Climate change - the POLITICAL debate (Vol 6)

[deeps]

A short interview with Senator Malcolm Roberts, one of the few politicians with a backbone

He talks about the unusually cold and snowy northern hemisphere winter, and the cold Australian summer (yes it will still be the warmest year ever).and how Australia is trying to commit energy suicide.


https://fb.watch/3Z7B-HG4_p/

[ATG]

robinessex said:

Cumbria coal mine plan 'damaging PM's reputation'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-562...

Boris Johnson has been warned by some of his foreign ambassadors that a planned coal mine in Cumbria is damaging his reputation.
The PM wants to lead the world on climate change, but the ambassadors say his tacit support for the mine is bringing accusations of hypocrisy.
The issue has flared as the UK co-hosts a coalition of nations pledging to phase out coal in power generation.
The Powering Past Coal Alliance (PPCA) was initiated by the UK.
Supporters of the Cumbria mine argue it should be encouraged because it will produce special coking coal for steel making, not thermal coal for power.........Germany is also a member of the PPCA, yet it opened a new coal-fired power plant last year. Canada has committed to phase out coal-fired electricity by 2030, but there are plans for new and expanded coal mining production in the west of the country..........contines

From a climate perspective, this is really an open and shut case. Or, a "don't open it" case.

From memory, steel production produces something like 8% of global CO2 emissions making it one of the most CO2y activities we collectively undertake. For example, that one industry is roughly equivalent to all forms of road transport combined. It's an industry entirely dominated by a pretty small number of very big producers. That makes it a pretty good candidate for transition to cleaner processes, e.g. increased use of hydrogen as a reducing agent or adding CO2 sequestration to existing plant. A virtuous circle could be created here. A small number of big strategic decisions in the steel industry could deliver a huge chunk of demand that could kickstart hydrogen and carbon sequestration at real scale. Other industries could then benefit from those same cleaner technology options.

This won't happen without international political cooperation and it won't happen if we create market signals that discourage the steel industry from innovating.

If we start allowing new coking coal mines in the UK, we are ballsing up the chance of an international political consensus and we're sending exactly the wrong market signal. I quite understand why the local Tory councillors are trying to approve the scheme; it's what their constituents would want them to do. This is precisely the sort of decision in which central government should be intervening. The national interest is in conflict with a local interest, and in this case the national interest must come first.

[ATG]

deeps said:

A short interview with Senator Malcolm Roberts, one of the few politicians with a backbone

He talks about the unusually cold and snowy northern hemisphere winter, and the cold Australian summer (yes it will still be the warmest year ever).and how Australia is trying to commit energy suicide.


https://fb.watch/3Z7B-HG4_p/

Come on ... apply your critical thinking skills

[PRTVR]

ATG said:

robinessex said:

Cumbria coal mine plan 'damaging PM's reputation'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-562...

Boris Johnson has been warned by some of his foreign ambassadors that a planned coal mine in Cumbria is damaging his reputation.
The PM wants to lead the world on climate change, but the ambassadors say his tacit support for the mine is bringing accusations of hypocrisy.
The issue has flared as the UK co-hosts a coalition of nations pledging to phase out coal in power generation.
The Powering Past Coal Alliance (PPCA) was initiated by the UK.
Supporters of the Cumbria mine argue it should be encouraged because it will produce special coking coal for steel making, not thermal coal for power.........Germany is also a member of the PPCA, yet it opened a new coal-fired power plant last year. Canada has committed to phase out coal-fired electricity by 2030, but there are plans for new and expanded coal mining production in the west of the country..........contines

From a climate perspective, this is really an open and shut case. Or, a "don't open it" case.

From memory, steel production produces something like 8% of global CO2 emissions making it one of the most CO2y activities we collectively undertake. For example, that one industry is roughly equivalent to all forms of road transport combined. It's an industry entirely dominated by a pretty small number of very big producers. That makes it a pretty good candidate for transition to cleaner processes, e.g. increased use of hydrogen as a reducing agent or adding CO2 sequestration to existing plant. A virtuous circle could be created here. A small number of big strategic decisions in the steel industry could deliver a huge chunk of demand that could kickstart hydrogen and carbon sequestration at real scale. Other industries could then benefit from those same cleaner technology options.

This won't happen without international political cooperation and it won't happen if we create market signals that discourage the steel industry from innovating.

If we start allowing new coking coal mines in the UK, we are ballsing up the chance of an international political consensus and we're sending exactly the wrong market signal. I quite understand why the local Tory councillors are trying to approve the scheme; it's what their constituents would want them to do. This is precisely the sort of decision in which central government should be intervening. The national interest is in conflict with a local interest, and in this case the national interest must come first.

The problem comes with imports, great if you ban goods containing steel or aluminium from countries that use coal, Germany, China, etc. If not all you are doing is virtual signaling, destroying our economy but allowing others to thrive.

[deeps]

ATG said:

From a climate perspective, this is really an open and shut case. Or, a "don't open it" case.

From memory, steel production produces something like 8% of global CO2 emissions making it one of the most CO2y activities we collectively undertake. For example, that one industry is roughly equivalent to all forms of road transport combined. It's an industry entirely dominated by a pretty small number of very big producers. That makes it a pretty good candidate for transition to cleaner processes, e.g. increased use of hydrogen as a reducing agent or adding CO2 sequestration to existing plant. A virtuous circle could be created here. A small number of big strategic decisions in the steel industry could deliver a huge chunk of demand that could kickstart hydrogen and carbon sequestration at real scale. Other industries could then benefit from those same cleaner technology options.

This won't happen without international political cooperation and it won't happen if we create market signals that discourage the steel industry from innovating.

If we start allowing new coking coal mines in the UK, we are ballsing up the chance of an international political consensus and we're sending exactly the wrong market signal. I quite understand why the local Tory councillors are trying to approve the scheme; it's what their constituents would want them to do. This is precisely the sort of decision in which central government should be intervening. The national interest is in conflict with a local interest, and in this case the national interest must come first.

Nice try, The national interest and the local interest should be one and the same - to exit the Paris Accord and reverse any virtue signalling CO2 reduction targets before too much harm is done.

Politicians cannot now and will never be capable of controlling Earth's climate. To believe otherwise is dangerously deluded.

[kerplunk]

deeps said:

A short interview with Senator Malcolm Roberts, one of the few politicians with a backbone

He talks about the unusually cold and snowy northern hemisphere winter, and the cold Australian summer (yes it will still be the warmest year ever).and how Australia is trying to commit energy suicide.


https://fb.watch/3Z7B-HG4_p/

Not sure how denying AGW so as to avoid taking on the huge task of transitioning away from fossil fuels is having a backbone.

I like how he appears to be a believer in the solar-driven ice age ahoy idea though - nothing at all convenient and self-serving about that of course.

He's clearly of the same stripe as australian oil/mining geologist (and like Roberts a One Nation candidate) David Archibald who back in the noughties predicted massive solar-driven global cooling by 2020 (promoted on these pages by guess who!). Guess what - it never happened and global temps went in the opposite direction. Oh well that non-physics based cycle idea didn't work - but there's still plenty of eager to believe suckers around so let's ply it again!

Edited by kerplunk on Tuesday 2nd March 02:55

[deeps]

kerplunk said:

Not sure how denying AGW so as to avoid taking on the huge task of transitioning away from fossil fuels is having a backbone.

I like how he appears to be a believer in the solar-driven ice age ahoy idea though - nothing at all convenient and self-serving about that of course.

He's clearly of the same stripe as australian oil/mining geologist (and like Roberts a One Nation candidate) David Archibald who back in the noughties predicted massive solar-driven global cooling by 2020 (promoted on these pages by guess who!). Guess what - it never happened and global temps went in the opposite direction. Oh well that non-physics based cycle idea didn't work - but there's still plenty of eager to believe suckers around so let's ply it again!

Edited by kerplunk on Tuesday 2nd March 02:55

There's plenty of predictions of solar cooling ahead, obviously predicting timescales isn't easy and I think many underestimated the solar lag to climate 10-15 years ago. When you weigh it up, that's not a patch on all the failed warm side predictions though. There's no way warmists 15 years ago would have predicted or remotely believed the extreme low temperatures of this winter.

One thing's certain, now is not the time to be investing in solar and wind, with the potential for bitter winters ahead and increased energy demand, what a foolish policy which will cost lives. I don't trust politicians at all when it comes to keeping the lights on over then next few decades. Potential disaster in the making.

[kerplunk]

deeps said:

kerplunk said:

Not sure how denying AGW so as to avoid taking on the huge task of transitioning away from fossil fuels is having a backbone.

I like how he appears to be a believer in the solar-driven ice age ahoy idea though - nothing at all convenient and self-serving about that of course.

He's clearly of the same stripe as australian oil/mining geologist (and like Roberts a One Nation candidate) David Archibald who back in the noughties predicted massive solar-driven global cooling by 2020 (promoted on these pages by guess who!). Guess what - it never happened and global temps went in the opposite direction. Oh well that non-physics based cycle idea didn't work - but there's still plenty of eager to believe suckers around so let's ply it again!

Edited by kerplunk on Tuesday 2nd March 02:55

There's plenty of predictions of solar cooling ahead, obviously predicting timescales isn't easy and I think many underestimated the solar lag to climate 10-15 years ago. When you weigh it up, that's not a patch on all the failed warm side predictions though. There's no way warmists 15 years ago would have predicted or remotely believed the extreme low temperatures of this winter.

One thing's certain, now is not the time to be investing in solar and wind, with the potential for bitter winters ahead and increased energy demand, what a foolish policy which will cost lives. I don't trust politicians at all when it comes to keeping the lights on over then next few decades. Potential disaster in the making.

Speaking of eager to believe suckers...

[kerplunk]

David Archibald's failed global cooling predictions were promoted on these pages by turbobloke of course, and were based on the pattern-seeking work of one Theodor Landscheidt, but for some reason turbobloke has been shy about sharing the full breadth of Landscheidt's amazing 'science'

Get an eyeful of this lot!

http://bourabai.kz/landscheidt/consider.htm

I also don't recall turbobloke ever telling us that Landscheidt's prediction of solar-driven global cooling starting around 2012 was preceded by a failed prediction by Landscheidt (in 1981) of solar driven cooling beginning in 1990. Oh well the 79yr cycle didn't work - let's try 100! 30 years now of failed cyclo-mania cooling predictions!

http://bourabai.kz/landscheidt/swinging.htm

deeps said:

When you weigh it up, that's not a patch on all the failed warm side predictions though.

fk me

Edited by kerplunk on Tuesday 2nd March 04:00

[Randy Winkman]

deeps said:

kerplunk said:

Not sure how denying AGW so as to avoid taking on the huge task of transitioning away from fossil fuels is having a backbone.

I like how he appears to be a believer in the solar-driven ice age ahoy idea though - nothing at all convenient and self-serving about that of course.

He's clearly of the same stripe as australian oil/mining geologist (and like Roberts a One Nation candidate) David Archibald who back in the noughties predicted massive solar-driven global cooling by 2020 (promoted on these pages by guess who!). Guess what - it never happened and global temps went in the opposite direction. Oh well that non-physics based cycle idea didn't work - but there's still plenty of eager to believe suckers around so let's ply it again!

Edited by kerplunk on Tuesday 2nd March 02:55

There's plenty of predictions of solar cooling ahead, obviously predicting timescales isn't easy and I think many underestimated the solar lag to climate 10-15 years ago. When you weigh it up, that's not a patch on all the failed warm side predictions though. There's no way warmists 15 years ago would have predicted or remotely believed the extreme low temperatures of this winter.

One thing's certain, now is not the time to be investing in solar and wind, with the potential for bitter winters ahead and increased energy demand, what a foolish policy which will cost lives. I don't trust politicians at all when it comes to keeping the lights on over then next few decades. Potential disaster in the making.

Don't you think there's a danger in getting a bit carried away about the cold weather earlier this winter? It's been positively balmy for a couple for weeks now in SE London and for today the BBC forecast for Inverness says 6 degrees, rising to 8 for the weekend. Where are the extreme low temperatures now?

[robinessex]

ATG said:

From memory, steel production produces something like 8% of global CO2 emissions making it one of the most CO2y activities we collectively undertake.

Bitcoin's energy consumption 'equals that of Switzerland'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-48853230

Bitcoin uses as much energy as the whole of Switzerland, a new online tool from the University of Cambridge shows.
The tool makes it easier to see how the crypto-currency network's energy usage compares with other entities.
However, one expert argued that it was the crypto-currency's carbon footprint that really mattered.
Currently, the tool estimates that Bitcoin is using around seven gigawatts of electricity, equal to 0.21% of the world's supply.
That is as much power as would be generated by seven Dungeness nuclear power plants at once.
Over the course of a year, this equates to roughly the same power consumption as Switzerland....continues

[durbster]

Randy Winkman said:

deeps said:

kerplunk said:

Not sure how denying AGW so as to avoid taking on the huge task of transitioning away from fossil fuels is having a backbone.

I like how he appears to be a believer in the solar-driven ice age ahoy idea though - nothing at all convenient and self-serving about that of course.

He's clearly of the same stripe as australian oil/mining geologist (and like Roberts a One Nation candidate) David Archibald who back in the noughties predicted massive solar-driven global cooling by 2020 (promoted on these pages by guess who!). Guess what - it never happened and global temps went in the opposite direction. Oh well that non-physics based cycle idea didn't work - but there's still plenty of eager to believe suckers around so let's ply it again!

Edited by kerplunk on Tuesday 2nd March 02:55

There's plenty of predictions of solar cooling ahead, obviously predicting timescales isn't easy and I think many underestimated the solar lag to climate 10-15 years ago. When you weigh it up, that's not a patch on all the failed warm side predictions though. There's no way warmists 15 years ago would have predicted or remotely believed the extreme low temperatures of this winter.

One thing's certain, now is not the time to be investing in solar and wind, with the potential for bitter winters ahead and increased energy demand, what a foolish policy which will cost lives. I don't trust politicians at all when it comes to keeping the lights on over then next few decades. Potential disaster in the making.

Don't you think there's a danger in getting a bit carried away about the cold weather earlier this winter? It's been positively balmy for a couple for weeks now in SE London and for today the BBC forecast for Inverness says 6 degrees, rising to 8 for the weekend. Where are the extreme low temperatures now?

Happens every winter on this thread. When it snows, they are falling over themselves to post but when we are all out walking in t-shirts a couple of weeks later, total silence.

They spend the whole year complaining about references to record warm events because it's just weather and nothing to do with climate change, except when there's a cold spell in winter when suddenly it's absolutely relevant to the thread. You can set your watch by it

[robinessex]

durbster said:

"when we are all out walking in t-shirts a couple of weeks later, total silence."

That's because it's called summer when the weather gets warmer. Remember it?

[zygalski]

With your typical razor-sharp anayltical skills, you've completely missed the point yet again, Rob.

You've already found your niche role in the whole climate change debate. You're much better at copying and pasting from Beeb links. Best stick with that.

[durbster]

robinessex said:

durbster said:

"when we are all out walking in t-shirts a couple of weeks later, total silence."

That's because it's called summer when the weather gets warmer. Remember it?

Summer? I'm pretty sure it was still winter when it was 17 degrees last weekend.

[robinessex]

zygalski said:

With your typical razor-sharp anayltical skills, you've completely missed the point yet again, Rob.

You've already found your niche role in the whole climate change debate. You're much better at copying and pasting from Beeb links. Best stick with that.

Not so good on wit and repartee then, are you?

[robinessex]

One Hundred Years of Climate... Change?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwIHCXjJxr8

[durbster]

robinessex said:

One Hundred Years of Climate... Change?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwIHCXjJxr8

To save anyone clicking, it's another one of those insane YouTube conspiracy theory channels.

robinessex, why do you demand people respond to your posts and then completely ignore when they do?

[robinessex]

durbster said:

robinessex said:

One Hundred Years of Climate... Change?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwIHCXjJxr8

To save anyone clicking, it's another one of those insane YouTube conspiracy theory channels.

robinessex, why do you demand people respond to your posts and then completely ignore when they do?

Award-Winning Dr. Lennart Bengtsson, formerly of UN IPCC: 'We Are Creating Great Anxiety Without It Being Justified...there are no indications that the warming is so severe that we need to panic...The warming we have had the last a 100 years is so small that if we didn't have had meteorologists and climatologists to measure it we wouldn't have noticed it at all.'

[durbster]

robinessex said:

durbster said:

robinessex said:

One Hundred Years of Climate... Change?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwIHCXjJxr8

To save anyone clicking, it's another one of those insane YouTube conspiracy theory channels.

robinessex, why do you demand people respond to your posts and then completely ignore when they do?

Award-Winning Dr. Lennart Bengtsson, formerly of UN IPCC: 'We Are Creating Great Anxiety Without It Being Justified...there are no indications that the warming is so severe that we need to panic...The warming we have had the last a 100 years is so small that if we didn't have had meteorologists and climatologists to measure it we wouldn't have noticed it at all.'

I mean, you lose every single argument here and everything you post is demonstrably wrong. Often embarrassingly wrong.

But you come back day-after-day to post again. Why?