. No luck for me tonight, but there was one report from Geraldton 400km north of us (28.7S). Hopefully sometime in the next year during the solar max…

A quick note to say a CME just hit Earth, and some people may be able to see an aurora tonight that wouldn’t normally see one. A severe Kp 7 Geomagnetic storm is in progress (BOM estimate). Kp 7 is the bottom end of what is classed as a “severe” geomagnetic storm with Kp 8 and 9 being bigger (and even rarer).

Reports on X (Twitter): #AuroraAustralis   #Auroraborealis

Southern Hemisphere data — BOM 3 day Geomagnetic Indices | Northern Hemisphere: SpaceWeatherLive

Keep reading  →

9.4 out of 10 based on 31 ratings


7.8 out of 10 based on 23 ratings

EV’s report 80% more problems than petrol, diesel cars

EV, Car breakdown. Repair.

By Jo Nova

Add it to the list. A survey of owners of 330,000 vehicles found that EV’s experience 80% more problems than petrol and gas powered cars.

So EV’s cost more to fuel, take longer to arrive on long distance journeys. They sometimes burn down ships, destroy airport carparks, and kidnap drivers. They are a national security risk, and a burden on electrical grids. Because they are heavier they create more potholes, wear out tyres faster, increase road noise and air pollution (from tyre particles). They also increase wear and tear on bridges and multistory carparks.

EV’s are on the verge of becoming uninsurable partly because near new EV’s may have to be written off after a scratch, and all EV’s need large empty spaces to be stored so they don’t destroy the cars around them.

And in the end, they barely reduce national fuel consumption, and no one even knows if EV’s will reduce CO2 emissions.

On average, electric vehicles are less reliable than other cars and trucks, Consumer Reports finds

By Tom Kriser, CBC News

Electric vehicles have proved far less reliable, on average, than gasoline-powered cars, trucks and SUVs, according to the latest survey by Consumer Reports, which found that EVs from the 2021 through 2023 model years encountered nearly 80 per cent more problems than did vehicles propelled by internal combustion engines.

Consumer Reports said EV owners most frequently reported troubles with battery and charging systems as well as flaws in how the vehicles’ body panels and interior parts fit together. The magazine and website noted that EV manufacturers are still learning to construct completely new power systems, and it suggested that as they do, the overall reliability of electric vehicles should improve.

Some problems are worse than others:

Keep reading  →

9.6 out of 10 based on 106 ratings

Germany: You will own a car and a heater but you can’t use them

Fantasy, floating, home, house, sky, mountain, surreal, dystopia.

By Jo Nova

Oh the irony — Green heat pumps and EV’s will need to be curtailed on a Green Grid

We’re watching the real time collapse of parts of the “Climate Industry” in on itself. The left eats its own. The EV’s and heat pumps the German government was coercing people to use are so incompatible with unreliable expensive energy, they will be among the first appliances to be restricted in the new clean green economy.

The truth is — Solar and wind power can’t power EV’s. In Germany the network regulator is working on ways to limit electricity to hungry EV’s and heat pumps so they don’t crash the grid.

The federal grid agency will throttle the charging power so EV’s will get just enough charge for a 50 kilometer trip from two hours of charging. Home owners will be offered a discount if they give control of their chargers to the government. Effectively the rich will charge their car or turn on their heater whenever they want. The poor will “save” €110 to €190 they never needed to spend with their old car or their old heater, and go withou electricity at peak times.

EV chargers, heat pumps may be curtailed in Germany as of 2024

By Nikolaus J. Kurmayer |

Germany’s residential grid operators will be empowered to restrict the flow of power to heat pumps and electric vehicle (EV) chargers from 2024 in order to preserve the stability of the grid, which is suffering from chronic underinvestment.

Did you see what they did there? Renewable energy requires a massive new infrastructure and network build to connect up low density energy collectors. Saying that the grid is suffering “chronic underinvestment” implies this new and unnecessary cost was somehow meant to have been built and paid for already. They blame the grid for not already solving the failures of wind and solar power.

This also applies to EV’s and heat pumps. It was obvious they would need more electricity, so this is a belated ploy to blame “investors” effectively for not building the coal and nuclear plants, they weren’t allowed to build, in order to keep the EV’s and heat pumps running…

Across Europe, investments into grids are lagging behind what’s needed as the continent embraces heat pumps and electric vehicles.

“Waiting time for permits for grid reinforcements are between 4-10 years, and 8-10 years for high voltages,” the European Commission said on Tuesday (28 November) as it unveiled a new Action Plan to accelerate the deployment of electricity grids.

“Grids need to be an enabler, not a bottleneck in the clean energy transition,” said Kadri Simson, the EU’s energy commissioner.

Blaming the grid is code for “blaming the taxpayer” for not already giving the Green industry all the things it needs so it can make a profit.

You will own nothing and feel grateful to get any electricity at all…

Car stick in snow

Australia, this is our future if we keep following Germany.

h/t NetZeroWatch

Floating rock house image by Reto Scheiwiller  |  

Frozen Jeep by (Joenomias) Menno de Jong




10 out of 10 based on 106 ratings


9.4 out of 10 based on 14 ratings

Rare signs of democracy in New Zealand — Govt asking if UN “Treaty” is in the national interest?

Eagle Mountain, NZ

By Jo Nova

Something promising across the Tasman Sea

WHO World Health OrganisationThe newly elected government in NZ is a three party coalition, promising tax cuts and less red tape. It’s barely been sworn in, yet somehow it already has the bright idea of checking whether deals with foreign conglomerate governments (like the UN) “pass the national interest test”. This is the same sort of test foreign conglomerate companies are also supposed to pass.

It sounds brilliant, but also like the bleeding obvious. This is what democratic governments are supposed to do, every deal and every day, right? Yet in 2023, it’s seems like such a radical right wing suggestion. So often our governments are serving someone else…

The conservatives have their sights set (justifiably) on the The UN’s Pandemic Preparedness Treaty. That’s due to be adopted in theory, next May. However The UN International Health Regulations is due to be sneakily accepted by default on Thursday. Hopefully the new NZ govt can fire off a quick letter to get NZ out of that tomorrow, making Australian and other global leaders look really silly (traitorously stupid) if they don’t. See James Roguski for more on that.

New Kiwi Government to Challenge WHO’s Pandemic Treaty

A new ‘national interest’ test will consider whether the Treaty limits government decision-making.

By Henry Jorn, The Epoch Times

The “national interest test” proposed by New Zealand’s newly formed coalition—including the National Party, ACT, and NZ First—will be applied before accepting any “agreements from the UN and its agencies that limit national decision-making and reconfirm that New Zealand’s domestic law holds primacy over any international agreements.”

The Pandemic Treaty is one example of a UN agreement.

In November 2021, New Zealand and other World Health Organisation (WHO) Member States agreed to establish an Intergovernmental Negotiating Body to draft a Pandemic Treaty.

However, following the conclusion of public submissions on the pandemic treaty on Aug. 11, 2022, a common theme (pdf) was a concern that a new pandemic instrument would require “New Zealand to relinquish control of our domestic decision-making processes during a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) to the WHO, or otherwise reduce autonomy at the individual or country level.”

Here in Australia, the Foreign Minister says the WHO will have no legal authority to force things on us.  (It will only have the right to do sneakery, deception, graft and intimidation, with unbridled help from all our academics, media, and our retirement funds).

The Guardian is already campaigning against the new Luxon government, so we know it’s off to a good start.

There is hope.

hat tip to Mayday.

Image by Ondřej Šponiar

9.9 out of 10 based on 101 ratings