The Global Warming Gravy Train is Coming to a Screeching Halt at Long Last
The global warming craze is dying out, says Matt Ridley in the Spectator, as banks, billionaires and politicians bail out of the Net Zero agenda. Well thank goodness for that. Here’s an excerpt:
The other factor that kept the climate scare alive was that emissions reduction proved impossibly difficult. This was a feature, not a bug: if it had been easy, the green gravy train would have ground to a halt. Reducing sulphur emissions to stop acid rain proved fairly easy, as did banning chlorofluorocarbons to protect the ozone layer. But decade after decade, carbon dioxide emissions just kept on rising no matter how much money and research was thrown at the problem. Cheers!
Switching to renewable energy made no difference – literally. Here’s the data: the world added 9,000 terawatt-hours of energy consumption from wind and solar in the past decade, but 13,000 from fossil fuels. Not that wind and solar save much carbon dioxide anyway, their machinery being made with coal and their intermittency being backed up by fossil fuels.
Despite trillions of dollars in subsidies, these two ‘unreliables’ still provide just 6 per cent of the world’s energy. Their low-density, high-cost, intermittent power output is of no use to data centres or electric grids, let alone transport and heating, and effectively poisons the economics of building and running new nuclear and gas generation by preventing continuous operation. Quite why it became mandatory among those concerned about climate change to support these unreliables so obsessively is hard to fathom. Subsidy addiction has a lot to do with it, combined with a general ignorance of thermodynamics.
Now the climate scare is fading, a scramble for the exits is beginning among the big environmental groups. Donations are drying up. Some will switch seamlessly to trying to panic us about artificial intelligence; others will follow Gates and insist that they never said it was the end of the world, just a problem to be solved; a few will even try declaring victory, claiming unconvincingly that promises made at the Paris conference a decade ago have slowed down emissions enough to save the climate.
Of course, Al Gore, the former US vice-president who did more than anybody else to alarm the world about climate change and made a $300 million fortune from it, has been at the recent conference in the Brazilian jungle – the one where they felled a forest to build the access road. As he railed against Gates last month for abandoning the cause and accused him of being bullied by Donald Trump, he sounded like one of those Japanese soldiers emerging from the jungle who did not know the second world war was over.
Perhaps Gore might now regret his exaggerated preachings of hellfire and damnation. In his 2006 film An Inconvenient Truth, for which he shared a Nobel prize, he predicted a sea-level rise of up to 20 feet “in the near future” – out by around 19 feet and nine inches. In 2009 he said there was a 75 per cent chance all the ice in the Arctic Ocean would disappear by 2014. In that year there were five million square kilometres of the stuff at its lowest point – about the same as in 2009. This year there were 4.7 million square kilometres. At the film’s showing at the Sundance Festival, Gore said that unless drastic measures to reduce greenhouse gases were taken within ten years, the world would reach a point of no return. Yet here we are 19 years later.
Gore is correct that fear of retribution from the Trump administration drives some of the corporate retreats. President Trump has already cancelled $300 billion of green infrastructure funding and purged government websites of climate rhetoric. But even if the Republicans lose the White House in 2028, it will be hard to reflate the climate balloon. The proportion of Americans greatly worried about climate change is dropping. If Trump takes America out of the 1992 treaty that set up the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change it would require an unlikely two-thirds vote of the Senate to rejoin.
Bjorn Lomborg, the Danish economist who is president of the Copenhagen Consensus and has fought a lonely battle against climate exaggeration for decades, recently explained the shift in public opinion: “The shrillness of climate doom also wears down voters. While climate change is a real and man-made problem, constant end-of-the-world proclamations from media and campaigners massively overstate the situation.”
A key figure in the collapse of the climatocracy is Chris Wright, the pioneer of extracting shale gas by hydraulic fracturing who was appointed by Trump as energy secretary this year. Wright commissioned a review of climate science by five distinguished academics that set out just how non-frightening the facts of climate change are: slowly rising temperatures, mainly at night in winter and in the north, correspondingly less in daytime in summer and in the tropics where most people live, accompanied by a very slow rise in sea level showing no definite acceleration, minimal if any measurable change in the average frequency and ferocity of storms, droughts and floods – and record low levels of deaths from such causes. Plus a general increase in green vegetation, caused by the extra carbon dioxide.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
“The Great Green Grab: How £28 Billion of Your Money is Being Spent on a Fairy Tale”
https://www.freespeechbacklash.com/article/great-green-grab-how-ps28-billion-your-money-being-spent-fairy-tale#:~:text=The%20Great%20Green%20Grab%3A%20How%20%C2%A328%20Billion%20of%20Your%20Money%20is%20Being%20Spent%20on%20a%20Fairy%20Tale
And to accompany the above an excellent, no holds barred piece from Tom Armstrong at Freespeech Backlash …
“What has just been announced is one of the largest acts of state sanctioned larceny in British history, dressed up as salvation.”
I have little time for Lomberg – the gay who is always actively quoted in these articles. He is just another clown and attention seeker. Lomberg is wrong – there is no man-made ‘climate change’. Nothing. Zero. For the ‘science’-challenged including limp wrist Lomberg, Co2 falls out of climate processes. Period.
Man-made emissions of the trace chemical called plant food, necessary for life, is 20 parts per million. 90% of that is recycled. There is no ‘crisis’ and we do not cause the complex convection system which includes the Sun.
There is no greenhouse effect (a ridiculous anti-science proposition). If this planet was a greenhouse it would be Venus. Ah, Venus. Yes, winged dinosaurs and life on Venus were promised by ‘the science’ in its 1000 F surface temps back in the 50s and 60s. Still waiting.
Most of ‘the science’ you think you ‘know’ is utter bullshit.
Follow the money and the underlying philosophy – which is never taught.
I agree with your gist and you may be right about Lomberg, but you walk into the trap of turning reasoned comments into factual errors by being absolute.
For example ‘there is no man-made climate change’ – man is part of nature and thus plays a part, however small, in the continual chaotic changes in the system.
Also ‘there is no greenhouse effect’ – the term is used as an analogy, not implying that there is an actual glazed enclosure containing the earth. It should be criticised as such.
Perhaps I am being picky, but I feel strongly that we should not lower our standards to, or even towards, theirs.
You’re not being picky. True sceptics need to consider evidence rather than dismiss out of hand.
Fair points, however, man-made climate change implies a climate (singular) has changed. There are 30 different climates on Earth and I cannot identify one that has changed. And if one climate has changed, what has it become? Polar climates are still polar etc. What might have happened is that a boundary between climate may have moved and looking at all the irregular shapes of the continents and oceans and the climate boundaries it is a tall order to expect some sort of permanence to these.
The only observable climate change that can be attributed to Mankind’s activities is local, such as building a city or change of land use.
As for planet-wide “Man-made” climate change, there is no default condition – no reference base line – for the Earth’climate system, which is chaotic and non-linear, so any influence by Man cannot be isolated from natural causes to be observed and measured to identify its scope and scale or indicate whether it is causing any change at all.
Anthropogenic global warming/climate change exists only in computer modelling and by manipulating averaged temperature data collected over only a small portion of the Earth’s surface.
It for this reason that a recent switch has been made from trying to provide evidence of Man’s effect, to “attribution” of any and all unusual weather events as being caused by Man’s activities.
It’s circular logic: Mankind causes changes in weather patterns, these changes from time to time are observed, therefore this proves Mankind causes them.
If you believed that Covid was a deadly pandemic, the outcome must have been hard to bear
Now that the truth is out about net-zero, that’s twice you’d have to admit you’d been played for a fool
Several other smaller fantasies have come and gone, and you fell for most of them (eg men can have babies)
Given that people of this type (the majority?) clearly need to latch onto fantasies to fulfil their lives, and that established religion is pretty much dead, what doomsday crisis will they latch onto next? It would be helpful for the rest of us to have warning…
The “rise of the authoritarian right” seems like a popular one.
Add to the list:-
The claim there was no national health service before 1948 and the NHS, and without it you “probably” would not be here as only the wealthy could get health care.
So where did the 2 750 hospitals (built prior to the 20th Century) and the 480 000 hospital beds and all the staff (no immigrants) come from that were nationalised in 1948, and who had been using them?
Private healthcare is unaffordable, but until the 1911 National Insurance Act was passed – which the public didn’t want – 75% of the population had private health insurance.
Vaccines were responsible for wiping out communicable diseases like Measles, Small Pox, Polio yet these disease had been declining significantly to a very low level for years prior to introduction of vaccines, and their introduction had little noticeable effect.
“The global warming craze is dying out”. Preaching to the choir. Has anyone told Ed Milliband?
‘Singing to the choir’ or ‘preaching to the converted’ surely BB?
To be fair, Boomer’s error is as rare as hen’ shit or even rockinghorse teeth.
It was deliberate. But yes, does the Pope sh1t in the woods?
Pterodactyl feathers, anyone?
We are the converted choir. New members always welcome.
Yes, perhaps. I was drawing from my Northern Irish Presbyterian roots and the mental picture of the little box beside the pulpit where the choir sat, week in week out no matter how full or empty the body of the church was. So they always got the full benefit, or not, of the sermon.
100% agree with this, I used to be in such a choir! Apparently Preaching to the converted is of older origin (at least 19th century) and preaching to the choir is a more recent arrival from the US.
It is difficult getting someone to understand something when their position/ideology and income depend on not understanding.
Almost twenty years since Gore’s film. And the positive acceleration of Net Zero may possibly be reducing to zero. Still a long way to go before it’s in reverse, and longer still to be rid of it completely. Buckle up, they’re gonna get nasty.
Charlie-Boy in Windsor must be crying buckets into his cornflakes every morning.
Well if he isn’t little Willy might be at the thought of all those sea bed royalties drying up.
Forget the climate hoax . The King needs to do his job and dissolve Parliament
…….and the future king too.
There was little objection to “Reducing sulphur emissions to stop acid rain proved fairly easy, as did banning chlorofluorocarbons to protect the ozone layer.” because we all understood these were genuine pollutants. There has been some revision of the evidence given originally but we have to act on best information and the public do not want to see our fields, rivers, communities or the globe polluted especially when it can be avoided.
CO2 is not a pollutant and it does not cause global warming. Even if it did cause a small amout of warming there is a very acceptable trade-off between prosperity and the benefits that gives compared with a little warming, added plant fertiliser et al.
Then it transpired that “acid rain” was not the cause of trees dying in Europe but a hitherto unknown bacterium. So the £billions spent on reducing sulphur emissions made no difference.
The ozone hole has been opening and closing ever since Mankind stopped causing it to change. So what’s causing it now?
I was intrigued by the idea that the effects of ‘acid rain’ was entirely due to a new bacterium, but couldn’t find any evidence – can you give more details? Thanks
It was never about “saving the planet” in any case.
The UN-sponsored climate scare was always a convenient pretext toward the real goal, which is the installation on a one-world socialist / corporatist government, aka Agenda2030 / Sustainable Development Goals.
Just ask yourself who gets to decide whether something is “sustainable” or not…
Can we now disestablish the (UN Agenda 2030/50 Sustainable Development bs) Development part of the UK Foreign Office?
Not while the Uniparty is in charge. It’s what they’re for.
Spot On the money!
The one thing missing from this article is any mention of weather manipulation. Geoengineering, chem trails, DEWS, DARPA, HAARP, DOD. GeoengineeringWatch.org
The next ‘crisis’:
Atmospheric measurements in Germany indicate that SF6 emissions, a greenhouse gas 24,000 times more potent than CO2, are significantly higher than previously estimated, particularly in the Heilbronn region. This area, home to the only known SF6 production and recycling facility in Europe, accounts for about one-third of Germany’s total SF6 emissions.
Marvellous, good is slowly prevailing over evil. But we are still left with a load of virtue signalling, woke wet wipes who can’t bear to admit that they have been wrong, gullible and stupidly naive.
Meanwhile our greedy leaders hate to lose the Carbon Tax bonanza lining their pockets.
sack the lot of them.