Climate change - the POLITICAL debate (Vol 7)

[PRTVR]

mike9009 said:

turbobloke said:

Recent evidence of Not Zero goes beyond the USA, as Net Zero retreat really is gathering steam. Unlike non-existent increases in extreme weather it's all around us.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03/27/europe...

20th century tech will soon be looked back on fondly like a horse and cart or steam train or the canal network........

Why the resistance to change and progress??

https://grid.iamkate.com/

Renewables 16% fossil fuels 43% resistance to change because it doesn't work perhaps.

[mike9009]

PRTVR said:

mike9009 said:

turbobloke said:

Recent evidence of Not Zero goes beyond the USA, as Net Zero retreat really is gathering steam. Unlike non-existent increases in extreme weather it's all around us.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03/27/europe...

20th century tech will soon be looked back on fondly like a horse and cart or steam train or the canal network........

Why the resistance to change and progress??

https://grid.iamkate.com/

Renewables 16% fossil fuels 43% resistance to change because it doesn't work perhaps.

It evidently does work.

[Diderot]

mike9009 said:

wc98 said:

mike9009 said:

The broken record.

The conspiracy on here is so strong.

The papers posted are fundamentally flawed yet continually cited in this thread without any response to simple critical analysis.

You are living in a dream world of zero taxes on carbon emissions, on the basis of 20 flawed research papers.

Have you read the link provided by Kawasicki above ? Would be interested in your take on it.

I have read it. The position maybe valid but the quality of the science in some papers quoted in this thread as evidence is dire. My critique of Mckiltrick and Christy (2018) has gone silently unacknowledged in these pages. The paper is fundamentally flawed and biased.

No way I would accept that in Nature or Science as it clearly has an agenda beneath the facade of science portrayed.

It seems the few other papers I have read, quoted in these pages, also have glaring omissions which an amateur can see through.

In the same vein, should scientific papers from flat earthers be published in Nature and Science on the same basis?

Hugely naive. You clearly do not understand how research works.

[Pan Pan Pan]

mike9009 said:

PRTVR said:

mike9009 said:

turbobloke said:

Recent evidence of Not Zero goes beyond the USA, as Net Zero retreat really is gathering steam. Unlike non-existent increases in extreme weather it's all around us.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03/27/europe...

20th century tech will soon be looked back on fondly like a horse and cart or steam train or the canal network........

Why the resistance to change and progress??

https://grid.iamkate.com/

Renewables 16% fossil fuels 43% resistance to change because it doesn't work perhaps.

It evidently does work.

It evidently does not.
All renewable energy systems are manufactured from fossil fuels, transported to site using fossil fuels, erected using fossil fuels, and operated, and maintained using fossil fuels. Even the energy is carried from them to point of use, using guess what in the distribution infrastructure?
Only when a viable alternative, which can produce the power, food, and products needed by the global population, currently ONLY made possible in the volumes required, by using fossil fuels has been discovered, (and more importantly put into production sufficient to meet the needs of the global population) can people switch away from fossil fuels. To date NO SUCH alternative has been discovered.

Edited by Pan Pan Pan on Tuesday 7th May 11:26

[turbobloke]

Pan Pan Pan said:

mike9009 said:

PRTVR said:

mike9009 said:

turbobloke said:

Recent evidence of Not Zero goes beyond the USA, as Net Zero retreat really is gathering steam. Unlike non-existent increases in extreme weather it's all around us.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03/27/europe...

20th century tech will soon be looked back on fondly like a horse and cart or steam train or the canal network........

Why the resistance to change and progress??

https://grid.iamkate.com/

Renewables 16% fossil fuels 43% resistance to change because it doesn't work perhaps.

It evidently does work.

It evidently does not.
All renewable energy systems are manufactured from fossil fuels, transported to site using fossil fuels, erected using fossil fuels, and operated, and maintained using fossil fuels. Even the energy is carried from them to point of use, using guess what in the distribution infrastructure?
Only when a viable alternative, which can produce the power, food, and products needed by the global population, currently ONLY made possible in the volumes required, by using fossil fuels has been discovered, (and more importantly put into production sufficient to meet the needs of the global population) can people switch away from fossil fuels. To date NO SUCH alternative has been discovered.

Edited by Pan Pan Pan on Tuesday 7th May 11:26

Exactly.

Beyond that point, which some are working hard to ignore or deny, years ago Google's green scientists/engineers studied renewable energy (RE) aka unreliables to demonstrate that unreliables could do the job required, but failed. That report is now buried. They noted that renewables could not provide reliable power to sustain a developed economy, even with fantasy technology in their calculations including self-erecting turbines in robotic wind farms. Part of the problem was that building new unreliables to get to the finishing line was consuming too much unreliable energy. The entire edifice is smoke and mirrors, most apt for something predicated on bunk.

[mike9009]

Pan Pan Pan said:

mike9009 said:

PRTVR said:

mike9009 said:

turbobloke said:

Recent evidence of Not Zero goes beyond the USA, as Net Zero retreat really is gathering steam. Unlike non-existent increases in extreme weather it's all around us.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03/27/europe...

20th century tech will soon be looked back on fondly like a horse and cart or steam train or the canal network........

Why the resistance to change and progress??

https://grid.iamkate.com/

Renewables 16% fossil fuels 43% resistance to change because it doesn't work perhaps.

It evidently does work.

It evidently does not.
All renewable energy systems are manufactured from fossil fuels, transported to site using fossil fuels, erected using fossil fuels, and operated, and maintained using fossil fuels. Even the energy is carried from them to point of use, using guess what in the distribution infrastructure?
Only when a viable alternative, which can produce the power, food, and products needed by the global population, currently ONLY made possible in the volumes required, by using fossil fuels has been discovered, (and more importantly put into production sufficient to meet the needs of the global population) can people switch away from fossil fuels. To date NO SUCH alternative has been discovered.

Edited by Pan Pan Pan on Tuesday 7th May 11:26

Transitional. Horses did not suddenly all get put to pasture overnight in 1898 (or whenever) and then ICE took over the following morning. It took quite a few decades of transition.

Depends how black and white you are looking.

[mike9009]

Diderot said:

mike9009 said:

wc98 said:

mike9009 said:

The broken record.

The conspiracy on here is so strong.

The papers posted are fundamentally flawed yet continually cited in this thread without any response to simple critical analysis.

You are living in a dream world of zero taxes on carbon emissions, on the basis of 20 flawed research papers.

Have you read the link provided by Kawasicki above ? Would be interested in your take on it.

I have read it. The position maybe valid but the quality of the science in some papers quoted in this thread as evidence is dire. My critique of Mckiltrick and Christy (2018) has gone silently unacknowledged in these pages. The paper is fundamentally flawed and biased.

No way I would accept that in Nature or Science as it clearly has an agenda beneath the facade of science portrayed.

It seems the few other papers I have read, quoted in these pages, also have glaring omissions which an amateur can see through.

In the same vein, should scientific papers from flat earthers be published in Nature and Science on the same basis?

Hugely naive. You clearly do not understand how research works.

Maybe naive, but I can read a scientific paper and pick out that it is fundamentally flawed. Yet no one on this thread can rebuke my critique.

I also understand publishing 'research' with such fundamental flaws would be hugely naive too.

Care to comment on my critique of McKiltrick and Christy??

[PRTVR]

mike9009 said:

Pan Pan Pan said:

mike9009 said:

PRTVR said:

mike9009 said:

turbobloke said:

Recent evidence of Not Zero goes beyond the USA, as Net Zero retreat really is gathering steam. Unlike non-existent increases in extreme weather it's all around us.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03/27/europe...

20th century tech will soon be looked back on fondly like a horse and cart or steam train or the canal network........

Why the resistance to change and progress??

https://grid.iamkate.com/

Renewables 16% fossil fuels 43% resistance to change because it doesn't work perhaps.

It evidently does work.

It evidently does not.
All renewable energy systems are manufactured from fossil fuels, transported to site using fossil fuels, erected using fossil fuels, and operated, and maintained using fossil fuels. Even the energy is carried from them to point of use, using guess what in the distribution infrastructure?
Only when a viable alternative, which can produce the power, food, and products needed by the global population, currently ONLY made possible in the volumes required, by using fossil fuels has been discovered, (and more importantly put into production sufficient to meet the needs of the global population) can people switch away from fossil fuels. To date NO SUCH alternative has been discovered.

Edited by Pan Pan Pan on Tuesday 7th May 11:26

Transitional. Horses did not suddenly all get put to pasture overnight in 1898 (or whenever) and then ICE took over the following morning. It took quite a few decades of transition.

Depends how black and white you are looking.

We transitioned away from windmills because of the intermittent generation of power, the facts stay the same in ten years or a hundred.

[Gecko1978]

PRTVR said:

We transitioned away from windmills because of the intermittent generation of power, the facts stay the same in ten years or a hundred.

An we don't ride into battle on horses......so when will that battery powered tank arrive.....I am betting never (as in not in next 50 years)

[robinessex]

Australia backs gas beyond 2050 despite climate fears

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cjq5gky4e5no

Australia has announced it will ramp up its extraction and use of gas until "2050 and beyond", despite global calls to phase out fossil fuels.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese's government says the move is needed to shore up domestic energy supply while supporting a transition to net zero........continues

[mike9009]

robinessex said:

Australia backs gas beyond 2050 despite climate fears

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cjq5gky4e5no

Australia has announced it will ramp up its extraction and use of gas until "2050 and beyond", despite global calls to phase out fossil fuels.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese's government says the move is needed to shore up domestic energy supply while supporting a transition to net zero........continues

Not great news....but at least still transitioning to net zero..... Wonder if the political position will change if the mini ice age in 2030 does not materialise?

[PRTVR]

mike9009 said:

Not great news....but at least still transitioning to net zero..... Wonder if the political position will change if the mini ice age in 2030 does not materialise?

I think the fact that the Arctic is not ice free yet , even given multi peer reviewed scientists predictions is make people realise perhaps it's been a lot of scare stories, along with an inability to manage without fossil fuels.
Did anybody see the BBC news piece from Wales on climate change ? My wife pointed out he was wearing 4 layers on his top..... then went on to talk about rising temperatures, its May and he was dressed for the Arctic.

[mike9009]

PRTVR said:

mike9009 said:

Not great news....but at least still transitioning to net zero..... Wonder if the political position will change if the mini ice age in 2030 does not materialise?

I think the fact that the Arctic is not ice free yet , even given multi peer reviewed scientists predictions is make people realise perhaps it's been a lot of scare stories, along with an inability to manage without fossil fuels.
Did anybody see the BBC news piece from Wales on climate change ? My wife pointed out he was wearing 4 layers on his top..... then went on to talk about rising temperatures, its May and he was dressed for the Arctic.

Distinguishing between weather and climate perhaps?

https://climate.copernicus.eu/copernicus-global-te...

[PRTVR]

mike9009 said:

PRTVR said:

mike9009 said:

Not great news....but at least still transitioning to net zero..... Wonder if the political position will change if the mini ice age in 2030 does not materialise?

I think the fact that the Arctic is not ice free yet , even given multi peer reviewed scientists predictions is make people realise perhaps it's been a lot of scare stories, along with an inability to manage without fossil fuels.
Did anybody see the BBC news piece from Wales on climate change ? My wife pointed out he was wearing 4 layers on his top..... then went on to talk about rising temperatures, its May and he was dressed for the Arctic.

Distinguishing between weather and climate perhaps?

https://climate.copernicus.eu/copernicus-global-te...

Climate scientists made the prediction, presumably they know what is climate or weather, or then again maybe not.

[kerplunk]

mike9009 said:

PRTVR said:

mike9009 said:

Not great news....but at least still transitioning to net zero..... Wonder if the political position will change if the mini ice age in 2030 does not materialise?

I think the fact that the Arctic is not ice free yet , even given multi peer reviewed scientists predictions is make people realise perhaps it's been a lot of scare stories, along with an inability to manage without fossil fuels.
Did anybody see the BBC news piece from Wales on climate change ? My wife pointed out he was wearing 4 layers on his top..... then went on to talk about rising temperatures, its May and he was dressed for the Arctic.

Distinguishing between weather and climate perhaps?

https://climate.copernicus.eu/copernicus-global-te...

Hard times for 'sceptics'

[dickymint]

kerplunk said:

mike9009 said:

PRTVR said:

mike9009 said:

Not great news....but at least still transitioning to net zero..... Wonder if the political position will change if the mini ice age in 2030 does not materialise?

I think the fact that the Arctic is not ice free yet , even given multi peer reviewed scientists predictions is make people realise perhaps it's been a lot of scare stories, along with an inability to manage without fossil fuels.
Did anybody see the BBC news piece from Wales on climate change ? My wife pointed out he was wearing 4 layers on his top..... then went on to talk about rising temperatures, its May and he was dressed for the Arctic.

Distinguishing between weather and climate perhaps?

https://climate.copernicus.eu/copernicus-global-te...

Hard times for 'sceptics'

Yep but chin up you'll get through it. Festival seasons here that'll help

[dickymint]

Greta Turdburg is branching out I see.................

[kerplunk]

dickymint said:

kerplunk said:

mike9009 said:

PRTVR said:

mike9009 said:

Not great news....but at least still transitioning to net zero..... Wonder if the political position will change if the mini ice age in 2030 does not materialise?

I think the fact that the Arctic is not ice free yet , even given multi peer reviewed scientists predictions is make people realise perhaps it's been a lot of scare stories, along with an inability to manage without fossil fuels.
Did anybody see the BBC news piece from Wales on climate change ? My wife pointed out he was wearing 4 layers on his top..... then went on to talk about rising temperatures, its May and he was dressed for the Arctic.

Distinguishing between weather and climate perhaps?

https://climate.copernicus.eu/copernicus-global-te...

Hard times for 'sceptics'

Yep but chin up you'll get through it. Festival seasons here that'll help

My hard times was years ago during the putative 'pause', dicky

[mike9009]

https://amp.theguardian.com/environment/article/20...


No doubt this is good news to some people in the thread.

[Vanden Saab]

mike9009 said:

https://amp.theguardian.com/environment/article/20...


No doubt this is good news to some people in the thread.

A CO2 monitoring station at the top of an active volcano.