Renewable energy is coming to an economic crossroads, one that could have dire unintended consequences for some of the most vulnerable populations – the poor and the elderly.
As renewable energy expands, activists around the world are calling for programs that would supplant conventional fuels – coal, oil and, to a lesser extent, natural gas – with renewable sources such as wind and solar.
Programs such as the misguided fossil fuel divestiture movement, ignore the costs that forcing a move away from fossil fuels imposes on those who are slowest to embrace the change. While there are benefits to diversifying our fuel portfolio, in its current form, the growing use of renewables requires a subsidy from fossil fuels.
Recent observations of the effects of a massive solar storm on the Earth’s atmosphere made by NASA using the SABER instrument on the TIMED satellite have very important implications for the two main classes of hypotheses backing the idea of catastrophic man-made global warming.
During this solar storm, gigantic quantities of energy were dumped into the Earth’s upper atmosphere by highly energetic particles. The SABER instrument measures the infrared emissions from the Earth’s upper atmosphere. The NASA measurements of those infrared emissions during the solar storm showed that 95% of the energy dumped into upper atmosphere was quickly re-emitted into space. There was no significant warming of the Earth’s surface.
European Union leaders announced they will be consolidating energy and environmental goals under a new commissioner, effectively axing the intergovernmental groups’ climate arm as green policies are making it harder for citizens to pay their power bills. “The EU is signalling a historical shift away from its green priority towards a new focus on economic recovery, competitiveness and energy cost,” Dr. Benny Peiser, director of the Global Warming Policy Forum, told The Daily Caller News Foundation. “This policy shift has been in the making for the last two years, but only now has Europe new leaders who are no longer obsessed with climate change,” said Peiser, who is based in the UK. --Michael Bastasch, The Daily Caller, 12 September 2014
Environmentalists from across the world are pressuring philanthropic foundations that help fund climate change projects to drop their investments in fossil fuels.
The environmentalists, all of whom have won major environmental honors, say they are targeting the foundations that handle billions of dollars in funding for climate change projects because those organizations likely are unaware that some of their finances are tied up in fossil fuels, which most scientists blame for causing global warming.
In Alice in Wonderland, by Lewis Carroll, Alice says she cannot believe impossible things. The Queen of Hearts is surprised: “When I was younger, I always did it for half an hour a day. Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.”
Therefore, suppose we compare two events:
Global warming advocates argue that the oceans are absorbing the extra heat that their computer models predicted, which has mysteriously vanished. The missing heat over the last 18 years has been going into the oceans.
Yet, the Arctic Sea Ice Cap aound the North Pole has grown by 43% since 2012. As confirmed by satellites from orbit, the Arctic ice pack has grown by 1.715 million square kilometers in the last two years, as reported in England’s Daily Mail. That is the size of the truly massive state of Alaska.
So, might we ask a question? Yes, you with your hand up.
CCD Editor's Note: So much for Branson putting his billions where his mouth his. He only put one-tenth of what he said he'd put into the development of green fuel for airliners. H/T to Raining Sky. From the Guardian:
Richard Branson has failed to deliver on his much-vaunted pledge to spend $3bn (£1.8bn) over a decade to develop a low carbon fuel.
Seven years into the pledge, Branson has paid out only a small fraction of the promised money – “well under $300m” – according to a new book by the writer and activist, Naomi Klein.
[Conservative MEP] Miguel Arias Canete, Spain’s former agriculture and environment minister, was nominated as the European Union’s next commissioner for climate and energy, becoming the first single supervisor of those two policy areas. The new commission will take office as energy policy is moving up the EU agenda amid a crisis in Ukraine, the transit country for around half of Russian natural gas to Europe, and the unrest in Middle East. --Ewa Krukowska, Bloomberg 10 September 2014
Jean-Claude Juncker’s decision to group EU commissioners into teams serving under a vice-president has been welcomed by some interest groups, and derided by others. Rumours of the intention to combine the climate and energy portfolios have been sparking alarm among environmentalists for weeks. But the elimination of a dedicated environment portfolio came as a genuine shock to green groups. The ‘Green 10’ – an alliance of European environmental NGOs – sent a letter to Juncker saying that his restructuring decisions suggest a “de-facto shutdown of EU environmental policymaking”. --Dave Keating, European Voice, 11 September 2014
Morano on Ezra Levant's 'The Source' on Sun News on September 8, 2014: 'There is a whole hodgepodge of nonsense and silliness. Leading Democrats are tying in the national security issue with global warming.'
Pat Michaels & Chip Knappenberger have a post up at CATO, questioning what effect reliance on govt grant money has on opinions about climate change.
It is well worth a read, but they use the example a recent Andy Revkin article, in which he interviews four prominent climate researchers.
The level of confidence that each showed in the mainstream (climate model-driven) global warming meme (despite this new research suggesting that something may be rotten in the state of Denmark) appears proportional to how much professional advancement still lies ahead.
The United Nations reported that the “hole” in the ozone layer is on the road to recovery about 27 years after countries signed a treaty banning the use of certain aerosols and other chemicals that were blamed for ozone depletion.
“International action on the ozone layer is a major environmental success story,” WMO Secretary-General Michel Jarraud said in a statement on the ozone report’s release. “This should encourage us to display the same level of urgency and unity to tackle the even greater challenge of climate change.”
The WMO report comes about a week and a half before the UN’s climate summit in New York City later this month. Some leaders from major economies, like China and India, have opted not to attend the summit later this month and few countries have officially committed to backing an extension of the Kyoto Protocol, the world’s only binding climate agreement.
Jeffrey SachsWSJ Editor's note: Matt Ridley's Sept. 4 op-ed, "Whatever Happened to Global Warming?," stirred a strong response, not least among the enforcers of climate-change orthodoxy. Here is Mr. Ridley's reply to his critics, adapted from his blog:
Post-script. After the article was published, an astonishing tweet was sent by the prominent economist Jeffrey Sachs saying:
"Ridley climate ignorance in WSJ today is part of compulsive lying of Murdoch media gang. Ridley totally misrepresents the science."
Curious to know how I had lied or "totally misrepresented" the science, I asked Sachs to explain. There was a deafening silence.
There then appeared at the Huffington Post an article under Sachs's name. Its style was quite unlike that of Sachs. The piece purported to—in a spin doctor's words—expose: