Is the evidence of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions dominating natural climate variability strong enough to warrant policies that are economically and societally expensive?
Good summary. Perhaps even Google AI is losing its left wing political bias on climate change. I like to summarize the whole man-made climate change issue with reference to three hurdles which must be overcome to justify the current trajectory of many Western nations re. climate and energy policy:
1. Safety - Do Net Zero benefits significantly outweigh the demonstrable harms?
2. Efficacy - Are the current renewables-focussed efforts to decarbonise effective?
3. Necessity - does 'the Science' unequivocally and empirically demonstrate the need for climate policy?
None of those above points are satisfied. I focus mainly on 3. Others attack Net Zero on 1. and 2.
The parallels with Covid mitigation policy and the 'vaccines', when you look at Net Zero like this, are all too obvious, and many of the same characters were/are involved in pushing both. No coincidence.
Wrong. The Rockefeller Foundation invented climate change. That means "your friends", Chevron, Exxon & Texaco. The UK is already 50/50, and -No One Died-. And, energy shouldn't be just FREE, but They Pay You To Take It! Solar Power Surge Sinks Europe’s Electricity Prices Deep Below Zero
Joel good summary and perspective and thanks for citing one of my articles. I am about to do a podcast with Tom Nelson and and publish a related Substack article. I will send you the links once they get uploaded.
It's not a topic I follow too closely as I am deep into the metabolic health stuff, but this was fascinating to listen to and has spurred me on to give it a proper read a bit later on - great stuff Joel 👏
Thanks for this Joel, sorry I’m a bit late in commenting.
The recent power outage in Spain has highlighted the danger of lack of inertia in a national grid driven by an oversupply of non-synchronous sources, especially wind and solar. This issue hasn’t featured as much as it should have in recent debate although I’m glad to say I touched briefly on Miliband’s giant flywheels in my cited post “Climate Change and the Corruption of Science”.
I last raised the issue of inertia in a 2019 online email to then Business Secretary Anthea Leadsom, sent shortly after the UK had suffered a small-scale precursor to the Spain power outage:
“The recent power cuts which affected a million people and caused hours of disruption have done us a favour by highlighting how our efforts to decarbonise the UK economy are leading us into a hopeless energy cul-de-sac. The establishment is doing its utmost to gloss over the incident which was almost certainly due to system fragility caused by having too much non-synchronous wind power connected to the national grid. This problem also applies to solar power and interconnector imports. Shortly before the incident the climate change cheerleaders at National Grid boasted in a tweet that wind power was close to setting an all-time record.
The BEIS response on national grid fragility glosses over the severe doubts on the lack of inertia and poor grid resilience evidenced by the recent power cuts caused by already having too much non-synchronous generation (wind, solar and international interconnectors) connected to the grid. Engineering experts have been warning politicians for years that these inappropriate technologies are unsustainable. Recently an experienced power systems engineer warned that there should be a 30% upper limit on non-synchronous supply yet National Grid had about 50% connected on the day of the power cuts.”
Anthropogenic climate change is a complete scam. Humans account for less than 1% of CO2 in the earth's carbon cycle. There is ZERO evidence not only for significant correlation between estimates of human produced CO2 and the slight increases in atmospheric temperatures measured over time because the regression models the IPCC published didn't account for nonstationary (time-varying mean) time series which makes them invalid. When the proper regression is done the correlation coefficient drops to less than 05. There is no evidence anthropogenic CO2 is doing anything to."cause" slight increases in atmospheric temps aslnd there is not even significant correlation. The entire hypothesis is wild speculation, and there is not a consensus in the scientific community either. That's a complete lie.
Wrong. The Rockefeller Foundation invented climate change. That means "your friends", Chevron, Exxon & Texaco. The UK is already 50/50, and -No One Died-. And, energy shouldn't be just FREE, but They Pay You To Take It! Solar Power Surge Sinks Europe’s Electricity Prices Deep Below Zero
Good summary. Perhaps even Google AI is losing its left wing political bias on climate change. I like to summarize the whole man-made climate change issue with reference to three hurdles which must be overcome to justify the current trajectory of many Western nations re. climate and energy policy:
1. Safety - Do Net Zero benefits significantly outweigh the demonstrable harms?
2. Efficacy - Are the current renewables-focussed efforts to decarbonise effective?
3. Necessity - does 'the Science' unequivocally and empirically demonstrate the need for climate policy?
None of those above points are satisfied. I focus mainly on 3. Others attack Net Zero on 1. and 2.
The parallels with Covid mitigation policy and the 'vaccines', when you look at Net Zero like this, are all too obvious, and many of the same characters were/are involved in pushing both. No coincidence.
100%
Wrong. The Rockefeller Foundation invented climate change. That means "your friends", Chevron, Exxon & Texaco. The UK is already 50/50, and -No One Died-. And, energy shouldn't be just FREE, but They Pay You To Take It! Solar Power Surge Sinks Europe’s Electricity Prices Deep Below Zero
https://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Solar-Energy/Solar-Power-Surge-Sinks-Europes-Electricity-Prices-Deep-Below-Zero.html
As-if after publishing 650 blog posts and 13,000 pages that this issue wasn't covered @ NurembergTrials.net
They have no right.
They are trying to control every aspect of our life---water, air and now light.
I didn't vote for this.
Read also Prof David Bellamy.
Joel good summary and perspective and thanks for citing one of my articles. I am about to do a podcast with Tom Nelson and and publish a related Substack article. I will send you the links once they get uploaded.
It's not a topic I follow too closely as I am deep into the metabolic health stuff, but this was fascinating to listen to and has spurred me on to give it a proper read a bit later on - great stuff Joel 👏
modals like the overstateddanofgerofconvid
Thank you for the refreshing presentation of divergent viewpoints!
I used to be fooled... then my own observations raised strong doubts that were later echoed and measured, and clarified by a Nobel laureate.
Now, I see it as one of the several major globalist fraud campaigns at play today.
Thanks for this Joel, sorry I’m a bit late in commenting.
The recent power outage in Spain has highlighted the danger of lack of inertia in a national grid driven by an oversupply of non-synchronous sources, especially wind and solar. This issue hasn’t featured as much as it should have in recent debate although I’m glad to say I touched briefly on Miliband’s giant flywheels in my cited post “Climate Change and the Corruption of Science”.
I last raised the issue of inertia in a 2019 online email to then Business Secretary Anthea Leadsom, sent shortly after the UK had suffered a small-scale precursor to the Spain power outage:
“The recent power cuts which affected a million people and caused hours of disruption have done us a favour by highlighting how our efforts to decarbonise the UK economy are leading us into a hopeless energy cul-de-sac. The establishment is doing its utmost to gloss over the incident which was almost certainly due to system fragility caused by having too much non-synchronous wind power connected to the national grid. This problem also applies to solar power and interconnector imports. Shortly before the incident the climate change cheerleaders at National Grid boasted in a tweet that wind power was close to setting an all-time record.
The BEIS response on national grid fragility glosses over the severe doubts on the lack of inertia and poor grid resilience evidenced by the recent power cuts caused by already having too much non-synchronous generation (wind, solar and international interconnectors) connected to the grid. Engineering experts have been warning politicians for years that these inappropriate technologies are unsustainable. Recently an experienced power systems engineer warned that there should be a 30% upper limit on non-synchronous supply yet National Grid had about 50% connected on the day of the power cuts.”
https://edmhdotme.wpcomstaging.com/the-case-against-net-zero-co2-emissions-2/
Joel, perhaps you could reach out to Richard Jeffs and offer to help him? I can associate with alot of his frustrations from 1 hour 36-40mins.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7yuMB_gBVk
Industrial Farm tilling releases most of the captured CO2. NASA satellites have shown this during the spring thaw.
Funded by fossil fuels, Legatum and the Heartland Institute, I'm sick of listening to JP, BP shill Toby Young and to Farage. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3G-bpM5W3c
In lockstep with Tony B-liar. Good for you Joel.
Anthropogenic climate change is a complete scam. Humans account for less than 1% of CO2 in the earth's carbon cycle. There is ZERO evidence not only for significant correlation between estimates of human produced CO2 and the slight increases in atmospheric temperatures measured over time because the regression models the IPCC published didn't account for nonstationary (time-varying mean) time series which makes them invalid. When the proper regression is done the correlation coefficient drops to less than 05. There is no evidence anthropogenic CO2 is doing anything to."cause" slight increases in atmospheric temps aslnd there is not even significant correlation. The entire hypothesis is wild speculation, and there is not a consensus in the scientific community either. That's a complete lie.
Wrong. The Rockefeller Foundation invented climate change. That means "your friends", Chevron, Exxon & Texaco. The UK is already 50/50, and -No One Died-. And, energy shouldn't be just FREE, but They Pay You To Take It! Solar Power Surge Sinks Europe’s Electricity Prices Deep Below Zero
https://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Solar-Energy/Solar-Power-Surge-Sinks-Europes-Electricity-Prices-Deep-Below-Zero.html
Thank you for your efforts.Despite having a number of charts in this post quite clearly
showing climate change you will be labeled a "climate change denier". Odd that is it not?
It is undeniable that climate changes. It is debatable that CO2 emissions, especially related to human activity, are a significant driver.