A few days ago I tweeted this in response to a tweet from Ryan Maue:
Climate Change causes EXTREME CALM!
Originally tweeted by Charles Rotter (@crotter8) on October 9, 2021.
Here is a more comprehensive take on the subject. Reposted from MasterResource
“Global Stilling” from Global Warming (latest EU/UK energy excuse)
By Robert Bradley Jr. — October 12, 2021
“The explanation of [wind speed anomalies] points to the phenomenon called global stilling and it is related to #climatechange induced warming in the poles.” (Roberta Boscolo, UN World Meteorological Organization, below)
“… we were told not to worry … it would resolve itself, they said, either because wind is usually blowing somewhere, or through the development of electricity storage in giant battery farms. This was plain wrong.” (Matt Ridley, September 20, 2021)
The present UK/EU energy crises, expected to head into the winter, have much to do with forced energy transformation from coal/natural gas to wind/solar. After looking the other way, the mainstream media now recognizes the problem but is offering excuses.
Excuses, excuses. It’s COVID and an economic snap-back that was faster than expected, as well as poorly coordinated international energy planning, states Thomas Friedman in the New York Times. Or it’s just a cost of doing business in the climate emergency: a bump in the road, not overinvestment in dilute, intermittent energies and underinvestment in dense, mineral energies.
Add something else. Someone, somewhere has a brand new theory–and the cause of the global energy crisis is … you and me via the human influence on climate. Global warming for global stillness….
Surprising? Not really. The human influence on climate is all bad things, after all. (Anthropogenic benefits? That’s politically incorrect, relegated to the sidelines.)
———————————-
Add to our sins global stillness, which is responsible for the lower-than-expected wind output of northern Europe and is allegedly caused by global warming. A consulting firm, Vortex, calculated that up to 15 percent less wind on average was occurring. (Never mind that other studies point toward the opposite, so “Wind Speeds Drop as They Speed Up!“)
Roberta Boscolo, Lead of Climate & Energy, UN World Meteorological Organization, stated:
Great coverage of Financial Times on the wind speed anomalies that affected #windpower generation in Europe. According to @vortex (https://lnkd.in/dsGt8Fb7) the wind strength across northern Europe was 15% less on average since the beginning of 2021. The explanation of this trend points to the phenomenon called global stilling and it is related to #climatechange induced warming in the poles.
An article in the Financial Times (paywall), “Europe’s electricity generation from wind blown off course,” pushed this narrative.
On LinkedIn, where you can actually debate climate science issues, some comments raised some questions to one Stilling post.
“Of course, more hurricanes and cyclones from climate change, but also less wind because climate change. Completely logical.” (Geoff Cruickshank)
“Climate change the great explainer for everything. All of a sudden we have this global shortage of energy yet 2 years ago the papers were full of oil and gas consumption falling due to energy efficiencies, renewable capacity increasing, nuclear, electric cars, hybrids etc, all softening demand. Two yrs ago the price of renewable energy stocks like Vestas, Hylion, Siemens price going through the roof and barrel of oil on the floor. Now renewables share prices getting hammered…. ” (Michael Desmond)
“Having priced and structured many derivatives on wind speed, a monthly average windspeed 15% lower than average is not that big and will happen sometimes…. In terms of wind stilling causing these low speeds this year it may have had an impact, however it will be dwarfed by the volatility in the wind speed that is usually there.” (Antony Stace)
“One possible explanation is that we always underestimate the range of natural variability. “Since records began” , “in living memory” are pretty irrelevant when establishing a realistic base-line and ranges. Maybe, just maybe, periods of calm are normal, if not frequent or typical….” (Richard Norris)
And of course I had to chime in:
Climate change lost my homework.
We live in a crazy world where emotions and agenda drive climate science, at least in the telling. The experts are getting edgy and concerned; will midcourse corrections be made?
CO2. Is there nothing it can’t do? Why can we not have cheap, reliable energy? What is wrong with our ‘beloved leaders’?
So is it Global Stilling from CC?
Or is it Global Stilling from Wind Turbine Perturbations? Wind Shadow
Or have we simply reached Peak Wind??
I know we have yet to reach Peak Stupidity though the Idiocracy are certainly charging forward
Travel restrictions have reduced the number of airplane flights, which contribute in several ways:
Don’t forget reduced ship movements, what with all those big container ships waiting at ports. They all helped push winds along too, along with creating sea currents. The Gulf Stream was named for its bigger pusher, all those Gulf Oil tankers heading north deeply laden and pushing / pulling all that water with them, heading back south lightly laden and riding high, contributing less to the ocean currents and more to atmospheric winds.
This is well-known.
It’s the age old game of “Heads I win, tails you lose”. CO2 causes anything that the warmunists care to complain about, illogic notwithstanding.
“Logic? We don’ need no stinkin’ logic!”
I loved this comment from the post:
“Of course, more hurricanes and cyclones from climate change, but also less wind because climate change. Completely logical.”
It was them as killed that damned bird wot done it!
We stuck, nor breath nor motion;
As idle as a painted ship
Upon a painted ocean.
Water, water, every where,
And all the boards did shrink;
Water, water, every where,
I hope you’re joking. Because your statement is a joke.
It’s more frequent and extreme global stilling as predicted by the climate models and is indisputable evidence of anthropogenic climate change because of SUVs and chainsaws. Everyone knows that.
Absolutely, you can blame Aunty Nguyen (not sure how Aunty Nguyen wound up there, I typed “Anything”) you can blame Anything on Climate Change just utilize the adjective “Extreme”
Climate change causes Extreme (fill in the blank)
Extreme (fill in the blank) is an indicator of Climate Change
Extreme spelling?
Whereas intellect seems to have an upper limit, stupidity appears to be limitless.
Or maybe this is the Lull Before The Storm…..
Or lulz before the storm
Our U.S. public school systems have been actively working on Peak Stupidity for 2 and 1/2 generations now with great success. These initiatives are the impetus for “Common Core” a 2 party bipartisan flim flam, to bring non-compliant systems in line along with BOb’s push, while Prez, to Federalize Day Care likely hidden in the Biden/Pelosi/Schumer 3.5 to 5 trillion dollar Socialize Everything Bill.
It’s never to early to begin filling those malleable minds of mush with post modern hoodoo instilling a Pavlovian response, upon hearing certain terms e.g. Global warming, Climate Change, Hurricane, Tornado, drought, monsoon, wildfire…causing GenX, Millennial, GenZ drones to turn to the east and fall on their hands and knees praying for salvation from Uncle Sugar while denouncing deniers of everything woke and crowdsourcing protests against individualism.
How long till griff assures us that the fault lies with natural gas plants that weren’t able to ramp up enough to cover the wind mills shutting down.
This is the great thing about “the narrative.”
Since everything is made up on the spot as needed, there is nothing that can possibly happen that cannot be blamed according to the narrative, IOW on Global Warming/Climate Change/Climate Crisis.
And since a complete inability to think critically is the hallmark of of the doomster mentality, those preaching the narrative have no need to worry that what they say will at some point be so insanely ridiculous that their supporters will snap out of their trance. There is no trance to snap out of, because warmistas are simply empty-headed gullible fools.
Period.
Or they could just fire up the gas plants to blow air over the wind mills then claim wind delivered 200% of the UK’s electricity needs
CO2 greens the Earth, and causes Greens to lose their raison d’etre.
Save a bird, a bat, a minnow in the sky, clear the gauntlet, whack a wind turbine.
Fossil and nuclear generation cannot be reliably replaced by intermittent renewables. They can only be reliably replaced by massive grid-scale storage.
There may come a day when grid=scale storage is more cost-effective than fossil and nuclear generation, but that day is not today, or any time soon.
Growing renewable generation is increasing the real cost of the required conventional backup, but will do the same to the real cost of grid-scale storage as well.
Suddenly Nuclear Energy is popular
The global energy crisis is squeezing the green religion to its logical endpoint. As long as we pretend “carbon” is pollution, the only way out of the maze for badgered politicians is nuclear power. The renewables industry may have thought that beating us over the head with climate propaganda was going to make renewables dominant and profitable, but it may just push everyone into nukes instead.
I forgot to higlight that out of the article 😀
Public support for nuclear energy rose 17 percentage points in France. “I do not want our country to lose its energy sovereignty under the pretext of an absurd energy transition copied from Germany,” said a conservative French presidential candidate seeking to defeat Macron.
The US has exactly two reactors which have been planned, built, and may actually become operational someday, in the past 43 years.
Two others were started around that time, 1978, and construction has been abandoned.
A handful of others are “planned” to be started around the end of this decades.
Just to supply all of our present day power needs, it is estimated we would need about 400 reactors.
The total number operating on the planet is around 500.
And these numbers do not account for switching over cars and heating and such from fossil fuels to electricity.
The world as a whole would have to start building nuke plants at a rate of several per day for decades on end to ever even begin to replace FF.
We do not even have a plan to replace our aging fleet of nuke plants we have now, as they inevitably reach the end of their useful life.
I am pretty sure most of them have already been in operation longer than originally intended.
No government on Earth is both speaking and talking with anything resembling informed rationality on any questions of energy, climate, economic viability, and preservation of our civilization.
AFAICT, none are even making contingencies for future changes in climate in the direction of sharp and long term cooling.
What on Earth are you babbling about?
You are comparing storage to generation.
The real cost of grid scale backup, with does not and never will exist, is so high it cannot even be estimated. The amount of extra generating capacity to ever charge up a grid scale storage system, and keep it charged, would be many times what is needed to supply 100% of all usage.
The only thing that has a shorter life span and is more resource intensive than panels and turbines, is batteries.
There is no way to come close to being able to make all the power we need from panels and turbines, let alone have the huge surplus of them that will allow for inefficient battery storage of enough grid scale power to supply our needs when there is no wind or Sun.
There is no sunshine at night, ever.
There will always be long periods of cloudy weather.
Low latitudes with low hours of low angle Sun will always coincide with cold temps and the need for large amounts of power.
There will always be long intervals with lower than normal wind, and long periods with no wind at all.
These periods will at times coincide with periods of low or no sunshine. In fact the wind is always lighter at night.
Batteries will always be incredibly expensive, have large losses when charging and discharging, have a limited lifespan, will always have low energy density compared to other ways to store energy, there will always be sharp limitations on how fast they can be charged and discharged…and no matter what, grid scale power will always dwarf battery capacity even on a short term basis, let alone the days and weeks worth of power that would be required to eliminate fossil fuel backups.
Here is the truth: Every method of generating sufficiently large amounts of affordable power to allow the continuation of our civilization is vehemently opposed by the people who say we need to get off of fossil fuels.
Only nuclear can do so while at the same time be able to be installed wherever needed. Hydropower will always be limited by geography, requiring large amounts of water that can be enclosed by reservoirs above a change in elevation.
All of this talk of replacing fossil fuels with renewables while also refusing to consider nuclear, is simply inane fantasizing.
Talking about grid scale battery storage is layering more inane fantasy on top of it.
There is no way to do it.
There is no way to obtain the materials to even theoretically do it without not only using fossil fuels, but vastly increasing the scale of their usage.
It would require mining to increase all over the world on an unprecedented scale…and any mining at all is another thing which is verboten by the same jackasses fantasizing about a world run on wind and solar power.
And even if it could be done, it would be an ecological nightmare for several reasons: It would murder every large bird on the planet; it would make life a living hell of infra sound noise and flashing shadows and towering behemoths that fail randomly and catastrophically; it would require huge amounts of land to be useless for any other purpose, and therefore require the destruction of vast tracts of habitat, forever; the huge scale of the mining would be forever, because turbines and panels and batteries have a limited and very short lifespan…several times shorter than a human life; and all of it would be for nothing, because there is no crisis, there is nothing unusual at all occurring with out weather, we are in an actual ice age which could at any time become far colder, and the CO2 gas that is being blamed for all of this nonsense is actually the most important molecule in the entire biosphere and the one in shortest supply.
Every single thing about every single detail in all of this is beyond belief from any rational and informed point of view.
People like you that think you know what you are talking about are among the most brainwashed and deluded and asinine human beings who have ever existed on the entire planet in all of human history.
Replace generation with storage?
It just occurred to me you must surely be joking.
Sure climate models would have predicted “extreme calm”, as they are spot on with everything. But then.. why did they not account for it?
Remain calm. We are not having a ‘climate’ crisis. We are having an unreliable energy crisis created by junk science fronting for socialist politics.
In a minute Griffo will tell us there is 6% more ‘climate change stilling’ now than 30 years ago, so there!
BigOil will be along soon to tell you that you are not worthy of living
At least Big Oil knows it needs it’s customers and rewards their customers by putting additional plant food in to the atmosphere.
they mean bigoilbob, i think
“Tolerance will reach such a level that intelligent people will be banned from thinking so as not to offend imbeciles.” Dostoevsky
Intolerance.
Handicapper General
Harrison Bergeron, like 1984 and Atlas Shrugged, has become a how-to manual.
The basic principle is that whenever something adverse happens, CO2 is responsible. Warming, cooling, droughts, floods, wind or no wind.
Gaia is annoyed!
Does Gaia have a soul, or is it, souless like all Lefties.
Gaia has a sense of humor, and I think that goes along with a soul
Lord knows, few if any liberals have a sense of humor.
Oh I dunno, I can think of a few liberal comedians. Bill Maher
Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, Trevor Noah… in fact it is quite a long list.
Bill Maher and Jon Stewart seem to be having serious second thoughts about their political orientation. As for the other two, only Simon would find them remotely amusing or funny.
Trevor Noah used to be funny, then he went political and isn’t any more. Shame really, I liked his early stuff.
Same thing with Kimmel. These bozos don’t seem to understand that tuning into their shows was a way to escape politics. Then they decided politics should be front and center.
Bill Mayer has had no second thoughts. If you can find a quote then let’s have it.
Being hired as a comedian doesn’t make you funny or actually mean you have a sense of humor.
if you are a successful comedian, at least some people find you funny.
Some people will find anything funny – if it’s happening to someone else, doesn’t mean a thing really. Frankly if someone paid me, I’d stand up and recite the phone book but it wouldn’t be comedy.
But they wouldn’t pay you to do that… which is the point really.
True fact, Gaia’s husband is Uranus. Let’s Go Brandon!
#FJB
Not so. My anus is a bachelor and Brandon can go fnck himself.
Nah, she’s just a redhead.
And as we all know, gingers have no soul…
(I was a ginger when I was born, and was soulless. My hair turned brown in my early 30s, and I earned a soul. Now in my 50s it’s turned grey and I no longer care about my soul).
‘Global stilling’ is beyond absurd, it’s becoming unintentional self-parody, it’s burlesque.
That’s why many of the regular visitors to this site are long on popcorn futures
It’s not even global.
This is clearly regional regardless of its cause.
Climate stasis marks the cooling… warming… before the change is evidence of the Humpty Dumpty effect.
If ‘man-made climate change’ causes ‘global stilling’ then wind turbines are entirely the worst energy source to be using aren’t they? If the climate enthusiasts are correct (gawd ‘elp us) then we should be ripping those things out and going for an energy source that works during the ‘global stilling’.
An effective counter argument! +10!
Well, if “global stilling” is a problem, just reverse the current in the windmills and make the needed wind.
You jest, of course. Unfortunately, proponents of Renewables are quite capable of taking your suggestion seriously.
No, no, no this only goes to show that we need even more wind turbines to make up for the lack of wind. /sarc
And that Rex will result in more stilling which will result in more windmills which will result in more stilling which will result in more windmills which will….. This is the Global Stillness runaway effect and everyone will be calm, happy and probably dead.
I agree 4 Eyes this whole thing is absolutely nuts but don’t be surprised if some idiot comes along and suggest more stupid turbines is the answer. As you say round and round in circles.
In military terms this is called a “Circle Jerk”. Or “having lost sight of our objective, we are redoubling our efforts”.
By that statement you demonstrate your fitness to be Prime Minister of the UK. He said exactly that.
JF
UK energy minister Kwasi Kwarteng said the crisis shows the importance of the UK’s plan “to build a strong, home-grown renewable energy sector to further reduce our reliance on fossil fuels”.
Read more: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2290840-blame-fossil-fuels-not-renewables-for-the-uks-winter-energy-crisis/#ixzz799yRaxtR
What about all those windmills stealing energy from the atmosphere?
In the military we call something like that a “Circle Jerk”.
A little ridicule is in order.
Now that we ‘know’ global warming causes global stilling, UK and Germany will surely back off on their wind initiatives. Since now the global stilling science is for sure settled cause the climate scientists said so. Cause the Arctic warmed thanks to polar amplification, which is why it now has more summer ice (and polar bears) than before.
Climate science at its finest. Cause MSM said so.
Global warming is caused by the MSM
Global Stilling means windmills are worse than useless, and building more of them will not change this, so it’s time for alarmists to give up their windmill dreams and go with something practical.
Yup, go to Global Stilling, make more booze…….
🙂
Nope. Just need 8 or 10 times needed capacity instead of only 5 or 6 times. Just a slight miscalculation.
No matter how many new windmills we build, they will all be “stilled”, as the Earth warms, if this conjecture is correct. I, personally, don’t believe this “stillness” is anything other than a persistent high pressure system, which just happens to be hovering over the UK right now.
LinkedIn suspended my account for three weeks while they investigated whether CDC was a valid source of data on my C-19 comments.
When I vowed to behave myself they lifted the suspension and I promptly erased my ten year old account.
If more people did that, you cn bet they’d soon change their tune … no more cancellations, fact checking and censorship.
I may just open a Farcebook account just so I can close it
Be sure to post something offensive to them first.
😎
Boycott all things Google, LinkedIn, GMail, etc.
I still have mine, unused since years since retired. I remain amazed at how many youngsters I never met still want to link because of my own true profile from years ago. Reminds me of lamprey fish. A commentary on how far the general public has fallen.
ain’t life grand –
UK wind power potential could fall by 10% by 2100 because …
https://www.carbonbrief.org › uk-wind-power-potential…
11 Dec 2017 — The results show that climate change is likely to dampen winds in countries across the northern hemisphere in the coming decades. In central US, …
Global warming will boost UK wind power, study suggestshttps://www.independent.co.uk › Climate › News
17 May 2018 — Scientists estimate a rise of 1.5C could see a 10 per cent increase in UK onshore wind energy generation.
Does this amount to testing the limits of absurdity by the already absurd?
I think this one is centered on the UK voters and COP26 participants.
Can it be knighted by the Queen as well?
I dunno but you could Beclown it
Simon says be still. Now freak out. They didn’t say Simon says.
Is “stilling” the first observed sign of cooling?
Well, it hasn’t been warming for last few years. But cooling should cause severe wind events, rather than calm weather.
So if we get any cooling the wind mills should be being ripped off their foundations.
It seems it’s just weather and having a lot idiots.
Think of the atmosphere as acting similar to tidal forces. There is flow, then a period of stillness as the cycle changes direction.
Calm winds are a sign that the weather cycle will start to seriously cool.
Then alarmists will be treated to how serious hurricanes can be during the cool oscillation. We should encourage them to go kayaking or rowing far beyond the breakers as early hurricane warning spotters.
It is not the Great Stillness. It is the Great Silliness.
Simple solution … just reverse the current on them big whirligigs and get that wind blowing again.
Not from our electric grids!
Let the alarmists come out with bicycles connected to their wind turbines and they can cycle the wind back into motion.
Now there’s a thought.
More windmills built means more concrete steel cast iron and plastic produced by fossil fuel energy that means more stilling that means more windmills must be built to compensate for stilling which means more more concrete steel and plastic and so on.
I read recently that Totalitarian states are ones that use people’s fear (of climate) and their control over the media, to effectively brainwash the people and turn them into sycophantic supporters. And in that state, of near hypnosis, rational argument no longer works.
Rational argument rarely works under any circumstances.
“use people’s fear and their control over the media”
Sounds a lot like the US lately.
It’s perfectly consistent with “SCIENCE” that adding 100 Hiroshimas an hour (pick your absurd time interval) into the Climate System would naturally result in less kinetic energy being imparted into air masses.
Just wait. Next thing, global warming will start making nights longer than days.
Global warming is already causing most U.S. clocks to be reset to one hour earlier…computer models project it will occur by November 7, 2021, 2:00:00 am. This is all CO2’s fault!
Hmm, when a fossil fuel driller sinks a hole and it’s barren, it’s a mistake with their projections and science – they update their maps and tweak the computers that predict such things. They go on to make a profit somewhere else.
When a wind turbine farm is built and fails to produce reliable energy, it’s climate change and NOTHING is learned. They keep wasting money and putting lives at risk.
What makes you think a wind turbine is intended to generate useful electricity? The whole point is to harvest the subsidies.
Sure glad it doesn’t cause more hurricanes.
Whirligig speed of rotation must be proportional to wind speed.
I don’t know the actual relationship, but I recall that energy produced is allegedly related to the fourth power of rotational speed. Which is why the British Bullshit Corporation’s latest canard (every rotation of a turbine powers a house for a full day) is blatant nonsense.
With low wind speeds a turbine might only rotate a few times a day.
But if the ‘fourth power’ relationship holds, a 15% average wind speed drop will give you just 52% of average power output.
Wonderful.
The formula for the maximum power theoretically available from a wind turbine is
P= 16/27(AρV^3) where A is the swept area, ρ is the density of the air (which varies with temperature, pressure and humidity primarily) and V is the velocity of the wind. Practical performance tends to fall somewhat short of that ideal. This is a typical curve, based on “standard” air density of 1.225 kg/M^3
https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/GqyyC/1/
Thanks!
Worse than we thought?
The Peter Ridd case result should be out any time now.
https://www.gofundme.com/f/peter-ridd-legal-action-fund-2019
He lost.
And more so did academic institutional integrity.
“will midcourse corrections be made?”
The natural answer is h*ll no, they will just keep going with the “climate change causes everything” meme. Let’s face it, it is easy to argue that global warming causes more intense tropical storms, and these suck the wind out of the non-tropics. If that’s not the pattern being observed, you just change the narrative.
But another thought has recently occurred to me: The promoters if the “climate change” panic did so for reasons which included getting even wealthier from government subsidies and mandates for renewable energy. The smart ones among them (they may be evil but they are smart) will be noticing the electricity ststems of California, Germany, Britain, etc nearing collapse, and they may well now quietly dispose of their assets to late-comers, then short sell them and start a new narrative. In other words, a classic pump-and-dump.
The authoritarian politicians riding on the coat-tails of “climate change” obvioysly don’t think it’s a pump-and-dump. Late-comers never do.
OK, maybe it’s just wishful thinking, but it is an interesting thought.
PS. I first keyed incorrectly on my phone: pimp-and-dimp. Maybe I should have left it that way. (Urban dictionary – dimp: Dimp is used when an idea, so dumb, that you just don’t want to bother replying. [Their grammar not mine]).
If global stilling is a thing, what’s the point building wind turbines? The mental gymnastics is impressive though.
I see that sadly Peter Ridd lost his case in the Australian High Court.
From the article: ““Of course, more hurricanes and cyclones from climate change, but also less wind because climate change. Completely logical.” (Geoff Cruickshank)”
I think that sums it up nicely.
Here’s another way to put it: Alarmists Cognitive Dissonance.
Global stilling, or maybe they just miscalculated the amount of time wind turbines would operate the way they miscalculated everything else in “climate change.” Guess the wind farm investors will be lobbying for a bigger subsidy now.
Global stilling = Persistent High Pressure systems.
Like the one that settled in over Texas last February, and all the windmills stopped working because the winds stopped blowing.
Exactly
Of course if this “global stilling” wasn’t showing up the failure of windmills to provide energy when needed, not just at the whim of the winds, these pleasant days of mild calm weather would be celebrated by the public who would not suffer being harangued by the ignorant “climate crisis” zealots about their selfish use of efficient, cheap and reliable fossil fuels.
That’s why we should change the terminology and only refer to it as RANDOM energy.
Think about it. What’s so “renewable” about yesterday’s wind? Can we recycle this morning’s wind? or last week’s?
Hey, that gives me an idea. Let’s harvest energy from Brownian motion using nanoparticles.
Weather weirding.
MSM and alarmists blame everything but themselves, their horrible specious claims and demands for alleged renewable energy.
Now, alongside alarmist claims for stronger more frequent storms dropping larger amounts of rain while winds destroy forests and towns, they want to claim that global warming causes becalmed wind turbines and shaded solar arrays…
Are you guys sure these people are not space aliens?
Just askin’, because they don’t seem to be familiar – even a little bit – with how atmospheres work.
“…points to the phenomenon called global stilling and it is related to #climatechange induced warming in the poles.”
I’ve wondered for some time if taking energy out of the wind is causing climate change itself, especially in the case of large wind farms. Wind moves from an area of of high atmospheric pressure to one of low pressure. If you reduce the direct flow by upwind wind farms, the low pressure area would draw air preferentially from other directions, probably setting up new weather cells and robbing the prime location of the wind speed it used to have.
It’s like building a hydro dam, say ¾ the way across the fast flowing River. Some electricity is produced but half the water makes an end run around the turbines.
Here is some more windmill climate change below:
?auto=webp&s=d209e8f2f74cfe9c5fbf32958a591bd02055f669
Oops:
http://ict-aeolus.eu/images/horns_rev.jpg
I’ve alluded to this myself. And think about this – in their zeal to “save us” from the nonexistent “climate crisis,” they have built these things which might have a potential and completely unknown effect on the weather (dare I say “climate”) without a moment’s thought regarding such possible effects (no to mention how many birds, bats and insects meet their deaths due to these stupid things), which would seem far more direct, and thus likely, than adding a little extra plant food to the atmosphere.
“Save the planet,” my ass.
Critical Silliness Theory
. The realisation that climate silliness is a white academic mental condition brought on by an academic’s and politician’s need to feel important and snuffle at the free money trough.
Can be cured by questioning dogma and looking at hard data honestly.
Nothing more than a or any child would say when it was caught with its hand in Sweet Jar
It does go right to The Humongous Contradiction which exists at the heart of Climate Science Theory – a bit like Black Holes at the centres of galaxies
Climate Science originally and still does assert = Global Warming
Warm vs Cold is the difference between Summer vs Winter
(for places/latitudes that have summers and winters)
But and as we all know:
Thus, Global Stilling is an accurate and true prediction
Yet Climate Science has always said/claimed something that is Diametrically Opposite.
i.e. that Warmer = Worser
Just like the black hole in the galactic centre will eat the galaxy, so the humongous contradiction will eat the science
Nothing else can possibly happen
Take hope, not sweeties, because sweeties really are: Worse Than Anyone Could Evah Imagine
This can’t be.
The science is settled, meaning new theories and ideas are fake news.
Since 97% of scientists didn’t predict “global stilling”, it is not real science.
Right Griff?
Or did you find a member of the 97% who claimed winds would weaken, or strengthen, or stay the same, and therefore 100% accurately predicted this?
They told us AGW increases wind speeds, now they blame AGW for lower wind speeds.
AGW should warm the equator same or more than the poles because the equator receives more sunlight and more atmosphere above their heads. Now they claim the north pole has more warming (south had record low temps, more sea ice coverage than 1980s).
It seems they can cover all possible outcomes if they use enough models, with more input parameters & more model runs. Atleast 1 model run will be right for a place each day. But not 1 of the models by themselves is any where near accurate for multiple places & longer time periods.
It’s like buying a ticket for every horse in the Melbourne Cup & later claim how smart you were to pick the winner but you only got back a small fraction of your money spent. They spend more time creating plausibility than ensuring factual reliability.
If Climate Change makes windmills useless due to increased “stillness”, then we’d better stop building more useless windmills, since climate change is now apparently unavoidable.
See how easy k1lling the climate scam is!!
#FJB
Charles, sorry about this…. It’s time we talked about global smoothing.
Look at the image accompanying this post. Look at the surface of the sea. There is a large smoothed area with less pollutes areas near the edges which are ruffled by the wind. The reason is oil or surfactant spill.
The smoothed area has lower albedo. It will warm. It has resistance to wave breaking so produces fewer salt aerosols. This reduces cloud cover. This increases warming.
The smoothed warm area stratifies.After using up nutrients which would normally be stirred up from below. Phytoplankton growth moves lower into low light low CO2 levels where they are forced to use carbon concentration mechanisms which are less averse to the heavier carbon isotopes. This pulls down C13/14. Light isotope signal.
Warmer, light isotope signal, less oceanic cloud. Sound familiar?
JF
If anyone ever looked in the submissions folder they would find my more lengthy explanation
There is a basic logic issue here. If you’re convinced that climate change is a critical issue such that minimizing it requires wind power, and also that climate change significantly reduces wind – well I think you have a problem in your thought process there! All those expensive windmills will make less and less power as time goes on if this is true.
Sounds like global shtumming to me.
But, but.. wasn’t this the point of reducing CO2? So we could have calmer weather? No? What did I miss?..
At time of writing, this thread is 11 hours old and no word as yet from griff, loydo, simon, banton.. it’s almost as if they know their religion is based on lies..
Solution: glue ER protesters stuck in front of windmill and tell them: blow, blow, whilst Greta addresses the blades to not dare not turning.
Here’s this morning’s weather radar report from the NWS peeps:
Freeze warnings north of San Francisco; hard frost and freeze warning in NM spilling into Texas, blizzard warnings in Wyoming and snow/freezing weather in surrounding states.
This all comes when it should but the world is somehow burning up? It comes up as rather normal weather forecasting for this time of year, so where is all that globull s–t warming coming from, huh?
The OFA says my general area will likely have a cold but dry winter this time (meaning less snow than last winter) which might be good since we’ve had so much rain this summer and into fall. And my new furnace is more fuel-efficient than the old one, which is a bonus. It’s been 10 years since the last blizzard piled 4’7″ of snow against my storm door and my neighbor had to dig me out. I have a bodacious photo of that pile of snow, too.
So just where is this globull warming I keep hearing about? And where does this “globull stilling” exist?
“This all comes when it should but the world is somehow burning up? It comes up as rather normal weather forecasting for this time of year, so where is all that globull s–t warming coming from, huh?”
AGW does not exist solely in your back garden, or at any specific time of year ….
It’s called weather.
The moving around of airmasses.
Notice how the opposite side of the swing of the pendulum is giving the eastern US and especially Canada temp anomalies of + 10C, balancing the – 10C anomalies over parts of the Rockies.
I noticed the temperature differences this morning when I looked at the weather map. We have been inundated with rain for weeks now, where I live, and the temps are now normal for where I am at this time of year. But we should be having “fall/autumn” colors, and instead, everything is still green, or just dropping dead leaves. Upsets in the weather cycles sometimes do happen.There have been chinooks in the middle of winter when I lived in the center of the state (grade school thru high school) and no one thought anything about it other than the roads were clearing out.
And when I look at all that cold air in Europe (on the map) flowing south into Africa, I don’t think that is a coincidence.
I’m starting to notice more and more people calling bullshit, even if they believe in catastrophic climate change.
Here again, we have an example of believing at least 6 impossible things before breakfast… lo
If your models were any good, how come you went and built a bunch of wind turbines where the winds would go calm?
Modified from commentor below:
“LULZ before the storm”.
The “scientists say” part is how you know it’s bona fide and true.
”Climate change” or “global warming” are the wagon, observations are the horse. Wherever the horse goes the wagon follows and the useless idiots keep explaining how the wagon is pushing the horse. The wagon tracks are human CO2 emissions.
It’s complicated.
1) Since the effective emission height for CO2 is well into the stratosphere, adding more CO2 will lead to overall cooling of the planet. Ignore the irrelevancies of downwelling IR. It is meaningless in the overall picture.
2) More CO2 also will also aide the latitudinal distribution of energy. Hence, the energy we do get will spread out more evenly across the planet. As a result, differences in temperature will be reduced and the average wind speed will be reduced.
So, it is likely this wind reduction will continue into the future.
Don’t still waters reflect more IR and visible light. Maybe this is the beginning of a great cooling! 🙂
We humans cannot effect the seas or the air in any meaningful way: we are insignificant in the grand scheme of things. BUT we can destroy our lives and economies by controlling energy, water and food sources. Having human wealth managed by our deep state government is generating crisis after crisis which could cause major disruption of our culture and lead to war. None of that will change the weather. The sun is our life source and we cannot control it or anything else of celestial magnitude. Read C.S. Lewis for a reasoned view of life.
An overall reduction in average wind speeds (if true) could have some beneficial effects, particularly in winter. Weather forecasters often mention “wind chill factor”, where exposed skin “feels” colder during high winds than during on calm days, for the same outdoor temperature. This is due to the fact that heat loss from the skin surface is faster in windy weather (with turbulent air flow over the surface) than in calm weather, when the heat transfer by conduction only is much slower. This is the reason why people like to sit in front of fans during hot weather, to increase the heat loss rate.
This is also true for buildings. In cold, windy weather, the heat loss rate on the windward side of a building is much faster than in calm weather at the same outdoor temperature (heat transfer is faster in turbulent air flow than in laminar air flow in calm weather). This means that a reduction in average wind speeds will tend to lower the amount of fossil fuels (gas or heating oil) to be burned to keep peoples’ houses or offices comfortably warm.
This could make up for the reduced power generated by wind turbines. There would also be a benefit for predatory birds, who have less chances of being killed by a wind turbine turning slowly than a wind turbine spinning rapidly in high winds.
Well, I do have to drop this in here:
Wind has currents, as do water bodies, and sometimes, they just are not obvious to the casual observer. Water bodies may be still and quiet on the surface, but there are currents below that are invisible to the “observer” , just as the atmosphere has currents that don’t show up on the weather maps. It is short-sighted and lacks understanding something that appears to be calm, when it is not, to say “Omigodd!! There isn’t any motion in the whatever!!! We’re doomed! Doomed, I tellya!!”
If you’ve ever lived in farm country, you know that there are days when there is literally NOT a breath of air stirring and it’s like being under a glass dome. And then WHOOSSHHH! in comes the storm and people complain even more because it’s so windy!!!
Falsifiability is the one and only necessary and sufficient condition for a theory to be scientific and therefore fall under the purview of science. If a hypothesis is not falsifiable, it cannot be considered scientific, and thereby disqualifies from the realm of science as well as from scientific discourse.