Climate Scepticism on the Rise Throughout the World
Scepticism about human-caused climate change continues to increase around the world. A recent poll conducted by a group within the University of Chicago found that belief in humans causing all or most climate change had slumped in America to 49% from the 60% level recorded just five years ago. Similar falls have been recorded elsewhere, with a recent IPSOS survey covering two thirds of the world’s population revealing that nearly four people in every 10 believe climate change is mainly due to natural causes.
Perhaps the most surprising statistic from the Energy Policy Institute at the University of Chicago (EPIC) survey is that 70% of Americans are unwilling to spend more than $2.50 a week to combat climate change. Nearly four in 10 Americans said they were unwilling to pay a couple of dimes. Despite decades of relentless green doomsday agitprop designed to corral populations into living under a collectivist Net Zero-ordered society, it appears that the vast majority of Americans are unwilling to pay even the chump change in their back pockets to stop the climate changing.
Surveys such as EPIC and IPSOS speak to the fundamental flaw in the ‘settled’ science surrounding the suggestion that humans burning fossil fuel are causing the climate to breakdown. The hypothesis is unproven – not a single science paper provides conclusive proof. Natural causes and the proposition that carbon dioxide becomes ‘saturated’ beyond certain atmospheric levels are more convincing explanations for scientific observations. Fears that mainstream climate science is heavily corrupted by faulty data, pseudoscientific modelling and outright political cherry-picking are becoming more widespread.
Interestingly, the recent overall fall in support for human-caused climate change in the U.S. is due to Democrats and Independents.
Scepticism levels remain high among Republicans but there have been dramatic increases among Left-leaning Democrats. Nevertheless, Democrats were found to be more likely than Republicans to be influenced by the ‘evidence’ of what is called ‘extreme’ weather (71% vs 30% for Democrats vs Republicans). This news will bring some comfort to green propogandists since the recent lack of noticeable global warming has led to a massive rise in pseudoscientific attributions of single weather events to overall climate change. Personal observations are said to influence 55% of Democrats, compared with 20% of Republicans, while appeals to higher authority play better on the Left than the Right. News coverage ranks higher for Democrats at 47% vs 20% , while scientists, most of whom go along with the ‘settled’ agenda, score 73% against just 32% for more sceptical Republicans.
EPIC also found that scepticism was rising among young people aged between 18-29 with a 17% decline in numbers who think humans play a predominant role in changing the climate. The drop was just as significant for those who graduated from college as those with a high school diploma (11%). Of considerable interest was this 17% fall compared with just a 9% drop for those aged over 60. This will concern alarmists, since the impressionable young are heavily targeted with green agitprop from an early age.
The IPSOS survey found that levels of climate scepticism were similar in all age categories. As with EPIC, it found that political leanings were decisive. In the seven countries where political input was sought, 28% of supporters of the Left turned out to be climate sceptics, compared with 50% on the Right.
Is it surprising that climate scepticism is increasing throughout the world? As noted, anthropogenic climate science rests on a shaky evidence base, which no amount of debate cancellation, modelling, invented attributions and data manipulation can hide. Over nearly 50 years, laudable environmental concerns have been hijacked to promote a collectivist, controlling political agenda. But decades of easy virtue-signalling are coming to an end, and the harsh realities of Net Zero are starting to become obvious. Claims that the green revolution will be largely painless are seen for the nonsense they are by the realistic Net Zero appraisal publicised by the Government-funded U.K. FIRES collaborative project.
According to the FIRES report, written by a number of British academics, Net Zero means just 60% of current levels of food cooking, heating and energy by 2050. Within less than 30 years there will be no beef and lamb, and all flying and shipping will have to stop. Road use will be restricted to 60% of today’s levels. There will be no cement, and the only steel available will be recycled. Norman Fenton, the recently retired Professor of Risk Information Management at Queen Mary University of London, noted that these conclusions are consistent with UN/WEF Agenda 21, the UN ‘World at 2050’ agenda and the WEF Great Reset. The latter, noted Fenton, incorporates ‘Build Back Better’ in which you’ll “own nothing and be happy”, and eat bugs instead of meat.
Another senior academic, the nuclear physicist Dr. Wallace Manheimer, recently warned that Net Zero would lead to the end of modern civilisation. The new green infrastructure will fail, cost trillions, trash large portions of the environment, and be entirely unnecessary. Manheimer noted that before fossil fuel became widely used, energy was provided by people and animals. Because so little energy was produced, “civilisation was a thin veneer atop a vast mountain of human squalour and misery, a veneer maintained by such institutions as slavery, colonialism and tyranny”.
****************************************************
Biden proposes $2 trillion for clean energy projects, calls for end to power plant emissions by 2035
Presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden on Tuesday proposed spending $2 trillion over four years on clean energy projects and ending carbon emissions from power plants by 2035.
The former vice president’s proposal is part of a series of economic plans aimed at jump-starting an economy battered by the coronavirus pandemic.
In a speech detailing the plan Tuesday afternoon in Delaware, Biden called the threat posed by climate change a “once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to jolt new life into our economy.”
“We’re not just going to tinker around the edges. We’re going to make historic investments that will seize this moment in history,” he said.
The plan marks a clear shift by Biden toward progressives’ goals of urgently reducing fossil fuel consumption to combat climate change. Biden’s new proposal is more ambitious than the 10-year, $1.7 trillion plan he’d offered during the Democratic primary, which included the goal of achieving net-zero emissions by 2050.
Biden used the speech to mock President Donald Trump’s lack of commitment to addressing climate change. “He said he doesn’t like LED because, quote, the light is no good. I always look orange,” Biden said.
His proposed 100% clean electricity standard by 2035 is modeled after a proposal initially offered by Washington Gov. Jay Inslee and later embraced by Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren. The same aim was included in a series of recommendations recently negotiated by a task force made up of members appointed by Biden and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and co-chaired by New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a chief proponent of the Green New Deal.
“It’s no secret that we’ve been critical of Vice President Biden’s plans and commitments in the past. Today, he’s responded to many of those criticisms: dramatically increasing the scale and urgency of investments, filling in details on how he’d achieve environmental justice and create good union jobs, and promising immediate action – on day 1, in his first 100 days, in his first term, in the next decade – not just some far-off goals,” said Varshini Prakash, the co-founder of the Sunrise Movement.
Biden’s aides told reporters on a call Tuesday he would pay for it in part by undoing Trump’s tax cuts, raising taxes on wealthy Americans and increasing the corporate tax rate to 28%. They said more details on how Biden will pay for his proposals will come in the weeks ahead, after he unveils other economic proposals.
The clean energy plan marks the second straight week Biden has proposed stimulus spending to bolster a reeling economy as part of his “Build Back Better” agenda. Last week, he called for $400 billion for US-made manufacturing efforts such as clean-energy vehicles, telecommunications equipment, steel and other building materials and health care equipment, as well as another $300 billion in research and development on areas like 5G, artificial intelligence and electric vehicle technology.
It’s an approach similar to how former President Barack Obama and Biden entered office in 2009. Biden aides argue that the former vice president’s role in enacting the stimulus package back then makes for a strong contrast with Trump, who has not signed into law any major infrastructure plans and whose administration’s efforts to make infrastructure the theme of specific weeks – only to repeatedly be derailed by controversies Trump caused – has become a long-running joke in Washington.
Biden on Tuesday highlighted his role in the passage of the stimulus in the early days of the Obama administration.
“I know how to get it done. In 2009, President Obama and I inherited an economy in free fall and we prevented a depression,” he said.
During the Democratic primary, Biden had expressed skepticism about Green New Deal objectives of net-zero emissions by 2030. Pressed by an activist in New Hampshire, he said he was committed to achieving that goal – but not on the same timeline progressive activists had called for.
“By 2030?” she asked. “No, it can’t be done by 2030,” he said, “but it can be done by 2050.”
Republicans criticized Biden’s proposal for endangering the jobs of millions of people employed by fossil fuel companies.
“Joe Biden’s economic and climate agenda shows that he is beholden to left-wing ideologues and not to the American people who face the prospect of eliminated jobs and higher taxes under his plan,” Republican National Committee spokesman Steve Guest said in an email to reporters.
Biden’s campaign said the plan would create union jobs in clean energy and through projects such as the construction of electric vehicle charging stations, the weatherization of millions of buildings, updating electric grids, expanding broadband internet access and more.
In his speech Tuesday, the former vice president was also critical of Trump’s handling of the pandemic and his rush to reopen schools and businesses.
“Mr. President, ‘open everything now’ isn’t a strategy for success. It’s barely a slogan. Quit pushing the false choice between protecting our health and protecting our economy. All it does is endanger our recovery on both fronts,” Biden said.
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/14/politics/joe-biden-clean-energy-plan/index.html
*************************************************US ESG Bond Market Chokes on Republican Backlash, Investor Angst
US sales of bonds designed to help companies do good are plunging amid pressure from investors and Republican politicians.
Companies sold about $6 billion of bonds last quarter to pay for projects that help the environment, achieve a social goal, or improve their governance, a type of debt known as ESG. That’s down more than 50% from the same time last year, according to data compiled by Bloomberg, which focused on companies outside the financial industry.
The slump in issuance comes amid a political assault on ESG investing by some of the biggest names in the Republican party, including former Vice President Mike Pence and the governors of Florida and Texas, Ron DeSantis and Greg Abbott. DeSantis, a likely 2024 presidential candidate, said last month that he’s leading an alliance of 19 states intent on banning ESG investing outright.
“Before, ESG could do no wrong and the scrutiny that should have been there wasn’t there,” said Andrew Poreda, a senior research analyst at Sage Advisory Services. “Now there’s more skepticism and policing.”
Some states are prohibiting external asset managers that oversee public pension funds and other investment pools from considering ESG criteria, wrote JPMorgan Chase & Co. credit analysts led by Eric Beinstein and Nathaniel Rosenbaum in February. That could be making borrowers less interested in selling ESG debt, they wrote.
*************************************************
Australia closes oldest coal plant, pivots to renewables
Here come blackouts on windless nights
Australia's oldest coal-fired power plant was shuttered Friday, as the country -- a once-notorious climate straggler -- prepares for a seismic shift towards renewable energy.
The Liddell power station, a three-hour drive north of Sydney, was one in a series of ageing coal-fired plants slated to close in the coming years.
Built in 1971, Liddell provided about 10 percent of the electricity used in New South Wales, Australia's most populous state.
Liddell's owner AGL said it would take about two years to demolish the hulking facility, which would free up the site for new clean energy projects such as a hydrogen power plant.
"More than 90 per cent of the materials in the power station will be recycled, including 70,000 tonnes of steel -- which is more steel than there is in the Sydney Harbour Bridge," the company said.
For decades, coal has provided the bulk of Australia's electricity, but University of New South Wales renewable energy expert Mark Diesendorf told AFP that stations such as Liddell were fast becoming unreliable "clunkers".
Besides being inefficient, highly polluting and expensive to repair, the continued widespread use of coal-fired power plants would make Australia's climate targets almost impossible to meet.
Australia has long been one of the world's largest coal producers and exporters, and a series of governments have resisted pressure to scale back the industry.
But the centre-left Labor Party elected last year on the promise of climate action has pledged that 82 percent of the country's electricity will come from renewable sources by 2030.
This demands a drastic overhaul -- while world leaders such as Norway produce more than 90 percent of their power through renewables, Australia currently sits around 30 percent.
"The plans are for a fairly rapid phase-out," Diesendorf told AFP. "These stations are overdue for retirement and there's no economic argument for replacing them with new coal."
- 'Right direction' -
Under growing public pressure to address the climate crisis, many Australian fossil fuel companies increasingly prefer to shutter old coal plants than keep them online.
Australia's largest coal-fired power station, the Eraring facility in New South Wales, is scheduled to close in 2025 and a handful more will follow over the next decade.
While these closures will test whether renewables are ready to fill the gap, a government report released Friday indicated Australia was heading in the right direction.
The Australian Energy Market Operator found that record levels of renewable electricity -- mostly solar power -- were already driving down both emissions and household power prices.
***************************************
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)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
*****************************************
Jim Hansen and his twin
No comments:
Post a Comment