China is the coal furnace of the world, and everyone is fine with that

By Jo Nova

Even though India now consumes more than Europe and the US combined, there is really only one coal consumer. Just to update those figures…

Remember you are a planet-wrecker, but China just has growing pains

China burns four times as much coal as the second largest coal burner in the world. Everyone else is an also-ran in the coal stakes. For every ton the US consumes, China fries 12 times as much. And poor patsy Australia, for every ton we apologetically ignite, China burns 50. More coal was burned on Earth in 2023 than ever before in human history, and more than half of it was burned in China. Moreover, despite all the Sino nodding to sacred targets, China shows no intention of putting the brakes on the coal train. Around the world, 95% of all new coal power plants built in 2023  were built in China.

Where is the apoplexy?

The UN has met every year for twenty-eight years to badger everyone to stop using coal to appease the Goddess of Trace Gases and Weird Weather — all while China became the coal furnace of the world.

Or perhaps The UN met every year, so China could do exactly that? Lord above, imagine if the bureaucratic starlets of the West could be bought off so easily by trophies, trinkets and photo-opportunities — as a trade strategy, it would be a bargain. And it surely was.

Somehow life on Earth depends on Just-Stop-Oil protestors, but they can’t seem to find the Chinese Embassy. Banker cartels threaten higher interest rates for naughty nations, but no one suggests so much as a boycott of solar panels made with coal.

 We’re all in this together, eh?

Supposedly, the developed world caused all the bad weather we have today — leaving the developing world to wallow in the suffering of the coal plants and cars the West invented. But, the developing world just landed a rocket on the moon and bought back some moon-rocks.

The last time NASA did that it was 1972.

A fork in the road for civilization

In a sense, the diverging lines of coal consumption mark the rise and fall of civilizations. They don’t have to — not if the West had upscaled to some better industrial power. But the West upscaled to witchcraft and corruption instead, arrogantly trying to control the weather itself with our power plants in a teenage fashion contest. China took our mistake and smiled and egged us on. They would be crazy if they didn’t support the Greens, and pay off our politicians to cripple our grid.

As CO2 Lover says in comments, it is the Sun Tzu Art of War. “The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.”

 

 

9.9 out of 10 based on 121 ratings

127 comments to China is the coal furnace of the world, and everyone is fine with that

  • #

    China burns about 12,000,000 tonnes of coal a day.
    Every day.

    Yet the planet still turns.
    Despite the 44,000,000 tonnes of plant food – CO2 – China produces each and every day.

    It’s all a con. Our innumerate [and scientifically illiterate] pollies can’t tell the difference.

    Sad.

    Auto

    680

    • #
      Geoff

      Its a massive wealth transfer. Somehow by making China rich we will make the West richer? Its all about spivs, grifters and money printing. Coal consumption is a direct measure of manufacturing. If you make nothing you will eventually lose control of everything.

      430

      • #
        el+gordo

        ‘Its a massive wealth transfer.’

        Based on the per capita model China and India are making progress.

        242

      • #
        PADRE

        The late Dr Tim Ball sums up the complete scam in two of his excellent books: ‘The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science’; and ‘Human Caused Global Warming – The Biggest Deception in History’. The second little book includes several telling quotations. Here are two: “One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy…We redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy.” Otter Edenhofer, Co-chair UN IPCC working group on Mitigation of Climate Change from 2008-2015.

        The second, “This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution”. Christiana Figueres, Executive Secretary of UN’s Framework Convention on Climate Change.

        The trouble is that ignorant politicians and the virtue signalling followers of this new religion have fallen for it – especially the majority of the MSM.

        110

    • #

      I have always thought the big driver was that the politicians, finance houses, and traders saw their chance to “put a price on carbon”.

      With the ambitious aim of taxing and trading the very air we breathe.

      60

  • #
    erasmus

    Politicians have failed us all.

    450

  • #
    Neville

    Thanks again Jo and yet about 99% of voters don’t understand the OWI Data graph and don’t understand the growing weaknesses of the wealthy OECD countries and very dangerous security implications for the so called free world.
    Their answer is their toxic W & S lunacy and the destroying of our environmements for thousands of klms at an endless cost of Trillions of $ and all for zero impact on climate or weather or ….?
    Of course the W & S toxic mess has to be torn down every 20 years and buried in landfill and yet they call this toxic disaster their so called “clean energy”?

    500

    • #
      Greg in NZ

      Toxic, lunacy, ‘clean energy’ buried in landfill… surely there’s a word for that, oh yes: sustainabull(sh!t).

      Save Trace Gases NOW!

      😃

      270

    • #
      GlenM

      I can just about make out Australia in the series……. errr, maybe not. Unless we are running the same as Lithuania.

      90

      • #
        Jon Rattin

        If emitting CO2 was an Olympic event- it’d be gold to China, silver to India with the USA and Europe fighting it out for the bronze. Australia would be back in the ruck with all the other also rans despite our politicians saying that we were a live medal chance leading into the event

        70

  • #
    David Maddison

    I question the typical politician’s ability to read or interpret a graph, but nevertheless, that graph should be sent to every Australian politician and others throughout the world.

    290

    • #
      Neville

      I agree David but this only takes a few minutes to find and then check and then perhaps start to think.
      It sures beats wasting endless trillions of $ for decades and all for a zero return.
      And then we can protect our environments and use the safest Base-load energy like Nuclear that will last way beyond 2100. It’s a win , win for everyone.
      But apparently this is just too difficult for Labor, the Greens and the Teals?

      250

      • #
        David Maddison

        But apparently this is just too difficult for Labor, the Greens and the Teals?

        But it all makes perfect sense when you realise it has nothing to do with “saving the planet” but dismantling Western Civilisation.

        If the Elites were truly concerned with supposedly saving the planet, would they really be flying to Klimate Krisis Konferences in their private jets? And playing with their megayachts? And living in huge energy intensive mansions?

        330

        • #
          Neville

          Yes David it’s the only thing that makes sense. They couldn’t care less about the environment or the waste of trillions of $ for a zero return and a much lower standard of living for the majority of the people.

          291

        • #
          Zigmaster

          David
          The proof that this is about dismantling western civilisation and not CO2 emissions is their opposition to nuclear. Renewables is a pathway to self destruction and a non solution to reduction of CO2 whilst not keeping the lights on .Nuclear is the only solution. In fact if energy policy was built around nuclear with renewables at the fringes we would’ve had a cheap reliable system . Furthermore the environmental damage caused by our current all renewables strategy actually tells you climate change is not an environmental cause but basically a socialist indoctrination applied to energy policy to help embed the globalist ruling class in power.

          290

    • #
      czechlist

      the graph looks similar to the graphs of government spending / national debt the pols see often.
      They don’t comprehend the meaning of those either.
      If it is spelled graft – they will get it

      130

    • #
      John in Oz

      Sent – to Rebekha Sharkie (Mayo)

      60

  • #
    Richard C in NZ

    Heh, Europe and USA are about to join “Every other nation” at bottom of graph.

    And I’d like to congratulate Australia on the resumption of coal exports to China February 2023.

    I can see the “assist” right at the end of the China stat.

    140

    • #
      Dennis

      Philippines very concerned about a new largest “coast guard” heavily armed ship from China now trying to intimidate Philippine Navy ships.

      Australian iron ore and coal?

      And another story raises suspicions that China are constructing new “islands” for military bases.

      180

      • #
        David Maddison

        China doesn’t have to worry about any serious interference from Australia (only some token complaints, if anything).

        They have purchased the services of large numbers of disloyal Australian politicians, past and present.

        380

  • #
    Neville

    Again can any of our blog donkeys look at the OWI Data coal consumption graph and tell us how the OECD countries can change the climate or weather?
    Then tell us why we need to waste endless trillions of $ forever, when we know we’ll achieve nothing?
    Anyone have any ideas and then can you tell us why you don’t care about our environments?

    220

  • #
    David Maddison

    Don’t forget to apply for position of Chief Scientist of Australia.

    Applications close in a few days.

    You might be able to teach politicians (and Lamestream media drones) how to read and interpret a graph. Use the one at the top of the post as a teaching aid.

    https://www.nature.com/naturecareers/job/12819547/chief-scientist

    200

    • #
      Ross

      Our Chief Scientists don’t have a good track record do they? The way we’re going Australia will probably appoint Dr Karl from the ABC. Our equivalent of the Science Guy from the US.
      Here’s one of those previous duds. “We’ve got 5 years to save world “ says Australia’s chief scientist Professor Penny Sackett. (December 4, 2009)
      “The planet has just five years to avoid disastrous global warming”, says the Federal Government’s chief scientist. Prof Penny Sackett yesterday urged all Australians to reduce their carbon footprint. Australians- among the world’s biggest producers of carbon dioxide-were “ better placed than others to do something about it”, she said. “Australians can make an enormous contribution, so why would we not rise to this challenge and this opportunity” she told a business conference in Melbourne. (Herald Sun 4/12/09). Which means this year is the 10th anniversary since supposedly the world ended? It’s amazing we’re all still here.

      300

      • #
        Graeme#4

        Don’t hear much from her/him these days.

        110

        • #
          GlenM

          My wife and I shared a cabin in WA’s SW in the 1990. Bombast and adherence to text book argument. Drinking more than a glass of local SB is dangerous too.

          60

      • #
        Philip

        “Australians can make an enormous contribution

        That’s exactly where she is wrong. Stop our economy entirely and it makes no difference. Science.

        110

      • #

        “… Australians can make an enormous contribution, so why would we not rise to this challenge and this opportunity …”

        A scientist wilfully ignoring scale and impact in such a statement can only be because there was some behind the scenes motivation; be it kudos from the WEF, accolades and awards, government policy pressures, or simply self serving financial rewards.

        It is not possible that the realizaton of the scale of impact of the infinitely small Australian phyical contribution would have been unknown to Penny Sackett.

        70

      • #
        Ronin

        “Prof Penny Sackett yesterday urged all Australians to reduce their carbon footprint. Australians- among the world’s biggest producers of carbon dioxide-were “ better placed than others to do something about it”, she said. “Australians can make an enormous contribution, so why would we not rise to this challenge and this opportunity” she told a business conference in Melbourne.”

        Maybe biggest PER CAPITA, but since there’s only a relative handful of us here, it’s all BS.

        40

    • #
      CO2 Lover

      Don’t forget to apply for position of Chief Scientist of Australia.

      I believe that Flim Flam Flannery (2007 AUSTRALIAN OF THE YEAR) has this job sown up!

      70

  • #
    Simon

    China per capita usage is still uses only half of the US and Australia.
    https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/fossil-fuels-per-capita
    You can’t criticize other countries when you are a worse offender.

    148

    • #
      TdeF

      Simple Simon, trolling trope. There may be a person living alone who is the worst offender, far worse than anyone in Australia. He/she should be hunted down.
      Per person guilt is absurd, as you know. On average there are no criminals?

      330

      • #
        TdeF

        The Chinese government does it better. Their line is that the current CO2 levels are not their fault, so they should be exempt from any restrictions as ‘historic victims‘. You have to admire their ability to play guilt games, the great weakness of Christianity in the West. In the 75% of countries which are military dictatorships, guilt is non existent. You take everything because you can.

        370

    • #
      MrGrimNasty

      Simon, every time someone trots out that argument, they expose the giant lie. Either CO2 from fossil fuels is an existential threat, or it isn’t; ‘being fair’ or ‘evening up’ emissions could not even be a consideration.

      390

    • #
      Lionel Rawson

      Simon, the greenhouse doesn’t care about the per capita emissions. Just the mass in tonnes is what counts. That’s assuming, of course. that even matters.

      420

    • #
      David Maddison

      You do realise don’t you Simon that China has absolutely no intention of cutting back?

      And they are building two coal power stations per WEEK.

      And given that (unlike disposable wind and solar plantations) coal plants have lives of at least 50 or even 60 years (perhaps longer in some cases) China will be burning vast and INCREASING amounts of coal for at least another 50 years – that’s if they stopped building power stations today but they won’t be doing that.

      Unlike stupid Australia, they have no intention of destroying perfectly good power stations.

      In any case, what difference does per capita consumption make? Your whole argument is that the absolute amount of CO2 is bad. It shouldn’t matter where it comes from or which individuals burn more or less.

      And the West and China need coal, gas, nuclear and real hydro (not SH2) power stations to charge their EVs.

      Please be honest and tell us why you support China and its ability to burn unlimited and INCREASING amounts of coal while expecting the West to dismantle their economies.

      380

      • #
        David Maddison

        Really Simon, unless you are a paid Chicomm shill, I am unable to understand your position.

        310

        • #
          Richard C in NZ

          >Really Simon, unless you are a paid Chicomm shill

          Paid yes, Chicomm no (at least I don’t think so).

          Forestry’s his game. Clue:

          Overview of forestry in the Emissions Trading Scheme
          https://www.mpi.govt.nz/dmsdocument/44128/direct

          ▪ Part 2: Forests in the ETS

          Forests in the ETS

          Owners of eligible forests can register their forest in the ETS to earn units for new sequestration

          They can use their units to offset their own emissions or sell them on the market

          Still plenty of forest mgt work on export log forests but doesn’t hurt to keep the ETS consulting/mgt fee stream fully activated.

          Can’t do that if the climate con fails.

          150

    • #
      Russell

      Simon always forgets that the number of energy policy decision-makers ‘per capita’ is a very low in China compared to Oz and US. They are really an easy target for lazy activists if they were really serious about any danger of coal.

      130

    • #
      yarpos

      Thanks Simon, for confirming its not real CO2 emissions that matter in the hand wringing stakes, its per capita that is the real threat.

      270

    • #
      Leo G

      You can’t criticize other countries when you are a worse offender.

      Jo is not criticising China but is criticising Western Governments for damaging their economies by acting on the false premise that shifting where the emissions occur is equivalent to reducing emissions.

      290

    • #
      el+gordo

      The per capita thingy makes a mockery of the West, there are very few Christians in China or India.

      AGW is a religious movement imbedded in our political culture.

      ‘Millenarianism: the doctrine of or belief in a future (and typically imminent) thousand-year age of blessedness, beginning with or culminating in the Second Coming of Christ.’ (wiki)

      72

      • #
        Richard C in NZ

        el G >there are very few Christians in China or India

        There’s millions. Boomed in China after it opened up then persecution sent them underground.

        China:

        CNA – Stark and Wang estimate that in 1980 there were 10 million Christians in the People’s Republic of China, and that in 2007 the figure was 60 million. These numbers yield an annual growth rate of 7 percent – which means that last year, there were nearly 100 million Christians in China.

        India:

        Census 2011 – According to a report by the government, the Christian population in India is estimated to be around 28 million, or 2.3% of the total population.

        70

        • #
          el+gordo

          Utopian millenarianism was alive and well in China many hundreds of years before Christ, while the Taiping Rebellion at the end of the 19th Century had a Christian bent.

          I don’t think a modern day Christian in China has any concept of Armageddon.

          21

    • #
      CO2 Lover

      This is the “We are Sinners” position of the Religion of Climate Cultism.

      Coal is Satan’s evil rock according to Climate Cultists

      Australia contributes around 1% of global CO2 emissions and if this was cut to ZERO it would have no measurable impact just as the reduction of CO2 emissions during the COVID Plandemic had no measurable impact.

      However, 26 million Australians are worse sinner than 1430 million Chinese!

      However, logic has no place in any Religon, including Climate Cultism.

      120

    • #
      Bronco

      Aw, come on guys. We haven’t had a funny from Simon for a few days now and I needed a good laugh. Don’t be so hard on him as we really do need him for a bit of comic relief.

      250

    • #
      Raving

      Fixed it for you Simon

      2.8 B people in India + China

      70

    • #
      Graeme#4

      If you want to go down the per capita path Simon, there’s an island in the South Pacific that is a really serious offender. I hope that we are not supporting them with any aid. /s

      120

    • #
      Richard C in NZ

      Simon >”China per capita usage is still uses only half of the US and Australia.”

      Except “per capita” users are small fry – even urban which is roughly twice rural:

      Urban and rural population of China from 2013 to 2023
      https://www.statista.com/statistics/278566/urban-and-rural-population-of-china/

      2023
      Urban: 932.6m
      Rural: 477m

      What is the ratio of FF use Urban : Rural ?

      What is the Industrial – Other – Residential breakdown ?

      “Per capita” can only be Residential:

      Energy and the Economy in China (2022)
      https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-86884-0_31

      1 An Energy System Dominated by Industrial Use

      Fig. 31.2 Energy demand by sector, 2000 and 2017. (Source: own elaboration on National Bureau of Statistics)
      https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-86884-0_31/figures/2

      2017
      Industry 66%
      Other 21%
      Residential 13%

      “Per capita” i.e. the Residential population, only makes up 13% of energy demand in China.

      60

      • #
        Richard C in NZ

        A further breakdown would be:

        FF use per capita in Industry
        FF use per capita in Residential

        Capita in Industry is employees.
        Capita in Residential is total population.
        Energy in Residential is residential only.

        Then a further breakdown:

        China Electricity Consumption: by Industry [Sector]
        https://www.ceicdata.com/en/china/electricity-consumption-by-industry

        Combined with,

        China No of Employee: by Industry [Sector]: Monthly
        https://www.ceicdata.com/en/china/no-of-employee-by-industry-monthly

        So for example: Chemical Material and Product

        661.169 kWh bn in 2022 (Note bn = billion)
        3,214,000 employees May 2023

        205.7 kWh per capita (employees Chemical Material and Product).

        Versus,

        62,066 kWh per capita (total population).

        I don’t get that last OWID result though:

        If China had a total electricity consumption of around 9,220 terawatt hours in 2023 and total population around 1,426,000,000:

        9,220,000,000,000 kWh / 1,426,000,000
        6456.6 kWh per capita

        Either OWID or myself are wrong here (probably me).

        9,220,000,000,000 kWh x 13% gives Residential
        1,198,600,000,000 / 1,426,000,000

        840.5 kWh per capita Residents energy only.

        Summary next.

        10

        • #
          Richard C in NZ

          Summary

          62,066 kWh per capita (total population) – OWID
          6456.6 kWh per capita (total population) – (?) Me
          840.5 kWh per capita (Residents energy only).
          205.7 kWh per capita (employees Chemical Material and Product).

          And as previous, Residents can be further broken down to Urban and Rural. I very much doubt Rural residents are using the same as Urban.

          And there’s big differences when total energy/electricity is apportioned out to the respective sectors.

          10

          • #
            Philip

            Can you make this a bit easier to understand? It seems a good argument but difficult to collate and analyse with all the figures.

            40

            • #
              Richard C in NZ

              Phillip >Can you make this a bit easier to understand?

              I’ll try.

              Simon, via OWID, bundles the entire China FF consumption and divvies/apportions it out to the entire population.

              He therefore equates an elderly 100 yr old Rural and poor lady consumer with a wealthy young Urban consumer.

              To that lady he ascribes: Industrial; Construction; Transport; Other; and, Agriculture as per the CEIC data linked. That’s along with wealthier Residential.

              Do you think that’s fair?

              30

          • #
            Richard C in NZ

            >840.5 kWh per capita (Residents energy only).

            70 kWh per month.

            As per my reply to Lance downthread I think 840 is probably too high, implying I’ve made a mistake somewhere or the data is dodgy.

            I’m a very low user for these parts using about 50 kWh per month or 600 kWh per year by comparison.

            I’m sure Rural China uses a lot less than that.

            So if Rural less than 840 Urban must be greater than 840. Doesn’t make sense unless in the much colder months in China the Urbanites crank up the consumption to maybe 100 kWh per month, or something.

            30

            • #
              Richard C in NZ

              >I’m a very low user for these parts using about 50 kWh per month or 600 kWh per year by comparison

              Should be – 50 kWh per [week] or [2600] kWh per year

              So 840 for China looks about right.

              20

          • #
            Richard C in NZ

            >62,066 kWh per capita (total population) – OWID.

            Incorrect, 62,066 is USA. China 27,129 kWh (Coal)

            Makes sense because when all other electricity sources are added in it comes down to 6456.6 kWh per capita for just electricity use – my calc.

            Comes down again for just Residential electricity from all generating sources to 840 kWh per capita – my calc.

            China per capita
            27,129 kWh (Coal)
            6456.6 kWh (All Electricity)
            840.5 kWh (Residential only)

            00

        • #
          Richard C in NZ

          >I don’t get that last OWID result though: 62,066 kWh per capita (total population).

          Duh, 62,066 is USA. China 27,129 kWh (Coal)

          Makes sense because when all other electricity sources are added in it comes down to 6456.6 kWh per capita for just electricity use – my calc.

          Comes down again for just Residential electricity from all generating sources to 840 kWh per capita – my calc.

          China
          27,129 kWh per capita (Coal)
          6456.6 kWh per capita (All Electricity)
          840.5 kWh per capita (Residential only)

          00

      • #
        Philip

        Thats very good. But can you put that in a sentence or two?

        00

    • #
      Lance

      To quote Dr Thomas Sowell: “Anything Fails by irrelevant standards”.

      China’s GDP per Capita is 34% of AU GDP/capita, at half the energy use per capita.

      https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/energy-use-per-person-vs-gdp-per-capita?country=USA~CHN~AUS~BWA~CAN~EGY~DEU~HTI

      So that means that the US and AU are 65% more efficient than China. Or, China is 35% less efficient.

      Simon, you never addressed how that energy is consumed. The poor in China are economically, socially, health , diet, and life expectancy, more ‘poor’ per capita than the poor of the US or AU, CA, UK, etc.

      Go back to school and study relevant things, rather than ideological myths.

      150

      • #
        Richard C in NZ

        Lance >how that energy is consumed. The poor in China…

        Exactly. Upthread I came up with (barring errors) –
        840.5 kWh per capita (Residents energy only)

        With the comment – “I very much doubt Rural residents are using the same as Urban”. So assuming that, an Urban-Rural breakdown would mean Urban > 840 and Rural < 840.

        I use about 50 kWh per month or 600 kWh per year by comparison so 840 is probably too high (or not). But if say Rural China used the same as me:

        1100 kWh Urban
        600 kWh Rural

        Not right because there's a 932.6m : 477m Urban/Rural ratio but illustrates the point. I'm sure Rural China uses far less than I do even though I'm a very low user.

        20

        • #
          Richard C in NZ

          >I use about 50 kWh per month or 600 kWh per year by comparison

          Should be – 50 kWh per [week] or [2600] kWh per year

          So 840 for China looks about right.

          10

    • #
      GlenM

      Some of your energy wasting left wing heros who fly around the world and hog it at numerous conventions are not included in your per capita calculation. Do you notice the hypocrisy?

      50

    • #

      “…..per capita usage….”

      Are we concerned with practical outcomes, or simply righteous stances?

      We can be very sure China will continue to escalate energy demand and increase coal usage for as long as it takes to reach its goals (ie, pretty well forever)

      Other than crippling their economies, brave sacrifices on a national scale by small emitters will have no measurable effect on climate, but will hand more and more financial power to the pragmatic Chinese.

      Couple all that with idiotic “Free” Trade idealist deals, and they will have put their entire economy and financial system, and in many cases considerable land ownership, into Chinese hands.

      40

    • #
      Boambee John

      Simon

      Correct me if I am wrong, but isn’t the “Klimate” supposedly influenced by the total amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, not the per capita amount?

      All your comment demonstrates is that you do not understand what you try to preach, and/or your only interest is in destroying western economies.

      40

    • #
      Ronin

      Per capita, Simon, so you get a huge discount if you have a massive population, yeah, that’ll work.

      20

  • #
    Penguinite

    This excerpt will exclude most qualified applicants who value their self-respect, sanity and integrity!

    “The Chief Scientist’s primary role is to provide independent advice to the Australian Government on matters relating to science, technology, and innovation.”

    110

  • #
    TdeF

    My view of CO2 in the air is that it is no more than the vapour pressure of the 98% of the gas which is dissolved in the vast oceans, 350x the weight of the thin air above. And China is a good example where when you add in 15% for the 1.4Billion Chinese breathing, you get 50% of the world’s CO2.

    And yet CO2 is a constant within 1% from pole to pole and hardly changes from year to year. A 50% increase in 250 years is a near constant year to year, despite the hype. Imagine if food prices only went up 0.2% to 0.5% a year? Or Petrol? Or wages? Or government taxes or council rates?

    And the massive growth in tree cover reported by NASA and 12 countries from 1988 to 2014, an increase of 14% which matched the CO2 increase of 14% in those 26 years. But despite the trillions of tons of CO2 sequestered in that time, the path of CO2 did not change in the slightest. It didn’t go down at all.

    So the idea that CO2 is affected by ’emissions’ is busted. I really don’t understand why the Physical Chemists don’t point out the truth of vapour pressure.
    Henry’s Law covers static situations in the laboratory but the principle is the same. Higher concentrations (acid acidification) or warming increase atmospheric CO2.

    So slight surface warming increases CO2. Absolutely no surprise there. We see it in the CO2 graph which peaks in summer and dips in winter over the oceans which cover 72% of the world. And the steady growth is from longer term warming where CO2 rises into the top layer, increasing the long term CO2 in the air.

    ____________________

    None of this is revolutionary. Very old boring actual science. What is amazing is how in 1988 Hansen/Gore/IPCC twisted it to make CO2 responsible for the warming. And even responsible for the slight increase in CO2 in the ocean surface! (that is neutralization, not acidification) But then Hansen/Gore/IPCC all did very well out of it. It was the foundation story for the IPCC and made the WMO part of the UN at last. World weather. Controlled by committees of politicians.

    It’s all twisted science. Illogical, torturous, unsupported by reality and unproven. What is proven is that of the 0.042% of CO2 in the atmosphere, only 3.0% is from fossil fuel. And at the rate of output of China alone that means it only lasts about six months in the air. The planet is self regulating and always has been.

    Conversely, someone could explain why CO2 is not much higher over China/India/USA latitudes than say Australia, the bottom 47% of the Southern hemisphere where only 2% of the people live.

    As 98% of our CO2 comes from overseas, we should be receiving, not paying Carbon taxes. Or for Climate Ministers, Climate Departments, Climate Finance, Climate taxes and Climate punishments for Major (CO2) Polluters. Which is now a punitive law in Australia. And our largest chemical manufacturer has closed, costing 800 jobs and stopping all possible plastics recycling in the country. Brilliant!

    More are to be put out of work across the country as we try desperately to save China by punishing our 250 ‘biggest polluters’. Why?

    Don’t worry, you won’t be taxed for breathing. Not yet, anyway.

    320

    • #
      TdeF

      I remember the ecological disaster of the Exxon Valdez. Massive load of oil dumped on pristine beaches. A huge effort to rescue wildlife and physcially remove the oil from the coast line, but they had to stop somewhere. What is not reported is that the beaches which were not cleaned were quickly cleaned naturally, so it was all a waste of time. Oil is natural rotted plant matter and breaks up and is digested, stored solar energy. And there is always something which will feast on it. Just as termites and bacteria and fungi devour old wood. Solar energy.

      The same is true of CO2, the gas from which ALL life of earth is directly made by photosynthesis. Carbohydrate is just hydrated CO2. Without CO2 this planet would be just rocks and water.

      And like the termites, we humans have developed to feast on the chair of stored solar energy in old plant matter. What is worrying is not that we might be heating the planet, but that we will run out soon enough. And then how will we build windmills and solar panels?

      If only the $1.8Trillion a year was on path to provide real solutions, not antique failed windmills.

      As for hungry governments creating Climate Ministers and endless departments to control the world’s climates, it’s so fantastic as to beggar belief.

      When did politicians become expert scientists and creating endless new departments for controlling the world’s weather? And they always need more money. Which really explains the whole thing, not science.

      260

      • #
        David Maddison

        Yes, oil is biodegradable, and there are natural oil seeps.

        Whilst the sight of a pristine coast covered with oil or seabirds covered in oil is not a pretty one, nature itself is cruel. In a few years or less all spilled oil disappears naturally.

        And some of the cleaning they did after Exxon Valdez was probably quite damage, such as removing oil-contaminated sands from beaches and putting it in landfill.

        The clean up was mostly virtue signaling except for cleaning seabirds which was a worthwhile thing to do.

        181

        • #
          TdeF

          Yes, saving individual bird lives is admirable. But in terms of the entire bird population, it would not matter at all.

          Such concern and pity reflects our Judeo/Christian empathy with all living things. Not as much as the Hindu/Buddist/Jainists, but substantial.

          It is a reason people choose to be vegetarian in a new agricultural world of seeds grown for purpose, a recent invention. Prior to that there was no choice. So people distance themselves from the process. It must be hard to be a farmer. Humans have softened as food becomes a choice. But when you are starving, you would eat your own shoes.

          170

        • #
          RickWill

          nature itself is cruel

          I have lost maybe 50 goldfish in the past few days. I noticed the diminished numbers and put it down to a fishing cat. But yesterday there was a Little Pied Cormorant like the one here:
          https://www.survival.ark.au/images/birds/little_pied_cormorant_3_600.jpg
          sitting on the rail of the porch over the pond licking its chops looking at us. Apparently wondering when we will get more fish.

          There are still a few traumatised fish left but they no longer come out for feeding. It has been 15 years since the pond was similarly raided and I ditched the mesh cover about 10 years ago. Will now need to cover again.

          I do feel that I failed as a fish protector but the Little Pied Cormorant on the railing was a rare sight. Its webbed feet not well suited to balance on a narrow rail. Only bettered by a Perieerine Falcon that spent a few hours in one of our trees during a Covid lockdown eating a dove it had caught.

          140

        • #
          Annie

          Accidental red David, sorry.
          I was steering around my coffee cup.

          40

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      I am sure someone would have already floated this idea (but having been off the net for 3+ months) I suggest that Australia and other countries in the southern hemisphere offer Carbon OffSet Certificates on the grounds that more than 90% of CO2 is emitted in the Northern Hemisphere but the atmosphere levels are the same everywhere.
      Obviously we are saving the North by storing their emissions and they should pay us. We can sell these Offsets to countries such as Germany where they depend on coal (and a surprising amount of gas from the unknown country to the East) to keep society going, esp. in winter.
      Also the UK would be able to claim (for a consideration) to be Carbon Free and fulfilling their treaty obligations without building more useless offshore wind turbines and saving farmland from being covered with solar panels etc.
      Peru, Chile, Malawi, Kenya would also benefit by extra money so their politicians would be enthusiastic about joining. Even various islands in the South Pacific would join in.

      30

  • #
    czechlist

    Trump says the whole scam was created by China.
    hmmm
    “no controlling legal authority”
    Agore
    IMO the Clinton/Gore admin is responsible for prooagating the hoax thru their “re-invention of the government” scheme.

    110

  • #
    Penguinite

    I read just yesterday that China’s push into renewables had reached a crisis point due to the amount of electricity being so generated. Now today we read that they require the power of coal too! In the South China Sea, they have deployed the largest and most formidable Coast Guard vessel to police the SCS and arrest any transgressors that dare venture into “THEIR” domain. IMO they are a much bigger threat to world peace than Russia. Airbus Albo needs to stop smiling and waving and get back to the business of defending Australia.

    120

    • #
      ozfred

      IMO they are a much bigger threat to world peace than Russia.
      Remember that peace is defined by the party doing the pronouncements….
      And anyone who disagrees will be eliminated.
      This fact is seemingly being forgotten by the western populations.

      60

  • #
    yarpos

    Its clear the me that the extinction rebellion/just stop oil crowd need to charter a flight to Beijing and start throwing some paint around. Mao’s Memorial Hall would be a good place to start. That would get their message across.

    110

  • #
    Ross

    Scathing. That’s the word I would use to describe this article. Well done again Jo. (and David E) There’s a few words I’d like to use to describe the members of the climate mafia/ green blob, but I don’t think it would pass the moderator. What’s another word for hypocritical, lying, fear mongering, zealous, activist terrorist?

    90

  • #
    RickWill

    Question – Do you know how much coal it takes to make a wind turbine?

    Answer – More than it will save in its brief operating life.

    Same goes for solar panels as well.

    The coal consumption in China is testament to this simple observation. If wind turbines were able to save coal, China would not be making them to sell offshore. They would be keeping all they make for their own power generation. They would not be selling any offshore until they had met their own energy needs.

    Solar panels are a convenient source of intermittent energy in places that get year round sunlight. They are next to useless as an energy source without the ability to store the energy in some way.

    210

    • #
      CO2 Lover

      Are solar panels a weapon of war?

      “General are always preparing for the last war”

      What better way to weaken the economies of your enemies by weakening their energy infrastructure (Just like Russia is attacking power stations in the Ukraine) by allowing your enemies to destroy themselves by replacing reliable energy generations systems with unreliable ones that cripple their economies.

      AS Sun Tzu said in The Art of War:

      The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting

      60

      • #

        Point added to the post. Thanks.

        A fork in the road for civilization

        In a sense, the diverging lines of coal consumption mark the rise and fall of civilization. They don’t have to — not if the West had upscaled to some better industrial power. But the West upscaled to witchcraft and corruption instead, arrogantly trying to control the weather itself with our power plants in a teenage fashion contest. China took our mistake and smiled and egged us on. They would be crazy if they didn’t support the Greens, and pay off our politicians to cripple our grid.

        As CO2 Lover says in comments, it is the Sun Tzu Art of War. “The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.”

        90

        • #
          John Connor II

          Ah, but if China destroys the west they destroy their export markets leaving only domestic consumption, and their local affairs are in a VERY bad way, so they destroy themselves.
          But then again China already owns vast amounts of land, businesses, property and politicians in the west, so they can take control over the ashes and expand their territory.
          But then again, chinese are fleeing “CCP world” to the USA by the thousands, moving to a collapsing country on the brink of civil war.
          P.S. Did you know China’s main tv broadcaster is called CCTV?
          The memes write themselves.

          Perhaps it should be: “Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak.”
          Pretending to be strong when they’re weak is their real hallmark.

          30

          • #
            Ronin

            “Chinese are fleeing “CCP world” to the USA by the thousands, moving to a collapsing country on the brink of civil war.”

            If they are doing that, imagine how bad the country must be that they are fleeing from.

            30

    • #
      TdeF

      Windmills are a net zero solution. No nett benefit, except to China. It’s a circular argument. What goes around comes around.

      But the money for producing useless things is fantastic and China understands the American consumer industry better than America where it was invented. While Japan builds high quality goods to live forever, the Germans build quality at a top price. But America has a short term view of consumption as the engine of growth. And China cuts every possible corner in production and quality of consumer goods creating vast quantities of shoddy third class stuff, volume fakes. But they are very cheap.

      130

  • #
    CO2 Lover

    China approved equivalent of two new coal plants a week in 2022, report finds

    In 2021, China experienced its worst heat wave and drought in six decades, dealing a blow to hydropower-reliant provinces -— and prompting authorities to turn toward coal instead.

    https://edition.cnn.com/2023/02/27/energy/china-new-coal-plants-climate-report-intl-hnk/index.html#:

    China will also need to catch up to the USA so as not to be left behind in the Data Centre race.

    https://www.statista.com/statistics/1228433/data-centers-worldwide-by-country/

    70

  • #
    Turtle

    As a way of achieving global communism it’s pure genius. Watermelon Trojan horse. Appeal to Western Leader’s egos, tell them they can save the world. Everyone off-shores their industrial base.

    130

    • #
      TdeF

      It allows the public service to expand into areas previously offlimits or non existent. Like departments to control the weather. King Cnut would love it.
      The Royal Department for tide control. And Tide science. Nett zero tides. But it delivers funding, staff, real power on the ground and great incomes, even if it is all fantasy. And the politicians love their increased responsibility, expanded ministries, new ways to stand out, make a difference, leave a legacy. I would guess that most Australian politicians think we do not have a carbon tax.

      70

  • #
    Mike Borgelt

    Not only brought back samples but from Lunar Farside which has never been done before.

    80

    • #
      Boambee John

      A developing nation with a space program, nuclear weapons, a huge navy and air force, and massive industrial base.

      And the UN will ensure that China will forever be rated as a “developing nation”.

      40

  • #
    Honk R Smith

    Our world is being reshaped by hysteria.
    We are well into a New Dark Age, albeit with lingering attributes of the enlightened machine age that preceded it.
    Dark Ages are marked by superstitious cultural tends that corrupt sociopathic social elements use to their advantage.
    Climate Change is the progenitor hysteria that set this New Dark Age into motion.

    Actual ‘carbon’ emissions reduction will be achieved as result of industrial, economic, and social collapse, not Net Zero political policy.

    ‘Net Zero’ … the ultimate Freudian Slip.

    130

  • #
    STJOHNOFGRAFTON

    You can’t blame China. I don’t like the CCP regime, but what they’re doing with coal makes sense. They’ve got lots of people to feed, house, provide with jobs and the necessities of life. The Chinese are practical and don’t care what other nations, especially those with stupid Green agendas, think of how much CO₂ the Chinese are creating from burning coal. The Chinese want more resource rich land as well. Australia’s got plenty but uses it foolishly, day-dreaming of one day becomming the world’s renewable energy super-power. China is expanding into the Pacific with the future purpose to ‘acquire’ Australia one way or another. It would be an easy prize for them and they would waste no time using our resources in sensible ways to further their expansion. Getting a few Switchblade drones now while we wait 10 years for nuclear subs on the AUKUS never-never is not going to stop China coming for us. We’ve put our wonderful country up for grabs with the aid of stupid Green politics and foolish sentimental notions that the Yanks will protect us from the bad boys on the block.

    110

    • #
      Kalm Keith

      Good stuff ; this situation is near critical level with New Guinea, a major northern port, Vicdanistan and many nearby Pacific Islands becoming “friendly ” with China.

      And how many Australians are aware of the unique Chinese air base over on the western side of our continent.

      We are very vulnerable.

      60

      • #
        Philip

        Conquer and defend what you have conquered. That’s the closest I can come to the only absolute truth of being.

        Australians have forgotten this. An apathy fed by geography, economy and too many good times without threat.

        50

  • #
    Kalm Keith

    Sun Tzu rocks!

    20

  • #
    Neville

    I listened to a silly girl on their ABC radio telling us why she’s suffering from mental anguish about CC.
    She told the drooling ABC presenter that she and most of her friends worry every day and wonder what they can do about the coming CC disaster.
    And she claims that she has to worry because she knows so much about the subject. I laughed and thought she understands SFA about climate or the data and should stop listening to the left wing idiots on their ABC. IOW she could fix her CC worries in 5 minutes. Just so Easy,peasy and costs her and us nothing. What’s not to like?

    110

  • #
    Philip

    Well, I was told just this morning that although China is the largest emitter, they are also the largest investor in wind and solar, and are now at near 40% of its power from WnS.

    This is how antiwhites cope.

    41

    • #
      Kalm Keith

      I would suspect that Chyna only has a small number of active renewables generators in service and these, most likely used in advertising.
      How much production of rennies is for show?

      40

      • #
        Philip

        His cope narrative also neglects to consider that even at the fantasy of 100% capacity you still need 100% backup and they’d still be burning loads and loads of coal. All these things can do is save you a bit of oil at great cost.

        And it’s all just for show, they know unreliable supply creates problems, and they know stupid westerners will buy them, and buy the stupid excuse that Chinese coal doesn’t matter “see, we have windmill”.

        50

    • #
      Yarpos

      Mmmmmm its a pity we arent allowed to use our over spending (I cant call it investment) on wind and solar to justify coal burning. We lack the Chinese special sauce.

      10

  • #
    melbourne+resident

    I think the Indian Nation and China should have listened to the wisdom of Gandhi who pointed out that for every person in India to achieve the wealth of the western world – it would take the destruction of the world – which is why his philosophy was for modest growth and homespun technologies. He had a point.

    40

    • #
      Philip

      Yes I agree with that too.

      The west should invest in cheap energy, so cheap it makes economical sense to make things here. Better than those huge populations coming into the picture and bringing political turmoil with it.

      I’m a free trade guy, but believe we gave up trying to make cheap things when Nixon brought China into the picture and we capitulated to our trade unions.

      50

    • #
      Honk R Smith

      See comment #17 above.
      Once long ago there was a dream of Camelot.
      Most people in the World looked to Western achievement and sought that for themselves.
      Arab nationalism, one of the main values promoted by TE Lawrence, and a goal of the Balfour Declaration, created Western style nation states in the Mid East.
      The goal being to bring the World out of the previous Feudal order and prevent another War to End All Wars.
      See photos of Kabul in the 1960s.
      Camelot failed.
      Non-Western countries rebelled against modernism for internal cultural reasons and likely due to a lack of a Reformation, that though bloody, set the stage for the enlightenment that produced the modern technological World.

      People sought equality with the West for everyone.
      This failed.
      Now the they seek Equity.
      Which requires the Western World be brought down the lowest common denominator standards of the rest of the World.
      (With the exception of invite list of the WEF.)
      Thus ending the Age of Western Enlightenment.

      20

      • #
        Honk R Smith

        Whoops … that should be see comment #19 above … by that brilliant fellow Honk something or other.
        #17 is a good one too.

        20

  • #
    bill

    The real point is that the claim that W&S are the cheapest way to produce say electricity why do the Chinese prefer coal fired generation.
    They produce W&S equipment but choose to send it to us.

    That is the deceit revealed in an instant. Why not stop exporting W&S and deprive us of this “super cheap option” while they destroy us with their newly built competitive grid.

    The Chinese do not, and they are rational so we the fools buy the W&S and destroy our industries, WE ARE SIMPLY STUPID.

    60

    • #
      Skepticynic

      WE ARE SIMPLY STUPID.

      “Hanlon’s Razor is a mental shortcut which teaches us, in the words of Robert J. Hanlon to “never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.” In other words, rather than questioning people’s intentions, question their competence.”

      Hanlon’s Razor is also a trap. It’s not a law. It can blind us to the fact that there are some who are both stupid AND malicious. We must also not overlook the fact that there are some who are malicious and very clever.

      60

  • #
    Neville

    Here’s the latest debate or conversation between Aidan Morrison of the CIS and Dr Finkel about our so called energy transition.
    I’m now even more convinced that toxic W & S are definitely BS and fraud and I only hope that Aidan is able to pursue the liars and con merchants and make them include all of the costs of toxic W & S.
    I hope Jo and Dr David Evans have the time to watch this video and hopefully get in touch with Aidan and the CIS team.
    You’ve both got the Maths and Science background to more easily understand the data than I have and hopefully Aidan can shift the debate and make the CSIRO answer some of his probing questions.

    https://www.cis.org.au/commentary/video/what-to-do-about-the-energy-transition-redouble-or-rethink-alan-finkel-and-aidan-morrison/

    60

    • #
      Michael

      The unreliables….solar, wind and batteries are the most EXPENSIVE and TOTALLY UNRELIABLE sources of energy that a country, that a nation, has to rely on to support and drive business, industries, manufacturing, refining etc., and for the essential welfare and for the benefit of sustaining a healthy and thriving population.

      It is already glaringly obvious from the evidence already revealed…and the solar, wind and batteries are only a drop in the ocean for where it needs to be and is so called planned…and from this early stage, it is shown to be the most destructive, gargantuan insanely expensive and will destroy our nation!

      Bowen, Albanese etc, and any government rep and any public servant supporting these “unreliable energy policies” are the enemy within, destroying Australia through the most criminally tyrannical destruct policies!

      60

  • #
    TdeF

    And as to Jo’s basic point if why do China and India get a free pass on what would be a terrible sin for anyone else? I don’t know.

    It think it is easier for our politicians, the people behind ALL of this, not scientists, to berate their own people.
    It elevates their moral standing and denigrates the deplorables. Us. It’s a power trip in every sense. And has nothing to do with reality.

    Just look at the graph. If China could reduce their CO2 by just 20%, the rest of the world would not have to do a thing.

    But we tried asking about their military virus weapon and were severely punished. So we know better than to ask why they have right to destroy the world while we have an obligation to destroy ourselves? It must be something in the tea. Perhaps they resent the world switch to coffee?

    90

  • #
    Rupert Ashford

    And the irony of it all (it would actually have been funny if not so devastating for all of us), is that we in the West all gullibly buy cheap products made using coal power without all the environmental and other red-tape constraints we self-impose, by an immoral communist regime with no regard for human or other rights, just so we could implement the NIMBY principle of environmentalism. And the voices making the loudest noises about DA Claimutt are the ones most actively buying products like EVs and others from this regime.

    40

  • #
    Old Goat

    Considering how much coal we export to china they don’t need to take over . We supply coal, iron ore , gas and some agricultural products too . They are currently switching their supply sources over to the Russian Federation which they share a border . If they were to halt exports to the western world we would be in massive trouble as they make a lot of what we use. If we could return to cheap energy we would return a lot of domestic manufacturing which has moved over there to increase profits by reducing costs . With automation manufacturing becomes much cheaper but requires cheap energy to run . The real enemy is the people who are gaslighting us into stupid policies – the hedge funds rule the world and control the media and politics (by “donation”).

    20

  • #
    Serge Wright

    The fact that everyone is fine with China’s massive and still growing coal and CO2 emissions is absolute proof that climate change was never about the climate, but only ever about wealth and power transfer. The west has now reached a tipping point. If we don’t turn back to FF now then we fall and China and the authoritarian world take over control of the globe and that will represent a change in the west that’s too terrible to contemplate, and yet that’s what all left wing voters are craving.

    60

    • #
      Ronin

      Christiana whatsername of the UN even told us as much.

      40

      • #
        Skepticynic

        At a news conference in Brussels February 2015, Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, admitted that the goal of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism.

        “This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution,” she said.

        Referring to a new international treaty environmentalists hope will be adopted at the Paris climate change conference later this year, she added: “This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model for the first time in human history.”

        40

        • #
          Ronin

          That’s the one, thanks Sk.

          30

        • #
          Serge Wright

          The worst part is not that some non-elected global elites are trying to give themselves absolute global power and control at the expense of the workers – we expect such people to be driven by greed and lust for power. The worst part is seeing our young citizens aged 16-35 gluing themselves to roadways and screaming in outrage that we donate every last cent and every last asset and surrender all power and control to these greedy elites, whilst the rest of us live like serfs in the dark ages.

          30

  • #
    MeAgain

    Is the whole scam just some weird attempt to maintain a moral high ground over ‘China and the authoritarian world’? “Just look at those evil coal burners!”
    While I believe in China’s planned resource assurance for it’s own population, aka https://dambisamoyo.com/book/how-the-west-was-lost/ (who knew, China is number 1 in the World now at teaching English), I am just not sure they want direct control of us – we are just extra bother, and they can leave the control / numbering and classification to our own nanny states. https://rumble.com/v55e2qj-fadi-lama-money-powers-and-west-collapsing-into-dystopia-as-east-rises.html To me, China appear to behave relatively openly in the resource race – belt and road, they ain’t hiding what they are doing if you can read Chinese. Governance in China remains relatively localised (subsidiarity) on day-to-day matters directly effecting citizens.

    30

  • #
    Ronin

    Australia could solve lots of problems by immediately applying to the UN for 3rd world developing nation status.
    We have almost no manufacturing.
    No aerospace industry.
    Too poor to sustain a car industry.
    Miniscule Defence capability, 40 year old fighter jets, rusting diesel subs unable to be crewed.
    3rd world roads and bridges.
    A collapsing electric grid.
    No nuclear industry. Major highways are single lane bush tracks that were built in 1970.

    60

  • #
    Gerry, England

    Of course China has to use more coal – how else can it make all the goods our retarded politicians have decreed that we shouldn’t and yet we still need? It is stunning what comes from China these days. For some reason I looked at the box of my Colgate toothpaste, and yes, Made in China.

    30

  • #
  • #
    Neville

    I know that trying to compare Nuclear fuel to Coal or Oil is difficult to understand. But here’s a quote from one of the Nuclear sites.
    Of course the USS Ronald Reagan Super Carrier wasn’t refueled for 25 years and the US Subs are never refueled for at least that period of time.
    Just unbelievable energy density.

    “With a complete combustion or fission, approx. 8 kWh of heat can be generated from 1 kg of coal, approx. 12 kWh from 1 kg of mineral oil and around 24,000,000 kWh from 1 kg of uranium-235. Related to one kilogram, uranium-235 contains two to three million times the energy equivalent of oil or coal. The illustration shows how much coal, oil or natural uranium is required for a certain quantity of electricity. Thus, 1 kg natural uranium – following a corresponding enrichment and used for power generation in light water reactors – corresponds to nearly 10,000 kg of mineral oil or 14,000 kg of coal and enables the generation of 45,000 kWh of electricity”.

    https://www.euronuclear.org/glossary/fuel-comparison/

    40

    • #
      TdeF

      And the same for Thorium. Except there is 100x the usable amount of fissible Thorium where Uranium 235 is only 0.75% of Uranium. And the total amount of uranium is limited, possibly as little as fossil fuel. If the problem is the world running out of energy, uranium is not a long term solution either. But windmills and solar panels are just a very bad joke. Their intrinsic energy is of course zero. And you need a vast number of replaceables, windmills and solar panels to match just one coal power station. And coal is also free and far cheaper to harvest.

      The downside is the endless story, the childish deceit that the invisible gas carbon dioxide, the gas from which all living things is made, is ‘dirty’.

      I find it amazing that people accept that? Every human, fungus, bacterium, blue whale, carrot breathes out carbon dioxide. We are all polluters of the planet. And people believe it? Without ‘dirty’ carbon dioxide there is no life on earth. Just rocks and water. In the sun.

      90

  • #

    […] China is the coal furnace of the world, and everyone is fine with that […]

    10

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

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