While the latest IPCC working group III summary report has its share of gloom and doom and ridiculous edicts, it does have one redeeming quality as Josh points out.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
MattS says:
April 14, 2014 at 2:39 pm
ah! I am lucky then – cos I am in Portugal currently enjoying 24+degC and lots of sunshine….
Obviously global warming is over ‘here’ this week?
regards etc
Kev
So even the IPCC admits the answer isn’t blowing in the wind after all.
davidmhoffer says:
April 14, 2014 at 2:39 pm
Nuclear and fracking have to be in the report to give western governments, Japan and Europe in particular, the cover they need to gain energy independence from Russia. The cold war was never over, it was only on pause, and now the Russian bear has come out of hibernation and is carving off bits of Europe one piece at a time.
=========
1 [trimmed]
Hypocrite, heal thyself.
@Khwarizmi – I do not agree with you, but I love your expression – NeoCon coup.
Thanks for the laugh!
Kev-in-Uk,
“Obviously global warming is over ‘here’ this week?”
Can I borrow some?
Khwarizmi
because your prime loyalty is to Der Judenstaat.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Your bigotry and hatred is on display for all to see.
Your anonymity suggests you are a coward to boot.
“Crispin in Waterloo says:
April 14, 2014 at 1:59 pm
“More fracking nuclear.” ”
Or, to get it done real fast, “more nuclear fracking”…. JUST KIDDING!!!
Moderator, I’m not a believer in censorship when it comes to blog comments but the “Khwarizmi’s” repulsive racist anti-Semitic comment has no place in this or any blog.
“Khwarizmi says:
April 14, 2014 at 3:15 pm ”
Mellow out the ‘tude….Nehemiah 2:20….
Felix says:
April 14, 2014 at 2:39 pm
The irony is that too many conservatives are in denial about the science of climate change while too many liberals are in denial about the solutions.
First, you need to disabuse yourself of the notion that this is a conservative vs liberal issue, as it goes far beyond that. Secondly, if you look at the so-called “science of climate change”, you will see that there really isn’t much even resembling science. The IPCC makes a lot of assertions based on assumptions, and then have the chutzpah to declare a 95% confidence level on it.
The real irony here is that the squabbling about “solutions” is a total farce, since there is no problem with our climate, and the kicker is that CO2 actually is nature’s and man’s best briend. The fight to “save” the planet by limiting our fossil fuel use is doing nothing but hobbling economies, and limiting the amount of plant growth enhancers we are providing for plants. Nothing green about that.
The reason the WGIII wasn’t listened to in Copenhagen 2009 is the same reason it won’t be listened to in the next 6 years either.
And especially the WGIII won’t be listened to on its position about nuclear or fracking either.
The IPCC is inherently faulted in a fatal way both structurally and ideologically***.
*** Ideologically => Post-modernism and post-normalism cannot work because they are based on irrational positions of what reality is.
John
“Jeff says:
April 14, 2014 at 3:37 pm
Or, to get it done real fast, “more nuclear fracking”…. JUST KIDDING!!!”
It has been tried with mixed results.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Rulison
Makes the “no nukes” crowd real antsy with the gas drillers moving closer and closer to the original bore hole.
“Nuclear power has far too many disadvantages, as described in my series The Truth About Nuclear Power. There will be 30 articles, of which 10 are published thus far.”
Offhand, I’d say that’s roughly 10 too many. In my experience, the truth about anti-nuclear folks is that they tell many, many lies. I have supreme confidence that this joker will live up to my expectations. Good to see that the Japanese govt is encouraging all the utilities to restart their nuclear plants and save Japan’s economy.
Commercial nuclear expansion in the US is, even if expedited, wouldn’t have any significant new amounts of operating capacity until at least ~20 years later.
By then the data on CO2 effects on the atmosphere will be sufficient to mitigate any real concern about fossil fuels. That will really dim the new found enthusiasm for nuclear and would reduce the economic benefit evaluation of nuclear plants.
Nuclear should always be significant in the power generation mix, but not a dominant option.
John
Funny how when you make coal, and to some extent gas more expensive because of the “carbon” they emit, nuclear suddenly looks more attractive.
Not unlike the action of alcohol in a bar setting.
“Bruce says:
April 14, 2014 at 4:15 pm ”
Ouch! I have to wonder if the water going to/through Battlement Creek (maybe tributary to Colorado River?) is still “hot”, as it were….
It’s one thing to have it inside a reactor or some sort of containment, but this is “gone fission” of
the worst kind….Then again, I wonder if folks back then really knew. I remember the machines they used to x-ray feet to get the “perfect” fit….wonder how those folks’ feet are now…(hopefully OK…)…
Not good news for the watermelons, the red is starting to come through the thin green skin.
Roger Sowell says:
April 14, 2014 at 2:47 pm
…… “There will be 30 articles”
Get lost with your “30 Articles”, of misleading poppycock. From what I read in the examples you gave at the website you linked to, you have little idea of the reality of modern nuclear science, which are using new techniques to recycle waste into fuel, and even use waste as fuel in itself.
Greens will criticize the ipcc and no one will call them anti science deniers
Hey Roger your very first article is disproved by France of all countries. They produce 75% of their own power via nuclear and export electricity to the rest of Europe. So exactly how is it that nuclear can’t compete?
I”ll admit if you pile artificial regulations on top of it to make it expensive then you have a point. Oh wait the NRA does doe that wow… perhaps some of those rules designed to make nuclear bad should be tossed out the windows. I say defenestrate the rules. 😉
After hearing preposterous claims from the anti-nuke jerkheads over the years, I would advise not believing anything they claim about 1) costs 2) nuclear waste 3) radiation leaks, etc. etc. In other words, most anything they say concerning nuclear power. For those who woud rather learn the truth about such things,including Gen 3 and Gen 4 reactors, etc this is the place to visit :
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org
There you will learn who is buying what from whom, what
costs are written into fixed price contracts, what new fuel and other technologies are being developed, where all the new construction is taking place around the world (70 plants currently
under construcion, 30 in China alone). For example, a plant site in China today ordered 2 Westinghouse AP1000 reactors, with 4 more to follow. The Chinese have previously indicated
they will be buying 30 more AP1000 reactors in the near future. By mid century China plans to have 500 reactors and 1600 by the end of the century. India is also very aggressively developing closed cycle nuclear power system. Most countries in the Middle East have ordered nuclear plants
and Britain has begun a large building program. The U.S. is the laggard, for a variety of reasons, however, for the first time in 30 years new plants are being constructed – 2 in Georgia, 2 in South Carolina and 1 in Tennesse. There will be more, many more. Nuclear power is the future of
energy. No question. None. No other energy technology has a future.
Fission is the best and cleanest transitional energy source available for the first 1/3 to 1/2 of the 21st century. But the next nuclear plants will be the last. Though the technology is more complex, it is much easier to build a Fusion plant without concern for the nonexistent pool of radioactive nucleides that a Fission plant must constantly concern itself about disseminating, into the biosphere. .
.
It will then give away to clean, inexhaustible, Fusion and energy as a constriction on growth disappears. With ample energy, you can make all the convenient fossil fuel that you want. Or anything else too.
questions? why aren’t the CAGW NGOs screaming & yelling? why is the CAGW MSM virtually ignoring this?
thankfully, there’s IPCC (which is still all about killing coal), then there is reality:
14 April: Bloomberg: Post-Fukushima Japan Chooses Coal Over Renewable Energy
By Chisaki Watanabe and Masumi Suga
Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is pushing Japan’s coal industry to expand sales at home and abroad, undermining hopes among environmentalists that he’d use the Fukushima nuclear accident to switch the nation to renewables…
In many ways, utilities are already ahead of policy makers. With nuclear reactors idled for safety checks, Japan’s 10 power companies consumed 5.66 million metric tons of coal in January, a record for the month and 12 percent more than a year ago, according to industry figures…
Japan’s appetite for coal mirrors trends in Europe and the U.S., where the push for cheaper electricity is undermining rules limiting fossil fuel emissions and supporting cleaner energy. In the U.S., a frigid winter boosted natural gas prices, providing catalyst for utilities to extend the lives of dirtier coal plants. Germany, Spain and Britain are slashing subsidies for renewables to rein in the cost of electricity…
WWF: “Japan basically needs to recognize an increase in coal use is a serious issue for climate change. The country needs to push for reduction of carbon dioxide.” …
“It’s crucial to have diverse energy sources for a country like Japan, which relies on imports for all energy,” said Akira Yasui, an official in charge of coal policy at the Ministry of the Economy, Trade and Industry. “Our basic stance is to use coal while caring for the environment as much as possible. Coal is economical and stable in supply.” …
More Coal
Tokyo Electric, better known as Tepco, has other plans to use more coal for the stations that serve 29 million customers around the nation’s capital…
“The plan represents nothing but anachronism,” said Mie Asaoka, head of the Kiko Network, a Kyoto, Japan-based environmental organization.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-04-13/post-fukushima-japan-chooses-coal-over-renewable-energy.html
14 April: Guardian: Lenore Taylor: Coal will be a main energy source for ‘decades and decades’, says Greg Hunt
Environment minister says advances in carbon capture will be key to Australia’s emissions cuts in his response to IPCC report
Coal will be a predominant energy source for “decades and decades” to come, but with “drastically” reduced greenhouse emissions owing to technological advancement, the environment minister, Greg Hunt, has predicted as he responds to the latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change…
“Coal will be used for decades and decades more … but what I do think will change is the emissions from it and that is the critical thing,” he told Sky news, describing “highly prospective” technology being developed by Csiro.
“What I think will happen is this … we will be able to use coal and gas in a dramatically more efficient way, with dramatically lower emissions … that will happen over the coming decade as we make real progress, including cleaning up our brown coal power stations, with drying gasification and capturing, not for storage … but capture and reuse,” Hunt said.
He nominated the three “great sources” for emission reductions for Australia as “the land sector, energy efficiency and cleaning up power stations.”
The government will release a white paper on its Direct Action plan in the next few weeks…
The IPCC report, prepared by more than 1,250 experts from around the world, found that limiting the global temperature increase to 2C above pre-industrial levels would require a tripling or quadrupling of low-carbon energy by 2050.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/apr/14/coal-will-be-a-main-energy-source-for-decades-and-decades-says-greg-hunt
@ur momisugly richard,on April 14, 2014 at 3:00 pm, and France’s nuclear utilities.
I refer you to Part Eleven of the Truth About Nuclear Power series, which addresses the French model. If what France has done is so great, why has no other country in the world followed its lead?
http://sowellslawblog.blogspot.com/2014/04/the-truth-about-nuclear-power-part.html
@ur momisugly Big Mac & Chips on April 14, 2014 at 4:48 pm
You miss the entire point. It matters zero to the economics if nuclear plants recycle their waste, or recycle spent fuel. Economics alone doom nuclear power to an also-ran. Keep reading the articles.
@ur momisugly LamontT on April 14, 2014 at 5:07 pm
You also should read the Part Eleven of my series. France is not the model to follow.