The Spectator UK, Matt Ridley writes unclean, not green useless alternative energy. The Global Wind Energy Council recently released its latest report, excitedly boasting that ‘the proliferation of wind energy into the global power market continues at a furious pace, after it was revealed that more than 54 gigawatts of clean renewable wind power was installed across the global market last year’. You might even think, …wind power is making a big contribution to world energy today. You would be wrong. Its contribution is still, after decades — nay centuries — of development, trivial to the point of irrelevance.… To the nearest whole number, what percentage of the world’s energy consumption was supplied by wind power in 2014, the last year for which there are reliable figures? Was it 20 per cent, 10 per cent or 5 per cent? None of the above: it was 0 per cent. That is to say, to the nearest whole number, there is still no wind power on Earth. but …together, wind and photovoltaic solar are supplying less than 1 per cent of global energy demand.… and Do not take refuge in the idea that wind turbines could become more efficient. There is a limit to how much energy you can extract from a moving fluid, the Betz limit, and wind turbines are already close to it. Their effectiveness (the load factor, to use the engineering term) is determined by the wind that is available, and that varies at its own sweet will from second to second, day to day, year to year.… finally, The point of running through these numbers is to demonstrate that it is utterly futile, on a priori grounds, even to think that wind power can make any significant contribution to world energy supply, let alone to emissions reductions, without ruining the planet. As the late David MacKay pointed out years back, the arithmetic is against such unreliable renewables.
It takes tons of fossil fuels to produce the tons of turbines and solar panels. Green energy is the most counterintuitive political, social and economic fantasy humankind has ever devised.
‘Let’s put this amount of energy in perspective. If we all turned off all our appliances and went and lived in caves, and then devoted every coal, nuclear, gas, hydro, wind and solar power plant to just heating the ocean, it would take a breathtaking 32,000 years to heat the ocean by just this 1˚C!
In short, our influence on our climate, even if we really tried, is miniscule!”
Trump meets with Princeton scientist who called ‘global warming’ fears ‘pure belief disguised as science’:
Princeton University physics professor Dr. Will Happer, an outspoken climate skeptic, who has authored 200 peer-reviewed scientific papers, has testified to the U.S. Senate that the Earth is currently in a ‘CO2 ‘famine.’ Happer explained to Congress in 2009: ”Warming and increased CO2 will be good for mankind…’CO2 is not a pollutant and it is not a poison and we should not corrupt the English language by depriving ‘pollutant’ and ‘poison’ of their original meaning,” Happer added.
In 2014, Happer ridiculed “global warming” fears. “The incredible list of supposed horrors that increasing CO2 will bring the world is pure belief disguised as science,” he noted. He also ripped the EPA’s climate policies in 2016, declaring: “
The EPA is just completely bonkers, CO2 will benefit the Earth.”
Happer has also directed his scientific ire at the United Nations, declaring that policies to combat “global warming” are “based on nonsense.” “Policies to slow CO2 emissions are really based on nonsense. We are being led down a false path. To call carbon dioxide a pollutant is really Orwellian. You are calling something a pollutant that we all produce. Where does that lead us eventually?,” he asked. (See:
Prominent Scientists Declare Climate Claims Ahead of UN Summit ‘Irrational’ – ‘Based On Nonsense’ – ‘Leading us down a false path’
Quiz for GW fans and fanatics (courtesy of Donna Quixote):
So to all of those devout members of the Church of Global Warming, answer these questions for me.
What is the optimum temperature, for all species, including man, to thrive?
What is the maximum population of humans that is acceptable?
What is the perfect combination of GHGs in the atmosphere??
What is the perfect level of humidity?
What is the optimum amount of annual rainfall, globally? For extra bonus points,
break it down by continent.
What is the perfect size for both polar ice caps?
What’s the optimum size for a glacier….at what point should it stop growing or shrinking?
What is the perfect ph level for every ocean, for all marine life, for all coral, for all marine algae and plant life to flourish?
What’s the optimum perfect sea level?
What is the maximum amount of volcanic ash and soot that can be shot into the atmosphere before it starts to affect the climate?
What is the maximum number of severe storms — hurricanes, typhoons, tornadoes — that you feel are acceptable? What’s the highest category allowed?
Tell all of us deniers what the absolute perfect climate is, so that no species ever goes extinct again, so that all flora and fauna flourish, so that we can tell the earth to stop changing her climate….something she’s done naturally for billions of years…..and stay at exactly the levels that you have decreed to be perfect for all life on planet earth.)
A great article from wattsupwiththat: London, 25 February: The GWPF has, for a long time, warned policymakers and the public that the leadership of the IPCC has been losing its scientific objectivity and has been adopting environmentalism as a missionary cause. The astonishing letter of resignation released yesterday by its outgoing chairman, RK Pachauri, drops all pretence to the contrary and proves that our concerns were valid.
The Global Warming Policy Foundation report here. Biggest fraud of these last 2 centuries.
Ontario’s Green Laws and policies are inspired by and founded on this massive fraud (which has made some of its advocates, millionaires).