Another climate myth busted
What I like to call ‘climate cult’ wind farms expose the myth that wind can replace hydrocarbon fuels for power generation. The following story is typical of the problems associated with using wind turbines to generate electricity in a cold environment.
Apparently, diesel-fuelled generators are being used to power some wind turbines as a way of de-icing them in cold weather, that is, to keep them rotating. Also, it appears that the wind turbines have been drawing electric power directly from the grid instead of supplying it to the grid.
Scotland’s wind turbines have been secretly using fossil fuels.
The revelation is now fueling environmental, health and safety concerns, especially since the diesel-generated turbines were running for up to six hours a day.
Scottish Power said the company was forced to hook up 71 windmills to the fossil fuel supply after a fault on its grid. The move was an attempt to keep the turbines warm and working during the cold month of December.
South Scotland Labor MSP Colin Smyth said regardless of the reasons, using diesel to deice faulty turbines is “environmental madness”.
Source: Straight Arrow News
I don’t agree that diesel is a ‘fossil’ fuel. It is not. Read Abiogenic Deep Origin of Hydrocarbons: Not Fossils But Primordial.
Nevertheless, those pushing these technologies are so blind to the physical realities of the world that they are prepared to ignore failures while pretending to efficiently generate electricity. I say ‘failures’ because wind energy was put out of service the day the Industrial Revolution was fired up (pun intended) with carbon-based fuels, from petroleum and coal. And in the case of modern wind turbines, they do not always generate electricity; they sometimes consume it from the grid.
Green energy needs the hydrocarbon-based fuel it claims to replace.
Hydrocarbon-based fuels were provided providentially by the Creator of this planet for our use. That includes coal, which has been demonised in the Western press as some sort of evil. But those who run that line must have forgotten to tell China, because they build two coal-fired power stations every other week. No other source of non-nuclear power is as reliable for baseload generation.
How will wind turbines work in a globally cooling climate as Earth heads into a grand solar minimum and temperatures plummet? This case from Scotland may give us a hint. As cloud cover increases with cooler weather, and more precipitation occurs, how will solar perform? It won’t.
The two worst choices for electricity generation in cold, wet, and stormy environments are solar and wind. Solar is obvious. No sun means no power generation. But you might think wind is a much better choice under those conditions.
However, wind turbine rotors have to be shut down if the wind becomes too strong and/or rapidly changes in strength. They are shut down when too much ice forms or when there is insufficient wind. And now we have learned in Scotland they just turn on the diesel generators when that happens or they draw power directly from the grid.
Where are all the real engineers? Were they fired?
In regards to wind turbines going forward, once their presence in the market has destroyed all the coal or natural gas electricity generators, how are they going to keep the rotors turning and the lights on?
These devices are based on a rotating shaft with a massive bearing, that suffers massive frictional forces. In this case, only a high-quality heavy-duty oil can lubricate this system and I am sure it would need to be regularly replaced.
Massive amounts of carbon-based oil are needed for the lubrication of all gears and bearings in a wind turbine system, which is mechanical in its nature. In 2019, wind turbine applications were estimated to consume around 80 per cent of the total supply of synthetic lubricants. Synthetic lubricants are manufactured using chemically modified petroleum components rather than whole crude oil. These are used in the wind turbine gearboxes, generator bearings, and open gear systems such as pitch and yaw gears.
Now we also know that icing causes the rotors to stop turning so diesel power has to be used to keep the bearings warm during cold weather. The diesel generator is needed to get the blades turning on start-up to overcome the limiting friction of the bearing or when the speed of the rotor drops too low.
In this case in Scotland, 71 windmills on the farm were supplied with diesel power. Each windmill has its own diesel generator. Just think of that.
What about the manufacturing of these windmills?
The blades are made from tons of fibreglass. Manufacturing fibreglass requires the mining of silica sand, limestone, kaolin clay, dolomite, and other minerals, which requires diesel-driven machines. These minerals are melted in a furnace at high temperatures (around 1,400°C) to produce the glass. Where does that heat come from? Not solar or wind power, that is for sure. The resin in the fibreglass comes from alcohol or petroleum-based manufacturing processes.
The metal structure is made from steel that requires tons of coking coal (carbon) essential to make pig iron, which is made from iron ore in a blast furnace at temperatures up to 2,200°C. The coal and iron ore is mined from the ground with giant diesel-powered machines and trucks. The steel is made with pig iron and added carbon in another furnace powered by massive electric currents. Carbon is a critical element in steel making, as it reacts with iron to form the desired steel alloy. None of this comes from wind and solar power.
Wind turbine power generation is inherently intermittent and unreliable. It can hardly called green as the wind turbines require enormous amounts of hydrocarbons in their manufacture and continued operation.
https://www.spectator.com.au/2024/08/another-climate-myth-busted/
*************************************************Japanese Scientist Concludes IPCC Is Using “Erroneous” Parameters And Climate Sensitivities
The anthropogenic global warming (AGW) scare was created in part by Japanese scientist Syukuro Manabe using a one dimensional radiative-convective model (1DRCM) having no ocean (1964/1967).
He obtained a no-feedback climate sensitivity of 1.3°C for doubling of CO2 using the fixed lapse rate assumption of 6.5°C/km and a radiative forcing of 4(W/m2) at the tropopause, which was further enlarged to 2.4°C with a water vapor feedback.
Eminent meteorologist R. Newell from MIT criticized Manabe’s model lacking in ocean cooling. He obtained a No-feedback climate sensitivity of 0.03°C for a doubling of CO2 with a thermal inertia of 30 (W/m2) per 1°C for the surface waters of the ocean using a surface radiative forcing of 1(W/m2) to incorporate the IR spectra overlap between CO2 and water vapor.
The department of Energy & Dr. R. Cess, however, killed Newell’s ideas to promote nuclear reactors in a difficult time due to the Three Mile Island nuclear accident in 1979.
Manabe continued his model studies to enlarge climate sensitivity (CS) for a doubling of CO2 with introducing various feed backs (FBs) as follows, which is the theoretical basis of IPCC’s AGW narrative.
He obtained a Planck feedback parameter0 of -3.3(W/m2)/C with equation (2), giving a No-feedback CS of 1.2°C using a radiative forcing of 4W/m2 for a doubling of CO2 at the tropopause as follows:
Cess’s Planck feedback parameter is used in all GCMs for the IPCC ARs with a slight decrease of the radiative forcing from 4 (W/m2) to 3.7 (W/m2) for a doubling of CO2 by IPCC TAR (2000).
Cess’s equation (1) is physically wrong
Conclusion
All green policy is nonsense because it depends on IPCC’s claim that the surface temperature Ts is increased as much as 3°C for CO2 doubling utilizing an erroneous Plank feedback parameter0 of -3.21(W/m2)/C from Cess’s mathematical error.
The Paris climate agreement reads as follows: “To keep the rise in mean global temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels, and preferably limit the increase to 1.5°C.”
This is based on IPCC’s erroneous climate sensitivity of 3°C for doubling of CO2 discussed above. Therefore the Paris climate agreement is nonsense, though it governs the world politics now.
More here:
***************************************************
18 Republicans Ask Mike Johnson To Save Biden’s Green Energy Subsidy Deluge
A group of 18 House Republicans asked House Speaker Mike Johnson to not pursue a wholesale repeal of subsidies contained in President Joe Biden’s signature climate law on Wednesday.
The lawmakers wrote to Johnson to urge him to not repeal energy sector-wide tax credits from the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), especially those that have already spurred ongoing development across the country. The IRA became law in 2022 without a single Republican vote, and while the lawmakers said they believe the law is “deeply flawed,” they do not want to see the repeal of all tax credits because “we would have spent billions of taxpayer dollars and received next to nothing in return” for that spending.
“Today, many U.S. companies are already using sector-wide energy tax credits – many of which have enjoyed bipartisan support historically – to make major investments in new U.S. energy infrastructure. We hear from industry and our constituents who fear the energy tax regime will once again be turned on its head due to Republican repeal efforts,” the lawmakers wrote in their letter to Johnson. “Prematurely repealing energy tax credits, particularly those which were used to justify investments that already broke ground, would undermine private investments and stop development that is already ongoing.”
“We must reverse the policies which harm American families while protecting and refining those that are making our country more energy independent and Americans more energy secure,” the letter says. “As Republicans, we support an all-of-the-above approach to energy development and tax credits that incentivize domestic production, innovation, and delivery from all sources.”
Republican Reps. Mariannette Miller-Meeks of Iowa, Buddy Carter of Georgia and John Curtis of Utah — who is running for the Senate — signed the letter. Other signatories of the letter include Republican Reps. Andrew Garbarino of New York, David Valadao of California, Lori Chavez-DeRemer of Oregon, Marc Molinaro of New York, Young Kim of California, Jen Kiggans of Virginia, Don Bacon of Nebraska and Erin Houchin of Indiana.
“The IRA was a bad bill that needs to be reformed, but let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater. The energy tax credits have led to immense investment in American energy production, created good-paying jobs, and spurred innovation,” Garbarino said in a statement shared with the Daily Caller News Foundation. “We need to be engaging in discussions around this and give it due consideration, rather than prematurely jumping to a wholesale repeal.”
All told, Goldman Sachs projects that the true cost of the IRA’s energy subsidies could ultimately reach $1.2 trillion by 2032. IRA subsidies and projects supported by the bill have found their way to GOP districts across the country, posing potential political problems for lawmakers whose districts are the site of development spurred by a bill they initially opposed, according to Bloomberg News.
The offices of Miller-Meeks, Carter, Curtis, Valadao, Chavez-DeRemer, Molinaro, Kim, Kiggans, Bacon and Houchin did not respond immediately to requests for comment. The offices of their fellow signatories Republican Reps. Mike Lawler of New York, Anthony D’Esposito of New York, Nick LaLota of New York, Thomas Kean of New Jersey, David Joyce of Ohio, Juan Ciscomani of Arizona and Mark Amodei of Nevada did not respond immediately to requests for comment.
*********************************************************
Big coal miner retreating from "Green" policies
Glencore chief executive Gary Nagle will test the ESG purists as he reverses plans to jettison coal and instead focus on harvesting the rivers of cash it generates.
Some of Australia’s biggest investors, including super funds will be quietly cheering him on.
For now Glencore’s own investors are happy to let yield win out over green investing, but that also marks a decisive shift in how big money is approaching ESG.
Big investors including Australian super funds have shown they have a higher threshold for energy pragmatism over green investing than their European counterparts.
Through its history as a commodities trader dating back to pugnacious long-time boss Ivan Glasenberg, Glencore, the world’s biggest thermal coal miner, has long resisted pressure to shun coal and was a reluctant mover on ESG conventions.
Despite taking the green hits, Glencore stuck with it and now the investors are moving in Glencore’s favour. Nagle has broken ranks with the mining pack on coal and in doing so has given his investors cover.
It’s been a twisted path for Glencore to get to this position.
Last year’s $US7bn ($10.7bn) buyout of Elk Valley Resources from Canada’s Teck was pitched to help the Anglo-Swiss Glencore bulk up on steelmaking coal to give its existing operations scale and more investor appeal to be spun out.
However, Nagle had a change of heart after citing overwhelming feedback from Glencore’s own shareholders that “supported the retention” of the thermal and met coal businesses. Shortly after the November deal he started getting approaches from big shareholders, but it was Australian activist investor Tribeca that led the charge urging Glencore to stick with coal.
Tribeca also pushed for Glencore to move its primary listing from London to the ASX where super investors were prepared to run a wider lens over coal’s role through the energy transition.
Think of the model of AGL or Origin Energy, where big super has been prepared to back the profits of today’s dirty coal-fired power plants in order to harvest the cash to fund the transition to a renewable energy future.
In AGL’s case, the giant Loy Yang brown coal plant will stay open for another decade.
Last year Macquarie Group made more profit from oil and gas trading and storage than it did green investing, yet it kept pushing record highs.
Glencore says keeping the coal operations “should enhance Glencore’s cash-generating capacity” to fund opportunities to buy greener friendly metals such as copper.
The coal operations where prices have remained elevated will also “accelerate and optimise” the return of excess cash back to shareholders.
So too the long-mooted coal exit was inconsistent with ESG principals, Glencore added, given its stated plan to run down its thermal coal mines over their life. This policy replaced a Glasenberg-era climate pledge of keeping an annual cap on coal production at 150 million tonnes annually.
Glencore’s move will certainly clear the path to put investor pressure on other diversified miners looking to exit coal. BHP has already sold off its lower-quality met coal operations to Whitehaven. Its Mt Arthur thermal coal mine is slated to close by 2030.
Elsewhere, Anglo American is in the process of selling its met coal operations for a mooted $5bn, which includes Australian mines. BHP’s since-shelved takeover of Anglo spurred on the exit. Other names such as Rio Tinto and South 32 have already exited coal.
To show the mood is changing among investors, even New York-based BlackRock, the world’s biggest asset manager that has been at the front of ESG push, is quietly curbing some of its green animal spirits.
BlackRock CEO Larry Fink’s full-throated approach to ESG investing in the past has seen him subject of political attacks which was impacting the $US10 trillion ($15 trillion) investor as some US state governments cut pension plan mandates.
This year has been one of transition for Fink. He has pulled back from ESG advocacy to acknowledge there is a balance that needs to be struck between energy transition and the need for energy security, particularly in the aftermath of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Where gas was once shunned, it is now a key plank in the transition, Fink says.
Glencore is now adding coal to the mix.
***************************************
All my main blogs below:
http://jonjayray.com/covidwatch.html (COVID WATCH)
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)
https://immigwatch.blogspot.com (IMMIGRATION WATCH)
http://jonjayray.com/short/short.html (Subject index to my blog posts)
***********************************************
Jim Hansen and his twin
No comments:
Post a Comment