Garbage in, Garbage out in Glasgow, Scotland
By DAVID R. LEGATES
No doubt you’ve heard—and always at ear-splitting decibels—that “97 percent of all climate scientists agree” that climate change is real, will be devastating to life on earth, and is largely or entirely due to human emissions of greenhouse gases. The participants at the COP26, United Nations Climate Change Conference in Glasgow, Scotland, have been screaming pretty much nothing else for days.
Problem is, the “97 percent” is pure fiction.
I should know. In 2013, I and several other researchers wrote in Science & Education that the “97 percent” figure came from John Cook and colleagues at the University of Western Australia—who basically cooked the books.
Cook and his comrades did not in fact poll the world’s climate scientists. Not even close. They simply collected the abstracts of nearly 12,000 journal articles and then subjectively designated whether the abstract of a given paper either endorsed or rejected “the consensus position that humans are causing global warming.”
Two-thirds of the abstracts, however, expressed no opinion, and of the remaining nearly 4,000 very few explicitly agreed—by the authors’ own assessment—with the stated consensus position. My colleagues and I were forced to conclude that “the 97% consensus claimed by Cook et al. turns out upon inspection to be not 97.1% but 0.3%.”
The “97 percent” consensus is, as we said then, “one of the greatest items of misinformation that has been circulated on either side of the climate debate.”
But the propaganda continued; and continues to this day—and is now more extreme. Just in time for COP26, and published in the same journal in which the first “consensus” was announced, a new group, led by researchers at Cornell University, wrote an article entitled, “Greater than 99% Consensus on Human Caused Climate Change in the Peer-reviewed Scientific Literature.”
Incredibly, the methodology in that article is even more flawed than that employed in the first. This latest clutch of climate alarmists randomly selected a mere 3,000 papers from more than 88,000 climate-related papers published since Cook—and then applied Cook’s subjective assessment to this tiny fraction of the available abstracts. Surprised to learn that only four were determined to be skeptical of human-caused global warming?
And the authors were also biased regarding the rest of the abstracts. For example, they noted that “a majority” did not state a position on whether climate change was human caused. But unlike Cook et al., who discarded such papers, this new group of researchers simply asserted that the act of publishing on climate change— in fact, just the authors’ mentioning of the term—was enough to have those articles logged as favoring the consensus. One would be hard pressed to come up with a more perfect example of circular reasoning.
The situation would be laughable but for the draconian measures the climate alarmists, citing this “99 percent” so-called consensus, have been calling for in Glasgow—which, mercifully, ends today. If these persons get their way, the needless human suffering will be no joke; and, as always, it will be the poor in all countries—who can stay alive only when affordable energy is plentiful—who will be harmed the most. And, unless the thinking part of US electorate starts a sustained revolt at the polls, you, thanks to your tax dollars, will be helping to finance that misery.
https://www.independent.org/news/article.asp?id=13866&omhide=true
******************************************Hydrogen planes may offer a possible solution to 'flight shame'. But can they safely provide greener air travel?
Why religious freedom bill is a culture war sugar hit — and not much more
As the world looks for new ways to combat climate change, hydrogen has emerged as a potential saviour for polluting industries like aviation.
It's the most common element in the world, and packs more energy than conventional aviation jet fuel without the side effect of producing massive emissions of carbon dioxide.
But hydrogen and air travel have a complicated history.
More than 80 years ago the hydrogen-filled Hindenburg airship burst into flames when attempting to moor at Lakehurst in New Jersey.
The extent to which the buoyant hydrogen gas can be blamed for the disaster has been the subject of much debate.
But the image of the airship crashing to the ground is something the aviation industry is hoping to leave behind as it re-embraces hydrogen.
One company is confident it can make it work, and is hoping to take paying passengers on a hydrogen-powered flight within just a few years.
The push for hydrogen flight
From its base at Kemble in England's scenic Cotswolds, ZeroAvia is developing an aircraft that could make the world's first commercial hydrogen-electric flight in 2024, between London and Rotterdam in the Netherlands.
The benefit of using hydrogen fuel cells, ZeroAvia argues, is that the only waste product is clean water.
"It's essentially a zero-emission process," says Sergey Kiselev, who heads ZeroAvia's Europe division.
"The only by-product is water vapour."
The concept has won financial backing from the UK government and from IAG, the parent company of British Airways.
While hydrogen played at least a partial role in the Hindenburg crash, the team at ZeroAvia says modern storage systems make it a reliable fuel.
"Certainly hydrogen is safe," says John Kells, the company's head of technical operations.
"Today there are electric vehicles with hydrogen fuel cell systems and it's not more dangerous than kerosene [which fuels modern-day jets]."
Hydrogen is much lighter than air, so will quickly dissipate when released, unlike regular fuel, ZeroAvia says.
But developing the plane hasn't been easy.
In September 2020, the team from ZeroAvia reached a major milestone after performing a take-off, circuits and landing in a six-seater Piper Malibu powered by hydrogen fuel cells.
The plane carried out dozens of successful test flights. Then in April this year, it crashed.
The plane made a forced landing in a field near Cranfield airport, in Bedfordshire. While trying to come to a stop on the uneven surface, one of its wings was torn off. Nobody was hurt.
"I think when you test novel technology, things like that happen," Mr Kiselev tells the ABC.
He says while the incident is still being investigated, the hydrogen itself was not the cause.
"We've gone through quite a bit of learning … to avoid that and make sure that doesn't happen again."
Stephen Lawes, who was on the plane when it crashed, is still convinced hydrogen is the future. "The technology we've got today works," he says. "You don't have to wait until 2030, 2040, 2050. You can do it now, basically."
Just outside ZeroAvia's hangar at the airport in the Cotswolds are dozens of fossil-fuel-guzzling passenger jets.
They were sent there for temporary storage during the COVID-19 pandemic. But the long-term future of some of these jets is in doubt, amid a push for greener flying.
**************************************************
‘King Coal’ Roars Back
Although the COP26 virtuous don’t want you to know it, rebounding economies and the ongoing global energy crisis have vaulted much-maligned coal to the top of the energy food chain, once again.
President Biden’s energy-climate policies have apparently been more friendly to coal than those of President Trump.
New federal data has U.S. coal-fired power generation leaping 22% in 2021 to 945 terawatt-hours - the first annual increase for coal since 2014.
Coal will generate nearly a quarter of U.S. electricity this year, with competitor natural gas prices doubling since June to over $6.00.
The demand boom has U.S. coal companies now offering miners six-figure salaries. Not too shabby for a commodity that the media has loved to leave for dead for well over a decade now. “Coal’s burnout,” The Washington Post declared on January 2, 2011.
Personal politics permeating “journalism” continues to leave us energy-climate stupid.
Adding a whopping 38,400 MW, China built more new coal generation capacity last year than the rest of the world retired.
The International Energy Agency says that China’s coal demand will hit a new record this year, some seven years after the Sierra Club promised that China’s coal use was “drying up.”
In addition, after decades of trying to “get off coal,” even small-growth Europe is realizing what happens when the real alternative becomes unaffordable: “Coal Is Making A Comeback In Europe As Gas Prices Explode.”
Yet, the rebound in coal is not surprising when we look at the numbers.
Only ~20% of global coal usage is internationally traded, making coal a largely domestic resource with huge energy security advantages for consumers. By comparison, ~33% of gas and ~75% of oil are swapped from country to country.
Coal is a foundational resource in all-important Asia, so demand typically grows as the population and economy expand.
Globally, coal is still easily the main source of electricity at 37-40% of all generation.
Coal accounts for 60-65% of the electricity generation in China and 68-73% in India – the two most significant incremental energy users that hold ~35% of humanity.
Coal demand has been so high in China this year that supply shortages have forced electricity to be rationed, with “alternatives” to coal not quite as available as some like to insist.
In the most energy-deprived nation on Earth, booming coal demand in India has also left the country short of supply: “Without coal, you cannot survive...It’s not possible to keep the lights on without coal.”
With 85% of the global population struggling in the still developing countries, the United Nations has affirmed that human progress trumps all:
“Economic and social development and poverty eradication are the first and overriding priorities of the developing countries,” United Nations
And I doubt very highly that the American taxpayers want tens of billions of their dollars going into some ambiguous, and surely untrackable, global “climate fund.”
Sorry, but I choose our precious resources to go to educational equity and economic opportunity for the poor and neglected Black neighborhoods of Homewood in Pittsburgh and Adamsville in Atlanta…..not for windmills in India. The American voting public deserves and should be demanding that.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/judeclemente/2021/10/27/king-coal-roars-back/
*************************************************Australia: Dark roofs ditched, commercial buildings must be net-zero from 2022
Coming from a warm climate, I have always favoured white or silver-coloured roofs as they help keep the house cool -- so the policy below has its merits
All large commercial buildings designed from next year will be required to operate at net-zero in a major climate policy announcement by the NSW Planning Minister.
Rob Stokes said dark roofing will be discontinued on homes built across Sydney and has taken a swipe at the Commonwealth’s climate agenda while unveiling a suite of measures to ramp up the state’s emissions reductions response.
Speaking to an online forum for urban think-tank Committee for Sydney, Mr Stokes also targeted parts of the property sector for their backlash over an earlier decision this year to mandate paler roofs in the south-west growth area, saying he found it “incredible” legislation was required to force change.
“There are no practical reasons why we shouldn’t be ditching dark roofing on new homes permanently to ensure that future communities of Sydney’s west don’t experience the urban heat that many communities do now,” he said, revealing he had asked planners to include the policy switch under a new umbrella approach to emissions.
The proposed rules will be contained in planning mechanisms developers must adhere to under Mr Stokes’ showpiece Design and Place policy, a wide-ranging document that aims to lift the statewide standards of sustainable urban design.
In his speech Mr Stokes referenced recent University of NSW research, commissioned by the federal government, that found switching to cool roofing would lower Sydney’s summer temperatures by up to 2.4 degrees.
He also revealed office skyscrapers, hotels and shopping centres would be among commercial developments in which energy usage must run at net-zero emissions from 2022. He said the vast majority of buildings operating under the NABERS emissions rating system already had net-zero commitments well ahead of 2050.
Stockland, which runs major shopping centres as well as residential developments and retirement villages, has committed to achieving net-zero by 2028.
The announcement was lauded by Committee for Sydney chief executive Gabriel Metcalf, who said it would “propel NSW event further into a leadership role on climate action”.
The Green Building Council’s chief executive Davina Rooney said constructing buildings powered by renewable energy was the best way to achieve this.
“We’d also encourage owners of large commercial office buildings to take strong action in reducing upfront carbon emissions from products and materials,” she said, referring to a new focus within the industry to cut down on embodied carbon.
As part of the state government changes, new residential developments will also be asked to meet higher energy ratings standards.
Property Council of Australia western Sydney director Ross Grove urged the government to allow time “to ensure building designers and developers can make the necessary upgrades”.
Steve Mann, chief executive of the NSW branch of the Urban Development Institute of Australia, said policy changes needed to be considered in light of the crisis around housing affordability and supply.
“Anything that means we’ve got to reset our supply pipelines would have some short-term impacts,” he said, adding that certain councils mandated against lighter roofs because of reflectivity. He said there could also be cost impacts to material supply chains: “[Colorbond] Ironstone is the strongest in demand at the moment.”
NSW Treasurer Matt Kean announced earlier this month that the state had signed a pledge with the United Nations Climate Change Conference to boost electric vehicle sales and was on track to make 50 per cent of all new vehicles sold in the state electric by 2030.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison has hit campaign mode with a “technology not taxes” mantra in regard to emissions reduction, announcing plans such as investment in charging stations for electric vehicles and a $1 billion scheme to be co-funded by private investors to decarbonise the economy.
Mr Stokes, who is temporarily juggling the transport portfolio, said he was left “bemused” by Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s comments to a business forum earlier this year during which he said net-zero wouldn’t be achieved in inner-city cafés and wine bars.
“He was making a different point but ... actually we won’t achieve net-zero without including our wine bars and inner-city cafes,” Mr Stokes said.
“Thankfully, the anti-climate rhetoric emanating from sections of Canberra has cooled significantly over recent months.”
He added that, while COP26 didn’t go as far on commitments as hoped, “it did put climate firmly on the agenda of our federal counterparts”.
Conversely, Mr Stokes said NSW’s response had shown a Coalition government was capable of an “ambitious” climate response while managing economic factors. He said his government not only wanted to act but, in light of recent legal and oversight decisions, was obliged to.
NSW independent MLC Justin Field said caution was needed in regard to increasing the role for timber in net-zero buildings.
“Expanding sustainable softwood timber plantations as a renewable construction resource makes sense, however we get exponentially greater carbon benefit from allowing our native forests to grow old while also building the resilience of the environment to adapt to a climate change,” he said.
***************************************
My other blogs. Main ones below
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM )
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)
*****************************************
Jim Hansen and his twin
No comments:
Post a Comment