Germany’s Grand Plan to Abolish Carbon Fuels Fails

Germany’s Energiewende – Lessons for Australia from Germany

In March 2017, the German Federal Ministry of Economics and Energy published a brochure announcing that the Energiewende, its renewable energy revolution, was ‘a success story’.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

The Energiewende (Grand Plan) has the goal of making Germany independent of fossil fuels in the long term. Coal, oil and gas were to be phased out, allowing drastic reductions in carbon dioxide emissions. However, these goals have not even begun to be achieved.

The Energiewende was only driven forward in the electricity sector, which, accounts for only one-fifth of energy consumption. There were hardly any successes in the heating/cooling and transport sectors.

And so carbon dioxide emissions in Germany have been rising since 2009, even though well over a hundred billion euros have been spent on the expansion of solar and wind energy over the same period. The financial obligations undertaken in the process will continue to burden taxpayers for another two decades and will end up costing German consumers a total sum of around 550 billion euros.

Despite this enormous effort, security of supply is increasingly under threat. At the same time, people and the biosphere are suffering; wildlife protection has become subordinated to climate mitigation, even though the possibility of achieving the goals of reducing carbon dioxide emissions is becoming increasingly distant and the measures for the energy transition seem to become more and more questionable from a constitutional point of view.

800 regional associations in Germany commissioned a report on the achievements of the Grand Plan, supported by 24 German experts in all relevant fields.

“In this review we would like to inform a public debate and set out a reasonable course for energy policy in Germany.”

It details stark lessons for Australia. They have produced a very clear readable summary of all aspects of the German electricity disaster.

Read more: http://clexit.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/1-6-_kompendium-der-energiewende_englisch_1.pdf [PDF, 2.7 MB]

Source: https://www.vernunftkraft.de/

UN Pleads for Climate Accord Ratification before Mass “Clexit”

From: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/19/paris-climate-agreement-un-pushes-fast-track-ratif/

By Valerie Richardson – The Washington Times – Tuesday, July 19, 2016

The United Nations has issued a plea for nations to fast-track ratification of the Paris Climate Agreement as some countries are backtracking on support for the deal’s sweeping restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions.

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urged nations to attend a “special event” Thursday where they may deposit their “instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession to the Paris Agreement on climate change.”

“I urge you to accelerate your country’s domestic process for ratification of the Agreement this year,” Mr. Ban said in a statement.
Continue reading “UN Pleads for Climate Accord Ratification before Mass “Clexit””

Waves and Tides

Watching Weather Waves, but Missing Climate Tides.

By Viv Forbes, 17 July 2018


The climate alarm media, the bureaucracy and the Green Energy industry follow an agenda which is served by inflating any short-term weather event into a climate calamity. They should take a long-term view.

Earth’s climate is never still – it is always changing, with long-term trends, medium-term reversals and minor oscillations. Humanity is best served by those who use good science to study geology, astronomy and climate history searching for clues to climate drivers and the underlying natural cycles and trends hidden in short-term weather fluctuations.

For the last 10,000 years Earth has basked in the Holocene Interglacial which is the latest of many warm cycles within the Pleistocene Ice Age. There are small warm and cool cycles within the Holocene. Today we enjoy the Modern Warm Cycle (which started about calendar 1900) following the Little Ice Age which bottomed in about 1750.

What does the future hold? The past gives clues to the future.
Continue reading “Waves and Tides”

Paris Accord Based on Fraud

By Brendan Godwin

The Paris Accord is based on fraud. Carbon Dioxide or CO2 is essential for all life on earth. Without it we are all extinct. There is nothing unusual happing with the globe’s temperatures. No unusual warming. Our interglacial warm period peaked 8,000 years ago and we are cooling. We’ve come to the end of this interglacial and are about to enter the next ice age. Humans can do nothing to stop that. The globe has no temperature control knob, it is impossible for humans to control the globe’s temperature. CO2 does not produce warming. There’s not enough of it to do anything. It is warming that produces CO2. It is impossible for the cause to be the effect. CO2 has lagged temperature by 1,000 years for the past 1 mil years and it has never stopped the earth from entering an ice age, even when it was 4,000 ppm. CO2 is the gas of life. We need more not less of it and we should be regulating for more not less emissions. It is needed to grow our food crops.

Paris is based on IPCC reports. The IPCC rely on their GCM models. None of the models rely on past climate history but rather a mathematical theory based on refuted, negated, fake and fraudulent science. They all incorporate:

  • A “human fingerprint” or THS (Tropical Hot Spot) on the earth’s climate that doesn’t exist. IPCC’s AR2 report was fraudulently altered to remove scientific reports that were negative of their GHE definition;
  • Lewis Fry Richardson’s flawed atmospheric model equation;
  • Michael Mann’s fraudulent hockey stick graph in AR3;
  • Arrhenius’ flawed hypothesis of the greenhouse effect; Arrhenius invented heat from nothing.
  • The multiplier effect of water vapor feedback. The flawed CO2 increases water vapor hypothesis based on Arrhenius and the Charney report; From observations, water vapor is decreasing.
  • A corrupted peer review process.

Then back all this up by fraudulently altering the data to support the failed models that can’t even predict the last 30 years of hindsight.

The money wasted on Paris will do absolutely nothing to the globe’s temperatures and is a waste. Paris is economic vandalism disguised as environmentalism. It is the political agenda of the communist movement. A wealth redistribution scheme to get rich countries to give away money to poor countries with the end goal to destroy capitalism.

The problem with Turnbull is that he only listens to one side of the science, the side that suits him. There are 32,000 real scientists in the NIPCC who dissent from the IPCC. Politicians need to listen to the real science, not the fraudulent science. During the last ice age CO2 levels dropped to 180 ppm. Plants don’t grow with CO2 at 150 ppm or less. That’s our food crops. If we lower CO2 will face human extinction. It is the interglacial warm period that is causing CO2 to be released from the oceans. Only 3% of annual emissions are from humans. We need more not less to starve off human extinction in the next ice age that is about to hit us.

 

Brendan Godwin
Weather Observer and General Meteorology
Bureau of Meteorology
Mawson Antarctic 1974

Quit Paris Treaty

Tony Abbott is right – Australia should quit the Paris Climate Treaty.

China, India, Russia, Brazil, South Africa and Indonesia will ignore Paris. USA has already quit and Japan even withdrew from the Kyoto Treaty. Germany will fail to meet its obligations and Poland will not try very hard. France relies heavily on nuclear power and naturally supports imposing Paris handicaps on competitors.

And most of the rest of the world are just hanging in there hoping for a flood of cash from the climate compensation fund or from selling phony carbon credits.

Australia has huge coal, gas, oil and uranium resources. To export these, while we hobble our industries with windmill power, is insane.

Viv Forbes

The Past is the Key to the Present… and the Future

A Corollary of the Principle of Uniformitarianism

By Howard Dewhirst, Geologist

This document aims to contextualise the scientific debate concerning Climate Change (CC) and Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW). Examining Earth history, it is indisputable that CC has been operating for many hundreds of millions of years, in cycles that span many different time-scales (millennial-plus to decadal), all without human influence. Understanding the causative factors in past CC provides a solid basis for framing the present debate. AGW is a notion which says that human activities, notably the addition of CO2 to the atmosphere, are causing an increase in the global heat budget. That higher-energy state of Earth’s environment it is argued sets the stage for damaging CC effects. Political and economic decisions have been influenced by this claim. Some of those decisions harm efforts to better the health and welfare of the world’s population, including both the poorest and those who are better off. If the CC and AGW arguments are incorrectly based, as we outline here, there is a need to re-consider those decisions.

CC in Earth History

  • Paleo-temperature (of atmosphere and ocean) is taken as a proxy indicator of climate, since climate is a complex concept that includes precipitation amounts and patterns, wind, etc whose history and future cannot be extracted or classified in a satisfactory way
  • Earth’s equatorial region has had a consistent temperature during the climate swings over hundreds of millions of years, but the polar areas have varied, thus altering the pole-to-equator gradient of heat energy, which is the principal driver of climate on the planet
  • Causes of CC (changes in temperature gradients) are dominated by orbital and solar effects, with added signals from volcanoes (both dust and chemicals), tectonics and plate motions, and biological feedbacks
  • Oceans (which cover ~70% of the planet) are the main heat reservoir, but with patterns of warmer and colder water distributions that reveal decadal and longer cyclicity that is not understood

Global Warming

    • Earth’s temperature has been generally rising since the end of the last ice age, with an apparent acceleration during the last century, but not since
    • Atmospheric concentrations of CO2 have also been rising more uniformly, now reaching 410ppm or 0.04% of atmosphere
    • CO2 has been identified as a ‘greenhouse gas’, based on an argument that it traps and reflects heat
    • The physics of CO2 heat retention are over-stated, as only a tiny portion of the electromagnetic spectrum (wavelengths of heat energies) can be captured by this molecule
    • Because CO2 concentration is rising and is implicated in global warming, and because CO2 is a by-product of combustion, energy sources from fossil fuels have been demonised – via social and political suppression of their use, and a push towards 100% renewable energy
    • There are three key challenges to the idea that CO2 is the primary cause of GW:
      • Long-term records of CO2 and temperature show good correlation, but the CO2 concentrations lag behind temperature increases by thousands of years. Thus, CO2 increase is the consequence of rising ocean temperature, not the cause
      • Numerical models of climate systems, which involve simplifying assumptions and methods that are associated with serious artefacts, consistently fail to ‘predict’ the known past temperature patterns. Such models cannot justify the suppression of hydrocarbon fuels.
      • Average temperatures are no longer increasing despite the inexorable rise of CO2

Human activities are not the driver of global warming (or cooling). Earth’s systems are governed by processes that operate over a wide range of time- and length-scales, many of which far exceed the usual scope of human perceptions. The demonization of carbon is scientifically unjustified.

Howard Dewhirst

Read the open letter: http://clexit.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/gsl-open-letter-dewhirst.pdf [PDF, 312 KB]

Concerned Household Electricity Consumers Council Press Release

PRESS RELEASE

The Concerned Household Electricity Consumers Council in its Comment Calls on President Trump and EPA to Repeal and Not Replace the Clean Power Plan(CPP).
CHECC CPP ANPRM Replacement Comment Overview FINAL 022718 PDF

Key Comment Conclusions*:

  • CO2 is a Beneficial Gas, not a Pollutant. As a result, the Social Cost of Carbon is Negative since CO2 is so very critical to plant growth and therefore human life.

  • The 2009 Endangerment Finding must be reconsidered and rescinded/vacated. Thus, the CPP would not be replaced.

  • All future Federal, State and private sector decisions regarding the Nation’s electric power grid must focus solely on minimizing consumer electricity prices as well as maximizing Grid Reliability and Resilience. No consumer electricity price increases should be permitted by regulators that result from increased Renewables/Energy Storage Grid penetration.

  • The Current Reconsideration of future vehicle MPG Standards must treat CO2 reduction as a cost, not a benefit, so that only consumer preferences matter, not climate change issues. Currently, with low gasoline price expectations, most consumers prefer trucks & SUVs.

*Based on the Concerned Household Electricity Consumers Council (CHECC) Comment in response to EPA’s ANPRM CPP Replacement

CHECC CPP ANPRM Replacement Comment FINAL to EPA 022618 (1)

Filed February 26, 2018

Continue reading “Concerned Household Electricity Consumers Council Press Release”

The Natural History Museum vs. American Museum of Natural History

The Natural History Museum is accusing the American Museum of Natural History “of being ‘anti-science’ and promoting ‘climate science misinformation’, and in particular, vilifying a scientifically-engaged trustee of the museum, Rebekah Mercer.”

For background on this dispute, see: Background Detail [PDF, 190 KB]

For the petition letter with signatories supporting American Museum of Natural History see: Petition [PDF, 445 KB]

Real Debate Rocks the Geological Society of London

The Geological Society of London helped to drive UK climate policy. However many members of the GSL have questioned their position papers, and a group of disgruntled geo’s resigned after the position papers were published.

There is now a movement to have the GSL position papers amended, and comments and submissions are invited. Read all about it below:

Here is the questionable policy statement:

http://euanmearns.com/the-geological-society-of-londons-statement-on-climate-change/

And here are some comments to date:

http://euanmearns.com/the-geological-society-of-londons-statement-on-climate-change/#comment-36505
http://euanmearns.com/the-geological-society-of-londons-statement-on-climate-change/#comment-36507
http://euanmearns.com/the-geological-society-of-londons-statement-on-climate-change/#comment-36511

Please join this important debate.