Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. Vol 4
Discussion
robinessex said:
Beebs CC puff piece
'Extreme and unusual' climate trends continue after record 2016
I tend to watch Fox News these days, it's one of the few unbiased channels.'Extreme and unusual' climate trends continue after record 2016
But I still flick through the others, and just my luck, as I flicked over to BBC News for no more than 3 minutes they had a climate piece presented as a kind of mega extravaganza Harrabin show piece, which mentioned...
Warmest year ever, less ice, melting glaciers, rising sea level, bleached corals, India's hottest year, China's wettest year, all caused by CO2 emissions.
Awesome! I don't know how many times it was repeated throughout the day, but I guess a lot of impressionable people will have sucked it up, simply because it's presented as news. Nothing new here I know, but I'm always sickened by how they get away with presenting half baked theories as factual news.
Interesting article.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3905...
It seems most Scientists can't replicate studies by their peers and it's a growing problem.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3905...
It seems most Scientists can't replicate studies by their peers and it's a growing problem.
kelvink said:
Interesting article.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3905...
It seems most Scientists can't replicate studies by their peers and it's a growing problem.
So, the PH deniers have been vindicated then. Where's Durbster when you need him ?http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3905...
It seems most Scientists can't replicate studies by their peers and it's a growing problem.
robinessex said:
kelvink said:
Interesting article.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3905...
It seems most Scientists can't replicate studies by their peers and it's a growing problem.
So, the PH deniers have been vindicated then. Where's Durbster when you need him ?http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3905...
It seems most Scientists can't replicate studies by their peers and it's a growing problem.
Paddy_N_Murphy said:
kelvink said:
Interesting article.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3905...
It seems most Scientists can't replicate studies by their peers and it's a growing problem.
tenuous link at best - You are capitalising simply on the use of word 'Scientist' regardless of the study subjecthttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3905...
It seems most Scientists can't replicate studies by their peers and it's a growing problem.
Tenuous link? Come on it's the BBC ...... more like a shot in the foot
A case study on religious nuts rather than spiritual fruits is covered by the political blog Climate Depot under the following headline:
Potsdam PIK Climate Director Says We Will Have To Go Back To Mud Huts By 2040
http://www.climatedepot.com/2017/03/21/potsdam-pik...
http://www.dw.com/en/schellnhuber-scientists-have-...
A key underperformance indicator in terms of total ecoclaptrap is in there - the 97% of scientists myth gets a bold mention as though it's accurate and factual.
According to similar previous hyperbollywocks, the British Isles were meant to be home to a starving and roasted population already. Something went wrong, or right!
Potsdam PIK Climate Director Says We Will Have To Go Back To Mud Huts By 2040
http://www.climatedepot.com/2017/03/21/potsdam-pik...
http://www.dw.com/en/schellnhuber-scientists-have-...
A key underperformance indicator in terms of total ecoclaptrap is in there - the 97% of scientists myth gets a bold mention as though it's accurate and factual.
According to similar previous hyperbollywocks, the British Isles were meant to be home to a starving and roasted population already. Something went wrong, or right!
turbobloke said:
A case study on religious nuts rather than spiritual fruits is covered by the political blog Climate Depot under the following headline:
Potsdam PIK Climate Director Says We Will Have To Go Back To Mud Huts By 2040
http://www.climatedepot.com/2017/03/21/potsdam-pik...
http://www.dw.com/en/schellnhuber-scientists-have-...
A key underperformance indicator in terms of total ecoclaptrap is in there - the 97% of scientists myth gets a bold mention as though it's accurate and factual.
According to similar previous hyperbollywocks, the British Isles were meant to be home to a starving and roasted population already. Something went wrong, or right!
Hans Joachim Schellnhuber has been Director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) since he founded the institute in 1992.Potsdam PIK Climate Director Says We Will Have To Go Back To Mud Huts By 2040
http://www.climatedepot.com/2017/03/21/potsdam-pik...
http://www.dw.com/en/schellnhuber-scientists-have-...
A key underperformance indicator in terms of total ecoclaptrap is in there - the 97% of scientists myth gets a bold mention as though it's accurate and factual.
According to similar previous hyperbollywocks, the British Isles were meant to be home to a starving and roasted population already. Something went wrong, or right!
Says it all really, doesn't it.
This is him:-
https://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2012/12/21/who-is-...
Follow the money !!!!!!!!
And :-
http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2011/11/29/...
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/climate-...
Edited by robinessex on Wednesday 22 March 13:25
Edited by robinessex on Wednesday 22 March 13:29
More of the same.
This is how a believer climate scientist breaks the good-bad news that she's pregnant.
Jo offers a health warning to readers..."Warning. Pure climate-princess material coming":
http://joannenova.com.au/2017/03/all-australians-a...
Hands up who knew this: "Nowadays, the very act of living in Australia, regardless of concern for our climate future, is detrimental."
This is how a believer climate scientist breaks the good-bad news that she's pregnant.
Believer scientist said:
And then, just as senselessly as our grief began, it ended. For no particular reason, the expected bad baby news never arrived and now the complexity of having an imagined child will become a concrete ethical entanglement.
Hope that's clear enough.Jo Nova said:
We also pray she escapes the climate bubble soon. Because by golly, she’s in deep.
Prayers to Gaia obviously. Jo offers a health warning to readers..."Warning. Pure climate-princess material coming":
http://joannenova.com.au/2017/03/all-australians-a...
Hands up who knew this: "Nowadays, the very act of living in Australia, regardless of concern for our climate future, is detrimental."
robinessex said:
Hans Joachim Schellnhuber has been Director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) since he founded the institute in 1992.
Says it all really, doesn't it.
He's a busy chap, look at these highly productive roles that consume no public money at all. OK maybe they do.Says it all really, doesn't it.
Article said:
These days Schellnhuber appears to be rather pleased with himself. PIK’s website includes a portrait gallery featuring no less than 10 high-quality images of him looking solemn and thoughtful. His online CV helpfully lists the professional positions he was offered but chose to decline.
We’re advised that he is a member of the editorial boards of six scientific journals and that he has taught at a number of universities. But the bulk of Schellnhuber’s time isn’t spent in a physics lab. Rather, for at least two decades, he has been an administrator, a bureaucrat, and a political advisor.
In 1992 the German government established the German Advisory Council on Global Change. Schellnhuber has been either its chairman or vice chair for most of its history. He is currently the leading climate advisor to German Chancellor Angela Merkel – whom he has known since at least 1995.
He heads the European Commission’s Global Change Advisory Group and the advisory board of the European Climate Foundation. He is a member of at least 11 other councils and boards, and has been involved for years with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
At the recent UN climate conference in Doha the world learned that Schellnhuber’s empire is expanding even further. PIK is establishing another climate research institute – located in, and funded by, the oil-rich nation of Qatar.
As you said - follow the money!We’re advised that he is a member of the editorial boards of six scientific journals and that he has taught at a number of universities. But the bulk of Schellnhuber’s time isn’t spent in a physics lab. Rather, for at least two decades, he has been an administrator, a bureaucrat, and a political advisor.
In 1992 the German government established the German Advisory Council on Global Change. Schellnhuber has been either its chairman or vice chair for most of its history. He is currently the leading climate advisor to German Chancellor Angela Merkel – whom he has known since at least 1995.
He heads the European Commission’s Global Change Advisory Group and the advisory board of the European Climate Foundation. He is a member of at least 11 other councils and boards, and has been involved for years with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
At the recent UN climate conference in Doha the world learned that Schellnhuber’s empire is expanding even further. PIK is establishing another climate research institute – located in, and funded by, the oil-rich nation of Qatar.
talking about money/cost ,seems improvements in that area in relation to wind power are not improving very well.
1. While turbines are getting larger, able to operate at lower wind speeds, and improving their capacity factors, the total lifecycle cost per unit of energy provided from offshore wind has not perceptibly decreased from 1991 to 2015. Higher costs of O&M for larger turbines farther offshore seems to consume savings from higher capacity factors.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/03/22/by-the-numb...
1. While turbines are getting larger, able to operate at lower wind speeds, and improving their capacity factors, the total lifecycle cost per unit of energy provided from offshore wind has not perceptibly decreased from 1991 to 2015. Higher costs of O&M for larger turbines farther offshore seems to consume savings from higher capacity factors.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/03/22/by-the-numb...
Further proof that appeals to authority re: NASA data may be flawed...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39351833
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39351833
Paddy_N_Murphy said:
and when Taxpayers money isn't wasted? then what does it become ? Or is that not the point you wanted to harp on about ?
might be worth reading the link i posted above. it doesn't look like it will not be wasted anytime soon looking at the current rate pf progress. i believe your preferred metric is lcoe , the numbers still do not work.johnfm said:
Further proof that appeals to authority re: NASA data may be flawed...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39351833
"Prof Larry Pinksy, from the University of Houston, told Radio 4: "My colleagues at Nasa thought they had cleaned that up."http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39351833
open peer review , not great for the ego sometimes ,but a very good way to avoid peer pressure.
Paddy_N_Murphy said:
turbobloke said:
It's been shown for some time that 'sustainable' renewables aren't sustainable but where faith and political will are strong, astronomical amounts of taxpayers' money can be and are wasted.
and when Taxpayers money isn't wasted? then what does it become ? Or is that not the point you wanted to harp on about ?Paddy_N_Murphy said:
robinessex said:
Paddy_N_Murphy said:
turbobloke said:
It's been shown for some time that 'sustainable' renewables aren't sustainable but where faith and political will are strong, astronomical amounts of taxpayers' money can be and are wasted.
and when Taxpayers money isn't wasted? then what does it become ? Or is that not the point you wanted to harp on about ?WHEN, was the point I was referring to.
If we want to do the politics of renewable energy these threads may be of interest.
http://euanmearns.com/the-lappeenranta-renewable-e...
and a follow-up to that one which should run in the comments for a while as the team that produced the paper are apperantly joining the discussion.
http://euanmearns.com/the-lappeenranta-internet-of...
In summary if every country in Europe agrees to a total electricity sharing grid (assuming that is truly viable at scale) and installs about 3 times the nameplate capacity required for peak energy demand and certain other assumptions are made about wind patterns and solar potential then some figures seem to suggest that there might just be enough flexibility to avoid large scale lack of electricity at peak demand over the whole of Europe.
Of course at times the infrastructure will be able to generate far more than is required and production will need to be curtailed despite the capital investment having been made. And at current expectations of longevity the entire "fleet" of turbines and solar panels will need to be replaced every 20 years or so which should provide for a fairly lucrative and very large industry and so a lot of cost for the consumer.
Also CO2 emissions somewhere around the planet .... but I digress.
It should be interesting to see which way the discussions develop.
http://euanmearns.com/the-lappeenranta-renewable-e...
and a follow-up to that one which should run in the comments for a while as the team that produced the paper are apperantly joining the discussion.
http://euanmearns.com/the-lappeenranta-internet-of...
In summary if every country in Europe agrees to a total electricity sharing grid (assuming that is truly viable at scale) and installs about 3 times the nameplate capacity required for peak energy demand and certain other assumptions are made about wind patterns and solar potential then some figures seem to suggest that there might just be enough flexibility to avoid large scale lack of electricity at peak demand over the whole of Europe.
Of course at times the infrastructure will be able to generate far more than is required and production will need to be curtailed despite the capital investment having been made. And at current expectations of longevity the entire "fleet" of turbines and solar panels will need to be replaced every 20 years or so which should provide for a fairly lucrative and very large industry and so a lot of cost for the consumer.
Also CO2 emissions somewhere around the planet .... but I digress.
It should be interesting to see which way the discussions develop.
Green energy is eating its own tail.
https://rogerhelmermep.wordpress.com/2017/03/02/gr...
Anyone with a vested interest may want to click here
https://rogerhelmermep.wordpress.com/2017/03/02/gr...
Anyone with a vested interest may want to click here
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff