Glasgow: The Stampede To Mass Poverty…120 BILLION Tonnes Of Materials For Wind Turbines By 2050?

Reposted from the NoTricksZone

By P Gosselin on 3. November 2021

Commentary by Fred F. Mueller 

[Germany] When looking at the current frenzy around the climate rescue event COP 26 in Glasgow, one can only get scared. Not because of our climate, which doesn’t care about the whole hype, but because of the proposed hysteria-driven radical measures.

Leading to a humanitarian catastrophe

The whole CO2 hypothesis is based on fundamentally flawed assumptions about the CO2 cycles of the earth, because the actual changes take place in the oceans and not in the atmosphere. The fear of mankind’s insignificant CO2 emissions, stoked by an incredible propaganda campaign, is now leading us toward a humanitarian catastrophe that will probably cost hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of lives.

Glasgow is the media highlight of a campaign that has been running for decades to dissuade mankind from using fossil raw materials such as coal, oil and natural gas. In the meantime, the anti-fossil campaign has assumed a breadth and mass that resembles a veritable tsunami in its effect on our society. In the past, it was mainly politicians, the media and “environmental” NGOs that put pressure on industry and banks. Today, Big Industry and Big Money are also aligned and have mutated into driving forces of “de-fossilization”.

The dwindling number of remaining mining and oil production companies are being squeezed in a variety of ways. At the behest of  central banks, they are no longer being granted loans, insurance companies are refusing to cover operational risks, customers must prove they are not buying “CO2-polluted” products, and in addition, associations such as the Carbon Disclosure Project are exerting enormous internal pressure through all possible channels.

The newest forces in this round are legal courts, all the way up to the German Federal Constitutional Court, which for example grant Peruvian farmers or young people from remote bushlands in the middle of nowhere the rights of action against our basic industries. As the icing on the cake, activist investors are now also making their appearance, using comparatively small amounts of capital to break up reluctant corporations and pick the fattest chunks from the leftovers.

Drax power plant no longer burns coal. Now it burns about one local forest a day. (Photo taken by Paul Glazzard, Attribution Share-alike license 2.0  CC BY-SA 2.0)

A round dance of cruelties

In the media frenzy of Glasgow, a veritable stampede is currently developing where everyone is trying to outdo the other with promises of ever tougher anti-CO2 measures. Moreover, there is no coordinated and thus specifically controllable action. Instead, a patchwork of countless actors from politics, associations, activists and the courts are rushing individually in the same direction. Apparently, none of the politicians in Glasgow has the slightest idea what they are doing to themselves and to all of humanity with these promises.

The first effects are already being felt with rapidly rising prices in the energy sector. Few seem to bother about the fact that the extraction of raw materials is an enormously time-consuming and capital-intensive undertaking. Regardless of whether we are talking about fossil raw materials or ores: The development of new deposits often takes more than five years and can quickly swallow up billions. And often enough, they are exhausted after just 10 years or so.

Raw materials supplies will be interrupted 

To ensure that supplies do not come to a standstill, raw material producers must therefore invest continuously in new projects. And it is precisely this continuity that is being shattered by the current campaigns. The consequences will be felt much faster than we can imagine today. What we are now experiencing with coal, oil and gas will spread like wildfire to all raw materials, and once the run on dwindling supplies has begun, there will be a scramble in which second and third world countries will not be able to keep up.

Even Europe will then be pushed aside by the next broad-shouldered “America First” representative. The already rising tide of poverty refugees from Africa, Asia and Latin America will swell to gigantic proportions and put all of Europe in great distress.

Warning signals: magnesium, aluminium and cement

Just a handful of specialists seem to have noticed the significance of the recent magnesium shortage. Since the production of magnesium requires a lot of electricity, western companies got out of this business a long time ago. Many here were even happy to leave these “dirty” activities to China with its abundant and cheap coal-fired power generation. At the same time, one could then lash out at China as “the world’s biggest climate polluter.”

Since then, magnesium production had to be cut back there, not only because of electricity prices, but also because the power plants had exhausted their CO2 quotas, which were fixed by the state. China, too, is now firmly in the grip of CO2 hysteria.

This has triggered a chain reaction that no one seems to have had on the radar. Magnesium is one of the most important alloying elements for high-quality aluminium alloys. The value chain today runs as follows: No CO2 means no magnesium, which means no aluminium. Period.

Similar rationales apply to steel and cement, and in principle to all other metals. How are we supposed to install at least 150,000 wind turbines that will be needed in Germany alone in the future if we are neither able to produce neither steel nor cement for them? Green hydrogen and similar “alternatives” can only be exalted by people who have no idea whatsoever of such mundane terms as energy efficiency or cost-benefit ratio.

There’s no civilisation without electricity

The brutal truth is that the uncoordinated, hysteria-driven global campaign against CO2 is causing us to catastrophically cripple the world’s energy and raw materials supply without really knowing how to generate the missing electricity. Wind and solar are useless for this, but few experts know that. On television, you only ever see certain “experts” who talk the talk of CO2 hysteria and are well paid for it. A prime example is Germany’s Claudia Kemfert, who appears in every available talk show. As an economist, however, she does not know the complexity of the technology for power generation.

How about 50% wind power worldwide?

What would we need for wind power alone for the year 2050, with then 10 billion people worldwide? Based on current energy consumption levels, probably 80,000 terawatt hours (TWh) of wind power alone would be needed annually worldwide by 2050. That is, if we want to end hunger and lift the third world out of poverty. That would be equivalent to some 20 million wind turbines. Each wind turbine requires more than 6,000 tons of material, mainly steel and concrete, aluminium, copper and rare earth metals. That adds up to some 120 billion tons of material. Let’s not even talk about the costs.

At the same time, existing power generation is already being cut away with brute force. But such aspects are not being thought about in Glasgow. There the motto is a Mad Max like Safari, who shoots the most CO2 sinners. And the latest fad is that they want to save the forests. Interesting about face specifically for England, where a large coal-fired power plant has been converted to wood-fired power. Year after year, gigantic quantities of wood are felled in America and shipped from there across the Atlantic and disappear in its fiery gullet. Of course, this project has all necessary eco-labels of being perfectly climate-friendly and CO2-free!Donate – choose an amount

4.9 47 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tom Halla
November 6, 2021 6:05 am

Being innumerate is a requirement for a green.

Reply to  Tom Halla
November 6, 2021 6:54 am

With bragging rights!

Bryan A
Reply to  IanE
November 6, 2021 9:57 am

Love the accompanying photo…it’s how future archaeologists will determine the beginning of the Idiocricene

Reply to  Bryan A
November 6, 2021 11:19 am

Crescent Dunes will be the future Stonehenge:
comment image

With the same questions asked: Who built it and why?

Metallic analysis will detect that almost the entire structure was transported from China. Did a sacrifice victim stand at the center? No one will guess it was because people believed the world was going to burn up, due to an elevated level of an atmospheric trace gas.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Anon
November 6, 2021 12:05 pm

Unlike Stonehenge, built of durable, hard stone. It’s very unlikely that thing will be around in 5000 years.

Bryan A
Reply to  Anon
November 6, 2021 3:45 pm

If it lasts into the next great society, it’ll likely be described as place of Vanity where some wealthy Narcissist would stand atop a tall dais and view themselves in thousands of mirrors to proclaim how great they were

Reply to  Anon
November 7, 2021 5:27 am

No, once it is “officially” abandoned the scrapers will clean it from the land, all that will be left is the cement foundation pieces. THAT will be the Stonehenge of future generations.

Carlo, Monte
November 6, 2021 6:22 am

Q: What is the universal material absolutely necessary for extraction of these raw materials?

A: Diesel fuel.

Ironic, isn’t it?

Gordon A. Dressler
Reply to  Carlo, Monte
November 6, 2021 9:25 am

Well, to get to the real base material that is necessary: that would be money.

Reply to  Gordon A. Dressler
November 6, 2021 11:16 am

Nonsense. It’s actually guns pointed at you.

Gordon A. Dressler
Reply to  Doonman
November 7, 2021 10:45 am


Guns being pointed at you can always be reversed by sufficient money . . . or do you not understand how the world really works?

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Gordon A. Dressler
November 6, 2021 11:50 am

What is money? Is it something that is ‘mined’ with a computer? Or ink printed on small rectangular pieces of paper? After the B Ark crashed on Earth, they got by with tree leaves.

An acquaintance recently remarked to me that he had been corresponding with an academic who had written a book advocating that federal deficits are not a problem, indeed, are good. He asked her, “If there is no problem with federal deficit spending, then why tax people? Shouldn’t expanding the money supply take care of the need for taxation?”

Reply to  Clyde Spencer
November 6, 2021 12:21 pm

It would in a world without limits on recovery and production, and supply would match demand. In our world, there are physical constraints and resource distributions governed by authoritarian and market forces.

And for everyone a beachfront estate in paradise… perhaps a vineyard.

Gordon A. Dressler
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
November 7, 2021 10:55 am


Good comment. But I offer the following clarifications:

1) Deficit “spending” has no correlation whatsoever to actual money needed to pay for goods and services . . . it is merely an accounting trick.

2) The means by which governments actually obtain “real money” is via annual taxation of citizens and corporations . . . and the taxed population is not allowed to pay by giving the taxing authorities (in the US, the IRS) debt notices.

November 6, 2021 6:37 am

Is it because all the fundamental industrial activities required to produce wind turbines & solar panels take place in remote locations, where no greentards are ever likely to see them firsthand, that they just can’t grasp what’s involved to achieve their power fairytale?

Reply to  Mr.
November 6, 2021 7:37 am

Don’t be silly, Mr.

Everyone knows that all you have to do is order 1500 wind turbines on Amazon and they will be delivered to the site next day if you check the ‘Priority’ box.

Far too many people have no idea what it takes to get even a toothbrush onto the shelf at the store. And electricity comes from an outlet in the wall. It’s always there; always has been.

The Mrs. was watching a TV show that I’d never seen, easy enough since I’m not much of a TV person. A bunch of people were milling about seemingly aimlessly and all were wearing jackets with ‘NCIS’ in large yellow block letters across the back.

I couldn’t figure it out. Stumped, I asked, “What does NCIS stand for, No Clue I’m Stupid?”

The Mrs. was not amused. We’re still married 😜 (45 years last month), but when reading here at WUWT, I often think a LOT of Green sheeple should be wearing those jackets, if only as a warning to others. Do Not Engage.

Reply to  H.R.
November 6, 2021 8:24 am

Yeah the missus & I have served 2 life terms together too.

But don’t leave us all hanging, Human Resources, what does NCIS really stand for?

Reply to  Mr.
November 6, 2021 8:37 am

I still don’t know, Mr., but the ‘N’ stands for Navy, as I recall.

Reply to  Mr.
November 6, 2021 8:49 am

I think it is Naval Criminal investigation Service.

Reply to  H.R.
November 9, 2021 6:52 am

As a US Vet, you have no idea how hard I laughed at the “No Clue, I’m Stupid,” remark. For those who don’t know, NCIS stands for “Naval Criminal Investigative Service.” They are about as popular as gangrene among the ranks and not known for being especially competent… lol.

Tim Gorman
Reply to  Mr.
November 6, 2021 9:14 am

Most greentard, heck most people in the world today, don’t know where *anything* comes from. They’ve never stood knee deep in cow guts to get their steaks and hamburger, they’ve never ever had to hoe a row of corn, they’ve never had to dig potatoes, they’ve never slaved over a hot stove preparing and canning tomatoes, beans, carrots, etc. They’ve never had to shear a sheep to get their wool coats, they’ve never had to sew up a sock because they couldn’t afford new ones, they’ve never had to hunt and kill game in order to survive a winter. They probably have no idea what a capon is let alone ever created one! They’ve never had to grease a u-joint, they have no idea at all what a faucet washer is, let alone how a toilet is sealed to the floor of the bathroom.

I’m not exactly sure how they make *any* judgement on policies that affect the lives of common people!

Old Gobie Jumper
Reply to  Tim Gorman
November 6, 2021 9:46 am

I love your list, thanks. You left out carrying water in buckets to the stock from the well every day, and milking twice a day 365 days a year.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Tim Gorman
November 6, 2021 11:55 am

It is the classic case of inner-city people who are enlightened enough to know that milk actually comes from white cows, and chocolate milk comes from brown cows, instead of from factories.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Tim Gorman
November 6, 2021 12:13 pm

Huh … as I read your list I was checking things off, saying to myself, you, yup. I missed only two … but was present while watching someone else doing it. I guess I must be really old. You’re right, of course.

Reply to  Tim Gorman
November 6, 2021 12:44 pm

A good list. I’ve done most of the things on it. I know what a capon is, but I’ve no idea how you make one. Can any of our readers enlighten me?

Richard Page
Reply to  Disputin
November 6, 2021 1:06 pm

I’ve never been involved with raising capon’s but I suspect the real skill would be with identifying a real one from the fat chickens that are often passed off as them (before tasting them, obviously).

Tim Gorman
Reply to  Richard Page
November 7, 2021 4:22 am

It ain’t easy! The testicular tissue is not external meaning you have to cut in the right place in the right way in order not to bleed the chicken out. It’s why capons are so expensive.

Easier to just butcher and eat the rooster before it matures! You don’t need that many roosters to maintain the flock.

Reply to  Tim Gorman
November 8, 2021 7:16 pm

Easier to let hybrid vigor do it for you and raise Cornish-Rock cross chicks. The little Cornish game hens you buy in the store are only 8 day old Cornish-Rock cross chicks.

Reply to  Disputin
November 8, 2021 7:14 pm

It is a castrated rooster chick. Have done that too! Have done everything on the list with the exception of milking daily. Have milked, however. My definition of running water is the water you run down to the crick to get

Reply to  Tim Gorman
November 7, 2021 1:20 am

This disconnect dates back a long way to a book written by Daniel Defoe in 1719.
In the book Robinson Crusoe the eponymous character mused that people in general relied on ‘stuff’ made by other people, and he had to learn all the life skills he needed.

Russ Wood
Reply to  StephenP
November 16, 2021 5:45 am

As a kid, I read “The Swiss Family Robinson”, where for the family’s survival, just about everything they needed turned up like magic! I don’t know if that book was INTENDED to be a satire on modern life, or was simply a kid’s entertainment.

Mark Pawelek
Reply to  Mr.
November 6, 2021 11:08 am

They can’t grasp anything; least of all the cost-benefits of varying energy systems.

Reply to  Mr.
November 6, 2021 12:25 pm

That, and the unspoken environmental disruption and destruction to recover sparsely distributed natural resources and a blight of low-density intermittents for a sustainable clean, Green myth and virtue.

Kevin kilty
November 6, 2021 6:41 am

The 120 billion tons of materials is apparently just for covering the “average” electrical demand over the year, not for the over building required for reliable service in unusaul conditions over moderate time scales; nor for the storage requirement should we foolishly decide to try to store energy rather than convert and deliver just in time. The ratio of needed materials for storage to primary energy production could easily rise to 10:1 or so. A trillion plus tons of mass.

Robert Hanson
Reply to  Kevin kilty
November 6, 2021 12:19 pm

Even if all of that were possible, and it’s not, it wouldn’t matter. Because there is no storage system, not just in use now, but even imagined in theory, that could power the grid for the days to weeks that the wind doesn’t blow. Or heck, just charge up millions of EVs every night when the solar panels produce nothing. Last winter in Houston was a warning from Gaia, but so far no one is paying any attention.

November 6, 2021 6:54 am

A remarkable proposition that I just came across in UK Money Week is that ‘We are aiming to prevent the limit on human flourishing set by a dependence on fossil fuels.’
That seems to be the new selling point for the scientically illiterate.
The reality is that without fossil fuels there can be no human flourishing unless there is a power source equally cheap, reliable and convenient.
There is no such source currently available and it would take a couple of decades to gear up a new nuclear industry.
So, that bit of jargon is actually a cover for the preventing of humanity from flourishing.
We owe everything we have to fossil fuels which is why China and India and others have pushed the whole issue into the long grass whilst the West commits economic and societal suicide.
One has to assume a hidden agenda in such circumstances and looking at the placards in Glasgow it appears to be the destruction of capitalism in favour of an authoritarian rationing of every available resource.
I am actually very afraid.

John Dawson
Reply to  Stephen Wilde
November 6, 2021 8:35 am

The Money Week article on page 16 is actually requoting The Economist which apparently says “For all their flaws, the UN framework and its COPs “play a crucial part in a process that is historic and vital: the removal of the fundamental limit on human flourishing imposed by dependence on fossil fuels””.

As you suggest, that seems to be a total reversal of the way things have happened so far in recent human history. I can see that one day we will run out of fossil fuels and will need alternatives – but that’s not a climate emergency, rather a resource issue.

Oh well…… will own nothing and be happy…..

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  John Dawson
November 6, 2021 11:57 am

Oh well…… will own nothing and be happy…..

You forgot, “Or else!”

Pamela Matlack-Klein
Reply to  Stephen Wilde
November 6, 2021 10:40 am

Yes, I am afraid too. These people are incredibly ignorant of what makes the world run as well as it does. They are well-fed, well-housed, and have lots of stuff. There is a huge disconnect between them having all their stuff and understanding how it comes into existence. They are marching to someone elses drumbeat and don’t realize that when all is said and done they will no longer have all the stuff they take for granted. The scary part is that this will affect MY stuff too!

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Pamela Matlack-Klein
November 6, 2021 12:01 pm

If civilization falls apart at the seams, even the wealthy will be affected. Perhaps more so because most of them won’t know how to cope with alternatives.

One of my PhD computer science friends acknowledged to me that he has never field dressed and butchered a large animal like a deer. I will be eating venison, while he is wondering where his next meal will come from.

Pamela Matlack-Klein
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
November 6, 2021 3:15 pm

I will happily instruct anyone who wishes to learn some of the finer points of coping without easy access to food and clothing. We can start with how to roast a turkey with fertile eggs or how to make a sweater with a live sheep. I can field dress a deer and butcher it as well, or any other critter for that matter. I can even make a cheese burger starting with a live steer and a fresh cow. Residential courses start at 2500 Euros a month, meals included. Limited space available, enroll early for the January session.

Reply to  Stephen Wilde
November 6, 2021 11:33 am

I’m not afraid at all. I actually laugh at the coming collapse. Remember, humans living their lives is not sustainable, so the collapse of civilization is inevitable.

It has all happened before to many great civilizations. Why would this time be any different?

Reply to  Stephen Wilde
November 8, 2021 8:17 pm

This book beautifully explains why we are even here because of FF. Our lives and very existence are intertwined with FF. Petroleum is not just for fuel but is the source of almost all materials and many lifesaving medicines..
The moral case for fossil fuels

Abolition Man
November 6, 2021 7:21 am

The CAGW Hoax is just the mad tickers of TikTok writ large!
Instead of ignorant and impressionable children learning mass psychosis with a helpful video hand from the ChiComs; our ignorant and easily bribed elites are falling all over themselves, trying to win the Boobie Prize in deconstructing modern civilization!
When Progressive zealots are allowed free rein to practice their religion on an unsuspecting populace, you get the soaring prices and shattered supply chains of the Bai Den Regime! Once they can gain full control of financial and material markets, the elites will completely destroy the consumer economy to win the accolades of their fellow co-religionists; the logical and sane need not apply!
The destruction they are wreaking could take decades to repair as they push the global markets to focus on solving a nonexistent problem! While I once believed that alarmism was largely based in ignorance, it has now been shown to have a large, wide, yellow streak of insanity running down it’s back!
Future generations will look back on the bird choppers and fryers of Climastrology with much the same outlook we have towards the Pyramids, and the statues of Easter a Island! And they will ask; “What were they thinking?”

Robert Hanson
Reply to  Abolition Man
November 6, 2021 12:33 pm

The destruction they are wreaking could take decades to repair”

I wish I had your certainty that it will be repairable.

glenn holdcroft
Reply to  Abolition Man
November 6, 2021 6:55 pm

Worship the gods and build for immortality , with other peoples money of course , except their new buildings will be a blight on history , less immortal than their own lives .

Burl Henry
November 6, 2021 7:23 am

The elimination of the burning of fossil fuels (which produce both CO2 and SO2 aerosols) will actually cause temperatures to RISE, because their SO2 aerosols cool our planet.

Should we have a period of 3 years, or more, without volcanic SO2 aerosols from a VEI4 or larger eruption, to cool the Earth, temperatures will quickly soar to those of the Medieval Warm Period, or higher, resulting in millions of deaths from droughts, famines, unbearable temperatures,,and forest fires. ,

We simply cannot let net-zero happen!

Reply to  Burl Henry
November 6, 2021 8:51 am

What is it that will cause the temperature to rise? You didn’t say.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  mkelly
November 6, 2021 12:03 pm

Yes he did.

… will actually cause temperatures to RISE, because their SO2 aerosols cool our planet.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Burl Henry
November 6, 2021 12:17 pm

LOL … you must be trying sarcasm because your post made no sense otherwise.

Burl Henry
Reply to  Rory Forbes
November 6, 2021 9:34 pm

Rory Forbes:

NO sarcasm.

The ONLY thing preventing current temperatures from rising to those of the Medieval Warming Period are circulating industrial SO2 aerosol emissions (72 Megatons in 2019), and occasional volcanic eruptions.

Net Zero is an attempt to eliminate all industrial SO2 aerosol emissions, and temperatures will have to rise.

Here is a NASA image of SO2 aerosols circulating in our atmosphere. .,


fluid map june 27.png
Rory Forbes
Reply to  Burl Henry
November 6, 2021 10:31 pm

SO2 aerosol emissions (72 Megatons in 2019),

Ooooh noooos, that’s a lot, right? 2019 reached a record high of 36.7 billion metric tons of CO2 emitted … so 72 million isn’t really very much, especially since we know there is no measurable effect from the CO2.

And why wouldn’t we want to have temperatures as warm as the MWP?

resulting in millions of deaths from droughts, famines, unbearable temperatures,,and forest fires.

Whatever gave you that idea? With 412 ppm of CO2 currently, natural disaster caused deaths has decreased by 95% since 1930. You’re clearly fantasizing.

November 6, 2021 7:24 am

“Green hydrogen and similar “alternatives” can only be exalted by people who have no idea whatsoever of such mundane terms as energy efficiency or cost-benefit ratio.”

World leaders seem to be more interested in impressing each other than the people in their own country. There are few things more dangerous than an enthusiastic moron with power.

Reply to  Olen
November 6, 2021 8:53 pm

Like renewable energy businesses the hydrogen alternative industry is seeking funding for research and development, government supplying taxpayer’s monies of course.

Peta of Newark
November 6, 2021 7:44 am

I didn’t bookmark it but recently the ongoing UK shortage of building materials, especially cement in this story, was pointing the finger:
not at Covid
not at Brexit and the folks who voted for
not at The French
not at the property spree

but at the gobsmacking amounts of cement being used to construct a High Speed trainline ‘tween London and Burrrr-Minge-Ham

why why why
In the same way that Glasgow is The Armpit of Scotland, so is Brum to England – why-oh-why would anyone be in any great hurry to go there. OK, to get out maybe.
And, they’re barely 100 miles apart – by the time any high speed train has got properly going it has to put the brakes on to come in and land. Its a joke
Even before most everyone along its route wants it to stop out side their house to hitch a ride.

If, if it went on a grand tour of say Taunton, London, Newcastle, Edinburgh, Preston (Manchester) Bristol, Taunton with minimal stops between each, it MIGHT have been some actual ‘high speed’ use – especially if they’d built a decent train running on a 3 metre+ track gauge = one that gives a nice ride and can go round corners without falling off the track.
Make it double decker, running at ‘just’ 125mph and it’ll carry 3 times more people in greater comfort
Plus they’ll arrive without deep vein thrombosis & migraine, without the equivalent of vibration-white-finger in their asses and – with all their fillings still in their teeth

But no. Nobody has any imagination

Dyana Gail Hilliard
Reply to  Peta of Newark
November 6, 2021 9:51 am

Pretty much like the high speed train in California. Too costly and who will use it?

Robert Hanson
Reply to  Dyana Gail Hilliard
November 6, 2021 12:38 pm

Hardly anyone, since right now it’s only on course, if barely, to go from virtually nowhere to virtually nowhere.

November 6, 2021 7:58 am

20 million wind turbines!! Just imagine how many birds would die as a result.

John Dawson
Reply to  Sunderlandsteve
November 6, 2021 8:39 am

For the purposes of balance I recall reading that domestic cats kill many times the multiples of birds sliced up by wind turbines.

That may not be true offshore (!) but overall it seems plausible. I am of course happy to retract this if shown to be mistaken!

Reply to  John Dawson
November 6, 2021 9:53 am

Cats kill lots of birds, so do high rises, etc. in cities ( landlords have them picked up ); so do other birds, but none of these kill the raptors and other species that may be at risk. Turbines, as well as being an affront to logic, are an ecological nightmare and a monument to the stupidity of the average person. ( cue George Carlin )

Pamela Matlack-Klein
Reply to  skiman
November 6, 2021 10:49 am

And don’t forget, a hideous blight on the horizon and an affront to the eyes!

Tom Abbott
Reply to  skiman
November 6, 2021 12:44 pm

How many bats do cats k!ll?

Windmills explode bats lungs if they get too close to the blade. They don’t have to make contact, just get close.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  John Dawson
November 6, 2021 12:07 pm

For the purposes of balance I recall reading that domestic cats kill many times the multiples of birds sliced up by wind turbines.

That may be true for the current number of wind turbines installed. But increasing the number significantly will shift the balance. Vultures may profit more than song birds, if they learn to avoid the blades.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  John Dawson
November 6, 2021 12:21 pm

The claim that domestic cats kill vast numbers of song birds has been debunked many times … and they don’t kill raptors, bats and useful insects either.

Reply to  John Dawson
November 6, 2021 12:34 pm

There are no claims that cats are clean, green energy producers, let alone scientists, investors, and children who spread political myths and sing handmade tales of their virtues.

Reply to  John Dawson
November 6, 2021 2:20 pm

Cats kill more wind turbines than birds do.

Reply to  John Dawson
November 6, 2021 7:52 pm


Please provide some link to the public record for the number of birds killed by any “wind farm” anywhere in the world.

Have fun trying to find such, the wind farms do not produce such, the governments do not require such information to be provided and academia has no interest in investigating such.


Bill Toland
Reply to  Drake
November 6, 2021 11:35 pm

The average wind turbine kills 500 birds and bats per year. Simply apply that number to a wind farm to get a rough estimate of how many birds and bats it is killing.

Gregory Woods
Reply to  Sunderlandsteve
November 6, 2021 8:40 am

Birds! Our children just won’t know what birds were….

November 6, 2021 8:14 am

The “climate problem” has been underdevelopment for over 70 years. A Candian oil baron, Maurice Strong, was appointed to organize UNEP, the United Nation’s Environmental Program.

A couple years later it was supplemented by the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, which was founded to assay the effects of “human caused” on the environment, mainly the world climate.

The UNEP has done some helpful projects to aid people in underdeveloped countries produce more crops and livestock, and more efficiently feed themselves and improve living conditions.

UNEP has had a much greater effect on the world. The “Stockholm Declaration” provided a laundry list of extant and possible harms to the environment. Variable annual conference evolved into the annual Council of Parties with the proclaimed goal of continuing progress on environmental improvements.

The actual effectiveness was a huge convention every year where top governmental officials and hangers-on from numerous “civilian” climate organizations congregated for a spendiferous multi-national celebration of “Human Caused” changes to the climate.

The relatively huge expenditures to study primarily only one cause of climate change, Human Beings in total ignorance of how the climate functioned has wasted huge amounts of money on a fictional problem. The best that can be said is the climate does change(witness the cyclical fluctuations between the ice ages and warm period such as now). The complete bias towards human causes has missed much. The current Grand Solar Minimum currently occurring shows how the sun, the primary source of energy in the atmosphere, was ignored. “Small” variations caused by sunspot numbers changing in a fairly regular series that changes solar energy output, the main driver of the climate, has been completely ignored by the UN.

The human-caused climate change turns out to be a system to transfer huge sums of money between the developed countries to the poorer ones through the UN, giving it significantly more global clout.

Reply to  Philo
November 6, 2021 12:39 pm

Evolution following a fitness function that normalizes progress or [unqualified] monotonic [redistributive] change to fund minority special and secular profits.

Robert Hanson
Reply to  Philo
November 6, 2021 12:54 pm

Just discovering this now? They’ve been openly saying that for many years:

“No matter if the science of global warming is all phony… climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.”
Christine Stewart, former Canadian Minister of the Environment
“We’ve got to ride this global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy.”
Timothy Wirth, President of the UN Foundation
“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?” –
Maurice Strong, Chairman – World Economic Forum
“This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the industrial revolution.” – Christiana Figueres, UN Climate Change Executive Secretary
“We’ve got to go straight to the heart of capitalism and overthrow it.
George Monbiot April 12, 2019

Reply to  Robert Hanson
November 6, 2021 1:46 pm

The formation of the sources in your list started with the establishment of UNEP.
Of course there were some sources claiming “Global Warming”. There had been for nearly a century. It appears to be Swante Arrhenius that made that claim in 1896.

Steve Case
November 6, 2021 8:21 am

The only thing that can be hoped for is that the Climate Crazies finally overplay their hand.

Climate believer
Reply to  Steve Case
November 6, 2021 11:05 am

I’m counting on it.

Richard Page
Reply to  Climate believer
November 6, 2021 1:11 pm

The whole human race is counting on it, whether they know it or not, otherwise we’re screwed.

Michael in Dublin
November 6, 2021 8:24 am

Why if in greenhouses where the temperatures are higher than outside and carbon dioxide is increased do the plants flourish? They evidently did not get the memo from the climate alarmists.

Joseph Zorzin
November 6, 2021 8:41 am

Now it burns about one local forest a day.”

Bullshit. Nobody is burning forests to produce chips. Forests are THINNED in order to grow high value timber so YOU can have a wood home to live in, and nice wood furniture, and toilet paper. What is removed in thinnings- or what’s left after the good timber is cut, before planting a new forest, the worthless trees must be removed. Damaged, diseased, crooked trees and trees of species not desired are removed and chipped. If not chipped, those same trees will simply be cut down to rot on the ground, or they’re burned in huge piles, releasing REAL pollution with no benefit to us. Biomass is HATED by the greens. It’s NOT anything like wind and solar. It’s truly renewable, it’s dependable when the sun isn’t shining and the wind isn’t blowing- 24/7. Anyone who hates biomass has no understanding of forestry, yet I bet you love wood products- well guess what, wood comes from managed forests- which offers decent jobs in rural areas.

Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
November 6, 2021 8:57 am

Joseph, as always, you are both correct and wrong. YES, Biomass — use it sensibly, and I respect your expertise in forestry. BUT, biomass is absolutely NOT a significant answer/alternative to world energy demand.

A high school kid with the Internet, Excel spreadsheet, basic arithmetic, and the right set of questions, could easily conclude that world-scale industrial biomass to energy is a non-starter. Even trying would result in serious environmental consequences for little to no net gain.

Thomas Gasloli
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
November 6, 2021 9:23 am

Yes, biomass generation can be good, but the generating facility must be close to the forest. Shipping wood pellets from the US to Britain is demented, and definitely is not “green”.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Thomas Gasloli
November 6, 2021 12:48 pm

“Shipping wood pellets from the US to Britain is demented”

It is.

Robert Hanson
Reply to  Thomas Gasloli
November 6, 2021 12:58 pm

“Forests are THINNED in order to grow high value timber”

So you are suggesting that DRAX is being run using carefully thinned trees, done by careful foresters? Now why would I question that? 

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
November 6, 2021 12:10 pm

… before planting a new forest,

Why would you plant a new forest if only thinning is practiced?

Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
November 6, 2021 8:51 pm

You said it ! The trees have to be chipped , with what ? a deep fryer , no! a diesel powered chipper , then put on a diesel powered truck and taken to a port , then put on a diesel powered ship , and transported across the sea , put on a diesel powered truck again and transported to the power plant and burnt with only 1/3 rd of the energy value of coal . How much diesel is involved in each ton of wood chips ?. How are you going to do all these things without the grunt of diesel , electric and batteries ? Have you ever seen and heard a wood chipper in action especially one capable of chipping whole logs , they shake the very ground!

November 6, 2021 9:02 am

There is hope. Nigel Farage wants a referendum. All the political parties have bought into the CAGW fraud and no politician dares to speak against it. Now there’s a chance the issue can properly be brought before the voters.

November 6, 2021 9:05 am

If you scrap half the cars in the world, all of the airplanes, all cement production, half of all manufacturing, turn off the heat in half of the houses, you still can’t get to “net zero” without nuclear power charging batteries at night for the remainder. Sure you can declare yourself to be “net zero” if you pay for green electricity to run the lights and air conditioner in your law, accounting, investment, bookstore, real estate office or bank. But try making steel rails for train tracks for the boom in mass transit….

Dennis G Sandberg
Reply to  DMacKenzie
November 6, 2021 9:23 am

The real catastrophic scenario and the only workable solution; it’s not complicated.

Questing Vole
November 6, 2021 9:32 am

‘Activists’ are trying to bully the UK government into closing (by withdrawing its perfectly valid mining licence) one of the last remaining mines in Wales. It works anthracite, so not exactly on a par with Germany’s lignite mines.

Gary Pearse
November 6, 2021 9:59 am

“The development of new deposits often takes more than five years and can quickly swallow up billions. And often enough, they are exhausted after just 10 years or so.”

Multiply your problem re time to do by 5-10. Massive exploration for new deposits takes many years and needs guaranteed investment funds, not the usual risk funds. Note also, exploration success rate depending on the minerals sought is only a few percent. Development is more like 8-10 years (enviro BL study 3yrs +).

Current global mineral exploration budget is ~$100B, more than half done by Canadians BTW (15yrs ago, it was about $60B and Canadian involvement was over 70%. Australia began to compete with Canadians and the two countries now fund ~ 80% of the total).

The bottom line is, the requirements can’t be physically met even halfway this century. This is what is going to bring this marxist dystopia down. We won’t have to wait long. It won’t take til 2030. Meanwhile, it’s already clear that C02 is only a very minor player. Continued rapid rise in CO2 without commensurate warming will make this clear to all.

Reply to  Gary Pearse
November 6, 2021 12:30 pm

Gary Pearse: Continued rapid rise in CO2 without commensurate warming will make this clear to all.”

Not to the 2 generations of indoctrinated schoolchildren and their sheeple parents. They didn’t get to to point of “CO2 evil and causes everything” by reasoning and reasoning won’t get them off that point.

Right-Handed Shark
Reply to  Gary Pearse
November 6, 2021 3:26 pm

This was the point of re-naming the problem from “global warming” to “climate change”, and now to “climate chaos” and “climate catastrophe”. Any extreme weather event, hot or cold, wet or dry can now be blamed on CO2.

John H
November 6, 2021 10:18 am

The World is taking The Killing Fields of Pol Pot as a training manual and not a warning.

4E Douglas
Reply to  John H
November 6, 2021 11:05 am

I had a (required humanities class that was taught by this
greenies that used as his text the Green Utopian (Oxy-Moron alert)
Novel “Ecotopia.” I’d come back to college to finish my degree, and had
to pick up a handful of classes. His premise was that to save the world from
freezing (this was at the heart of the “Ice Age scare.”) He wore cotton clothing and made his own sandals. “Ecotopia’ remade society into non-consuming organic ,vegan Proles who (this is is the funny part) rode to their cities in “Cascadia” on a Meglev high speed train. No word on what powered it.
I had the temerity to ask:” with this social shift, here in the west, where are the fields of skulls or are the bones of the dead used for the phosphate?”
The Prof became incensed “It is a non violent movement” I said so was Pot Pot, youre non violent if you are dead.” I was asked to leave the class. I wore that incomplete as a badge of

November 6, 2021 10:43 am

Actually a key part of the Green Con is to point at particular countries or regions (such as Tasmania with its hydro and Denmark with its North Sea wind) and say: they can do it, so give us your money. Very few regions have such abundant wind and water resources.

Reply to  climanrecon
November 6, 2021 12:18 pm

The biggest problem that the world has is that the constant propaganda about global warming /climate change has been a huge success in our schools and universities through out the world..
On the TV news last night Greta Thunberg was being hailed as royalty in Glasgow by thousands of young people .
The warmists have run a very clever campaign for the last 25 years and in many countries they now want to drop the voting age down to 16.
I was brought up on a farm with no electricity for appliances but we did have a wind charger to charge a battery for 12 volt lighting untill a power line was installed across our farm to serve an isolated coastal village in 1948 .
I can remember the refrigerator and the washing machine arriving and what a difference those two appliances made to our mothers life.
We had a horse and sledge to cart fencing materials ,fire wood and to distribute bags of fertilizer 12 to the tonne for men on foot to clamber around the hills and spread by hand .
Young people today would not cope if they had to do everything by hand , andt they have not thought what it would be like to live with out instant energy to charge their cell phones and computers .
Graham still farming to feed the world.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  climanrecon
November 6, 2021 12:27 pm

And even if a country does have a constant prevailing wind. On must still factor in the destruction of the visible landscape to produce power. Wind has a very low harvestable energy density. The cost will never be less than the benefit.

Martin Pinder
November 6, 2021 1:23 pm

Boris Johnson is going for the soft option by his attempts to fight climate change. Instead of worrying about things far into the future, when he will be long dead, he should tackle some of the current problems that we have, like migrants crossing the channel.

November 6, 2021 1:53 pm

Evolution in action. I used to wonder how mankind would evolve because how could one have survival of the fittest in a comfortable society. Now I know.

Peta of Newark
November 6, 2021 2:47 pm

120GT of basalt, crushed and spread over existing farmland (I make that almost exactly 10 Tonne per acre) would be epic

Yes Great Plains and Australia – you too could be getting 4+ tonne per acre of wheat
Seriously why anyone wants to eat that toxic mush beats me but it’ll make a whole lotta love (oops) Bioethanol
In ‘some’ defence It is a sort of substitute for meat in that it’s chewy and absorbs fat but that Gluten is the Devil’s Own Porridge – it drives our immune systems perfectly crazy.
(Check out ‘Lectins’ = Hideous pieces of protein that plants hide inside themselves for the very reason that they don’t like to be eaten any more than me or you might)

Double that 120G of basalt (almost any black coloured rock is good) and put same over existing deserts and thereafter enjoy life in a Global Garden of Eden

sooooo very simple
and we already move nearly 60GT of ordinary soil/dirt/rock’n roll rubble every year anyway = no big deal
there’ll be soooo much Good Stuff to eat we won’t have to be eating our own and other people’s children.

btw any of these things familiar…

November 6, 2021 5:48 pm

The latest geoengineering talk is of increasing the salinity of the Arctic seas by blocking river discharge to the Arctic, including to the big Russian north flowing rivers the Lena, Ob and Yenisei:

Anyone here connected with policy people – can you tell us how far advanced plans already are for the invasion of Russia to save the climate? Presumably it will begin with a pre-emptive nuclear strike? The pre-war vilification is of course well underway.

Pat from kerbob
November 6, 2021 7:52 pm

Keep in mind
The beauty of the alberta oilsands is that there is no exploration risk. It’s right there, well mapped by area and depth. Last time I looked with current rates (and current technology, the kicker) we have almost 400 years.
We essentially boil oil and water with gas. So we can decarbonize the oilsands by simply going nuke and using electric heating instead.
Sask next door has massive uranium reserves, canada has mature nuke tech and we are well positioned to develop 4th gen.
Build a series of nukes for the power using uranium from shield mines and return the waste to the rock hole when the mine is depleted.

Redirect all that gas to LNG exports, and export nuclear.

Just need France type of will to proceed

November 6, 2021 8:50 pm

I watched a rural programme today and one part about renewable energy transition in Australia, the missing link is more transmission lines apparently, and the theory is that when constructed renewable energy businesses will rush to secure positions nearby for wind turbines and solar panels. The future for renewable energy is inevitable, apparently.

Many farmer-land owners do not want transmission towers and lines crossing their lands but the renewables industry representative said they must be convinced and reimbursed. It was pointed out that there are enormous areas of UN registered National Parks where transmission towers and lines could be located but no, that would damage the environment.

At this time after decades of renewables transition wind turbines and solar energy business installations (rooftop solar not included) supply intermittently up to about 14 per cent of the grid electricity baseload and most is generated by coal, gas or diesel fuelled generators and hydro.

There was the usual references to “government” funding or subsidies needed.

November 7, 2021 5:25 am

catastrophically cripple the world’s energy and raw materials supply” This has ALWAYS been the goal of the left. Killing millions of people is just gravy for these anti-human f**kbags.

Geoffrey Williams
November 7, 2021 2:42 pm

The cop 26 movement represents an anarchist movement determined to rewrite history and destroy the world economy.

Gerry, England
November 8, 2021 2:47 am

Drax DOES burn coal. In fact it has been playing a vital role in keeping our grid from collapsing by using the generating plant that Drax were refused taxpayer cash to convert to burning trees, so kept as it was. They are also getting paid over £4000/MWh to shore up the grid when the normal rate is around £70/MWh. Yes, we lucky users will pick up the bill for that. As we will for the new daily record cost for grid balancing of over £44m. Before unreliables were added to the grid it was around £200m a year – it is now over £2bn.

November 8, 2021 8:11 pm
%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights