WHO IS BEHIND THIS CHANGE IN ENERGY POLICY UPON THE FREE WORLD ? ITS THE COMMUNIST ORDER OF THE UNITED NATIONS, CHINA, RUSSIA, THE US DEEP STATE, WALL STREET, HOLLYWOOD, AND THE GLOBALISTS. THE GOAL IS TO KILL MOST OF HUMANITY AND TO ELIMINATE PRIVATE WEALTH AND OWNERSHIP FOR THOSE THAT REMAIN. AS THE US FALLS DEEPER INTO COMMUNIST RULE BY TYRANNY, AMERICANS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO REVOLT BY WARFARE IF THEY ARE TO SAVE AMERICA AND RETAIN THEIR LIBERTIES.
The beauty of upstate New York outside of buffalo and the Catskills near Binghamton has been destroyed by giant wind monsters crushing the landscape. It’s horrifying
I cross posted this story because I was shocked at how little has been done world-wide to deal with human-created climate change which is a scientific reality. I respect the facts within the article but apparently in a completely opposite way intended by its author and taken by most of the readers' comments that follow. I'm wondering, is the author and the majority of his readers' attitude one of: "Oil is wonderful, climate change is real but f*** it anyway: smash your bottles on the gravestone and let the devil take tomorrow" or "Oil is wonderful and human-caused climate change is bogus, so keep the oil burning"? Signed, Curious from California
That's hard to answer, because it's hard to take climate change seriously at all, when the people most concerned about it, can't speak coherently about energy. I had an Aunt once who thought the name of alfalfa sprouts was "Alpha" sprouts. She kept telling me how good alpha sprouts were, and how I should eat more. She's right, but do I listen to her? Maybe not.
People shrieking about climate change are intellectually lazy. That is the main problem that I see. They can't get the story straight, and just repeat stuff they half understand, mixing up all the details. Then get angry when you try and correct them.
I think climate change is a problem, we need to address, and step one is getting all the people who don't understand climate change or energy out of the way, so we can make good decisions. That isn't happening, and because of that progress is impossible. Look at the opposition to nuclear power and hydroelectric dams - almost a 1:1 parity with people concerned about climate change. How can take them seriously?
Well said . s humans continue their “ progress “, more and more energy will be needed. The very costly, and thus far very ineffective, solution has been to battle “ climate” change, that 2 degree uptick in global average temperatures over the last 150 years. It’s all virtue signaling by crass politicians who know better.
Climate change is the tip of the catastrophe created by human development. Loss of many species, ecosystems, and millions of years of hard fought biodiversity is our legacy.
In 10 years, energy needs will be greater, biodiversity will have shrunk further; the plastic ocean the size of Texas floating in the Pacific will be larger. And yes, we will continue in our blind ignorance. And we will have spent $20 trillion for nothing.
California already gets its electric energy from sun and wind during daytime. Try some of those charts. It may change your narrative.
Lying by omission is still lying. We are in a transition, but it is much slower than it should be, and it is not done by all they should do it (China and India, as you note).
Where is your lie? That the Biden admin plan is all a “hype.”
Solar generation increased 24.1 percent (9,492 GWh) to 48,950 GWh in 2022 from 39,458 GWh in 2021. Renewable and non-GHG (nuclear and large hydroelectric) resources accounted for 54.2 percent of total generation, compared to 52.1 percent in 2021. Natural gas fueled another 42%.[2022 data.]
Robert - thanks for your great coverage of the energy markets in particular the electric grid.
Can you comment (or a forthcoming article) on the accompanying grid buildouts for these various countries since it is so hard to do. Your previous documentary (Juice 2019) highlighted corruption in power delivery systems with rampant stolen electricity as one problem. These large power plants leverage economies of scale but also require a large and economically stable grid to deliver the power...
Earth is cooler with the atmosphere, water vapor, 30% albedo not warmer.
Ubiquitous GHE heat balance graphics use bad math & badder physics.
The kinetic heat transfer modes of the contiguous atmospheric molecules render impossible a BB surface upwelling and looping “extra” LWIR energy for the GHE.
Consensus science has a well-documented history of being wrong & abusing those who dared to challenge it. (Bruno, drawn & quartered)
GHE & CAGW are wrong so alarmists resort to fear mongering, lies, lawsuits, censorship & violence.
Induction and natural gas stove top burners deliver almost all of their heat to the point-of-use pots or pans.
Converting NG to electricity loses 70% up the stack of a combustion turbine and 20% up the stack & 50 % out the condenser of a steam turbine.
With station auxiliaries and transmission losses much less than 30% of the converted NG heat makes it to the stove top.
Electricfication with heat pumps and induction stove tops is really^4 dumb.
But what else should we expect with a snake oil hustle from the climate change scam?
Honest question, what evidence would convince you of the existence of climate change? And consider also whether that sufficient weight of evidence would mean it's already too late to do anything
"As a journalist focused on energy and power systems, my affiliation is with the math and the physics."
Unfortunately, you seem to be the only one (with a few other Substack exceptions) with a focus or even passing acquaintance with math and physics.
I so often hear or read news stories about which if the "journalist" had used the least amount of math and fact looking-up skills, he or she would have realized the story was lies. These days they seem to just parrot press releases from NGOs.
There are dedicated CAGW / Climate Crisis propaganda aggregators such as "Covering Climate Now" that force-feed the lazy msm 'journalists' all around the world.
Goebbels would be ecstatic about the success of his legacy -
"A lie told once remains a lie but a lie told a thousand times becomes the truth."
As Shellenberger writes in "Apocalypse Never", as an economy becomes more technologically advanced it moves from burning dung and wood to coal and oil to natural gas to uranium. Energy dilute to energy dense. Simples!
China and India are keen to avoid famine methinks so that would be a big motivator of their ramp up of coal fired power. Plus it's cheaper currently than nuclear; just a pity about the mercury, particulate and sulfur in the air and water. Trade-offs are the way of life.
"Why won't mom and Dad listen to me?!" screamed the child throwing a tantrum in the supermarket.
Because a) you're a child, and emotionally and intellectually incapable of making good decisions and b) you're causing a scene.
But enough about climate change activists....
Climate change is not the issue.
Man-caused GHE climate change is the issue.
There is no GHE and mankind's CO2 does nothing to the terrestrial heat balance.
Short term transient weather is not climate.
If you think CO2 causes all these weather issues the burden of proof is on you.
Correlation is not cause.
Appealing to authority is not evidence.
WHO IS BEHIND THIS CHANGE IN ENERGY POLICY UPON THE FREE WORLD ? ITS THE COMMUNIST ORDER OF THE UNITED NATIONS, CHINA, RUSSIA, THE US DEEP STATE, WALL STREET, HOLLYWOOD, AND THE GLOBALISTS. THE GOAL IS TO KILL MOST OF HUMANITY AND TO ELIMINATE PRIVATE WEALTH AND OWNERSHIP FOR THOSE THAT REMAIN. AS THE US FALLS DEEPER INTO COMMUNIST RULE BY TYRANNY, AMERICANS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO REVOLT BY WARFARE IF THEY ARE TO SAVE AMERICA AND RETAIN THEIR LIBERTIES.
The Woozle Effect.
I must remember that.
The beauty of upstate New York outside of buffalo and the Catskills near Binghamton has been destroyed by giant wind monsters crushing the landscape. It’s horrifying
I cross posted this story because I was shocked at how little has been done world-wide to deal with human-created climate change which is a scientific reality. I respect the facts within the article but apparently in a completely opposite way intended by its author and taken by most of the readers' comments that follow. I'm wondering, is the author and the majority of his readers' attitude one of: "Oil is wonderful, climate change is real but f*** it anyway: smash your bottles on the gravestone and let the devil take tomorrow" or "Oil is wonderful and human-caused climate change is bogus, so keep the oil burning"? Signed, Curious from California
That's hard to answer, because it's hard to take climate change seriously at all, when the people most concerned about it, can't speak coherently about energy. I had an Aunt once who thought the name of alfalfa sprouts was "Alpha" sprouts. She kept telling me how good alpha sprouts were, and how I should eat more. She's right, but do I listen to her? Maybe not.
People shrieking about climate change are intellectually lazy. That is the main problem that I see. They can't get the story straight, and just repeat stuff they half understand, mixing up all the details. Then get angry when you try and correct them.
I think climate change is a problem, we need to address, and step one is getting all the people who don't understand climate change or energy out of the way, so we can make good decisions. That isn't happening, and because of that progress is impossible. Look at the opposition to nuclear power and hydroelectric dams - almost a 1:1 parity with people concerned about climate change. How can take them seriously?
We could always stop drilling for mineral oil and go back to killing whales.
Oh wait, the offshore wind farms are already doing that . . .
No, actually there isn’t any evidence of that at this time. The two main causes of death for whales are encounters with boats and fishnets and climate change. https://www.wgbh.org/news/local/2024-04-01/the-complicated-truths-about-offshore-wind-and-right-whales
bullshit.
Car and truck ads are staples for TV sports. Why is *every* one of them on the hockey broadcasts for an EV?
Well said . s humans continue their “ progress “, more and more energy will be needed. The very costly, and thus far very ineffective, solution has been to battle “ climate” change, that 2 degree uptick in global average temperatures over the last 150 years. It’s all virtue signaling by crass politicians who know better.
Climate change is the tip of the catastrophe created by human development. Loss of many species, ecosystems, and millions of years of hard fought biodiversity is our legacy.
In 10 years, energy needs will be greater, biodiversity will have shrunk further; the plastic ocean the size of Texas floating in the Pacific will be larger. And yes, we will continue in our blind ignorance. And we will have spent $20 trillion for nothing.
Nuclear and hydropower power plus some new sources of energy we haven’t perfected yet
California already gets its electric energy from sun and wind during daytime. Try some of those charts. It may change your narrative.
Lying by omission is still lying. We are in a transition, but it is much slower than it should be, and it is not done by all they should do it (China and India, as you note).
Where is your lie? That the Biden admin plan is all a “hype.”
Solar generation increased 24.1 percent (9,492 GWh) to 48,950 GWh in 2022 from 39,458 GWh in 2021. Renewable and non-GHG (nuclear and large hydroelectric) resources accounted for 54.2 percent of total generation, compared to 52.1 percent in 2021. Natural gas fueled another 42%.[2022 data.]
May need to reconsider your source... Here are California's own stats. Doubtful they changed much between 2021 and 2024.
https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2021-total-system-electric-generation
What's the lie? Check out this graph for California. Is it a lie too?
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:California_Electricity_Sources.png
How about having data to 2023 instead of wikimedia to 2018.. https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/styles/content_image/public/2024-05/Generation.png?itok=9Y5zVjdJ
Robert - thanks for your great coverage of the energy markets in particular the electric grid.
Can you comment (or a forthcoming article) on the accompanying grid buildouts for these various countries since it is so hard to do. Your previous documentary (Juice 2019) highlighted corruption in power delivery systems with rampant stolen electricity as one problem. These large power plants leverage economies of scale but also require a large and economically stable grid to deliver the power...
thanks
Something someone noted to me: the Cartel will never pollute or geoengineer to the point it could harm them and their family…
Earth is cooler with the atmosphere, water vapor, 30% albedo not warmer.
Ubiquitous GHE heat balance graphics use bad math & badder physics.
The kinetic heat transfer modes of the contiguous atmospheric molecules render impossible a BB surface upwelling and looping “extra” LWIR energy for the GHE.
Consensus science has a well-documented history of being wrong & abusing those who dared to challenge it. (Bruno, drawn & quartered)
GHE & CAGW are wrong so alarmists resort to fear mongering, lies, lawsuits, censorship & violence.
Induction and natural gas stove top burners deliver almost all of their heat to the point-of-use pots or pans.
Converting NG to electricity loses 70% up the stack of a combustion turbine and 20% up the stack & 50 % out the condenser of a steam turbine.
With station auxiliaries and transmission losses much less than 30% of the converted NG heat makes it to the stove top.
Electricfication with heat pumps and induction stove tops is really^4 dumb.
But what else should we expect with a snake oil hustle from the climate change scam?
Honest question, what evidence would convince you of the existence of climate change? And consider also whether that sufficient weight of evidence would mean it's already too late to do anything
We need honest science not fear mongering fraud!
Outstanding and one of your best presentations. Yes indeed, the math and physic just do not provide for us to continue living our high quality of life and depend on un-reliable, un-Dispatchable sources of electricity as we "Electrify Everything" It is nuts! Here is my take on the unreasonableness of Net-Zero Carbon: http://dickstormprobizblog.org/2024/01/11/facing-the-hard-truths-of-energy-part-1-79-quadrillion-btusthe-enormity-of-the-fossil-energy-systems-providing-sustainable-lives/
"As a journalist focused on energy and power systems, my affiliation is with the math and the physics."
Unfortunately, you seem to be the only one (with a few other Substack exceptions) with a focus or even passing acquaintance with math and physics.
I so often hear or read news stories about which if the "journalist" had used the least amount of math and fact looking-up skills, he or she would have realized the story was lies. These days they seem to just parrot press releases from NGOs.
There are dedicated CAGW / Climate Crisis propaganda aggregators such as "Covering Climate Now" that force-feed the lazy msm 'journalists' all around the world.
Goebbels would be ecstatic about the success of his legacy -
"A lie told once remains a lie but a lie told a thousand times becomes the truth."
As Shellenberger writes in "Apocalypse Never", as an economy becomes more technologically advanced it moves from burning dung and wood to coal and oil to natural gas to uranium. Energy dilute to energy dense. Simples!
China and India are keen to avoid famine methinks so that would be a big motivator of their ramp up of coal fired power. Plus it's cheaper currently than nuclear; just a pity about the mercury, particulate and sulfur in the air and water. Trade-offs are the way of life.
Looking forward to reading the envirotard comments below. CAN'T WAIT!