Skip to content

Saudi in 10 GW renewables plan but oil and gas ‘needed for decades’

January 19, 2017
tags:

By Paul Homewood

 

image

http://www.powerengineeringint.com/articles/2017/01/saudi-in-10-gw-renewables-plan-but-oil-and-gas-needed-for-decades.html?cmpid=enl_pei_peidigest_2016-01-19

 

The Saudis inject a bit of honesty into the debate:

 

PEI report:

Saudi Arabia’s first round of renewable energy tenders are expected to deliver up $50bn by 2032 to bankroll 10 GW of clean energy, the country’s energy minister announced yesterday.

However, Khaled Al-Falih also used the stage at Abu Dhabi Sustainability Week to stress that oil and gas had a role to play in the global clean energy narrative.

And he was adamant that without oil and gas being utilised alongside renewables, “we will have a shock to the global economy”.

Read more…

BBC Ignore The Satellite Record

January 18, 2017
tags:

By Paul Homewood 

 

image

Temperature data for 2016 shows it is likely to have edged ahead of 2015 as the world’s warmest year.

Data from Nasa and the UK Met Office shows temperatures were about 0.07 degrees Celsius above the 2015 mark.

Although the Met Office increase was within the margin of error, Nasa says that 2016 was the third year in a row to break the record.

The El Niño weather phenomenon played a role, say scientists, but the main factor was human emissions of CO2.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-38652746

 

There must be something wrong with my old eyes, as I can’t seem to find any mention of the satellite record, which shows no such thing.

To recap, both UAH and RSS say that atmospheric temperatures for 2016 statistically tied with 1998, at just 0.02C higher.

Neither 2014 or 2015 were anywhere near being a record.

 

image_thumb8

http://www.nsstc.uah.edu/climate/

 

image_thumb21

http://data.remss.com/msu/monthly_time_series/RSS_Monthly_MSU_AMSU_Channel_TLT_Anomalies_Land_and_Ocean_v03_3.txt

 

Satellite measurements of global temperatures are regarded as much more comprehensive, accurate and unaffected by UHI, as Roy Spencer explained in 2014.

 

The BBC shows the map provided by NOAA, with lots of red on it to convince us how hot it has been.

 

_93646662_fe098573-c3a8-4186-8183-4a4d68bfd590

 

 

However, if they were more honest, they might have showed the Land-Only map, which underlines the fact that most of the world’s land mass has no thermometer coverage at all.

 

201601-201612

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-38652746

 

Of course, there might be good reasons why the satellite record has diverged from the surface data in recent years, but is it not the job of the BBC to provide us with all the facts, and not just the ones that suit its political agenda?

Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon and Baseload Tidal Generation in the UK

January 18, 2017

By Paul Homewood

 

Tidal lagoon

The project would see energy produced for 14 out of every 24 hours, according to TLP

 

We are well aware of the problems of intermittency with the proposed tidal lagoon at Swansea Bay. Even the developers, TLP, admit it can only supply power for 14 hours a day.

But they also propose to build a chain of other lagoons, which they claim overcome this problem because of differences in high tide times around the coast.

Euan Mearns has tested this claim by carrying out a detailed study of tides at the sites likely to be developed. His verdict is that even with staggered tide times, the issue of intermittency remains, with four spikes separated by four periods of zero production every day.

He writes:

 

Read more…

Claims Of More Extreme Rain In Australia Disproved By Facts

January 17, 2017
tags:

By Paul Homewood 

 

More rain on the horizon as climate change affects Australia, study finds

Australians will need to batten down the hatches with more intense rain storms predicted as a result of higher humidity driven by a rise in global temperatures.

New findings from the ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science, published in Nature Climate Change on Tuesday, reveal that a two-degree rise in average global temperatures would lead to a 10-30 per cent increase in extreme downpours.

The study’s authors predict that while some parts of the continent will become wetter, others will experience increasing drought.

Steve Sherwood, a professor at the Climate Change Research Centre at the University of NSW who contributed to the research, said global warming would have a clear impact on rainfall.

“There is no chance that rainfall in Australia will remain the same as the climate warms,” he said.

“With two degrees of global warming, Australia is stuck with either more aridity, much heavier extreme rains, or some combination of the two.

https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2017/01/17/australia-will-be-wetterdrieror-a-bit-of-both/

 

We had a good laugh at this latest piece of junk science earlier, but just what have been the trends in extreme precipitation in Australia?

Read more…

Earth Hour In 3D: Dim, Dark and Dopey–Tony Thomas

January 17, 2017

By Paul Homewood

 

image

http://quadrant.org.au/opinion/doomed-planet/2017/01/earth-hour-3d-dim-dark-dopey/

 

Tony Thomas has an excellent essay over at Quadrant about the upcoming Earth Hour:

 

World Wide Fund for Nature (Australia) is gearing up for its tenth idiotic Earth Hour at 8.30pm on Saturday, March 25. Once again it will be urging people to turn off lights  (but not fridges, freezers, TVs, dishwashers, computers, aircons and smart-phones). If WWF is aware that satellite data shows no atmospheric warming for the past 18 years, that information figures nowhere in its literature.

Read more…

100 Climate Scientists Write To PM

January 17, 2017

By Paul Homewood

 

image

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-38640413

 

There is said to be five stages of grief – denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance.

It appears as if climate scientists have now got to stage three.

From the BBC:

 

Donald Trump and his cabinet accept far more of the research on climate change than many of their political supporters, say British scientists.

UK researchers say Mr Trump’s team acknowledge key concepts such as the relationship between fossil fuels and rising temperatures.

They are among a group of 100 scientists urging the Prime Minister to push the President-elect on climate.

Mr Trump has previously pledged to pull the US out of the Paris climate deal.

Evolving position

Throughout the presidential election campaign, Donald Trump made clear that the Paris agreement was "bad for US business".

He said the pact allows "foreign bureaucrats control over how much energy we use".

Since winning the White House, Mr Trump has moderated his view somewhat, saying he now has an "open mind" on US involvement in the pact.

Many environmentalists have railed against his nominations for key posts, accusing them of denying or minimising climate science. These include Scott Pruitt as head of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and former Exxon Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson as Secretary of State.

Speaking to the media, UK climate experts said there were reasons for hope that the pro-active climate change agenda adopted by President Obama would survive under President Trump.

"It is clear that they actually accept a great deal more of the science of human influence on climate than they are prepared to let on," said Prof Myles Allen from the University of Oxford.

"They are acknowledging there is a link, there is a potential problem and that’s already more than enough to justify continuing the relatively modest goals of both the Paris agreement and Clean Power Plan."

At odds with the base

Prof Allen believes that the statements of the transition team to date are far removed from the views expressed by their grassroots supporters.

"We’re in a situation where the foot soldiers of denial are well behind their generals," he told reporters.

Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Environmental campaigners have taken to the streets to oppose some of Trump’s cabinet nominations

"If the blue collar voter that Trump is so concerned about is to change their position to support climate action they are going to have to understand that it isn’t a Chinese hoax plot, and they are going to have to understand that even the people they vote for don’t believe that either."

Prof Allen was among a group of 100 academics who have written to the Prime Minister asking that she push Mr Trump to accept climate science and the global deal that was negotiated in Paris at the end of 2015.

"We urge you, as Prime Minister, to use the United Kingdom’s special relationship with the United States, as well as international fora such as the G7 and G20, to press President-Elect Trump and his administration to acknowledge the scientific evidence about the risks of climate change, to continue to support international action to counter climate change, including the Paris Agreement, and to maintain support for world class research and data-gathering on climate change in the United States," the letter states.

Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Trump promised that he would "cancel" the Paris agreement while campaigning for office

Other signatories are hopeful that the new President’s practical approach may yet ensure that climate friendly policies are enacted.

"Trump is not as idealistic as several climate deniers are. He has changed his mind on several topics so far," said Prof Corinne Le Quere from the University of East Anglia.

"He has said he is going to invest in infrastructure, he hasn’t said what exactly he is going to do.

"My feeling is that he is actually more influence-able than we think, I would hate to see him pushed in a corner and I would want to see sectors of society trying to influence and push him in the direction where he actually takes the risks of climate change seriously."

British researchers believe that the anti-climate science stance of populist movements around the world shows that scientists must urgently change their own message to appeal to a broader audience.

"For too long the climate change discussion has been about things that will happen in 100 years time," said Prof Allen.

"For economically insecure people, statements about what might happen in 100 years time they just don’t care about, because they know these kind of predictions have been proved wrong in the past and will be in the future."

"Better science is not the crucial thing here. It’s this realisation that the people primarily being affected by climate change are the poor and the people benefitting are the extremely wealthy."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-38640413

 

Prof Allen believes, as politicians often do, that the only thing that climate science has got wrong is the message.

In fact most people are much less gullible than he seems to think. They see through the lies and cheating, the apocalyptic forecasts that never happen, the trough guzzling scientists, the renewable scamsters and the rest of this crooked industry.

I have one word of advice for him – start telling the truth.

 

 

FOOTNOTE

Shub Niggurath has discovered that the letter appears to have come from our old friend Bob Ward, who is paid to spread global warming propaganda.

Whether Ward actually wrote it we don’t know, but he is evidently at the heart of it.

Shub comments:

 

Not unexpectedly, contained within was the usual combination of admonishments, pleas for funding and veiled threats one has come to expect from climate science nowadays, and sadly enough from the science establishment in general. The tone is dismally poor and presumptuous, a familiarity to anyone associated with the climate debate.

What’s more, Ward signed on the letter himself though he is no scientist. That close to a hundred professors and leaders in UK climate science would sign off on such a poor letter can at best mean they did not read its contents. At worst, they actively worked with an activist Ward and are happy to be tarred by his political brush.

In large part, letter campaigns do not befit science. These types of documents seem to represent the views of small cliques in any discipline, the kind that will not do science and instead spend time in activism. Such letters, usually on a politically sensitive topic, then get passed around head to head and people simply sign off to avoid confrontation, keep the peace and be seen as doing the right thing. Their prestige is used to score political points or ride the news cycle.

https://nigguraths.wordpress.com/2017/01/16/letter-to-british-pm-from-climate-scientists-authored-by-bob-ward/

Australia Will Be Wetter/Drier/Or A Bit Of Both

January 17, 2017

By Paul Homewood

 

image

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/01/16/aussie-climate-scientist-predicts-rainfall-will-change/comment-page-1/#comment-2399081

 

Eric Worrall at WUWT brings us the latest piece of junk science, this time from Steve Sherwood.

Sherwood after much taxpayer funded study concludes that Australia may see more rainfall in the future, less rainfall in the future, or a combination of the two.

 

More rain on the horizon as climate change affects Australia, study finds

Australians will need to batten down the hatches with more intense rain storms predicted as a result of higher humidity driven by a rise in global temperatures.

New findings from the ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science, published in Nature Climate Change on Tuesday, reveal that a two-degree rise in average global temperatures would lead to a 10-30 per cent increase in extreme downpours.

The study’s authors predict that while some parts of the continent will become wetter, others will experience increasing drought.

Steve Sherwood, a professor at the Climate Change Research Centre at the University of NSW who contributed to the research, said global warming would have a clear impact on rainfall.

“There is no chance that rainfall in Australia will remain the same as the climate warms,” he said.

“With two degrees of global warming, Australia is stuck with either more aridity, much heavier extreme rains, or some combination of the two.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/01/16/aussie-climate-scientist-predicts-rainfall-will-change/comment-page-1/#comment-2399081

 

He must have taken a leaf out of Mark Carney’s book! Mystic Mark’s crystal ball has apparently told him that

“the next interest rate move could be either up or down”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38644963?SThisFB

 

Truly we are in the hands of fools!

Prince Charles & The Uckfield Floods

January 16, 2017

By Paul Homewood

 

93575371_climatechangebook2_thumb

https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2017/01/16/prince-charles-writes-book-on-climate-change/

 

We await with gleeful anticipation what dreadful nonsense Prince Charles will include in his new book for the Ladybird series.

But if the front cover is the best example of the perils of climate change he can come up with, he might as well not have wasted his time!

 

Read more…

Global “clean” energy spending falls 18% in 2016

January 16, 2017

By Paul Homewood

 

image

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/global-clean-energy-spending-drops-18-per-cent-environment-populist-brexit-donald-trump-climate-a7525386.html

 

It is not clear why Trump, only elected in November, or Brexit, which has not happened yet or had any impact at all on UK energy policies, have had any effect on global investment in renewable. But it is the failed Independent that we are talking about here!

 

Global investments in renewable power dropped the most on record in 2016 as demand in China and Japan faltered.

Worldwide spending on clean energy fell 18 percent from 2015’s record high to $287.5 billion, according to a report Thursday by Bloomberg New Energy Finance. It was the first decline since 2013 and comes as environmental policies face pressure from populist movements that have fuelled the rise of Donald Trump, the UK Independence Party and others.

Read more…

Green Energy Plant Blamed After 1,000 Fish Die At One Of Britain’s Best-Loved Salmon And Trout Rivers

January 16, 2017
tags:

By Paul Homewood

 

image

http://www.thegwpf.com/green-energy-plant-blamed-after-1000-fish-die-at-one-of-britains-best-loved-salmon-and-trout-rivers/

 

From GWPF:

 

A supposedly ‘green’ power plant has been blamed for killing more than 1,000 fish on one of Britain’s best-loved salmon and trout rivers.

Officials are investigating if a fault caused hundreds of thousands of gallons of toxic waste to be discharged from an anaerobic digester and into the picturesque River Teifi in West Wales, killing every single fish along an eight-mile stretch.

Two weeks ago The Mail on Sunday highlighted the growing risk to the environment posed by the ‘green guzzlers’, which convert slurry from dairy herds into methane.

 

They have been responsible for 12 serious pollution incidents since 2015, but the contamination of the River Teifi just before Christmas could be the worst yet, according to anglers and environmentalists.

Natural Resources Wales confirmed more than 1,000 fish carcasses had been counted following the spillage, and a source told The Mail on Sunday that investigators were focusing on an anaerobic digester in the area.

Local angler Steffan Jones said: ‘I don’t know what went wrong with the unit but clearly something did for so much effluent to have been discharged.

‘This is absolutely tragic.’

The farmers who own the plant have not responded to requests for comment.

Critics of anaerobic digesters claim there is not enough slurry and waste, so thousands of tons of feed, including maize, is used to fuel the digesters as farmers chase massive Government subsidies.

 

The full Mail story is here.

 

Government subsidies on anaerobic digesters and other bio schemes via the Renewable Heat Incentive scheme, all funded by taxpayers, will cost £5.4bn between now and 2021/22. This does not include subsidies for biomass generation for the likes of Drax, which are added onto electricity bills.