|
|
||||
 Image by ThankYouFantasyPictures from Pixabay By Jo Nova The stench of failure is written all over Cop30 in BrazilThe USA, China and India are not attending. The UN has said the 1.5 degrees target is no longer possible. And the OECD admits “policy commitments have fallen from 10% annual growth to just 1%. The Consensus is not only dead, but no one can hide the body under the rug any longer. Things are decomposing so fast, even Keir Starmer has flown all the way to the COP conference in Brazil to say “the consensus is gone”. Keir Starmer didn’t even want to go to COP30 lest he look like he’s in the palm of the globalist Blob which would feed his nemesis – Nigel Farage. So he’s put in a last minute appearance and gone out of his way to avoid the usual fire and brimstone devotion by uttering a blasphemy. The consensus, after all, was the holy grail. It was the reason “to believe” and a reason to act even if we didn’t believe. The Blob always said: “We don’t want to fall behind” like moving with the herd was a benefit in and of itself. For a bunch of Groupthinkers, this is big admission:[The Guardian] The UK prime minister told world leaders on Thursday at the Cop30 climate summit in Brazil that the “consensus is gone” on fighting climate change around the world, a decade after the landmark Paris agreement in 2015. “Ten years ago, the world came together in Paris … united in our determination to tackle the climate crisis,” Starmer said. “The only question was how fast we could go. Today, however, sadly that consensus is gone.” For Starmer, this might be the best escape route from the Net Zero bomb. As long as the fuse is lit and the carbon-clock is running, the globalist Blob parties face a wipe-out at the next election. But if “the consensus” is over, maybe he can pack the climate-talk away in a box for a few years and curb the fury over electricity prices. It’s what Mark Carney did to win in Canada. He scrapped the carbon tax on his first day in office and de-fanged the opposition. It may even placate the Groupthinking Greens, if he can convince them that no one else is acting and to wait for a better day. Further to that, Starmer shocked everyone by pulling out of Brazil’s flagship policy. The Tropical Forests Forever Facility (TFFF) was supposed to raise $25b which has been downgraded to $10 billion this year to pay people to preserve forests, and the UK was expected to be one of the first contributors. Without $1b from the UK, it’s hard to see it succeeding at all. Chris Bowen, the Australian Minister for Weather Control even agrees with Keir StarmerBut in renewable-crazy-land that just means that Australia has to do even more. The Guardian asked him about Keir Starmer’s words and he replied: “I think that’s fair comment. Yes, it’s a contested space, but that makes supporting action in keeping with the science more important, not less important. “It makes continued action by governments and industry who get it – that this is a scientific and environmental imperative, but also excellent economics – even more important. And that’s certainly our approach in Australia.” Unlike the Reform Party in the UK, the opposition in Australia is a Lump of Jello, and doesn’t have a climate policy. So Chris Bowen is free to keep sprouting crazy witchery. He’s not afraid of the opposition because, effectively, there isn’t one. Indeed, Bowen has to keep waving the flag, because the Australian government wants to host the next loser COP event this time next year. Thankfully, the opposition and the Nationals have both said “Let Turkey have it”. We want our billion dollars. Even the OECD admits policy commitments have stalled. Globally, they only increased by 1% last year, when previously they would grow by 10% each year. Global climate action losing momentum: OECDBy Ryann Cropp, The Australian Financial Review The pace of global efforts to address climate change has ground to a halt, according to a report by the OECD that is likely to turbocharge Coalition wrangling over its commitment to emissions reduction. The expansion of international climate policy commitments increased by just 1 per cent in 2024, with only 17.7 per cent of global emissions now covered by legally binding net zero pledges, according the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s annual Climate Action Monitor. According to the OECD, the slowdown in climate commitments since 2021 contrasts significantly with the prior decade, when average emissions reduction policies expanded by about 10 per cent each year. They have run out of excuses: “This slowdown can no longer be explained by the COVID-19 pandemic or economic shocks: it reflects a loss of momentum in implementing effective policies,” the report said. Even the UN agrees that we will fail to hit their 1.5 degrees magical targetIt is, of course, our fault and we are moral failures: The failure to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius is an emergency and nations must now “lead or be led to ruin”, UN secretary-general António Guterres has said as the COP30 climate conference got underway in Brazil’s rainforest city Belém. He added: “Every fraction of a degree means more hunger, displacement and loss — especially for those least responsible. This is moral failure — and deadly negligence.” Mr Guterres, being a Blob man and the total socialist, paints this as capitalist greed: “Too many corporations are making record profits from climate devastation, with billions spent on lobbying, deceiving the public and obstructing progress,” he said. “Too many leaders remain captive to these entrenched interests.” After all, it’s not like the consensus died because millions of people in the largest economy on Earth were not convinced and voluntarily voted (twice!) for a man who called Climate Change a con and a hoax. Oh no… UPDATE: Just to clarify, the consensus Keir Starmer refers to is not “The Science consensus” (which is still sacred to socialists everywhere). He’s talking about the consensus for climate action, meaning political or economic moves. As long as “The Science” is still standing, this is just a pause in climate grifting. It’s never enough to win the economic arguments, we still have to beat down the bad-science monster.
November 8th, 2025 | Tags: Australian Politics, UK, UNFCCC | Category: Global Warming, Politics |  Print This Post | | Plastic-eating bacteria have already evolved to eat our PET bottles and spread through global oceans Image by Filmbetrachter from Pixabay By Jo Nova The Experts thought PET plastic was impossible to degrade naturallyWWF tell us it will take 450 years for a plastic bottle to break down. The US EPA says it will take up to 1,000 years. And the UN says “plastic is forever”. But now that we’ve banned plastic straws and picnic spoons, and changed our shopping bags and spent hours sorted our rubbish, it turns out bacteria have already evolved to capture the energy left in the plastic. And furthermore, they weren’t just in one shallow bay, they found them spread throughout the world’s oceans. Presumably there will be some microbes working on our landfill that we don’t know about. If not now, then soon. How much of our recycling is just a waste of time and money? Life on Earth was never going to leave a free meal sitting aroundIn 2016 researchers found one sort of bacterium in a Japanese recycling plant was able to live off the plastic waste. Now we know that the enzyme PETase breaks down plastic, and that it is found in marine bacteria too. Researchers looked at 400 sites around the world and found the plastic-chewing-enzyme in (by golly) 80% of them.
A previous study looked for any enzymes that degrade any kind of plastic bond and came up with 30,000 candidates. They also were more likely to be found in areas with a lot of plastic pollution. All over the world, a whole new ecosystem is rising out of the mud. With a library of some 200 million microbial enzymes across the land and sea, and quadrillions of bacteria flexing their mutations, it was only a matter of time. Plastic is just a different form of C-H-O waiting to be converted into CO2 and water.  Polyethylene-terephthalate (PET) Artist: Jynto The time to panic is over…. Plastic-eating bacteria discovered in the oceanKeep reading →  Solar Panels, Perth Australia
By Jo Nova The government plays Santa Claus, but poor people paid for the “free” electricity a long time agoIt’s a very socialist solution to a socialist problem. Having screwed the free market, the government has to take desperate measures to limit the damage being done by the solar death spiral. The more solar panels we install, the more expensive electricity gets, which forces more people to install solar panels, etc and so on until “poof” we turn into Zimbabwe. Last year, Jeff Dimery, the head of Alinta claimed that the “the rooftop solar glut” was so bad, the renewables transition itself had stalled. The solar surge in Australia has destroyed the profit margin for reliable generators. But it also killed the business case for new solar installations, and wind turbine parks too. With the national market bleeding negative prices at lunchtime, most generators would have to pay real money if they generate at lunchtime, but the household solar owners don’t. This created the perverse incentive where the only escape for households from rising electricity prices was to put solar panels on the roof. We’re reached the point where two thirds of Australia was subsidizing the other third to buy solar power. Like a dragon that eats it’s own tail, it couldn’t go on forever. Since solar panels were always subsidized, we know they were not economic to install. They were never really cheaper than mass coal fired power — not on a 24 hour system. So we’re added 4 million inefficient generators that wouldn’t have been installed without the subsidy, and we’ve paid the subsidy too. Now we’re putting bandaids on top of bandaids so we can pretend that it will get cheaper, maybe, one day. “Free” electricity will slow solar sales, increase batteries, shift the load, and get more people on smartmetersWithin the confines of a crazy grid, it makes sense. It also makes the government look like heroes, until the people realize they were tricked. The Labor Government wants to force the retailers to give some customers three free hours in the middle of the day. (Those with smartmeters, and in certain areas). They’re hoping: 1/ This will reduce new sales of rooftop solar panels. Fewer people will want to pay thousands to install solar panels when their best working hours are already free. This is good for a grid overflowing with energy at noon. It’s bad news though for solar panel installers, and will leave a nasty taste in the mouths of people who are still paying off their solar panels. 2/ It will increase battery sales. People who can charge their batteries free may find it appealing to sell electricity back to the grid at peak prices at 6pm, or to just avoid the evening price spikes themselves. This assumes that batteries are still subsidized, which means they still don’t make sense, and the country is still be getting poorer, but it will keep the Labor government out of hot water a bit longer. 3/ It will shift demand to noon (somewhat) to match the sun. Grid managers will be hoping that they can shift some demand from breakfast and dinner to the middle of the day. The new market intervention gives an incentive to people to spend hours figuring out how to rearrange their lives to match the “free” energy. It will help retirees who are at home and can do their washing and make their pot roast at lunchtime. But dual income families struggling to make ends meet won’t be home to use the free gift they paid for. It will take some effort to reprogram their hot water systems, and set their air conditioners and washing machines to run at noon while no one is home. They may not bother. It won’t help those who need to charge their electric car at night. 4/ It will increase the uptake of smart meters (not that people have much choice in that). But Big Government loves that control. It means they can turn off poor people’s air-conditioners on the hottest days of the year. As an unwanted side effect retailers may have to charge more during the rest of the day. Like all government finagling, it will raise prices in ways the government didn’t see coming. There is no free lunch — the poor already paid for a share in these solar panelsFor years the unwashed masses have been quietly forced to pay for wealthier people to install solar panels in Australia. It was all so well disguised. Solar installers would sell panels below their real cost and then collect the SRES carbon credits as a rebate the cover the difference. But on the other end of that deal, electricity consumers paid for those carbon credits as an unlisted extra on top of their rapidly rising bills. This charge hit the poor who didn’t have solar panels harder than those who could afford them. It means, then that part of the cost of installation of solar panels was paid for by neighbors who got nothing in return.
 Solar Panels Perth Australia It makes sense in Renewable Crash Test Dummy LandAt the moment solar power is being wasted in the middle of the day, so this is an improvement in a system overloaded with generators that are supposed to make it rain in 2100 AD and which no one would have bought otherwise. Right now, the government doesn’t want to tell Australians that don’t have solar that they can’t install it (“you missed the boat”). They don’t want to tell people with solar panels to pay back the subsidies and rebates to help reduce electricity prices (“We said it would be cheap, but it isn’t”). The government needs a lot of batteries to keep the renewable fantasy alive a bit longer, but they can’t afford them, so they need some carrot-and-stick-tricks to get Australians to do it for them. Thus we arrive at the “three free hours of electricity” plan that was suddenly announced this week in a move that shocked the retailers.
November 6th, 2025 | Tags: Big-Government, Solar Energy (PV) | Category: Global Warming | Print This Post | |  Corals in the Great Barrier Reef off the coast of Australia. (Courtesy of Jessica Hankins) By Jo Nova Everyone was sure that corals would be degraded by our “increasingly acidic oceans” (a political-activist-term for “slightly less alkaline”). But when a team took cores from 200 year old corals in the ocean — instead of studying them for a few months in a laboratory — they discovered some corals have adjusted to the pace of “acidification” much more effectively than anyone thought. The corals actively manage the chemistry of the thin layer of fluid next to the skeleton as the ocean chemistry shifts. Who would have thought that corals would have the ability to cope with rapid changes in the climate? In the last 4 million years, corals have only survived 90 or more ice-age cycles.
L. E. Lisiecki and M. E. Raymo (2005) If only someone had thought to test actual corals at sea before they spent twenty years scaring little children at school? Thanks to Oldbrew at Tallboke’s. From the Press Release: Corals are “More resilient than previously thought” Corals, the foundation of ocean biodiversity, are threatened by climate change. But new research suggests that these organisms might be more resilient than previously thought. In a study published August 27 in Science Advances, a CU Boulder researcher showed that despite a gradual increase in ocean acidity levels over the past 200 years, some corals seem to be able to adjust and continue to generate their hard, stony skeleton structures. While it remains unclear how the corals adapted to the changing environment, Hankins said the secret might lie in their calcifying fluid. “It could be that the processes corals use to modify and regulate their calcifying fluid are more complex than we’ve been able to constrain previously,” said Hankins. “More studies are needed to determine if different species, or if the same species in a different location, have similar responses,” she said. The ocean absorbs about 30% of carbon dioxide emissions from human activities. As more CO2 dissolves in the ocean, the seawater undergoes a chemical reaction that makes the ocean surface more acidic. Previous studies suggest that ocean acidity has increased by 40% since the Industrial Revolution and is likely to rise further. Corals use aragonite, or calcium carbonate to build their skeleton. It turns out that pH of the water is so important that corals don’t leave it up to chance, but manage the right pH in the calcifying fluid around the skeleton. Corals build their skeleton in a microscopic compartment between the coral’s tissue and the skeleton. The area is only micrometers thick, and they use proton pumps to get rid of H+ molecules and control the pH themselves. In the graph below, in part A we can see that the aragonite in the calcifying fluid (Ωcf) has been increasing since about 1840 in the oldest coral. In B the aragonite in the seawater starts to fall rapidly from about 1970 onwards, which ought to “change everything”. However in D, despite all that, the annual calcification rate stays remarkably similar.
 Fig. 2. Multidecadal time series of coral growth parameters and seawater conditions. Just because one study in one type of coral shows that corals may be more resilient than thought doesn’t mean the whole Great Barrier Reef will be fine. But it does show that the experts have been talking out of their hats, whipping up dramas they really didn’t understand. REFERENCESJessica Hankins and Thomas M Decarlo (2025) Multidecadal decoupling between coral calcifying fluid and seawater saturation states, Science Advances, 27 Aug 2025 Vol 11, Issue 35 DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.adr0264 L. E. Lisiecki and M. E. Raymo (2005) — A Pliocene-Pleistocene stack of 57 globally distributed benthic δ18O records, Paleoceanography 20, 1003
November 5th, 2025 | Tags: Corals, Great Barrier Reef, Hyperbole | Category: Global Warming | Print This Post | | By Jo Nova This is the state of national energy debate in Australia — preschooler tauntsThe Nationals have finally decided to dump the Net Zero target (an excellent step*). In reply, Chris Bowen, the Minister of Electricity and Weather, could have reeled off all the countries with unreliable energy that are building aluminum smelters, except there aren’t any. He could have dazzled us with talk of terrawatt-hours, or fantasy hydrogen tankers that are just around the corner, but no one believes that any more — so he just went for dinosaur joke he heard in Grade two. Mr Smug, Chris Bowen: “The old National Party — deciding whether the Earth is flat, and whether the Earth rotates around the sun, or visa versa in 2025. Like get with the program…” Effectively the Energy Minister has nothing at all, so he’s calling the National Party stupid like a rock. He hopes you don’t notice. It’s a cheap childish trick, but hey, it fooled the ABC. They were so impressed with his sneering condescension, they played it on the nightly news on Saturday night and introduced this wit as “standing firm on policy”, as if he said something meaningful. Most of the climate change debate is a bluff. It has always been that way.When an impertinent sod asks a hard question, the believers launch into a scathing pantomine — calling them deniers, or mocking them as lizard-brain flat-Earthers. It’s a rhetorical trick that implies the answer is so bleeding obvious, and the questioner is so stupid, they don’t even need to answer the question. When done well, the debate is won before it even starts. And onlookers learn that they don’t want to ask questions like that. It’s just a form of bullying. What’s really extraordinary is the ABC didn’t recognise how silly this makes Bowen look. They usually work as the Labor-Green promotion team, so they must have thought this was not A-Grade moral-preening, but something impressive. Scary. It will be a great day when we see the opposition mock Bowen (and the ABC) for this unprofessional petty behaviour. Namecalling only works until someone calls it out. Make them pay. If anyone wants to see the context, here’s the 40 second segment. *The Nationals leader, David Littleproud, sadly, is still pandering to the “We Believe In Climate Change” crowd, which is a shame, because it will deprive The Nationals of their best points and funniest lines, but in order to get to the Land of Sensible, they have to get over the Net Zero bridge, so it’s a significant win, and may yet drag the Liberals over the line, or split them.
November 4th, 2025 | Tags: Australian Politics, Coercion, Left Wing Extremist, Net Zero | Category: AGW socio-political, Global Warming, Ideology | Print This Post | |
By Jo Nova Only a few schmuck countries are even trying anymoreTen years ago 196 countries signed legally binding pledges to fix the weather. Every five years they agreed they would update their plans, and the plans could only go upwards, and never retreat. So here we are, with a week to go before the COP30 party starts again, but this time only 64 countries have bothered to update their plan. The best guess is that the UN is on target to reach cuts of 10% instead of the 57% cut they said the world needed to stop a 1.5°C rise by 2035. What does legally binding mean? — Turns out, not much. Most countries fail to submit new climate pledges ahead of summitBy Matt McGrath, BBC Recently drafted climate plans from scores of countries fall drastically short of what is needed to stave off the worst effects of climate breakdown, analysis has shown. Only 64 countries have submitted new plans to cut carbon, the UN says, despite all being required to do so ahead of next month’s COP30 summit. Taken together, these plans would cut carbon by only about 10% by 2035 compared with 2019 levels. This is only about a sixth of the drop in global emissions needed to limit global heating to 1.5C. To keep that goal alive will require steep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, up to 57% by 2035, according to the UN last year. These include around 30% of global emissions, which incredibly includes the US, because Joe Biden, or one of his minders, put in an update early. Given that the US emits 14% of global emissions and is not going to be meeting any agreement, except accidentally, the current Paris agreement covers what’s left, which is 17% of global emissions. Most countries are not even going through the motions of setting pretend targets that they have no hope of meeting. That’s how little they care. Though the EU, riven with political strife, is still arguing over how ambitious to make their commitment. By the time the US is officially out, the EU may be back in. But at this point, even the UN effectively admits defeat on the 1.5°C target“One thing is already clear: we will not be able to contain the global warming below 1.5 °C in the next few years. Overshooting is now inevitable. Which means that we’re going to have a period, bigger or smaller, with higher or lower intensity, above 1.5 °C in the years to come.” — António Guterres, address to the World Meteorological Organization meeting, Geneva, late October 2025 But they got the money and another decade of junkets, which was really the point wasn’t it? The Liberal Party need to get out and about because most of the world knows The Paris Agreement will not recover. Australia is nearly the last Global Schmuck left standing.
November 1st, 2025 | Tags: Unthreaded | Category: Global Warming, Uncategorized | Print This Post | | By Jo Nova Everyone’s new favourite Bureau of Meteorology page is the old one (reg.bom.gov.au)UPDATE: People don’t seem to realize this is the golden link (above) to the old BoM site. You can remake your bookmarks. Eg: The Old Rain Radars. UPDATE #2: Good news! The BoM has decided to keep the old radar style, but allow people to choose the mm/h newer style if they want. Sounds like a choice! Despite 4 million dollars and 18 months of beta testing the new BoM website was met with anger and dismay and accusations that they put lives at risk by rolling out big unnecessary changes just before the storm season begins in the north. The new design radiates smug condescension. They are the experts and you are the kindy kids. The headers are done in 100 point font, with acres of screen-space used to convey almost nothing at all, apart from the temperature of the capital city near you. The BoM, apparently, thought this is what Australians wanted — “the temperature now”. Except that most people with a computer or a phone can see the temperature in the task bar or home screen. If only someone had told them “there’s an App for that” they could have saved the money. Across the top of the home page is a giant message for four-year-old taxpayers — “Discover Your Weather”. The BoM are the authority and you, a crusty old farmer/brickie/businessman, have never known weather before. This headline is designed to remind you of how stupid you areIt “feels like” Dick and Dora would like to teach you about clouds today. If it grates on you, there’s a reason. The feedback has been so bad even the federal Labor government is demanding answers. But really, it’s your fault and you need to adjust faster:The BoM’s top man acknowledged ‘some’ people (i.e. the stupid ones) will take time to adjust. In other words, they are sorry, not sorry. The BoM’s CEO, Dr Peter Stone, said he recognised the unpopularity of the changes. “We didn’t make the change lightly and we appreciate that it will take time for some to adjust. I sincerely apologise for the challenges the change has caused,” he said in a statement on Wednesday. Because they live off constant taxpayer funding, the BoM don’t realize out in the real world, the hours Australians spend learning how to use a new website costs real money. All the knowledge millions of Australians had of how to find meteorological-data has been tossed to the wind. The BoM just drained 10 million hours of productivity from the country. One of reasons for the change is that the “upgrade was overdue”: “The old website served us really well, but it had been well over a decade since there has been any upgrades to it,” he said. So? It’s as if a ten year old site simply had to change because there was grant money to spend and no one had spent it yet, right? The old public service axiom. Compare the new site to the old. In the same space on the home page, the old site has a satellite map, temperatures, wind direction, wind speed, max and min temperatures, and rainfall in mm. There are one click links to warnings, forecasts and observations. That’s about 50 times as much information.
Many people are especially unhappy about the rain radarsSome people in Queensland were up in arms when storms hit a few days after the new site opened, and the rain radar appeared to be underestimating the intensity of the rain. Below is the old and new versions of the same rain patterns at the same time around Brisbane last night just for comparison. The designers have added a white halo around the town names to improve readability on a busy background, but it makes the town names stand out which obscures the rain. Kinda defeats the point…  Old Radar page and the New radar BOM. The two scales are not exactly the same (they don’t have the same menu options). The new site works a bit better zoomed in.  Up closer, Brisbane to Caloundra 2:20am The two color scales appear to be the same in the key (below). But the colors are applied in different conditions. According to Steve Turton, the old radar site uses radar reflectivity units (dbz) while the new one uses a rainfall rate in millimeters (mm/h). Rainfall that appeared black in the old scale was only red in the new scale. Hence people got a nasty surprise because they underestimated how heavy it was.
Steve Turton also says the Doppler wind function is gone: Farmers and fishers have been frustrated by the disappearance of the Doppler wind function. On the old site, this function was a vital way to track the intensity of winds associated with supercell storms, cold fronts and tropical cyclones. In hilly regions such as the area between Cooktown and Townsville, local weather radars are essential as a way to give residents and farmers a better way to see rainfall. But in the new update, some areas appear to have been completely wiped from the radar view. Places such as Cape Tribulation – one of the wettest locations in Australia – can no longer access this crucial information. Around Broome last night the oncoming rain looked remarkably different in the two radar displays. The vast rain dropping north of Bidyadanga almost disappears (as does Broome itself, in the new radar, oops).  Broome rain radar — old and new Let the BoM (and your MP) know what you think. The BoM wants your feedback they say: Customers and the community can continue to provide feedback via:•On-page: Customers can submit anonymous feedback using the feedback pop-up window or the ‘Was this page useful’ button at the bottom of every page. The BoM are too detached from real Australians:The real problem seems to be that the BoM is a long way from any accountability or competition in anything it does. They got away with hiding their methods, making huge adjustments to data, throwing away data, not being honest about the uncertainties they are dealing with, and using electronic equipment that records “one second records”. At times they have made flagrantly bizarre and radical changes to our historic data, or homogenized data from 1,500 kilometers away. Sometimes, they pretend the 1800s didn’t happen (don’t mention the Federation Drought or all the times it was 50 degrees Celsius in Australia). It appears they think taxpayers are simpletons. (Perhaps because 69% of them don’t believe in the BoM’s favourite climate religion?) Wrapped up in their inner city enclaves, many BoM staff may have never met a real farmer. Yet farmers are businessmen who make a living out of placing bets of hundreds of thousands of dollars on the weather every year. And fishermen and firemen sometimes risk their lives. Who were testing the beta site for 18 months — not farmers, firefighters and fishermen? h/t Geoff D, J.J. Peter C, Vicki, David Maddison, Old Ozzie, Yarpos, Ronin, OzFred Keep reading →
By Jo Nova Yet another climate change heavyweight abandons shipIt’s the beginning of the end of the renewables fantasy, but there will be no apology — no admission they were wrong, or that thousands upon millions of people have suffered because of climate sorcery. Watch as the billionaire who lectured us from private jets, pivots into word salad. Now he says we still have to solve climate change (whatever that means), but the doomsday view is wrong, and that awful carbon pollution “will not be the end of civilization.” He’s suddenly turned into a kind of Bjorn Lomborg. Forget Mitigation, say hello to Adaptation. On the cusp of COP30 in Brazil, Bill Gates has launched a life raft for his reputation — a 17 page memo called Three tough truths about climate. Bill Gates can see what’s coming (a reckoning for the renewables debacle), and he is repositioning himself so he doesn’t go down with the ship. Indeed, he’s almost writing an escape plan for the whole Blob. In a nutshell, he’s admitting between the lines that wind and solar power are unaffordable, and since climate change won’t actually be that catastrophic, everyone should calm down while we invent technologies, and in the mean time, get back to stopping people from starving. Wouldn’t you know, he says “Health and prosperity are the best defense against climate change.” (That’s Truth #3 ). What he’s not saying is that he and his friends wasted untold billions (maybe trillions) of dollars of our money installing wind and solar panels which aren’t very good. He is not joining those dots. We still need that breakthrough mythical technology to save us from the climate monster. Three tough truths about climateby Bill Gates …though climate change will have serious consequences—particularly for people in the poorest countries—it will not lead to humanity’s demise. People will be able to live and thrive in most places on Earth for the foreseeable future. Emissions projections have gone down, and with the right policies and investments, innovation will allow us to drive emissions down much further. Unfortunately, the doomsday outlook is causing much of the climate community to focus too much on near-term emissions goals, and it’s diverting resources from the most effective things we should be doing to improve life in a warming world. He’s still painting himself as a savior, of course: If given a choice between eradicating malaria and a tenth of a degree increase in warming, Gates told reporters, “I’ll let the temperature go up 0.1 degree to get rid of malaria. People don’t understand the suffering that exists today.” –– AP News Now, at long last, he says the first priority should be to prevent suffering in the here and now. Which is all very noble, but where were you Bill for the last ten years when people in Africa needed coal plants — you were telling them to invest in wind and solar. Compare this to Bill Gates in 2021:“The countries that build great zero-carbon companies and industries will be the ones that lead the global economy in the coming decades.” –Bill Gates, How to Avoid a Climate Disaster  Bill Gates Bill Gates set up Breakthrough Energy Ventures (BEV) “the future of energy” in 2015 and often put in a star performance at the UN COP Junkets. Only a few short years ago climate change was going to be awful in our lifetimes according to Bill:
Between the lines Bill Gates is admitting the wind and solar experiments were a waste of moneyThe tough truth he dances around is that we don’t have a realistic way to get to Net Zero yet, we still need those breakthroughs. This is a polite way of saying that we wasted lots of money, and made life tougher for poor people. Sometimes the world acts as if any effort to fight climate change is as worthwhile as any other. As a result, less-effective projects are diverting money and attention from efforts that will have more impact on the human condition: namely, making it affordable to eliminate all greenhouse gas emissions and reducing extreme poverty with improvements in agriculture and health. What he doesn’t say is that the UN doesn’t care less about the poor, it’s just a vehicle for dictators and corporations to profit or sabotage competitors. That’s why they are jumping up and down over the best managed reef in the world, and not spending more time talking about the murder of Christians in Nigeria. The big shift away from climate dogmaThis is the Big-pivot away from Climate Doom, the obsession with a tiny 0.14°C of warming (per decade) and wind and solar subsidy harvesting: Truth #1: Climate Change is a serious problem but it won’t be the end of civilization. Truth #2: Temperature is not the best way to measure our progress on climate. Truth #3: Health and prosperity are the best defense against climate change. Expect The Blob to spend less time talking about temperatures and 1.5 degrees of warming, and more time talking about quality of life suddenly. The New York Times makes out that it is a bit controversial, but really, we’ll solve climate change faster if we stop harping on about the prophesies of doom. Optimism, they now say, is the most effective way to motivate people. Bill Gates Says Climate Change ‘Will Not Lead to Humanity’s Demise’by David Gelles, New York Times In a memo, the Microsoft co-founder warned against a “doomsday outlook” and appears to have shifted some of his views about climate change.
Politics aside, Mr. Callahan said Mr. Gates’s change in messaging was in line with studies that have shown that alarmist rhetoric about climate change is not the most effective way to motivate people to take action. “The result of a lot of research is that it’s much better to lean into the optimism than the pessimism,” Mr. Callahan said.
Feel the Quickening: the green retreat is acceleratingThe Democrats are openly saying they should not even talk about climate change if they want to get elected, and Tony Blair is trying to dig the UK Labor government out of a very big hole, telling them to abandon Net Zero targets. Gates is yet another to hop on the sort-a-skeptical bandwagon.
As I said before, The Australian conservatives could end up being the last people on Earth still endorsing Net Zero. h/t ClimateDepot Photo Bill Gates: Kuhlmann /MSC October 29th, 2025 | Tags: Blob (The), Gates (Bill), Net Zero, The Blob | Category: Global Warming | Print This Post | | |
Jo appreciates your support to help her keep doing what she does. This blog is funded by donations. Thanks!
Follow Jo's Tweets
   
 
|
|||
|
Copyright © 2026 JoNova - All Rights Reserved |
||||
.jpg){kind=link}
Recent Comments