Guest essay by Eric Worrall
h/t Dr. Willie Soon – Cortez shocked establishment Democrats when she won the NY-14 Primary a few weeks ago. But even climate advocates are skeptical that a transition to 100% renewables could be achieved by 2035, and are skeptical of Cortez’s apparent rejection of the nuclear option.
Can Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Save the Planet?
Democrats lack an organized plan to stop global warming. Climate scientists say the newcomer has the beginnings of a good one.
By EMILY ATKIN
July 4, 2018Progressives have been practically leaping for joy since 28-year-old self-described democratic socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez won her primary election for Congress last week, an outcome that CNN called “the most shocking upset of a rollicking political season.” But perhaps no group has been more excited than environmentalists. In a political environment where even her fellow Democrats often stay vague on climate change, Ocasio-Cortez has been specific and blunt in talking about the global warming crisis. She also has a plan to fight that crisis—one to transition the United States to a 100-percent renewable energy system by 2035.
…
Climate scientists overwhelmingly agree that aggressive action is needed to stave off the violent storms, rising seas, and debilitating droughts projected to worsen as the climate warms. Avoiding that means the earth’s average temperature can’t rise more than 2 degrees Celsius above where it was in the year 1880. Unfortunately, we’re already nearly there; as The Guardian’s Carbon Countdown Clock shows, humans can only emit greenhouse gases at our current rate for another 18 years before we reach the 2-degree mark. We can buy more time, however, if we stop emitting so much greenhouse gas. “The science is pretty clear—we want to reduce emissions, to near zero, as fast as possible, if we want to minimize climate change,” Texas A&M University climate scientist Andrew Dessler told me. That means rapidly decarbonizing the U.S. economy—much like Ocasio-Cortez has proposed.
But for most of the the climate scientists I spoke to, their alignment with Ocasio-Cortez’s plan stops there. That’s not because they don’t want a 100-percent renewable energy system by 2035, but because the Green New Deal lacks some important details. “How will energy be stored as an economical cost if only using wind and solar? What is the role for nuclear power in such a plan? Who will fund this transition?” said Penn State climate scientist David Titley, also the former chief operating officer of NOAA. “I’m very skeptical such a transition can be done in a period less than 20 years from what is basically a standing start.”
…
Read more: https://newrepublic.com/article/149520/can-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-save-planet
Nuclear power is the only certain path to rapid decarbonisation of the economy. France converted over 75% of their electricity to nuclear back in the 1970s. They kept costs down by mass producing nuclear power plants and reprocessing nuclear fuel.
Cortez’s website doesn’t even seem to mention nuclear power – she wants a 100% renewable solution by 2035.
Why do greens like Cortez ignore the nuclear option? Why risk the planet, why risk continued political stalemate fighting for acceptance of renewables, when a nuclear programme would meet far less resistance from Cortez’s right wing opponents? How can socialists like Cortez in good conscience reject the one solution which might win rapid bipartisan support, when they claim the fate of the planet hangs in the balance?
One possible explanation is that embracing nuclear power would not offer politicians like Cortez the same opportunities as renewables to restructure society – life in capitalist nuclear powered France is similar to life in neighbouring countries which have not embraced nuclear power. But this explanation would suggest that Cortez is just another left wing fanatic who sees climate change and renewables as a convenient vehicle to force acceptance of her social programmes.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
” transition the United States to a 100-percent renewable energy system by 2035.”
Excuse me, but I think I’ve just wet myself from laughing too much.
‘Avoiding that means the earth’s average temperature can’t rise more than 2 degrees Celsius above where it was in the year 1880.’
Cos we know what the earth’s average temperature was in 1880.
We don’t know what is was in 1975.
Canada has its Climate Barbie.
Not to be outdone…
The US Democratic Socialists now have their Climate Lolita.
Why would anyone care what a barmaid thinks about the climate or anything else?
Well she is cute afterall.
Action on Existential Threats
Prior to 1973 oil was used for gas turbine power. The OAPEC oil war of 1973/74 imposed an embargo on oil exports to the Canada, Japan, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the United States for their support of Israel in the 1973 Yom Kippur war. This caused a severe recession in the US.
France rapidly converted from oil to nuclear power and Denmark to natural gas.
Why the French like nuclear power
By 1982/83 the US had developed enough new oil to effectively eliminate net oil imports.
Responding to Crisis”. University of Wisconsin. April 26, 2010.
(But then oil imports grew to >12,000 bbl/day by 2005.)
Despite the alarms, how is “climate change” possibly an existential threat like the OPEC Oil Embargo?
Never ascribe to malice what can be explained by ignorance.
I’ll give 100:1 odds that she doesn’t know that France is nearly 100% nuclear. Or that nuclear is currently the largest source of green energy in the US.
“she wants a 100% renewable solution by 2035.” Did she forget the “unicorn for every household” and “never a rainy day”?
Why do greens like Cortez ignore the nuclear option? Maybe in fear getting linked with
https://www.google.at/search?q=us+nuclear+power+plants+leaking&oq=us+nuclear+power+plants&aqs=chrome.
So? A few radiation leaks, maybe even a few meltdowns, vs the end of the world.
Eric – don’t tell me! convince Cortez.
If you really want that at all!
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2018/06/26/1804655115
You’re more likely to win a multi-million dollar lottery than to experience a major nuclear meltdown in your lifetime.
Over the last 40 years there have been three meltdowns, killing around a dozen people.
More people than that die each year just building wind turbines.
Four years of work experience as a bartender has given Ocasio-Cortez all the deep insight into the complexities of energy generation, delivery and use in the modern world that she needs to conclude that it can be made to run on 100% renewable energy within 17 years, and anyone who doesn’t agree must certainly be a racist, sexist hater.
“Alice laughed: “There’s no use trying,” she said; “one can’t believe impossible things.”
“I daresay you haven’t had much practice,” said the Queen. “When I was younger, I always did it for half an hour a day. Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.”
Alice in Wonderland.
Or if you believe that we are in the world of Oz, Toto hasn’t yet learned to pull back the curtain.
Perhaps it is proof that Cortez actually is what she sounds like she is: Someone who is afflicted with a case of incurable terminal dumb-ass. Ignorance is curable, you know. But stupidity is most likely for life and terminal.
For the greenhouse theory to operate as advertised requires a GHG up/down/”back” LWIR energy loop to “trap” energy and “warm” the earth and atmosphere.
For the GHG up/down/”back” radiation energy loop to operate as advertised requires ideal black body, 1.0 emissivity, LWIR of 396 W/m^2 from the surface. (K-T diagram)
The surface cannot do that because of a contiguous participating media, i.e. atmospheric molecules, moving over 50% ((17+80)/160) of the surface heat through non-radiative processes, i.e. conduction, convection, latent evaporation/condensation. (K-T diagram) Because of the contiguous turbulent non-radiative processes at the air interface the oceans cannot have an emissivity of 0.97.
No GHG energy loop & no greenhouse effect means no CO2/man caused climate change and no Gorebal warming.
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6394226874976919552
http://www.writerbeat.com/articles/21036-S-B-amp-GHG-amp-LWIR-amp-RGHE-amp-CAGW
The woman is a nutcase….and the media is trying to make her into some kind of hero. Typical
She can use all of daddy’s and mommy’s money and it will make no difference at all. Little rich girl wants socialism for everyone except herself, as usual for leftists. I have watched 3 different interviews of her and she struggles to form a coherent sentence. THAT is the face of the Democrat Party. I love it.
A lot of discussion about a 28-year-old candidate for the House of Representatives who has visions to control the world. Loads of free publicity.
Can progressives change the climate? Yes, you don’t even have to ask them. They will tell you they have the power to do so and will, if you believe hard enough.
All it takes (according to them) is truckloads of OPM.
… and when that fails, they’ll claim it was because they didn’t take enough OPM.
A vicous cycle of Never Enough defines Socialism.
Cortez is wrong about everything. Pick any topic.
That’s the nature of being progressive.
Fortunately the progressive mob is being eviscerated by their own actions causing a movement of liberals walking away from the Democrat party.
Cortez is a poster child for there is no such thing as too far left.
The more publicity she gets, the more Democrats walk away to Trump. This isn’t what most of them thought they were voting for.
Funny how she is such a product of her age group demographics. No original thinking there. Best of luck to NY if she wins, they will need it.
CIA agents are running for congress this year like a swarm of deep state locusts – some incognito, apparently. Cortez’ bio suggests she’s a CIA cupcake. Obama with boobies.
She looks like she has spent a few weeks at the compound
In concept green energy sounds fantastic. In reality the scale of the problem is so great that people vastly underestimate what is required.
100 trillion dollars is required. The 100 billion annual climate fund the UN promised would take a 1000 years to pay for the change to green. But of course the UN fund was doomed from day 1.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez won a primary election that will allow her to be on the ballot for the upcoming Congressional elections. If she is ultimately elected, she will be a freshman member of the US House of Representatives, with almost zero political power and very little influence on national policy. Her demand for “100% renewable solution by 2035” is entirely rhetorical — and should not be taken seriously.
Even climate hawks can’t take that seriously — it is simply, categorically impossible both politically and physically. Even if her “plan” (there is no plan, btw) included nuclear, it would be impossible to build nuclear power plants fast enough. Without nuclear, the idea is an Alice-in_Wonderland story.
Obama was a do nothing bloviator who wascabke to con his way into the Oval office on one term.
Her district is heavily Demo-Rat leaning. She almost certainly will win in November.
Joel ==> I think that you are right == all the I Love Hillary dems will vote for A O-C as a proxy for their failed bid to put HC in the Oval Office. That said, she will still be a Freshman Congresswoman from a state with 26 other congresspersons, will have no important committee positions and will spend two-three years trying to figure out what she is supposed to be doing.
She may be a Big Fish in the Bronx and Queens — but she’ll just be bait in Washington DC.
When Joe Lieberman lost a Democratic primary, he got elected as an independent.
Best name I’ve seen for her is She Guevara.
The AGW cult explained:
“OK, boys and girls, sit up and please listen. Suspend all your critical thinking skills and refuse to question my or any other authority. First, let’s ignore the facts. Let’s ignore that we are in an Ice Age. Let’s ignore that temperatures shot up from 18 to 11 thousand years ago when CO2 was low and man was still banging on rocks in the caves. Let’s ignore that temperatures have been going up and down for the past 11 thousand years. Let’s ignore the ice records that show CO2 has been steadily increasing for the past 8 thousand years. Let’s ignore that the same ice records showing no correlation between temperatures and CO2. Let’s ignore that it has been warmer many times in the past. Let’s ignore all those facts.
“Let’s instead focus on only the current warming since the end of the last cooling period. The last 150 years. No, Jimmy, do not look past that. The past does not matter. You mustn’t know that it has warmed naturally before. Why? Because…. I hate the oil companies! Hate! Hate! Hate oil! We hate oil! Oil bad! Oil evil! You must believe every lie we make up because oil is evil! Hate! Oil evil! Tear down all the oil! Put up windmills! Windmills good! Windmills not oil! Hate oil! Oil! OIL!!!!! *start frothing at mouth and babbling in tongues*”
AGW in a nutshell.
This young millenial is clearly guided by a childish belief that the magical thinking in Harry Potter was a management and policy guide.
There is no physical way to convert the US to so-called “renewables” without impoverishment and genocidal population reduction.
She is a cute Pol Pot spouting the same hatred that evil mass murderer did.
She would impose a corruption on us as bad or worse than Venezuela and the kleptocrats who have destroyed that foolush nation. And even as she and her family and insiders steal and starve our nation, blame the victims who dare to speak out.
Eff her.
Just another born and raised useful idiot elite.