The ice age cometh

ice age

The stupidity of policies to counter global warming may yet turn out to be one of the most lethal set of policies ever devised by the human race. We found ourselves able after a million years of primitive existence to harness various forms of energy to keep us warm, power our businesses, cook our food and transport us from place to place. For this, we have been using various forms of carbon-based fossil fuels that, because they have defied the leftist fools who predicted capitalist misery, have decided to bring in this misery on their own. They are despicable in their worm-eaten destructive impulse. But in this particular episode, may yet contribute to a catastrophic future of such immense misfortune, that there are no words to describe how misbegotten their effects will be.

Maurice Newman has a review of David Archibald’s The Twilight of Abundance: Why Life in the 21st Century Will Be Nasty, Brutish, and Short in today’s Australian, a book that I have a much longer review of coming out in the September Quadrant. But Newman, whose piece begins by asking What if David Archibald is Right?, spells out what ought to be part of our communal conversation.

Russian scientists at the Pulkovo Observatory are convinced the world is in for a cooling period that will last for 200-250 years. Respected Norwegian solar physicist Pal Brekke warns temperatures may actually fall for the next 50 years. Leading British climate scientist Mike Lockwood, of Reading University, found 24 occasions in the past 10,000 years when the sun was declining as it is now, but could find none where the decline was as fast. He says a return of the Dalton Minimum (1790-1830), which included “the year without summer”, is “more likely than not”. In their book The Neglected Sun, Sebastian Luning and Fritz Varen­holt think that temperatures could be two-tenths of a degree Celsius cooler by 2030 because of a predicted anaemic sun. They say it would mean “warming getting postponed far into the future”.

What worries me even in this review is that it merely suggests that AGW may be wrong. It doesn’t set out what happens if there is an actual global cooling. The effects, if Archibald is anywhere near right, are the deaths of tens of millions of people in a world that will no longer be able to feed, clothe and house its population because energy supplies are lower while growing seasons have been cut short. If you think it’s science fiction, the Great Plague wiped out between one-third and half of Europe’s population in a two year space. This is a future we can actually prepare for if we start thinking that we might have to. In the meantime, we are savaging our energy industries and raising the cost of all forms of production, including farm production. Human stupidity knows no upper bound. If this is yet another instance, well that’s how it will be. But we have been warned, and if you are still of a mind to side with the likes of Obama and Julia Gillard on the need to cut our greenhouse gases, you may end up being party to one of the greatest catastrophes the human race may ever have to endure.

This entry was posted in Global warming and climate change policy. Bookmark the permalink.

128 Responses to The ice age cometh

  1. C.L.

    The stupidity of policies to counter global warming may yet turn out to be one of the most lethal set of policies ever devised by the human race.

    No no.

    Let me fix that typo for you.

    The stupidity of policies to counter global warming may yet turn out to be one of the most lethal set of policies ever devised by the Western left.

  2. I’m sorry, but the year without a summer was as a result of volcanic activity, the eruption of Mount Tambora to be precise.

    This may have been exacerbated by the climate downturn, or the downturn may have exacerbated the effects of the volcanic activity, but no eruption would have meant no year without a summer.

  3. Robert O.

    History tells us that global cooling was not good for mankind in general and although it was good to skate on the Thames river, it also wiped out the early Norse colonists in Greenland. Perhaps our politicians will enjoy skating on Lake Burley Griffin to keep warm.

    Seriously, just imagine the useful things that could have been done with the expenditure wasted on global warming. Instead, both the leaders of the Greens and Labor still believe in climate change since they will be proved right whichever way it goes.

    Strategically, Australia should start on nuclear power stations and develop an industry which processes yellow cake into fuel rods, re-processes spent fuel rods, and leases them to others and also develops a decent storage facility in the middle of nowhere west of Alice Springs.

    People are talking about Thorium and also nuclear fusion which should be investigated too.

  4. steve

    the world has too many people. If this is how we fix it…….

  5. Ant

    She’ll be right here in Victoria coz we were schmart and built a desal plant. Yeah!

  6. Rabz

    I simply can’t see the mantra of the climate catastrophists changing – the cause will still be humanity (or more specifically, human economic activity) and the “remedies” will also remain the same – more laws, more taxes, more regulation, less individual freedom, etc.

  7. Demosthenes

    their worm-eaten destructive impulse

    At least your writing is getting more vivid, Steve.

  8. C.L.

    I remember Bird talking about an Ice Age here several years ago.

    He was howled down by certain unnamed libertarians who were spruiking an ETS as the best “market-based” solution to the “problem” of – what was then still called – “global warming.”

    Try selling bottled burps in the City, said I; seize that market.

  9. Fisky

    Bird fully believed the science of climate change (C02 = rising temperatures), so his solution to the coming brutal and pulverising ice age was to emit as much C02 as possible.

    His position is certainly much more consistent than Abbott’s.

  10. JC

    The Neglected Sun, Sebastian Luning and Fritz Varen­holt think that temperatures could be two-tenths of a degree Celsius cooler by 2030 because of a predicted anaemic sun. They say it would mean “warming getting postponed far into the future”.

    2/10′s? so what? Big deal!

    What worries me even in this review is that it merely suggests that AGW may be wrong. It doesn’t set out what happens if there is an actual global cooling. The effects, if Archibald is anywhere near right, are the deaths of tens of millions of people in a world that will no longer be able to feed, clothe and house its population because energy supplies are lower while growing seasons have been cut short. If you think it’s science fiction, the Great Plague wiped out between one-third and half of Europe’s population in a two year space. This is a future we can actually prepare for if we start thinking that we might have to. In the meantime, we are savaging our energy industries and raising the cost of all forms of production, including farm production. Human stupidity knows no upper bound. If this is yet another instance, well that’s how it will be. But we have been warned, and if you are still of a mind to side with the likes of Obama and Julia Gillard on the need to cut our greenhouse gases, you may end up being party to one of the greatest catastrophes the human race may ever have to endure.

    Steve, I hate to say it, but you’re making the exact same mistake as the gerbil warmers. You can’t cast out an eye beyond 30 years without it being nothing more than crystal ball gazing. Furthermore, lets say the earth cooled over the next 200/250 years. Again, so what? If it did cool drastically over than period it certainly wouldn’t be a good thing, but you also have to ask is what is the technology in use at a particular point in time.

    Either way, it’s nothing to worry about. What we really have to concern ourselves with is avoiding any form of the current Western Left gaining power as this would retard the rate of growth and therefore new technologies. They just fuck everything up. Everything!

  11. JC

    While on the subject of gerbil warming and cooling. Why the fuck is the Climate Authority still operating when there is no longer a carbonic tax? Why is Clive Hamilton earning two, not one but two government stipends? Clive, just do the right thing and resign, preferably both jobs, but most certainly as a gerbil authoritarian. In other words get the fuck off the taxpayer dime, you miscreant.

  12. stackja

    The current prediction for Sunspot Cycle 24 gives a smoothed sunspot number maximum of about 70 in late 2013. The smoothed sunspot number reached 75.4 in November 2013) so the official maximum will be at least this high. The smoothed sunspot number has been rising again towards this second peak over the last five months and has now surpassed the level of the first peak (66.9 in February 2012). Many cycles are double peaked but this is the first in which the second peak in sunspot number was larger than the first. We are currently over five years into Cycle 24. The current predicted and observed size makes this the smallest sunspot cycle since Cycle 14 which had a maximum of 64.2 in February of 1906.
    linky

    The Greens, of course, can control the Sunspot Cycle.

  13. egg_

    I’m sorry, but the year without a summer was as a result of volcanic activity, the eruption of Mount Tambora to be precise.

    Shit happens – all the time – do they model for this?

  14. Rob MW

    “For this, we have been using various forms of carbon-based fossil fuels that, because they have defied the leftist fools who predicted capitalist misery, have decided to bring in this misery on their own. They are despicable in their worm-eaten destructive impulse.”

    Steve – I hope that it is ok to say that that is about how I would have said the same thing if only I knew exactly how to word it. (lol) ……… “worm-eaten” eh……lol. The only thing lower than that is shark shit.

  15. JohnA

    Human stupidity knows no upper bound.

    This may be an opportunity to test and approve another of Einstein’s theories – the limits or boundaries associated with the universe:

    “Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I’m not sure about the universe.”

    Dr Russell Humphries “Starlight and Time” confirms the second clause.

  16. JohnA

    egg_ #1417323, posted on August 14, 2014 at 9:29 pm

    I’m sorry, but the year without a summer was as a result of volcanic activity, the eruption of Mount Tambora to be precise.

    Shit happens – all the time – do they model for this?

    Obviously not, otherwise we wouldn’t be in it – right?

  17. I am the Walrus, Koo Koo K'choo

    But but but … the soience is settled. Julia said so.

    The catastrophists, without missing a beat, will find some way to blame this on capitalism and ‘the rich’. You watch.

    ‘Worm eaten’ was a v. nice touch, well done.

  18. duncanm

    global cooling won’t kill as many this time.

    Transport of goods is infinitely better, and we have the ability to move agriculture with the climate.

  19. IC-1101

    The scary thing is that leftist policy used to dictate and eventually kill industry is quickly forgotten amid a flurry of hyperventilation and selectiveness from the left on other far less important issues. The left has a short memory and is simply unable to condemn and criticise its own kind. With a mainstream media dominated by leftists with dangerous amplification, this makes it difficult to actually amplify the fallacies of their abhorrent climate policy. We can try, but they’ll always find a way to propel the “horrors” of capitalism to the front of public discourse, and somehow shape how failed socialistic policy was actually the product of the other side’s corporate/capitalist/conservative agenda.

  20. egg_

    Obviously not, otherwise we wouldn’t be in it – right?

    I was inferring that various natural events modulate the climate, no need for the condescension, genius.

  21. Rob MW

    “……….and we have the ability to move agriculture with the climate.” – Yeah that’s what the Woolly Mammoths thought when they reach Utah.

  22. Yobbo

    Warming or cooling will not have anywhere near the same consequences as it has had in the past due to technological advancement.

    But yeah, hard to take this post seriously when the quoted commentator doesn’t know what caused the year without a summer.

  23. nerblnob

    if you are still of a mind to side with the likes of Obama and Julia Gillard on the need to cut our greenhouse gases, you may end up being party to one of the greatest catastrophes

    No, you’re getting hysterical and catastrophist there.

    Reducing “greenhouse gases” has done and will do fuckall to change the climate either way.

    We need to concentrate on “how much” energy we can make, not fret stupidly about the source and tax ourselves into oblivion

  24. Renato

    The problem for the IPCC is that they have dismissed the effects of sunspots in either causing or adding to the big rise in temperature from 1975 to 1998. This is because the sun’s heat output doesn’t vary all that much, regardless of sunspots.

    Back in 1982 I bought my first telescope and using projection looked at the face of the sun for the next few years. The face of the sun was always pock marked all over with huge sunspot groups. Then it tapered off, and from around 2000 sunspots have been negligible in comparison to the 1980s.

    So if the IPCC accept or give any kind of credence to the warnings of these various scientists about the sun, they undermine the basis of AGW – why wasn’t the high sunspot activity of the 80s the main cause the global warming?.

    The theory of why sunspots do have an effect on earth temperature came from scientists in Scandinavia over 15 years ago. The theory goes that at times of little sunspot activity, cosmic ray particles hit the earth which causes cloud formation at lower levels, and a colder planet. At times of high sunspot activity, the solar wind particles knock the cosmic ray particles away, leading to cloud formation at higher levels, and a warmer planet. Plainly though, to date they haven’t proved that theory, since the man-made Global Warming theory still holds primacy.

    The consequences of betting billions of dollars on one theory being right, if it then proves that the other theory is right are indeed horrendous.
    Regards.

  25. entropy

    Rob MW
    #1417512, posted on August 14, 2014 at 11:58 pm
    “……….and we have the ability to move agriculture with the climate.” – Yeah that’s what the Woolly Mammoths thought when they reach Utah.

    Actually that is true. As examples I give you the new varieties of Apple developed around Stanthorpe. They weren’t bred with a specific plan to still fruit without a lot of frosts, but they do because there have always been less frosts in Stanthorpe than Young or Batlow.

    And then we have GM to speed things up if we need to. So any hysteria about any type of climate change and agriculture is just ignorant. We can breed new varieties much quicker than climate change, regardless of what actually happens.

  26. cohenite

    Of course it will cool; the Earth is basically glacial which is why this interim period is called an interglacial; typically interglacials are a boon to life but are very brief in the scale of things; this one will end soon; look at the graph and then spit in the face of an alarmist when you next see one of the bastards.

  27. Tel

    …this one will end soon; look at the graph…

    Where “soon” means a thousand years from now at least. Check the scale on that graph.

  28. duncanm

    But yeah, hard to take this post seriously when the quoted commentator doesn’t know what caused the year without a summer.

    Yabbo.. try re-reading the quote for me:

    He says a return of the Dalton Minimum (1790-1830), which included “the year without summer”..

    Volcanic eruptions large enough to alter the climate like Tambora seem to come along every hundred years or less. The chances of one happening during a climate minima are pretty high.

  29. Tel

    So any hysteria about any type of climate change and agriculture is just ignorant. We can breed new varieties much quicker than climate change, regardless of what actually happens.

    We have a worldwide transport system to rapidly re-deploy any crop to any location.

    We can store water in dams and move it around in pipes.

  30. But yeah, hard to take this post seriously when the quoted commentator doesn’t know what caused the year without a summer.

    Yabbo.. try re-reading the quote for me:

    He says a return of the Dalton Minimum (1790-1830), which included “the year without summer”..

    Oops. </a

  31. Bruce of Newcastle

    The only thing which could cause a lack of food is incompetence and Green ideology.

    Food can now be produced without the Sun ever being involved. All it takes is desalinated sea water, energy and fertilizer. The latter is mainly produced from energy, air and water, which is how the fertilizer plant in my town produces vast amounts of annomium nitrate.

    Any indoor plant grower can tell you how to do it.

    The common factor with this is energy.

    There is plenty of energy available in the form of coal, oil, gas, uranium and thorium, all of which we know how to use. The Greens oppose their use. They also push biofuels which cause food prices to rise and starve people who cannot then afford the high prices.

    So my suggestion of how to feed the world even during a Little Ice Age is this. Round up all the Greens and send them to Mosul. They cause more deaths through their policies than mad Islamists do with their AK-47′s, so they should get on very well together. Then the rest of us can get on with the job of producing enough cheap food to feed everyone.

  32. John Comnenus

    Bruce,
    Thats a great Green Mosul solution. LOL

  33. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    No, send the Greens to absolute hell. Oh wait, that’s Mosul now, isn’t it?

  34. Max

    … they’ll always find a way to propel the “horrors” of capitalism to the front of public discourse, and somehow shape how failed socialistic policy was actually the product of the other side’s corporate/capitalist/conservative agenda.

    There will always be 1 mansion on the hill that 10,000 people will point to and think “I deserve that” – they never consider that the’ll have to share it with 10,000 of their bretheren to achieve “Equaladee”.

    Hence why the left will always have envy and why the’ll always be at war with their own.

  35. cohenite

    Where “soon” means a thousand years from now at least. Check the scale on that graph.

    This interglacial is in its twilight; it may end through one of these: Heinrich and Dansgaard-Oeschger. D-O events typically feature quick, even abrupt, over 50 years, increases in temperature followed by centuries of cooler conditions. We have had some weak bursts of temperature similar to D-O events beginning in 1850. The bigger worry is that any longer cooler period following the warmer periods will be like the Younger Dryas which occurred over about a year and featured a temperature drop of 15C.

    Point being I wouldn’t rely on a gradual cooling.

  36. manalive

    Retired CSIRO chief research scientist Barrie Hunt’s letter in the Australian today, in response to Maurice Newman’s article, summarises climate-worriers’ position I think:
    “Over the past 100 years, the carbon dioxide amount has increased from 280 parts per million to 400 ppm. Can Newman explain why such a large increase in this gas would not have produced a warming?”.
    They reverse the scientific method, they assume a priori the result of what they claim to be investigating.
    Mr Hunt goes on:
    “The present hiatus in the global warming increase is attributable to internal climatic variability, and I am confident that the warming trend will return in a year or so …”.
    Science cannot explain ‘internal climatic variability’, which can exaggerate stand-alone CO2 induced warming as well as mask it.
    “Predictions can be very difficult—especially about the future”.

  37. John Comnenus

    The answer to cooling ‘catastrophism, will be the same as the answer to heating catastrophism. More government, more taxes, more regulation, less freedom. It will be advocated by the same people and through the same institutions – all majority funded in one way or another by the tax payer.

    It will attract the same rent seeking business people seeing an easy way to use catastrophism to make up for their inability to develop products that generate enough utility to make a profit.

    Humanity survived the last Dalton Minimum, just like it survived previous warming. There might be a lot more of us now, but we are far more technologically advanced, infinitely more productive and a lot more adaptable. If the world cools half a degree or five degrees – so what.

    Don’t buy into catastrophism – it is always a stalking horse for the Left to try and take more control over our lives and our pockets.

  38. Tel

    Scientists recognise that without greenhouse gases, the Earth would have a temperature of minus 18C and would be uninhabitable.

    You have to wonder how anyone measured that?

    Does Barry mean the Earth would uniformly be minus 18C or average minus 18C? Speaking for myself, I don’t inhabit an average location, I inhabit a specific location… dunno what other people are doing.

  39. Bear Necessities

    I think the last 2o years have proved that we don’t know much about Climate. Whether its Catastrophic Warming or Catastrophic Cooling, any predictions of either should be taken with much skepticism.

  40. Elwood

    This stuff is just as silly as the Warmanista. BTW, Archibald isn’t a scientist, he’s a former Resources sector analyst. credibility no higher than Flummery.

    We are adding 2ppm per year of CO2, which does have some warming effect. That should at least offset any plausible cooling trend from a quieter sun, or other natural causes.

  41. Tim Neilson

    Bruce of Newcastle
    #1417726, posted on August 15, 2014 at 7:40 am
    “The only thing which could cause a lack of food is incompetence and Green ideology.”
    Unfortunately neither are in short supply.
    And, in accordance with Blair’s law, they symbiotically feed off each other to maximise the damage they cause.

  42. cohenite

    We are adding 2ppm per year of CO2, which does have some warming effect. That should at least offset any plausible cooling trend from a quieter sun, or other natural causes.

    Who’s adding 2 ppm? What a bunch of bullshit. There is cogent evidence that some if not all of the increase in atmospheric CO2 is natural.

  43. incoherent rambler

    See
    http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/08/02/proof-that-us-warming-is-mann-made/

    The problem has become that no researcher can trust the raw data.

  44. cohenite

    For those who are interested the proof of the greenhouse temperature of 33C is here by Arthur Smith.

    A critique of Smith by Kramm et al is here.

    I won’t bother linking to Gerlich and Tscheuschner (2007, 2009). Suffice to say the temperature of the Earth is a sum of two quantities. One is the so-called effective temperature, determined by the available incoming energy (depending on the solar constant, planetary albedo [reflectivity] and internal heat sources as ocean-atmosphere heat exchange, industrial heat generation and so on), now about 255 Kelvin or minus 18 Celsius.

    The other is the greenhouse temperature, coming from the presence of infrared-active gases (H2O, CO2, methane, ozone, etc.) and clouds in the atmosphere, generally accepted as about 33 degrees Celsius. These two give up the known 288 K (+15 C) global average surface temperature.

  45. Tel

    For those who are interested the proof of the greenhouse temperature of 33C is here by Arthur Smith.

    OK, so from the link you gave:

    Similar to the effective albedo, an effective emissivity and effective radiative temperature can be defined as averages over the planetary surface:

    Equation (7) is a fourth power law geomeric average. Not the same type of average that climate scientists use and anyhow, I ask again, do you inhabit a specific location on Earth, or do you inhabit a global average?

  46. Tel

    If λ is small (heat capacity or rotation frequency high or latitude close to the poles), heating or cooling will occur only slowly, and the temperature will stay close to Teff throughout the day (y will be close to 1).

    We know from measurement of dry places (deserts, etc) that temperature variation between night and day is large, the dirt is a poor conductor of heat, and heating/cooling does NOT occur slowly.

    If λ is large (heat capacity or rotation frequency low, latitude closer to the equator) then heating and cooling are rapid, and the temperature variation is more significant.

    If Earth had no water, that’s exactly what would happen, large temperature variation, both temporal and spacial. In other words, the significant effect of the water is the transport and regulation of temperature. Water carries heat from the equator to the poles (i.e. cools the hot places and warms the cold places), and it reduces the day/night variation and THAT is what makes the Earth surface inhabitable at specific locations.

    The global average is largely meaningless and irrelevant.

  47. cohenite

    Smith’s paper is an interesting start to look at the Global Average Temperature [GAT]. The fallacy of a GAT was first dealt with in Essex’s famous paper and subsequently by Pielke Snr.

    I summed up the issue at another Cat thread:

    The Earth energy balance; indeed eve is right because the EEB can be the opposite of the temperature trend; that is global average temperature [GAT] may be going up while the EEB is declining; 2 words and an equation explain; the 2 words are Stephan-Boltzmann and the equation is (A + B)^4 > A^4 + B^4; GAT can increase but the EEB need not change; conversely, the EEB can vary but the GAT temperature stay the same. SB explains this; the SB equation is E = sigma x T^4, where sigma = 5.67×10^-8, and T is temperature in K.

    What this means is that the radiated energy increases as the 4th power of temperature. The base temperature is crucial; for instance, a 50′C rise in temperature has a different change in radiated energy depending on the base value; for example:

    From 200K-250K radiated energy increases from 91-222 W/m^2 – an increase of 131 W/m^2.

    From 300-350K radiated energy increases from 459-851 W/m^2 – an increase of 392 W/m^2.

    And this is where the equation, (A + B)^4 > A^4 + B^4, comes into play. The GAT is the average of all the anomaly temperatures ate various sites around the world. If you average all those sites you get (A + B)^4; but that ignores the base temperature at the particular sites which is where A^4 + B^4 comes into play; for instance the base temperature at the Arctic is very cold so this means an increase in temperature at the Arctic or the West Antarctic Peninsula, which are both slightly warming, has a much less radiated energy effect than a slight decrease in temperature in a warmer region, which is happening.

    The slight increase in temperature at the poles will increase GAT but the slight decrease in temperature at the warmer parts will mean based on SB that the EEB will decline.

    Hope that helps.

  48. Leo G

    Fairfax this morning tries to hit down Maurice Newman’s oped with the Club of Rome. Oil, gas and coal industry careerist Ian Dunlop claims the IPCC’s authority as the conductor “of the most extensive scientific investigation ever”, to assert that the world is warming far faster than previously expected, and ththe oceans have continued warming at an accelerating rate,
    “There is evidence that we may have already passed tipping points where the climate jumps from a relatively stable state to a new state far less conducive to human development; to wit, the rapid warming of the Arctic, leading to accelerating sea ice and permafrost melt and large methane and carbon emissions; Greenland and west Antarctic ice sheet disintegration leading to accelerating sea level rise; coral reef destruction; ocean acidification and so forth.”

  49. Lysander

    Politically, Abbott and others should be constantly asking what’s Shorten going to do about AGW.

    Typically his answer will be a “Carbon tax” of some form.

    =Shorten loses.

  50. Boambee John

    Cold kills more efficiently than heat, so if the option is warming or cooling and accepting (purely for the sake of argument) that carbon dioxide does control the earth’s temperature, we should maximise our energy output.

  51. That’s a good quote LeoG. He manages to hit nearly all the talking points – a bit like kids in the USSR in the 70′s were graded on their ability to quote Lenin and Marx in their schoolwork.

  52. Leo G

    “He manages to hit nearly all the talking points – a bit like kids in the USSR in the 70′s were graded on their ability to quote Lenin and Marx in their schoolwork.”

    I particularly enjoyed the implication that we are experiencing the cusp of a new catastrophic post-glacial sea level rise.

  53. Simon

    [quote] “the world has too many people. If this is how we fix it…….”[/quote]

    Bullshit. We have the tech, and the world, to feed and support far more than currently live on our fair planet.

  54. egg_

    If Earth had no water, that’s exactly what would happen, large temperature variation, both temporal and spacial. In other words, the significant effect of the water is the transport and regulation of temperature. Water carries heat from the equator to the poles (i.e. cools the hot places and warms the cold places), and it reduces the day/night variation and THAT is what makes the Earth surface inhabitable at specific locations.

    The global average is largely meaningless and irrelevant.

    +1

    There is also the Early Sun/watery Earth paradox for the atmospheretards.

  55. outsider

    Even a slight decline will have a large impact, you only have to look at the number of premature deaths observed in the UK among poor people who cannot afford heating, especially the elderly – remember the cold hastens your demise from otherwise uncritical illnesses like influenza – which is still a huge killer. You cannot take it lightly in my view.

    “The cold killed 31,000 people last winter – a rise of 29% compared with the previous year. The majority of these deaths were among pensioners – with over-75s accounting for 25,600 winter-related deaths in 2012/13, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS) said.

    The figures follow a bitterly cold start to the year. This March was the coldest since 1962, with an average monthly temperature of just 2.6C (36.7F).”

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/uk-weather-31000-people-died-2852677#ixzz3AQYHTiXR

  56. manalive

    “There is evidence that we may have already passed tipping points …”

    Oh good, now we don’t have to worry, we’re all doomed anyway.
    As with Zeno’s paradox I thought we’d never get there.

  57. Good ol’ Prof. Tim Flannery, the lying hypocrite tries to outdo himself with lying hypocrisy:

    We cannot tolerate deliberate misinformation from people in such influential positions. Today I called for [Maurice] Newman to meet with a group of Australia’s top climate scientists immediately. Newman’s position is untenable if he will not respect scientific expertise and facts.

    We cannot tolerate deliberate misinformation from such people in influential positions. Today, I call for Tim Flannery to meet any group of ordinary Australians who, severally, have at least half a brain and some knowledge of reality immediately. Flannery’s position as a self-serving propagandist for a silly, pseudo-scientific alawmist conjecture ought to be untenable since he will not respect facts but, alas, the man grows ever richer by means of his gross deceptions and delusions.

  58. Bruce of Newcastle

    Today I called for [Maurice] Newman to meet with a group of Australia’s top climate scientists immediately.

    Sounds good. Mr Newman can meet with Bob Carter, David Evans and David Archibald. The warmists are charlatans.

  59. Sadly, Flannery is such a deceiver (as you well know, B.o.N.) that when he says “ a group of Australia’s top climate scientists” he doesn’t really mean a group of Australia’s top climate scientists but some of his silly accomplices who’re equally duplicitous and meretricious “climate scientists”.

  60. cohenite

    Flannery is a loon who should be sued.

    Sounds good. Mr Newman can meet with Bob Carter, David Evans and David Archibald.

    And Stewart Franks, Peter Ridd, David Stockwell, Michael Asten etc

  61. In March, 2012, cohenite, I wrote to Tasmania Police suggesting that Prof. Flannery be prosecuted “for obtaining a financial advantage by deception, for general dishonesty, for conspiracy to defraud, and for numerous other crimes”. I have still not received a report from the police thereon!

  62. Deadman, perhaps you shouldn’t have suggested.
    You should have said ‘required’, as per Crimes Act number and stuff…

  63. John of Mel

    I wouldn’t worry about any changes in climate.
    In 30-40 years the planet we’ll be living in peace (as defined in Koran) and the World’s Grand Mufti will simply issue a fatwa against any inconvenient climate change.

  64. thefrollickingmole

    A while ago i got to ask a question of Flim Flannery on the ABC here in west oz, i knew a straightforward “you speak shit” wouldnt get anywhere so i pointed out that Indias projected mega-super power plants (coal fired, reported in the Guardian so he couldnt “Da Murdoch” it) would dwarf Australias emissions once constructed making all the crap about international agreements moot.

    He switched from prophet of gloom (we must act etc) to “humanity will pull together, its not too late” in a heartbeat.
    I couldnt pin him of figures as I was travelling at the time and didnt have the article in front of me.
    He is a born showman and really doesnt care how contradictory what he says is as he tries to bring people along with him as a showman.

  65. David Brewer

    Sure global warming is probably crap, but this post is wildly overblown.

    First, assuming it is crap, cutting emissions won’t freeze the planet and letting them rip wouldn’t fry it. So there’s is no point wetting yourself about wrong policies – no policy is going to make any material difference to the climate.

    Second, forget about medieval famines when the sun went quiet. Global agricultural production is hundreds of times what it was in the Middle Ages and we could grow bananas at the South Pole if we had to.

    As for plague, we do have flea powder you know, to say nothing of streptomycin.

    The only real argument is that dopey emission policies reduce welfare through waste. True enough, but in that respect a carbon tax (revenue raising) might have been less damaging in principle that Direct Action (expenditure on “picking winners” for the climate).

  66. Bruce of Newcastle

    David – You haven’t worked out just how harmful those “less damaging” policies actually are in practice.

    They devastate the economy, especially poor people. If you compare things like the carbon tax to the do nothing option the NPV of the do nothing option is so far ahead that you’d no longer see the dust.

    Then there are things like the “innocuous” biofuel policies which have indirectly caused deaths of millions of poor people through malnutrition. Nearly half of the US maize crop gets burnt in cars as ethanol, and likewise a vast amount of edible oil is burnt in diesel engines, especially in the EU. Food price inflation has been very significant, and at least part if not all is due to green policies. If you cannot afford enough to eat you are open to all sorts of fatal diseases.

  67. David Brewer

    Bruce – Fair enough, I don’t disagree, but notice biofuels subsidies are again not a broad-based tax, but a “winner picking” policy.

    Many of the enviros seem to have woken up to the damage caused by biofuels subsidies, which were a truly horrendous deal – poverty-inducing, waste of land, not even effective in cutting CO2 emissions.

    But how many more years will it be before they wake up to the fact that the same is true of their winner-picking policies to favour wind, solar and biomass electricity? If a carbon tax had been the only emissions policy, very few of these boondoggles would have got off the ground.

  68. Marion of the Glades

    Sweeties: the Chinese and the EEC and the US are on board with the idea. Certainly we can debate the knucklejaw nonsense of the Labor years. But we live in a market that is now and will in future be characterised by methods that price carbon emission. That much is factual.
    Our need is to make money from it. Preferably not in the way we tried to make money from the OPEC price hikes (power subsidies to various lost souls in the global energy market).

  69. Bruce of Newcastle

    Best way to make money from emissions trading schemes is to sell them short.

    The appropriate market price for carbon emissions certificates is zero dollars per tonne. Anything above that is an unsustainable bubble, which those three links vividly show.

  70. Hope that helps.

    So basically you need to take the average of the fourth power of each component area, and then the fourth root of the result, to get a figure which is comparable to total emission.

    Obvious, but not something I’d noted.

  71. As for plague, we do have flea powder you know, to say nothing of streptomycin.

    The relevant question here is whether we can stay ahead of the curve. A combination of good fortune and good management has kept disease at bay for a couple hundred years; it doesn’t take much consideration to note the effects of a major outbreak today of something we don’t have the capacity to treat.

    Air travel gets shut down. If it gets worse, sea transport will cease.

    Count those chickens.

  72. BilB

    What sort of an idiot are you, BoN? The article that you linked to refers to a very sharp price slump over 6 weeks followed by a slightly larger price bounce back with a net increase of 5% which was attrbuted to weather related influences.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/2014/03/20140326_food.png

    For you to claim

    “Food price inflation has been very significant, and at least part if not all is due to green policies.”

    …on the basis of that piece of “evidence” is a deliberate missrepresentation of the facts. This fits a pattern for you of vaguely research information followed by outlandish claims.

  73. Leo G

    ABC FactCheck Fact Check:
    Responding to Rupert Murdoch’s illustrative point that“ at the moment the North Pole is melting a bit, but the South Pole is getting bigger” ABC FactCheck redefines the polar frigid zones, then claims that :
    - the Antarctic ice sheet area is decreasing; and
    - the Greenland ice sheet area is decreasing significantly;
    - there is no land in the Arctic Circle (or the Arctic Region); and
    - there is no ocean in the Antarctic.
    Therefor, claims FactCheck, Rupert Murdoch’s “illustrative point” that “at the moment the North Pole is melting a bit, but the South Pole is getting bigger” is misleading.

    ABC FactCheck Fact Check investigates the ABC FactCheck claims and finds that the area of Greenland appears unchanged, that the area of Antarctica appears unchanged, that Antarctic sea ice area anomaly appears to be increasing more than the Arctic sea ice area anomaly is decreasing, that there are significant land masses within the Arctic Circle, and significant ocean area (including sea ice) within the Antarctic Circle.

    The verdict is that the ABC FactCheck claims that the polar regions consist only of the Antarctic continent in the south and only of the Arctic sea ice in the north are false and misleading.

  74. Tel

    Food prices look pretty close to linear to me (give or take a ripple here and there).

    http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=HPj

  75. Bruce of Newcastle

    Oh all right BilB, I’ll go find some other refs. Its not as if they’re thin on the ground:

    New paper says biofuels will cause high food price inflation, but don’t worry, you’ll eat less as a result

    Even the IMF has noticed:

    IMF Survey: Biofuel Demand Pushes Up Food Prices

    And The Guardian:

    Biofuels are driving food prices higher

    You want a few hundred more, I could probably find them, and I don’t even have a file on the subject. You sensitive enviro types are starving people in Third World countries so you can feel good driving your SUV’s on edible oil. Why anyone might think you are hypocrites!

    But maybe you can find another Democrat donating Real Climate author who says no its all a myth.

  76. Tel

    Ratio of wages to food prices is more interesting… that’s for the people who have a job of course, and probably doesn’t keep statistics on a lot of cash in hand jobs (below min wage, etc).

    http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=HPm

  77. rickw

    If we compare Earth to Mars, it would seem that what the oceans and the atmosphere do is limit the extremes (day / night, summer / winter, equator / poles) whilst the sun sets the average based on its energy output.

    AGW seems like the tail wagging the dog.

    I would be most interested in what the sun is doing, or isn’t doing.

  78. BilB

    Do you bother reading any of this material, BoN?

    The food issue is entirely political, and the politics are different in each area. The intriguing thing is that a libertarian should be bringing this up. From Argentina

    This is where about 55m tonnes of soya a year, worth $24bn (£14.7bn), starts a journey through the docks to the importers – China, India and Europe.

    And this is now a key battleground in the fight over the global food system. For in South America, those who control the food chain, make money from it, and determine what we eat, are at the heart of a fierce political debate.

    The Argentinian authorities took the dramatic step of suspending all four big transnational traders from their export register this year, accusing them of tax evasion. Last month, it expelled Bunge from the register altogether.

    In an exclusive interview with the Guardian last month, Ricardo Echegaray, head of the Argentinian revenue service (Afip), detailed the charges against them. The companies have all denied the allegations and said they would defend themselves vigorously.

    The industrial soya complex arrived in Argentina from North America with a bang when the government approved the planting of genetically modified crops for the first time in 1996. Since then soya production has gone from about 6m hectares to 17m ha, and 60% of productive land is now given over to the monocrop.

    This is entirely the politics of greed, which is synonymous with Libertarianism. But true to form you are trying to pin this massive failure of conservative governments to represent the interests of their people onto the Green movement. What a smoke screen. I am afraid I have to refer to you in future as “BoN the Con”.

    For what it is worth Australia under Howard produced ethanol predominately from grain. Australia now produces nearly all of its ethanol from sugar cane. We are the most efficient producers in the world yielding up to 12,000 litres of ethanol per hectare. Cane ethanol does not affect the price of sugar as ethanol is not produced from refined sugar, it is produced from the sugar in the cane, cane which is milled differently to cane for sugar and the returns to farmers is based on end product selling price.

    Bio diesel comes from a variety of materials which when you talk to the industry people they will point out that their feed stock is from the food non commercial part of the harvest ie non edible produce.

    The problems for farmers in Australia are entirely climate related, with much of Queensland now officially in drought. I’ve no doubt that you are already concocting a way of blaming that on the Greens.

  79. BilB

    I see Steve Kates that you are determined to plow ward with this “ice age” theme, and I find it no coincidence that Maurice Newman has come out with

    http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/climate-change-measures-like-primitive-civilisations-offering-up-sacrifices-to-appease-the-gods-says-maurice-newman-20140814-3do0v.html

    It will be interesting to see how this plays out and how many other denialists start driving this fiction. I suspect that this is a new assault on climate science cooked up in the denialfest in Las Vegas earlier and we will see a huge effort from those who missed out on this years awards making a play for next years stupidity awards. It is a watching brief.

  80. Bruce of Newcastle

    The Argentinian authorities took the dramatic step of suspending all four big transnational traders from their export register this year, accusing them of tax evasion. Last month, it expelled Bunge from the register altogether.

    First, BilB, I am not a libertarian. Second, Argentina is run by Axel Kicillof who is an actual Marxist economist (an oxymoron which is being proved in Argentina’s sad case). The lawfare persecution of companies is the standard approach of people like Dr Kicillof. He stole YPF off the Spanish. It has been happening in Russia and Venezuela. The result in the latter is a tropical country which can’t feed itself, can’t even get water to the people and you have to take your own toilet paper if you go there (and hope the customs officers don’t steal it off you).

    Making biofuel from edible crops like sugar cane, grain, oil seed, palm or maize should be banned. Indeed because biofuel requires arable land for cultivation – even switchgrass if the cellulostic approach ever becomes practical – it should be completely banned even if it doesn’t use food.

    And ‘non-edible’ is a defense, since most of the non-edible stuff Manidra uses could be animal feed, displacing maize which otherwise is used. And etc. But ethanol subsidies are quite juicy.

    Only a misanthropic monster would advocate a policy that starves poor people.

  81. Do we have our own pet science denier? Should we be checking how much other science he can’t deal with?

  82. Tel

    If we compare Earth to Mars, it would seem that what the oceans and the atmosphere do is limit the extremes (day / night, summer / winter, equator / poles) whilst the sun sets the average based on its energy output.

    In terms of what makes the world livable, limiting the extremes is what makes specific locations livable. That does not imply anything about the global average. Right now, Antarctica is not IMHO considered “livable” and Siberia barely so. If the global average went up, maybe more of Siberia would be livable and less of Arizona, but nobody lives in a global average.

    That’s what annoys me with people saying, “Well if the Earth was a perfectly conducting spherical black body with no atmosphere, it would have a temperature of minus 18C which is too cold for life” Other than as an abstract thought experiment, the result proves nothing at all.

  83. It may be that some of us are looking at the wrong thing here. The planet grows enough food for all of us – it could easily feed twice the amount of people. The issue is transport of those foodstuffs. Once a region becomes embroiled in strife and troubles, the distribution system breaks down, leading to mass starvation and fleeing refugees.

  84. rickw

    Once a region becomes embroiled in strife and troubles, the distribution system breaks down, leading to mass starvation and fleeing refugees.

    Why they have been starving in the bountiful country of Africa since I was a kid and longer. (Poor agricultural practices aside).

  85. BilB

    There is no doubt your are a Libertarian, BoN, judging by your arguments.

    Local biofuel production is an essential part of our future world, your protestations are meaningless and blatantly missinformed. You don’t even understand the basics of the subject. Winston’s comment is the reality. Yes there are people losing land to corrupt politicians in a lot of countries, biofuels where they are involved, are simply the medium for that corruption, not the cause. A crop portion made available for biofuels provides an essential stable income source for farmers in many countries. Palm oil is one of the most versatile crops for that purpose.

  86. Bruce of Newcastle

    There is no doubt your are a Libertarian, BoN, judging by your arguments.

    No I’m not. If you have been paying attention on threads like the SSM and immigration policies of the LDP you will know I think they are fruitloopery. I am a Christian free market capitalist, who happens to be a scientist.

    Local biofuel production is an essential part of our future world

    Again you haven’t been paying attention. Your opinion is stupid since you want to starve poor people to run vehicles of the rich. My position is that nuclear methanol as vehicle fuel is the long term answer.

    2H2O –> H2 + O2 (by nuclear electicity)
    CO2 + H2 –> CO + H2O (by nuclear heat or electrical heating)
    CO + 2H2 –> CH3OH (by nuclear heat or electrical heating)

    All of this is well known chemistry. Economics are good. We have enough U and Th to power our civilization for 20,000 years, by which time we will have done enough R&D to crack nuclear fusion.

    No one needs to starve because of green policies. You are a monster, and so are the human-hating Greens.

  87. Bruce of Newcastle

    Oops, should’ve been “2H2O –> 2H2 + O2″. Hang my chemist’s head in shame.

  88. BilB

    It hasn’t occurred to you, BoN, that people (poor and regular) might like to run their own vehicles and engines with fuel that they made themselves. Best prospects are palm oil, canola oil and algal oil. All from sunlight, of which there is an endless supply.

  89. JC

    Oh Fuck me, Mr. Solar is back, this time peddling shustainability.

  90. Infidel Tiger

    It hasn’t occurred to you, BoN, that people (poor and regular) might like to run their own vehicles and engines with fuel that they made themselves. Best prospects are palm oil, canola oil and algal oil. All from sunlight, of which there is an endless supply.

    This is freaking gold.

    Years ago I saw a piece about some German guy who had converted his Merc to run on the oil from the deep fryer at his fish n’ chip shop. I could only imagine the pong that beast made.

  91. JC

    All from sunlight, of which there is an endless supply.

    Years ago I saw a piece about some German guy who had converted his Merc to run on the oil from the deep fryer at his fish n’ chip shop. I could only imagine the pong that beast made.

    I’d sell some of my Biology stocks to buy this. and it’s shustainable too in a fashion. Stick a turbo charger on or a version of one and Sydney Melbourne up/down the Hume hwy could be done in an hour. It would send fucking morons like Bilbutt to the loon house.

  92. Tel

    Years ago I saw a piece about some German guy who had converted his Merc to run on the oil from the deep fryer at his fish n’ chip shop. I could only imagine the pong that beast made.

    Ask your local fish & chip shop guy how many buyers he has for his fryer oil, bet you can’t guess the answer. There’s a classic Jeremy Clarkson scene where he looks at the camera deadpan and says, “Always remember to pay you fuel tax” then goes back to mixing up backyard biodiesel.

  93. Bruce of Newcastle

    Hasn’t it occurred to you BilB, that poor people in Africa and elsewhere who do not have a car, for whom a car is an unimaginable luxury, would like to…eat?

    In Haiti there are shops which make and sell actual mud pies, flavoured with some edible oil, because the very poor can afford to buy them. The mud makes them feel full.

    Haiti: Mud cakes become staple diet as cost of food soars beyond a family’s reach

    This is what high food prices caused by people like you burning palm oil in their cars does.

  94. BilB

    Rural people without cars are not unlikely to have water pumps for irrigation. Australian outback truckers use canola oil diesel. Australian mining companies use ethanol in their diesel to keep the engines decoked.

    This is just such a junk statement and completely false

    “This is what high food prices caused by people like you burning palm oil in their cars does.”

    Haiti’s problem is that they are a grossly overpopulated Catholic country, thanks to the anti contraception policies of the Vatican, and people have insufficient land to live on let alone farm. Adding to their dilemma was the earth quake which made an already bad situation intollerable. I saw a documentary on Hait’s plight years ago when the need for firewood (charcoal) for cooking had completely denuded the country.

    Typically though BoN the Con wants to frame this totally as a biofuels issue, and yet again he is completely wrong.

    “A 2010 study also by the World Bank concluded that their previous study may have overestimated the contribution of biofuel production, as “the effect of biofuels on food prices has not been as large as originally thought, but that the use of commodities by financial investors (the so-called “financialisation of commodities”) may have been partly responsible for the 2007/08 spike.”[23] A 2008 independent study by OECD also found that the impact of biofuels on food prices are much smaller.[24]”

    Get your facts right BoN.

    Mud cakes wth fat for food or similar are not unheard of in Australia. One of the worst food products in this country is the Australian sausage roll. Back in the 60′s there was a huge controversy over what could and could not be in pies and sausage rolls for them to be still classified as those products. It was decided for a sausage roll to be called a sausage roll it had to contain a minimum of 20% meat FAT. Our bakers took that standard to heart and have been dishing up that minimum standard ever since.

  95. wreckage

    Haiti’s problem is that they are a grossly overpopulated Catholic country, thanks to the anti contraception policies of the Vatican

    Like all the other Catholic countries, right? Right?

  96. wreckage

    Back in the 60′s there was a huge controversy over what could and could not be in pies and sausage rolls

    Totally the same situation as Haiti, dickhead.

  97. Infidel Tiger

    This BilB character is Hammy’s less gifted sister, right?

  98. Bruce of Newcastle

    This BilB character is Hammy’s less gifted sister, right?

    Pentti Linkola acolyte, probably. Seriously crazy Fin who wants to depopulate the Earth. Like Holdren and Ehrlich.

    Woe betide the human race if people like Holdren get into power. Oh wait…

    I have not met someone as batshit crazy as BilB in my life. We humans produce people like this. Its a worry.

    Un Fucking Believeable.

  99. BilB

    Haiti has just one third of a hectare of land per person for each of its 10 million inhabitants. Haiti’s total arable land per person is just 1,200 square meters. Generally it takes 4000 square metres to feed a person, but under absolutely optimal conditions a person can live off 700 square metres. That does not include land for firewood.

    GNI for Haiti is 800 per person against Australia’s 65,000 , US’s 54,000 and China’s 7,000. It should be clear from those figures that Haitians do not have the purchasing power to buy food from anywhere, no matter what. Your argument is utter bullshit.

  100. Tel

    My position is that nuclear methanol as vehicle fuel is the long term answer.

    How do you feel about nuclear powered coal hydrogenation? Remember that Valentine chap from the US DoE was enthused about it; I thought he sounded pretty convincing. Maybe that’s more of a medium term answer until the coal runs out (which will be a long while), but even nuclear power is going to run out some day.

    Australia should go nuclear, people would respect us if we were a nuclear power. We could hire Indians to run it for us, because they seem to know what they are doing, and cheaper than Canadians.

  101. BilB

    Find the mention of bio fuels in this report on Haiti’s poverty.

    http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPOVERTY/EXTPA/0,,contentMDK:20207590~menuPK:443285~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:430367,00.html

  102. Bruce of Newcastle

    How do you feel about nuclear powered coal hydrogenation?

    Needs coal. I have worked at and modelled a reforming plant which works quite well without nuclear. I was talking about loonnngg term vehicle fuel.

    CTL is economic now. It only needs the political will to give the requisite approvals. I know of at least one coal company who has been doing serious CTL piloting in Oz. Its commercial in South Africa (Sasol) and China already.

    We have coal available to power our civilization for centuries or millenia. After that nuclear methanol fueled Formula One championships for 20,000 years until we go fusion. Then Formula One races will be between the Moon and Mars.

  103. Bruce of Newcastle

    BilB – Let me explain this in small words.

    If food is half the current price the poor people in Haiti can afford twice as much. They survive.

    If malevolent enviros like yourself make ethanol and biodiesel from food, there is less food. It becomes more expensive. Haitians can afford less to eat in such circumstances. They die.

    I have a relation who was an eminent economist in the Carribean. A lefty. Very lefty. When I visited Jamaica he showed us Trenchtown on the way from the airport, so we knew how the ordinary people lived. I remember that and I remember and honour his memory, since he died from a terrible accident this year. BilB you do not know how the ordinary people live in this world, yet you wish to starve them to death. Fuck you.

  104. BilB

    Nuclear has missed the boat, Tel. The problem with nuclear generated fuels for use in combustion engines is the appaling inefficiency. Nuclear energy is highly inefficient but that is ignored, but ICE’s are 25% efficient, so 75% of the energy is wasted. But you still have to manufacture the energy in order to make the system work. If you make fuel for fuel cell electricity then that is better. You can improve the situation by making fuel for use in hybride electric cars where the fuel is a backup energy source, but this is still not going to be a commercial proposition against rooftop solar charged vehicles with biofuel backup energy. A solid breakthrough in saltwater produced algal oil (see the work of Dr Jonathan Trent) would render the nuclear plants obsolete.

    It all sounds good when you talk about it conversationally but when you put the calculator to Nuclear flops. And that is why they are NOT popping up like white mushrooms.

  105. JC

    You’re a fucking evil human being Bilbutt. Truly fucking evil in every possible way.

  106. Bruce of Newcastle

    I know who has been popping the mushrooms.

    Algal oil is not too bad, but economically its stupid because it works off a diffuse energy source. Nuclear is a dense energy source, so the economics are better.

    Then there’re the hybrid cars…which need batteries. Made of lithium, typically*. Of which there is a very limited supply because of serious cosmological reasons. We currently mine about 50,000 t/y worldwide, which if you sacrificed all your phones and iPads would be enough for about 2 million Tesla sized batteries per year.

    The world produces one hundred million cars per year. There is not enough lithium for 2% of that total. Only the rich would be able to afford a car.

    Typical BilB. Never thinks things through.

    * Do not presume to tell me about electrochemistry since I have personally electrowon three different metals (zinc, copper and gold), and am an expert on six more (cadmium, aluminium, magnesium, titanium, silver and lead).

  107. BilB

    BoN, I grew up in New Guinea, I know what subsistance living looks like. I also know what it feels like. I spent 2 years living on $22 per week in the seventies. That was low even for then. We pay our people way more than that per hour now. In that time I lived in a 6 foot by 6 foot trailer which included a shower, cooking, storage and a bed for 1 and a half. I know what basic living is all about. The real difference was that I had a choice, most Haitians don’t. As the world bank information pointed out food prices were driven up by the commidification of and speculation in food NOT biofuels. And the longer people like yourself deny this the more millions of people die, …..at your hands. That is the truth.

  108. Tel

    There was a boat?

    Look, if the choice is leaving the nuclear fuel in the ground to decay naturally, or sticking it in a reactor to get free heat, I know which one is more efficient. As for ICU efficiency, are you counting per dollar efficiency? An ICU is cheap to build, and yes an electric motor is also cheap to build (give or take a pinch of neodymium) but batteries cost a lot more than petrol tanks. Then we could get into energy density, and liquid hydrocarbons

  109. Tel

    … stupid mobile browser. But you get my drift.

  110. Bruce of Newcastle

    I know PNG, visited there in 1970. An aunt was there for many years as a missionary. As I said I can probably get for you hundreds of references to food price inflation due to biofuels. From A grade sources like the IMF link I gave earlier. If you keep your head in the sand like this you’ll be cleaning silica out from between your teeth for a decade.

    You are a misanthropist. Typical Green masochistic arsehole. Why do Greens want to kill poor people?Fuck off arshole.

  111. BilB

    BoN go back through the posts, I proved that there is sufficient Lithium for every one of 9 billion people to have access to 8 kw hrs of battery storage from just 1 US source. Lithium, a recycleable resource, is not a limiting factor.

    Typical BoN, too lazy to do the research, and apparently too old to remember what he reads.

    I don’t just research this material on the internet, I get in touch with the core players and learn about their technologies first hand.

  112. BilB

    BoN, you’re getting stressed and your tourettes is flaring up again. Go to bed.

  113. Bruce of Newcastle

    Typical BoN, too lazy to do the research

    I work in that industry, idiot. I was asked to take a job up in Chile on a salar project, which I declined since Newcastle is much nicer. I have computer modelled a spodumene plant for a large company.

    Oh my aching sides. This guy is something else.

  114. BilB

    The one place I thought where nuclear would find a place, Tel, was in shipping (as you mention “boat”), but that does not seem to be taking hold yet. The CEO of Cosco shipping did make some suggestions but I have not heard any more.

  115. BilB

    Tel,

    This doesn’t say that nuclear shipping did not work, it says that global ports were not yet ready to accept it, so maybe.

    http://barentsobserver.com/en/business/no-future-nuclear-powered-container-ship-24-10

  116. JC

    See bruce, it doesn’t take long to simply lose your cool with the Bilbutts of this world. There’s no use reasoning with this scum.

  117. Tel

    The one place I thought where nuclear would find a place, Tel, was in shipping (as you mention “boat”), but that does not seem to be taking hold yet.

    Seems to work for the Nimitz class.

    I’d happily zoom around in a nuclear powered Toyota if Tony Abbott would trust me to drive one. Nuclear powered coal hydrogenation only requires trusting a small group of people, at a remote location. It does consume coal as Bruce points out, but the coal you put in comes out as petrol and coal is cheap.

  118. Leo G

    “Haiti’s problem is that they are a grossly overpopulated Catholic country, thanks to the anti contraception policies of the Vatican” – BilB

    Given that the population is 10% Baptist, there must then have been a time not so long ago when Haiti’s population was predominantly Baptist- or do Baptists also eschew birth control?

  119. As the world bank information pointed out food prices were driven up by the commidification of and speculation in food NOT biofuels.

    Link.
    “Commodification” of food has lifted millions out of poverty and starvation.

    And the longer people like yourself deny this the more millions of people die, …..at your hands.

    You’ll need a link if you’re going to make strong claims like that. You know, evidence to back up your talk.

  120. Tel

    BoN go back through the posts, I proved that there is sufficient Lithium for every one of 9 billion people to have access to 8 kw hrs of battery storage from just 1 US source. Lithium, a recycleable resource, is not a limiting factor.

    Out of interest, why are those batteries so expensive? I’d love to get my hands on a good supply of cheap high quality lithium cells if you know where to look.

  121. Nuclear energy is highly inefficient but that is ignored

    This is a meaningless thing to say.
    How, exactly, is it inefficient? Perhaps because nuclear power stations waste a lot of the energy harnessed from nuclear reactions? Some of the energy gets dissipated as heat? So what?

    “Efficiency” only has a meaning if there is something else that’s more efficient at extracting the same energy. Nuclear power stations are the only ones harnessing nuclear energy, so the efficiency with which they do so is a completely irrelevant and meaningless thing to talk about.

  122. JC

    As the world bank information pointed out food prices were driven up by the commidification of and speculation in food NOT biofuels.

    No fuckface, you don’t get to lie like this. Speculation can occur on the long and the short side. If there is speculation on the up side it means that both hedgers and speculators are expecting higher prices do to underlying supply or demand shocks. Food supply, during the middle of last decade was hugely impacted by the sudden demand for bio fuels, which meant we were burning up food to use in our cars.

    The arseholes like gore and the senior scum in the green movement should have been executed for the number of lives lost from starvation and lack of nutrition. And I do mean executed.

  123. JC

    Nuclear energy is highly inefficient but that is ignored

    Incredible.

  124. WhaleHunt Fun

    Nuclear energy has killed very very few greenfilth despite generating vast amounts of electricity. Clearly it is the use to which the electricity is put that is inefficient in cleansing the world, not the nuclear energy. But never fear, ISIS and the iSlamic Calli Fete will clean out the Greens.

  125. BilB

    Fair point Aussie pundit, but BoN needs to prove his repeated statement that bio fuels are causing the deaths of millions of people, first, and that it is all my fault second. Then I will substantiate my argument.

    Commodification (and globalisation) has lifted millions out of poverty where those millions have a product to sell and can sell it into a global market at market prices. This however does the exact opposite for the poor who have no option but to pay the global price. These people have no purchasing power and are left eating clay, salt, and cheap fat. This is why BoN’s argument is completely false. I remember years ago at the beginning of the internet and when India had a programme to provide one computer per village. A farmer was saying this was so important to him because he could now see wat the real price was for his produce and could no longer be scammed by the local wealthy buyer.

    33% efficiency for light water reactors, I have seen lower figures, and as you say, so what, which is why I said it gets ignored. ?…because the avilable energy is so high relatively.

  126. BilB

    Just got back from the pub have you, JC? I see you are still in verbal vomit mode, and you too should go to bed. Run along now.

  127. JC

    Fair point Aussie pundit, but BoN needs to prove his repeated statement that bio fuels are causing the deaths of millions of people, first, and that it is all my fault second. Then I will substantiate my argument.

    This moron doesn’t understand demand and supply curves. Unreal.

    Commodification (and globalisation) has lifted millions out of poverty where those millions have a product to sell and can sell it into a global market at market prices. This however does the exact opposite for the poor who have no option but to pay the global price. These people have no purchasing power and are left eating clay, salt, and cheap fat. This is why BoN’s argument is completely false. I remember years ago at the beginning of the internet and when India had a programme to provide one computer per village. A farmer was saying this was so important to him because he could now see wat the real price was for his produce and could no longer be scammed by the local wealthy buyer.

    This is how an 8 year old understands economics.

    33% efficiency for light water reactors, I have seen lower figures, and as you say, so what, which is why I said it gets ignored. ?…because the avilable energy is so high relatively.

    WTF does this even mean, you bumbling fool.

  128. Bruce of Newcastle

    Some links BilB:

    Starving The Poor To Feed Green Illusions

    The Ethanol Disaster

    Starving the Poor by Noam Chomsky

    Surely you know who Noam Chomsky is BilB.

    Without links because I can only do 3 at a time:

    How Biofuels Could Starve the Poor | Foreign Affairs
    Are biofuels starving the world’s poor? | Deseret News
    New Statesman | How the rich starved the world
    Corn for Cars: Will Biofuels Starve the Developing World – Spiegel
    The Western Appetite for Biofuels Is Causing Starvation in the Poor World.
    EU biofuels target will starve the poor, says anti-poverty group
    Biofuels Starving World’s Poor – Outside The Beltway
    BBC NEWS | Business | Will biofuel leave the poor hungry?
    Corn-based ethanol may starve the world’s poor – Science Blogs
    Biofuels ‘starving the poor to keep the cars of the rich running’
    Boosting biofuels can mean less food for the poor | DW
    Biofuel Starving World Poor – Global – News – OnIslam.net
    Biofuel policy is feeding cars but starving people | Trócaire
    Is ethanol starving Africa? | The Verge
    Biofuels, international food prices, and the poor
    The problem with biofuels | ActionAid UK
    Biofuels are Bad for Poor Countries – they Cause Starvation
    Biofuels: Starving Guatemalans to Feed Cars – Reason.com
    The Catholic Knight: Biofuels May Kill The World’s Poor
    Killing people with “concern”? Biofuels led to nearly 200,000 deaths (est) in 2010.
    Biofuels a ‘crime against humanity’ – Drive
    Food vs. Fuel: Diversion of Crops Could Cause More Hunger
    False hope for biofuels starving millions.
    Agricultural Biofuels: Two Ethical Issues – MSU paper
    Are biofuel policies to help Mother Earth killing her most vulnerable children instead?
    Ethanol Policy Threatens To Starve The World – wpaag
    How Biofuels are Starving the Poor | North American Congress on Latin America

    I could go on and on and on. And no I haven’t got a database, these are from a quick Google and some copy-pasting. All sides of politics are castigating this obscene policy. At 200,000 deaths a year it makes the ISIS look like saints.

    No it is not your personal fault BilB, you are just supporting and strongly advocating a policy that kills millions of poor people. Which makes you complicit.

Comments are closed.