Iran blows up Saudi oil wells

Saudi Arabia Has ‘No Excuse for Its Military Failures’…
Oil spikes most in history…
OPEC, Russia Hold Off Pumping More…
Trump says USA does not need Middle East oil, but cargoes keep coming…

Is this really a one-day wonder? The story has virtually disappeared from the news. Maybe it’s just a ripple but maybe it’s not. We might soon find out how much we like things without cheap energy.

Of course, there is always this: Iran Dismisses US Claim It Was Behind Saudi Oil Strikes, Says Ready for War. Which might be looked at in the context of this: Pentagon chief blames Iran for ‘unprecedented attack’ on Saudi oil facilities as military considers options.

That’s what blogs are now for, to post the minor stories of the day while the media goes on about idiotic and obviously false claims of sexual harassment by Supreme Court justices by women who cannot even remember any such event.

Posted in International, Media, Politics of the Left | 19 Comments

Tuesday Forum: September 17, 2019

Posted in Open Forum | 483 Comments

C.L. : Tim Flannery names Andrew Bolt and Alan Jones as anti-child ‘predators’

A “furious” Tim Flannery has a column at ABC Online this morning whose stated purpose is to ‘change the language’ in relation to “denialists,” such that henceforth they be regarded as akin to, and be associated with, child abusers.

The gloves are off: ‘predatory’ climate deniers are a threat to our children.

… the climate crisis has now grown so severe that the actions of the denialists have turned predatory: they are now an immediate threat to our children … school principals must decide whether they will allow their students to march in the global climate strike in an effort to save themselves from the climate predators in our midst.

Who are these child predators? He names two:

Far fewer humans will survive on our warming planet

That future Earth may have enough resources to support far fewer people than the 7.6 billion it supports today. British scientist James Lovelock has predicted a future human population of just a billion people. Mass deaths are predicted to result from, among other causes, disease outbreaks, air pollution, malnutrition and starvation, heatwaves, and suicide.

My children, and those of many prominent polluters and climate denialists, will probably live to be part of that grim winnowing — a world that the Alan Joneses and Andrew Bolts of the world have laboured so hard to create…

As I have become ever more furious at the polluters and denialists, I have come to understand they are threatening my children’s well-being as much as anyone who might seek to harm a child.

I do hope both gentlemen contact their lawyers.

Believe it or not, Flannery goes on to describe 16 year-old “global movement” leader Greta Thunberg as a “young woman.” The highly vulnerable autistic Swede is, in fact, a child under Australian, European and international law.

Posted in Guest Post, Hypocrisy of progressives, Shut it down. Fire them all. | 78 Comments

Is the war on plant food sustainable?

Sustainability is the trojan horse that the global environmentalists have used to smuggle a crippling burden of red and green tape into the law and regulations of the western world.

The biggest play in their book is the threat to life on earth posed by human emissions of carbon dioxide. Hence the War on CO2.

Truth is not just a casualty, it was killed to get the war started. Wars are expensive and this one is costing trillions. Wars call for heroic sacrifices as well, so the cost of electric power has doubled as we inject more and more intermittent energy into the grid.

But this part of the war on CO2 is itself not sustainable because in the absence of storage there has to be 100% backup for wind and solar power. How much more needs to be said?

There is more. Spending that much money to increase power prices and undermine energy security plus the damage to human beings and the planet looks plain crazy given that the objective is to reduce the supply of plant food. We were reminded yesterday that most plants evolved with CO2 levels in the range 1500ppm to 4000ppm so the level of 400 ppm at present represents almost a starvation diet. What is more, how can people claim that increasing CO2 will generate unbearable temperatures if plants evolved when the atmosphere contained far more CO2 than we enjoy at present. How come there was no problem with warming then?

BTW on advice from mem I have ordered Lynne Balzer The Green New Deal and Climate Change.

PS. Are they learning about the trojan horse in school these days?

To keep the number of posts down I may add other climate items to this post during the day. Our server has trouble when posts proliferate.

The Salvatore Babones Newsletter on line.

Posted in Global warming and climate change policy, Rafe | 5 Comments

Q&A Forum: September 16, 2019

Posted in Open Forum | 151 Comments

Advice to the teachers and the kiddies who are worried about CO2

Jo Nova on Tuesday. The Green Religion of Intolerance.

Something else. Solar panel toxic waste.

Carbon dioxide is a colourless gas that occurs in a barely measurable trace in the air we breathe.

It is the foundation of life on earth because it is the starting point for building all the chemicals in living matter.

The process that occurs in green plants called photosynthesis uses sunlight, CO2, water and some essential minerals to start the amazing production process that led from the first primitive single-celled organisms through the evolutionary pathway to every form of life on earth at present.

Over billions of years the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere declined from almost 50% to modern times when it is around 0.04% and it is measured in parts per million. During the Little Ice Age before the Industrial Revolution the level was below 300 parts per million. It is now a little over 400 parts per million and increasing at the rate of 2 ppm each year.

The level fell below 200ppm during the last Ice Age (not the Little Ice Age) threatened life on earth. The increase in CO2 since then and especially after the industrial revolution has rescued life on earth from that precarious situation and satellite observations since 1980 show a remarkable greening of the planet.

Still the current level is far short of the optimum for most plants and the process of greening will continue as long as the supply of CO2 continues to improve.

There is some concern about what might happen when the level of CO2 doubles from the 300ppm in 1850. With 400ppm at present, increasing by 2ppm per annum we have a hundred years to plan.

So go back to school and learn some science!

PS. 0.4% CO2 corrected to .04%. The link in the post was only inserted to show the critical level in the Little Ice Age but there is a lot more valuable information there in a short and clear read. Highly recommended

From Forest Stylist in the comments. As most plants evolved with CO2 levels 1500ppm to 4000ppm, 400 ppm represents a starvation diet. Some of the increase in crop productivity thought to be due to genetic improvement may in fact be due to higher CO2 levels (which makes photosynthesis more efficient at a given humidity).

See also Chapter 13 in Climate Science: The Facts 2017 summarized in three posts last year including this one.

Jo Nova on bushfires, CO2 and other stuff.

Posted in Global warming and climate change policy, Rafe | 65 Comments

45 Whoppers about the Barrier Reef

Interesting that The Conversation (Academic rigour, journalistic flair) is funded by the Group of Eight leading universities presumably to demonstrate their commitment to learning and scholarship. Or is the “unlearning” motto at the University of Sydney a real aspiration and not just a malicious rumour? Anyway check out this story about the Reef.

Very slick and impressive presentation but!

Before you go…
It is easier than ever before for vested interests to spread disinformation on vital matters of public interest. If you want to know what’s really going you need to hear from the experts willing to drill down to the truth. But we can’t do that vital work unless readers donate. Please make a donation.

Vested interests spreading disinformation? The horror!

Posted in Global warming and climate change policy, Rafe | 23 Comments

How many times in a year is it OK for the grid to go down?

People who plan things like drains and flood levees usually consider the frequency of events that challenge the capacity of the system. So they plan for 10, 20, 50 and maybe 100 year events as well as they can to calculate the cost/benefit ratio of the options. If it really matters they conduct exhaustive due diligence analysis to consider what could happen in the worst conceivable case.

Did the people who planned the entry of unreliable energy into the grid every hear about due diligence and worst case scenarios? Like the choke points in the supply of wind and sunlight.

Did they consider what would happen when the unreliables drive coal-fired power stations out of business? Do they have shares in gas companies?

Apart from South Australia we have been shielded from the reality of this situation because there is just enough reliable power to get by most of the time. Did the South Australians learn anything from the experience?

This issue can only be resolved after a frank admission on both sides of politics that we should never have gone down this path in advance of storage. Step up to the plate Albo and show us that you are more about the Australian people than you care about Green preferences.

WHAT IS THE POINT OF WIND POWER? The % contribution of Wind to the evening peak (after sunset) in recent weeks from 25 July to last night. 6, 2.4, 3, 2.5, 2.5, 3.5, 4, 5, 1, 4.5, 7, 4.5, 15, 16, 4, 10, 1.3, 6, 10, 6.5, 7, 15, 10, 14, 15, 15, 9, 13, 4, 3, 5, 8, 4, 4.5, 5, 7, 10, 3, 5, 6.5, 17, 14, 3, 7, 2, 10, 6, 6. What is the point of doubling, tripling or even quadrupling that if we lose two more coal-fired plants?

UPDATE. Investment in wind and sun stalling in Australia, demonstrating that the unreliables depend on government assistance and can’t stand on their own. Fancy that. And so cheap too!

COMING UP, electricity-free kitchen appliances, h/t bemused.

Posted in Global warming and climate change policy, Rafe | 34 Comments

How unreliable energy has brought the lucky country to the brink of ruin. Look at the the choke point for unreliable energy

Australia is a very lucky country. Is there a country more blessed with resources to provide cheap and abundant energy? Vast amounts of coal, gas, uranium and a bit of mountain country for hydro. What more could we want?

Renewable energy of course, and we have wind and sun in abundance as well.

Australia also has a very special characteristic that is not shared by the nations and states on the mainland of Europe and North America. This is not so lucky. We do not have neighbours to help out if we are a bit short of power for any reason, like low winds at night.

So here we are in the age of RE and what is happening? We have to confront the choke point in the supply of unreliable energy without neighbours to help. We had no warning of this from overseas because in Europe and North America the choke point is a bother for states that went long on unreliables but it is not lethal (although it almost was in Germany, more than once).

So we should have been the last place on earth to go ahead with publicly funded unreliable energy in advance of storage facilities instead of setting records for the pace of development. As the Dutch commentator and wit Gert Jaap explained, we have put the horse of unreliable energy ahead of the cart of storage.

Lets see if the geniuses who got us into this pickle can find a way to get us out of it.

Posted in Global warming and climate change policy, Rafe | 70 Comments

Open Forum: September 14, 2019

Posted in Open Forum | 1,974 Comments