Fair play to her. I like her approach. She took the elite climate worriers on their word…and they could not sustain their arguments in the face of simple logic. That being,” if you think it is a crisis, act like it is.”
Great stuff, good for her, and I loved watching her sing, “you can stick your climate crisis up your arse”. She looked like she was having fun.
You’ve got to remember she is a young person and should have every right to campaign for whatever she wants.
Don’t know why. Chuck could have flogged off a couple of O B E s to fawning Arabs to pay the bill. He and fergie are in the same boat for whoring and cringing to where the big bucks lie . Chuck used to suck up to ceacescu for Christ’s sake . When mum dies let’s have done with the whole royalty farce
They have been showing Greta on PBS TV here in Michigan, a show about her exploring and traveling and investigating what is going on in the world of how to undo climate change and it provides me with good belly laughs, how liberals get so wound up over NON problems and how additives in cow food reduce methane and such. I just got 5 inches of snow last night so I am about to go shovel some of that white global warming.
I did not see any info about slowing the craft to allow it to enter Mars orbit other than they haven’t figured it out yet. But hasn’t that always been the obstacle? Getting a craft to a fast speed is doable but carrying the fuel to slow it down at the destination is always the problem.
Yes, slowing the craft down enough to enter orbit is a problem for Mars and for the Stars.
For Mars, they could probably build a laser that orbits there to slow the craft down.
I think the best way to get back and forth to Mars is to use Buzz Aldrin’s concept of human habitats that are put in an orbit that travels from Earth to Mars and then returns to Earth. Once this type of vehicle is put in its orbit, it takes very little propellant to keep it there.
Then, as Aldrin’s “cycling space station” comes near Earth, we send out an orbital tranfer vehicle to match orbits with it and tranfer crew and cargo back and forth, and then do the same thing six months later as the cycling space station comes near Mars.
We don’t need exotic propulsion methods to implement this system.
We will need a way to move the orbital transfer vehicles around. Perhaps lasers would be useful in this application by powering the orbital transfer vehicles. The laser could be used to heat water to the boiling point, and then the orbital tranfer vehicle can “steam” all over the Earth/Moon system. A flying tea kettle. I’m assuming the laser is space-based.
Also ‘the development of high-temperature materials that allow the spacecraft to break against the Martian atmosphere upon arrival.’
Being able to break against the atmosphere is the trick that will allow for return.
a) When astro-scientists don’t know the difference between “break” and “brake” it makes me nervous.
b) Slamming into an atmosphere at such high speed would be like hitting a brick wall, would it not? If they just skim it to slow down a little, they would be going too fast to be captured into Mars’ orbit and would continue into space.
c) I would love to see the researchers build and test this idea. It would seem to have promise, but I think a more safe and reliable braking system would be required.
d) If they send astronauts by this method, how do they propose to bring them back?
The board that oversees the state’s $104.1 billion pension fund voted on Thursday to start using its shareholder power to pressure companies to act on climate change.
The Massachusetts Pension Reserves Investment Management Board, which is chaired bystate Treasurer Deborah Goldberg, voted unanimously in support of the newguidelines, which essentially transform the pension fund’s managers into shareholder-activists. It asks them to vote against any directors of companies the fund is invested in if they don’t make a plan for keeping warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, or hitting net-zero emissions by 2050.
Conflict of interest is another cause of action to explore…. Are any of those pension managers or their family benefitting from the promotion of solar or wind or electric vehicles or the like?
“Could they be sued for not adhering to their fiduciary responsibility?”
I think they could be sued for fraud because there’s no evidence that humans can affect the Earth’s temperatures by reining in CO2. Where’s the proof that anything they do can have any effect on the Earth’s temperatures? They don’t have any proof because there isn’t any proof. Claiming they do have proof is fraud.
Tom Abbott
February 18, 2022 3:21 am
When radical Democrats talk about “Democracy” they really mean “Socialism”.
When radical Democrats say Democracy is in danger, they really mean Socialism is in danger.
When radical Democrats warn that Republicans are going to destroy Democracy, what they really mean is Republicans are going to destroy Socialism.
When radical Democrats speak for the American people, they are really speaking for the radical, leftwing, American people, but they want us to think they speak for us all.
“By world standards US Democrats are barely social democrats, let alone ‘socialists’”
And yet, dear griff, as you well know the US Democrats are not social democrats, oh no, they are democratic socialists.
For the benefit of those who may be uncertain of the differences....
“Social democracy allows for market forces. In a social democracy, the government can privatise some state-owned industries and utilities. The high profits from the privatised industries are distributed using the tax system. It’s similar to the more ‘right-wing’ socialist parties like the Labour party under the leadership of Tony Blair.
Democratic socialism calls for a mixed economy whereby the state controls all the key industries such as oil, electricity, and gas, water, railways etc. The ‘elected’ government manages all the major factors of production. They are then distributed amongst people through centralised planning. Private industries have the freedom to operate the remaining parts of the economy. The tax system used to redistribute wealth from the rich to the poor is progressive. Allegedly.
DS also calls for the provision of a very generous welfare state.
Fascism – govt control of business and capital (the current US)
Socialism – govt ownership of business and capital
Communism – the collective owns business and capital
Fascism requires a dictatorship and a large bureaucracy to exert control
Socialism expands the dictatorship and bureaucracy
Communism requires the dictator and bureaucracy to step aside
The US is now controlled by a large, unelected Bureaucratic Hegemony who controls all aspects of our life. Witness the vaccine mandates, almost none of which were passed by elected representatives into law but, instead, imposed by unelected bureaucrats. While there is no permanent dictator there is a party dictatorship – the Democrats.
The expanded welfare state the Democrats are instituting is the first step along the road to Socialism. Sooner or later the government will have to institute business ownership in order to fund its social (welfare) programs Just one more step in the “from each according to ability and to each according to need” meme, with the government deciding what you need.
Not once in history has Socialism ever transitioned into actual communism. Once established the Bureaucratic Hegemony has never been willing to give up its power to the collective. The US will be no different.
Another difference was that fascism was nationalist and communism was international. Hitler didn’t care what type of government was set up in the countries he conquered as long as they provided Germany the goods and manpower he wanted. The commies do care; they want everyone on the planet to have communist governments.
In practice, not much difference at all, except that the fascists lost the war.
Here’s a note that might interest President Putin in regards to Ukraine –
The second charge in the Nuremberg war crimes trial indictment was for planning, initiating, and waging wars of aggression.
Very good summary. I would quibble just a bit that we have not gotten yet to true Fascism; I think we are in the midst of an Oligarchy phase (the government is being controlled by “oligarchs”, who will ultimately loose to the “government”)…
It’s really the Bureaucratic Hegemony that runs the show in the US today. It’s the rules and regulations they propagate that carries the power. The BC doesn’t really care about the Oligarchs, the BC is not elected and they aren’t beholden to wealthy donors. Fascism doesn’t require a powerful dictator, just an all-powerful government.
Tim, I’m curious about your source. Did Marx use another name for fascism? I believe he was dead by the time fascism came about.
I’m not really sure about the order your evolutionary steps, either. One can argue Red China went from communism to fascism. Both are forms of socialism.
Marx didn’t use the term fascism. But what he described as the steps to communism was the same thing.
Lenin and Stalin didn’t believe in a gradual transposition to communism as Marx described, they used force instead and bypassed the true fascism stage and went straight to Socialism. But they and the bureaucracy wound up never actually transitioning to true communism.
Mao did the same as Lenin and Stalin, violent rebellion to move directly to Socialism with the government controlling everything. China never actually transitioned to communism either. Their dictatorship and bureaucracy just moved back to fascism because it was much easier to control the population that way.
I don’t think that is correct. Mussolini described it as a partnership between the government and industry, not control of one by the other. He thought it it as the government going into business with the corporations, like a JV. Communism was supposed to be the means of production and management thereof by the people who worked in the facility. Very few workers are capable of consulting effectively, let alone running a business so that was a non-starter. State capitalism is what Russia quickly became, China took more time as the “local ownership” model failed repeatedly.
I am happy that one can study these definitions from a non-partisan perspective as I don’t lie any of them. A game-changer for all these ideologies would be the elimination of parties (factions). When the representatives at the top are only required to follow their conscience – collective or not – a huge set of problems evaporates. A tiny group dictating to the members of a party dictating to everyone is no way to run a country. Freedom of thought has to be the norm.
“Mussolini described it as a partnership between the government and industry, not control of one by the other.”
Ummm, the power structure had the government in control of capital which meant they also controlled the business sector. “Partnership” was just a marketing ploy to make things sound better. When Mussolini (and Hitler) said jump, business jumped. If they didn’t they didn’t stay in business very long.
Crispin,
Perhaps, but that’s an argument of nuance. Both what you said and what Tim said are much closer to the original definition than what is currently used.
Merriam-Webster: a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
Wikipedia: a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and strong regimentation of society and the economy that rose to prominence in early 20th-century Europe.
Fascism doesn’t require a dictatorial leader, just an all-powerful government. leaders can come and go as long as the bureaucracy remains. Presidents can come and go but as long as the Bureaucratic Hegemony remains, at local/state/federal levels, you will continue with a Fascist government. Economic and social regimentation comes from the rules and regulations promulgated by the BC, not from politics.
Nor is Fascism a right-wing ideology. Both Hitler and Mussolini were rabid Socialists early in their careers. They didn’t all of a sudden become right wing. What they found was that Fascism gave them just as much power as Socialism would without the added responsibility of maintaining the economy. Any economic failures could be blamed on the private sector not performing adequately. For proof look at the Nazi political platform:
We demand that the State shall above all undertake to ensure that every citizen shall have the possibility of living decently and earning a livelihood. (right wing?)
That all unearned income, and all income that does not arise from work, be abolished. (right wing?)
We demand the nationalization of all trusts. (right wing?) (Hello Lizzie and Bernie!)
We demand the creation and maintenance of a sound middle-class, the immediate communalization of large stores which will be rented cheaply to small tradespeople, and the strongest consideration must be given to ensure that small traders shall deliver the supplies needed by the State, the provinces and municipalities. (right wing?)
In order to make it possible for every capable and industrious German to obtain higher education, and thus the opportunity to reach into positions of leadership, the State must assume the responsibility of organizing thoroughly the entire cultural system of the people.(right wing?)
Newspapers transgressing against the common welfare shall be suppressed. (right wing? or left-wing censorship like today?)
In order to carry out this program we demand: the creation of a strong central authority in the State (right wing? the left has been clamoring for this for 70 years – contrary to the Bill of Rights, Amendments 9 and 10)
These are just some excerpts of a few of the party platform planks. These are *very* similar to the Democrat left-wing party platform of today.
Merriam-Webster end Wikipedia are peddling misinformation.
Tim, please refer to my earlier comment to you: “Refreshing to see someone who remembers the original definition.”
I’m pointing out that they have “changed” the definition of fascism to suit their own ideas (and specifically to make it out to be “right-wing” and to equate conservatives with Nazis), and that you and Crispin only disagree over nuance – both of you are far more correct than either MW or Wikipedia. You’re not telling me anything I don’t know here.
In 1972 I started work for a nationalised gas industry in the Uk . It was run by very inspired, competent and modestly paid patriotic individuals of high integrity. Our first Gas well was a5 Tcf discovery and our first onshore well was a .5 billion barrel oilfield. I was proud of my modest part in both. Then we were privatised. Public assets flogged off for peanuts. Useless fat-cat CEO’s paid astronomical salaries for indifferent performance. That is where national rot started and carried on with each administration being worse than the last . Thank
Griff, in the US we don’t measure the democrats according to world standards because the world standards don’t measure far enough to the left. We have a new measuring system where the left edge of the measuring stick includes: cultural marxism, race marxism, communo-fascism, and facist-communism. No other place on the planet in the last 150 years has gone as far left as the democrats in the US have.
Look at the Big Picture :
NATOstan’s Mackindergarten is throwing a tantrum!
For the politically challenged, Mackinder’s Geopolitics could start WWIII, and NATOstan has long outlived its usefulness. No difference whether Trump or Biden occupy the WH – the same Mackindergarten is throwing up a stink. Time for adults in the room to call order!
Strange times when a professional comedian come President of Ukraine was only adult in the kindergarten until got brought in line by Biden and BoJo’s re-parroting panic tantrums.
“politically challenged”
Really now.
I checked. Mackinder had a thesis. He talked of a “heartland” consisting of western Europe, eastern Europe, and Asia.
1) if you control the “heartland”, that is all of the above, you control what he called “the islands”.
2) The islands consisted of North America, South America, Australia, and Japan.
3) If you control both the “heartland” and “the islands”, you rule the world!!!
Wow! Such insight. If you control the world, you control the world.
Interesting, in his world view, North America was an “island”, the Mideast did not exist and Africa was of no importance.
Of course he put his thesis out there in 1904. That was before WWI and the emergence of the US a a world player, so yes, to him it was just an island. Same with the Mideast. in 1904, the place hardly rated a second look.
“politically challenged”
*sigh*
Mackinder: An academic geographer with delusions of grandeur, and a vision for World Domination. If you could make him appear truly evil instead of pathetic, you could have the villain in a James Bond movie.
Was King Edward VII’s advisor. Gave us WWI, WW2, Afghanistan (via Brzezinski), Syria, Iraq, and the Caucasus (Arc of Crisis), and Kazakhstan recently.
The World Island geopolitics where China, Russia, Germany, France operate in harmony , sees the Belt And Road Initiative as directly contrary.
Hence Ukraine, totally bankrupt, a stepped upon stone, a landmine.
Academics may claim clean hands – it will not work.
I assume there are some Democrats who are not radical, so I like to include “radical” in my criticism because that’s who I’m criticizing, the radicals.
I happen to be a registered Democrat and have been all my life, for some practical reasons, but I vote conservative. I’m what would be called in days past a “Reagan Democrat”.
The Democrat Party of today looks nothing like the Democrat Party at the time I registered. The Democrats of today look like radical socialists and anarchists.
The radical Democrats of today will ruin this nation if given the chance.
GregS
February 18, 2022 4:26 am
FFF
(Fauci Funded Flu) Credit really should be given where it’s do.
John Garrett
February 18, 2022 4:30 am
VERY IMPORTANT
If you have investments at Vanguard or Fidelity or T. Rowe Price or BlackRock or American Funds or any other mutual fund manager,
BE SURE to let that organization know that you do not want them voting in favor of activist-sponsored “climate change” corporate proxy proposals.
If you own company shares directly, be sure to vote.
The Carbon Disclosure Project, of the Great Reset, that BlackRock et al, and the EU, all now follow, originated with major Tory donor Goldsmith. Symonds worked as press-agent for both top donors, Goldsmith and Aspinall. BoJo’s position easily explained.
So one should ask why these financial behemoths are following British policy.
Oh, wait – the City of London is actually their HQ.
I still see an opportunity for a shareholder class action lawsuit against Blackrock and others for putting their pet projects about shareholder value. How is their activism aligned with their fiduciary responsibility?
TODD CALLENDER: GENETIC-ALTERING VACCINES COULD NULLIFY HUMAN RIGHTS Feb 18, 2022 Today on TruNews, founder and host Rick Wiles is joined by disabled rights activist attorney Todd Callender, who is actively defending US servicemen from being forced to take the operating system jab. They also discuss the history of the development of mRNA injections, and their future in altering human DNA, ending in the nullification of human rights. Excerpts, at circa 25 minutes into the video: – The 2005 International Health Regulations Treat commit almost 200 countries to give full authority to the World Health Organization to deal with pandemics. That is how the Covid-19 scam was perpetrated in so many countries. – There was no significant increase in all-cause mortality during the height of the so-called “Covid-19 pandemic” in 2020. – All-cause mortality in the USA military (ages 18 to 40) increased by 1100% in ten months of 2021, caused by the toxic Covid-19 “vaccines”. The forecast for 2022 is an increase of all-cause mortality of 5000% in 2022. – Deaths were accelerated by injections of potentially toxic drugs including Remdesivir, Midazolam, Morphine, Fentanyl, etc. – Insurance companies are denying death benefits, saying the taking of experimental Covid-19 “vaccines” constitutes “suicide”. That’s all for now, dear Mudbloods, from the Right Reverend Billy-Bob Bayou. Regards, Allan (he, him, Pureblood, gotcha, satire!)
David Dibbell
February 18, 2022 4:56 am
Please consider the implications of these plots in respect to the concept of water vapor feedback. The claims of harmful warming depend on the amplification of the direct radiative absorption and emission effect of CO2. This amplification is attributed mostly to water vapor.
There are links below to three plots, all from the ERA5 reanalysis product from ECMWF. Yes, it is a model. But a reanalysis model does not purport to predict. It is tied to observed conditions in the atmosphere such as temperature and humidity to calculate the bulk properties and mass and energy flows as realistically as possible.
The plots are for a single gridpoint near where I live in the mid-latitudes. Hourly values for all of 2019 are given, for total column water (vapor + droplets + ice crystals – the values for vapor-only are not much different) and for downward longwave radiation received at the surface, on which the poorly-named “greenhouse effect” depends. The third graph is a scatter plot of one versus the other.
?dl=0
?dl=0
?dl=0
Such plots will take on a different shape from the tropics to the poles, but the points remain the same:
The total column water is highly variable on short time intervals in all the seasons.
The downward longwave energy received at the surface is also highly variable on short time intervals as the seasons pass.
When you plot one versus the other, it becomes clear that the static concept of “water vapor feedback” can never explain the climate outcome at a single gridpoint or any gridpoint. It’s not static at all. So neither can it drive the composite climate result for the planet. It is far too variable for that. And the ready reservoir of very dry air at altitude keeps it all working as the atmosphere’s own highly self-regulating performance as a heat engine necessitates.
Another way to look at it: Sure, warm air “holds” more water vapor, but you can’t keep it there. The heat engine operation of the atmosphere will not let it accumulate as a consequence of what non-condensing greenhouse gases do.
So, as I see it, the “feedback” due to water (mostly vapor) in the atmosphere is already fully spent. Will the slowly rising concentrations of GHG’s be able to make it stronger? I don’t see how. There is no new source of energy being supplied to the land-ocean-atmosphere system. There is simply an incremental increase in the radiative coupling of the atmosphere to the surface that helps drive the heat engine.
Another way to look at this is from the viewpoint of the water vapour IR absorption spectrum. The absorption bands are so strong and saturated that even if the atmospheric moisture content were to increase, it would have little effect of the total IR absorption and hence global temperatures. See the link http://www.ijaos.org/article/298/10.11648.j.ijaos.20210502.12
Thank you. I saved and read the paper. As you say, it addresses the question of water vapor feedback from a different viewpoint, which I would describe as a “static” analysis. What I take away is that even if one considers the Earth to be a single emitter, and evaluates equilibrium climate sensitivity to increases in GHG concentrations using a static approach, there is no reason for alarm.
Steve Case
February 18, 2022 5:19 am
Here’s how the misleading Global Warming Potential
numbers for methane are derived:
Due to these difficulties, the simpler and purely physical GWP index, based on the time-integrated global mean RF of a pulse emission of 1 kg of some compound (i) relative to that of 1 kg of the reference gas CO2, was developed (IPCC, 1990) and adopted for use in the Kyoto Protocol. The GWP of component i is defined by
where TH is the time horizon, RFi is the global mean RF of component i, ai is the RF per unit mass increase in atmospheric abundance of component i (radiative efficiency), [Ci (t)] is the time- dependent abundance of i, and the corresponding quantities for the reference gas (r) in the denominator. The numerator and denominator are called the absolute global warming potential (AGWP) of i and r respectively. All GWPs given in this report use CO2 as the reference gas.
Steve, try to find how RFi is determined from basic principals, as in have someone show an example calculation….you will have entire university environmental science departments shrug their shoulders….
Thanks for the reply (-: Yeah, I’m guessing no one is going to try to figure out the CH4 GWP based on H2O^. But if you think about it, CH4 is on track to increase by about 0.5 ppm (0.00005%) by 2100. So if water vapor increases by 0.00005% how much will that run up temperature? Since water vapor is somewhere between 2 and 3% it’s a stupid question. Well the calculation for CO2 at 415 ppm increasing to 415.5 ppm and figuring out the temperature increase is also stupid for the same reason, but that’s what climate science is doing.
I rag on about methane because policy makers actually believe that the GWP numbers really mean something and they are passing some very stupid regulations based on them. For example:
Scientific American California Adopts Strict Rules for Methane Emissions One of the biggest challenges will be to figure out how to reduce emissions from the state’s 1.4 million dairy cows
It seems odd that a crew of 22 could not put out a fire onboard but had to be evacuated. It happened yesterday, is there anything in any european news outlets about this?
Well, I suppose the crew could have filled all cargo spaces with sea water – as recommended by firefighters in the U.S. It’s been tried before for different reasons. Titanic. Andrea Doria. ………..
That the fire suppression response was, essentially, “Abandon Ship” is strong evidence that electric vehicles were involved. (See below — the captain of the Mitsui ship followed the protocol suggested in the Hellenic Shipping News article) Even if a BEV did not start the fire, once one caught on fire, there is no putting out that fire and other BEVs are highly likely to catch fire, also.
A BIG RISK for insurers. Thus, in the coming weeks, look for: 1) the price of property casualty insurance for marine vehicle carriers to go UP; 2) insurers such as Lloyds looking to taxpayers to fund that price – for, the cost will be too high for their insureds to pass on to consumers via vehicle price.
Supporting cites:
… the crew should know if and where BEV, HEV or FC vehicles are on board. This information is highly valuable for emergency services in the event of a fire. (p. 42)
It is not possible to reduce the risk because, if and when the event occurs, it will be rapidly catastrophic in the immediate area and there is no effective structural fire spread prevention within existing CO2/hi. ex. zones.
In my opinion, where carried on current fleets, the fire safety strategy for Li-ion battery EVs should be one of presumption of a large fire at the outset that will be beyond any manual first response. Therefore, on discovery, the available fixed installation should be discharged and the vessel should seek refuge or assistance.
Probably a really stupid question but, what if EV’s were transported in a segregated, sealed part of the ship whereupon, if a fire broke out, the ‘EV hold’ could be pumped full of seawater in a short space of time?
Tomorrow, when I can use the wifi at work (between 9:30AM PST and 6PM PST) and have more than my phone to use (DO YOU HATE TYPING ON A PHONE AS MUCH AS I DO?! grrrr) I will research that for you.
One incident comes to mind which you might want to look up was a vehicle cargo ship (ro-ro, I think, i.e., “roll on-roll off”) which caught fire off the Gulf Coast of the U.S. state of Louisiana (or Mississippi? ) within the past 5? years. The investigation report might address your question. There, the cause was failure by crew to properly disconnect cargo vehicle battery(s)).
Also see the first link in my 11:18 AM 2/18/22 comment above; the Maritime Safety Innovation Lab has a lot of suggested procedures for managing an EV fire).
As I close my eyes in slumber, you will likely be opening yours to a new day. So, I wish you a hearty “Good mornin’.” 🙂
Well, here is the National Transportation Safety Board’s December, 2021, report of the roll-on/roll-off vehicle carrier Höegh Xiamen (in Jacksonville, FL, USA, as it turns out).
There are some interesting observations in it, but, what stood out most to me was there was no mention of special handling of lithium ion batteries. Perhaps, the focus of the report was not how to fight the fire, but, to prevent it in the first place (proper disconnecting of vehicle batteries). Nevertheless, how to prevent it from becoming an out-of-control fire was not addressed (except to scold the master for not engaging the fixed fire suppression system soon enough).
*********************
And now, please forgive me, but I am realizing that I will have less down time at work to research this than I thought last night. So, I just leave you with these thoughts:
See the wattsupwiththat thread of 6:06PM PST, February 18, 2022 about the lithium ion battery-involved fire aboard the Felicity Ace which largely echoes my comment above of 11:18AM February 18, 2022.
There are probably lots of informative comments there.
2. EVEN IF a part of the ship could be sealed and filled with water in which all the BEV’s would be stowed, that would be very costly. Further, given how heavy water is and how critical it is to keep the vessel balanced, this method is not likely possible on a large enough scale to make it cost-effective.
Bottom line:
If electric vehicles had to pay their own way (insurance, shipping, cost of production and maintenance, etc.) with a free market price, they would NEVER be marketable (with current or likely to exist in the foreseeable future technology).
Solution: END ELECTRIC VEHICLE SUBSIDIES/MANDATES IMMEDIATELY.
Until then, noble ships will become burnt out hulks in the scrapyard, people’s beautiful $300,000 dream cars (also aboard with the BEV’s) will go up in flames, and people will burn to death in parking garages.
Please, don’t ask me (in your “Reply to Janice Moore” above) any more questions unless you are interested in reading my answer. I realize that my answer wasn’t especially thorough, but, if you would at least acknowledge my attempt. As it appears, you simply never came back. Thus, I took quite a bit of trouble for you for nothing.
Just a “Thx” or ANYTHING to acknowledge…
You remind me of a man I thought cared deeply for me who couldn’t be bothered even to write one word to acknowledge my plea for a response. He showed me! He did, indeed…
But, it hurt deeply, thus, here I am writing about him, years later…
Lol, on an open thread, you might find just about anything — even this therapeutic comment by me.
Take care, HotScot. If you ever come back here — I waited around quite awhile….
2,500 cars including these. Salvage rules will apply!
Some US customers are for sure worried.
Second time this happened to these cars. In 2018 a ship sunk after a fire with chemicals on board.
Just wow. Apparently electric cars fires are not at all uncommon on freighters.
“Now, after what it describes as the “umpteenth case” of a fire breaking out in vehicles transported by cargo vessels, Grimaldi has called for tighter regulations on what can be transported at sea.”
EVs will be banned from all public garages. Private multi-family housing garages will follow suit. Insurance rates will be raised significantly on all EVs.
But as with pit bull owners, their EV is harmless.
The Green Panel specializes in installing solar panels on houses and charging stations for Tesla and other EVs.
This was just one warehouse bonfire. Imagine when the alarmists get what they want and the batteries get large enough to back up more than one little charging station.
Are the batteries of EV vehicles in transport charged?
Are the batteries ‘connected’ i.e. essentially live, or are they connected at the dealership?
How does an insurance company assess the risk?
How will the loss of, perhaps, dozens of EV’s along with other vehicles impact on transport?
How would ‘segregated’ transport affect the price of EV’s?
Is the loss of a single shipload of cars worth bothering about?
Joseph Zorzin
February 18, 2022 5:48 am
Scientists agree: Climate change is real and caused by peopleScientific academies, professional societies, associations, governmental and nongovernmental organizations and published research worldwide are aligned.
The scientific consensus that climate change is happening and that it is human-caused is strong. Scientific investigation of global warming began in the 19th century, and by the early 2000s, this research began to coalesce into confidence about the reality, causes, and general range of adverse effects of global warming. This conclusion was drawn from studying air and ocean temperatures, the atmosphere’s composition, satellite records, ice cores, modeling, and more.In 1988 the United Nations and World Meteorological Organization founded the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC, to provide regular updates on the scientific evidence on global warming. In a 2013 report, the IPCC concluded that scientific evidence of warming is “unequivocal” and that the largest cause is an increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere as a result of humans burning fossil fuels. The IPCC continues to assess this science, periodically issuing new reports.
Later in this article it mentions “the consensus” and the glorious work of John Cook.
ResourceGuy
February 18, 2022 6:00 am
Who needs food, energy, and shelter anyway when all it arrives at your door, or at least some doors?
Earth Could Surpass Ability of Ecosystems to Recover from Warming Scientists outlined the risks of climate inaction ahead of a major IPCC report later this month
Some parts of the planet are approaching the limits of their ability to adapt to climate change, scientists warned yesterday ahead of a major U.N. report being released later this month.
Extreme drought and heat could prevent trees from absorbing carbon dioxide, thrusting some ecosystems past the point from which they can recover, the researchers said. Some systems, like tropical coral reefs, have already surpassed those limits and are headed toward decline.
That grim assessment comes about two weeks before the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the world’s foremost scientific body on global warming, releases a report that focuses on the limits of Earth’s ability to respond to damaging temperature increases, and what can be done about it.
What I can’t understand is how those who disseminate this kind of stuff can never explain how none of these predicted catastrophes have never happened during all of the other times in earth’s history when it was much warmer. About the only half-arsed response they can come up with is ” this time is different from those times” but can’t explain why, save for the fact that humans are now using fossil fuels. But of course, correlation doesn’t imply causation… The last glaciation period (end of the ice age) ended rather quickly, and no doubt humans alive then might have thought the world was coming to an end. Especially people living on the coasts and in areas prone to flooding. But, the world didn’t end, and animals and plants either adapted or they perished.
IMO these clowns are no different than the guys you used to see on street corners with “end of the world” signs. So many failed predictions, yet apocalyptic cults still persist. And sadly, we have seen some that brought destruction on their own followers on purpose, perhaps to justify their failed predictions. I fear these green-mongers will do the same. People won’t suffer and die from a couple of degrees of warming, but rather will do so from cult leaders’ attempts to ” do something” about climate change.
“thrusting some ecosystems past the point from which they can recover”
What these idiots need is a good course in historical geology- so they can undersand that oceans come and go- mountains rise and waste away- continents tear apart and smash into each other- meteors/comets hit the Earth- aggressive species like humans arise- and the Earth still survives- but they’re terrified of a POSSIBLE few degrees rise in temperature from which the Earth may not be able to recover- and there’s hardly a journalist out there willing to challenge them.
Warm Waters Are Causing The Earth To Dim Satellite data reveals that cloud cover is disappearing over the Pacific, leading to less reflectivity
New research tracking the albedo of our planet—its ability to reflect sunlight—has revealed that a complex interplay of periodical weather patterns in the Pacific Ocean affects our overall cloud cover, especially in the sky west of the Americas. This in turn has a large impact on the amount of light absorbed rather than reflected from the Earth.
“The reflectivity of the Earth is mainly a story of clouds,” says Philip Goode, a physics professor at the Big Bear Solar Observatory run by the New Jersey Institute of Technology.
Goode and his colleagues were examining data gathered from the Big Bear Solar Observatory in Southern California from 1998 to 2017. They examined both the amount of light reflected off the surface of the Earth onto the moon and back, called earthshine, and satellite measurements of the Earth.
In a study published recently in Geophysical Research Letters, they found that on average the Earth reflects about half a watt less light per square meter than it did 20 years ago.
“What we saw is a short drop in reflectance,” Goode says.
The Earth reflects about 30 percent of the sunlight that hits it, and overall, it has decreased in reflectance by about 0.5 percent.
That sounds like the study where the uncertainty of the nominal 0.5 w/m^2 was (+/- 0.5)! That is, the ‘decline’ was somewhere between 0 and 1.
sendergreen
February 18, 2022 7:30 am
Our region in the southwest of Ontario just imploded the last remaining structure this week of a large coal fired generating plant. The closure, and demolition was started by the previous Liberal Party Government that was likewise demolished in the most recent Provincial Election. They were as woke as it gets. While not as visible yet to the general public as it is in other jurisdictions, the Provincial electricity grid has been hollowed out. Hollow only works in the mildest of physical, and economic conditions.
Willem post
February 18, 2022 7:42 am
Instead of batteries that are VERY expensive, last at most 15 years, and may catch fire, it would be much better to have pumped hydro storage power plants, which last 100 years and NEVER catch fire.
He is an example of what is required in New England.
PUMPED STORAGE HYDRO PLANTS, IF 100% WIND AND SOLAR
Hydro power plants, with large reservoirs, can deliver a steady power output on a year-round basis.
Typically, such reservoirs have at least one river, and a large surrounding watershed, to keep the water in the reservoir at desired levels.
Wind and solar systems can be used to power pumps, which would return water from below the power plant dam to the reservoir.
Such a plant is called a pumped-storage hydro plant.
Example of Pumped Storage Hydro Plant
A very large reservoir could be created, if the Connecticut River has a 150 ft high dam. Large areas of land would be flooded, whole towns with people would be displaced, which is OK, because we are trying to reduce CO2 emissions from evil fossil fuels to save the world from climate change.
If we assume the reservoir area would have 1,000 square miles, and the water level drops by only one foot, about 52,185 MWh of electricity would be sent to the grid. See table
New England total electricity loaded onto the grid is about 115 billion kWh/y, or 115 million MWh/y, or an average daily grid load of 0.315 million MWh, about 315068/52185 = 6 times greater than from one foot of water level drop. See Note
It would take about 10,799 MWh to return the water to the reservoir, for a net gain of 41,386 MWh per daily roundtrip
The electricity production would be about equal to the average daily grid load, if a 6-ft drop were allowed and the reservoir sides were vertical. See Note
Working Storage for All of New England, if 100% wind and solar
The total reservoir area would be about 10 million MWh/(41,386 MWh x 365) = 662 sq miles to provide 10 million MWh of working storage:
1) If all NE electricity were from wind and solar
2) If a 6 ft drop were allowed and the reservoir sides were vertical. See Note
3) To cover seasonal variations of wind and solar outputs
NOTE: If sloping sides, the reservoir surface area would become less, and the electricity produced per foot of drop would become less, i.e., at least 1,000 sq miles would be required.
I can’t see the greens allowing a dam to be built, because, you know, there might be some kind of rare fish or frog living in the river. Yes, hydroelectric and pumped storage are clean and green, but greens tend to be anti-dam.
Student climate groups at Yale, Princeton, Stanford, Vanderbilt, and MIT have filed complaints with attorneys general in their respective states arguing the schools have violated state law by investing in fossil fuels.
On the Hydrocarbon Market reset Front. US oil producers are holding the line on production while making huge profits. They say they just don’t have enough sand. Ditto the NG producers. Why supply? No one is sure how high the prices for Hydrocarbon fuels will go.
What is the solution? 55mph speed limit, price ceilings, turn thermostat down to 62, STAY HOME, work virtually, don’t go on vacations or become Iran’s best friend, arm a Shiite uprising in Iraq, foment revolution in Saudi Arabia or scare the hell out the Tsar.. or impose a windfall profits tax, or build an awesome NG infrastructure. Those days are long gone the reset has happened.
Why are Germans antinuclear? This seems a strange contradiction. Germany is a leading nation in the charge to “clean” carbon free energy, with its “Energiewende”. But paradoxically the country is rejecting the most powerful and probably the only significant carbon-free alternative to fossil fuels: nuclear power generation.
That’s why so far Energiewende had made Germany’s carbon emissions more, not less. Some element of antinuclearism is clearly more important to Germany than CO2 and climate. What could this be?
Germany is becoming isolated in its stubborn antinuclear stance. But Germans are in denial of this isolation. In a DW video article (Germany’s CNN), a young talking head was aggressively justifying their anachronistic antinuclear-ism. An interviewer put the point – is Germany isolated on this? The defiant head robustly replied “no!”. Austria is also anti-nuclear! Austria! LOL! The green Anschluss is complete. But – umm – having just Austria in tow doesn’t quite end German antinuclear isolation.
So who else is with Germany and Austria in this revival of 1970’s hippy antinuclearism? Well there are a few further north European allies, it turns out. Denmark, for one. And – IIRC, Norway and maybe Sweden. But I think that was it. (Maybe Lichtenstein as well.)
Pop quiz question – what do all these nations in this grand alliance of retro-70’s antinuclearism, have in common? Well the answer is easy – they’re all Germanic. While only Germany is actually Germany, on paper, Austrians also speak German, of course. And Denmark, Norway and Sweden all speak Germanic languages.
Yes the Anglosaxon world also has a strong and influential antinuclear movement and community. The Angles and Saxons were both Germanic tribes, after all. So why wouldn’t they?
So the neo-hippy antinuclear revival is a Germanic thing. But why is this? Why is it German to be antinuclear? What could the connection possibly be? It seems an odd one.
After all, Germany practically brought us the atom and the atomic age. It’s called the “Bohr atom” for a reason – Niels Bohr kind of discovered it. Along with giants of 20th century physics like Planck, Heisenberg, Einstein and Schroedinger. OK they got beaten to the atom bomb by the Americans under the German-named Oppenheimer. Whose cold-war nuclear missiles were perfected by Werner Von Braun. But I digress.
So the atomic age seems as German as salt-crusted pretzels and sausages with sauerkraut. Then why has modern Germany turned its back on the atom, as a source of energy? Why do they stubbornly reject nuclear power generation? At first sight this seems curious and illogical.
The answer to this question is a somewhat dark one. It’s about the psychology of purity. We have to dive into the darkest part of Germany’s (recent) history to understand this. This is a painful thing to examine of course, and no disrespect is meant to Germany or any Germans, by this. But it is what it is, and unfortunately some of it is still with us today.
Out of the cataclysm of Germany’s WW1 defeat, and the economic collapse with disappearence of the “middle class” aided by the vindictive reparations of Versailles, the toxic culture of Hitler emerged. This coalesced around an idea of racial superiority – no, supremacy – of the “Aryans”. And a key element of this supremacy was purity. The skin was white as cleanest snow, the eyes as blue as purest sky.
A powerful and deadly idea took hold that the German “Aryan” people represented a pure humanity. And that anything else was a contaminant. To be either exterminated or – if allowed to live – to do so only as servants of the Aryan lords. Worst of all of course were the Jews – who were off the scale, racially radioactive.
Germany has of course utterly repudiated the politics and policies of the Nazis, and to their credit changed their national culture more than any other country, post-war. But underlying attitudes and mindsets are harder to change than politics and even culture. Especially if mind-memes such as the purity idea probably predated the 1930’s and the Third Reich.
Racist supremacist thinking was in no way exclusive to Germany of course – it was prevalent in the early 20th century, including in Britain, America and Scandinavia, where the Eugenics movement was powerful and popular.
But the point here is not about racism, but about one of the psychological ingredients of racism – the purity ideal. It is not a coincidence that environmentalism in Europe came into existence largely in Nazi Germany, where the pure race ideal merged with the ideal of a pure environment. A green movement with white skin and blue eyes.
Fast forwarding to today, what is left of this purity ideal? A lot, unfortunately. Old fashioned racism and supremacism won’t ever go away completely, sad to say. Germany has left behind its world war history and become largely a force for good in the world. However, in Germany and elsewhere, the purity ideal hasn’t gone away.
My point – or conjecture – is this: antinuclear sentiment feeds from a purity ideal that – subconsciously – has racist roots. In this (scientifically false) view of the world, radioactivity and ionising radiation are impurities and contaminants in an otherwise pure world. A stable atom is pure, and unstable one – not so much.
The airy whiteness and light coloured decor of an IKEA megastore remind us of the purity ideal that lingers in the mindset of all Germanic nations to this day. And in the sphere of energy and power engineering, this purity ideal with its dark psychological origins manifests itself as a strong antinuclear prejudice which is harmful and unhelpful in the search for long term sustainable energy solutions.
Radioactivity is not an alien contaminant but has always been an integral part of the world and even the biosphere. Bacteria in deep rock even metabolise energy of ionising particles. Without the uranium series radioactivity the earth would never have developed its layered structure and convective tectonic movements. Life has always existed in a radioactive milieu. Every second you have been reading this article, ten thousand or so radioactive disintegrations took place in your body. Radioactivity is not an enemy.
Of course, ionising radiation is – above a threshold – harmful and people must be protected and shielded from it. But of all toxins and dangers it is the easiest and most convenient to safely measure and detect. Because of what it is – a leakage from the vast energies of the atomic nucleus, detectable remotely and cleanly by a hand held Geiger counter.
So ionising radiation particles or waves should be instead seen in a positive way, as harbingers of a wellspring of enormous and beneficial power for humanity. Not a label of impurity. When properly managed and engineered, and separated from weapons and armaments, nuclear power should not be thought of as dirty or impure, or as a source of contamination. As an energy source it is, all things considered, way cleaner than all the alternatives.
It is the Morgenthau Plan for total de-industrialization of Germany, which could not be imposed after defeat, in 1948, now in full swing. Green Party platform of 1986 : German industry is a “threat to peace,” during the debate at the Hanover convention. Nuclear power and big industry are “a declaration of war against the people.” That Platform included drug legalization, as does today’s . The US is getting a taste of this Morgenthau Plan right now. Today it is called the Great Reset. It is well known if high density energy flux is removed from modern industrial economies massive population reduction is guaranteed. And just look at all the so-called anti-nuclear groups – openly stating maximum ‘sustainable’ populations of 1 billion.
So to eliminate 5 billion people is indeed racist – an attack on the human race that would make Goebbels blush. Prince Phillip’s openly stated wish to be re-incarnated as a deadly virus to do something about overpopulation gets to the point, what?
Yes the odious misanthropy behind Eugenics, the Na3is, Paul Ehrlich etc still lives on in the likes of Phil the Greek (May he rest in peace) and even some early quotations from David Attenborough. Some of our resident trolls like Griff probably also think the earth is grossly overpopulated – which it’s not.
That’s why it’s so cool that Elon Musk says, “there aren’t enough people”.
CHARLEMONT — One of the three blades of Berkshire East Mountain Resort’s wind turbine snapped in half on Thursday morning, likely resulting in a lengthy repair, though the incident will not disrupt the outdoor adventure center’s operations.
James Schrumpf
February 21, 2022 4:37 am
I’ve got a question regarding NOAA’s GHCN-Monthly Adjusted v4 data set. Anyone know what the requirements are for a station to be used in a 30-year series?
There are 27,697 stations in the data set, 12,151 that were still recording in 2021. Of those, 2958 have at least 350 valid monthly average values between Jan 1992 and Dec 2021.
Of those 2958 stations, 1291 are in the US. Another 887 are in Russia, China, Japan, Germany, Australia, and Canada. That accounts for 2,187 out of 2,958 worldwide stations. That leaves 780 stations scattered around the world.
NOAA’s web site says of the GHCNm data set: “The Global Historical Climatology Network monthly (GHCNm) dataset provides monthly climate summaries from thousands of weather stations around the world.”
I suppose that a little under 3,000 stations with good temp data counts as “thousands,” but it seems a little sparse, and I’d love to know more about how it’s decided to include a station or not.
I have an interesting puzzle for you to solve….
https://breadonthewater.co.za/2022/02/10/so-who-is-speaking-for-the-people/
Relevant?
As for wealth disparity in that link, China got it right :
Today the MSM, in full lockstep, gleichschaltung as Göbbels said, is The Mighty Wurlitzer!
From Kensington-upon-Thames.
https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-mighty-wurlitzer-theatre-organ-made-1929-and-installed-in-the-regal-75482611.html
Too many words
Goebells- a very ugly man who loved to talk about the tall, blond, blue eyed macho Teutonic master race- probably due to a severe inferiority complex.
Or he could have been gay.
How is Greta doing? I miss her enlightened climate-related comments a lot – is she in school yet?
I believe she has made nearly enough money to retire by now. A few more attention grabbing outbursts and she’ll fade away..
Fair play to her. I like her approach. She took the elite climate worriers on their word…and they could not sustain their arguments in the face of simple logic. That being,” if you think it is a crisis, act like it is.”
Great stuff, good for her, and I loved watching her sing, “you can stick your climate crisis up your arse”. She looked like she was having fun.
You’ve got to remember she is a young person and should have every right to campaign for whatever she wants.
She’d get arrested in Canada.
Oh wait – maybe Justin doesn’t think she has “unacceptable views” according to his world view.
“You’ve got to remember she is a young person and should have every right to campaign for whatever she wants.”
I’m an old geezer, are you suggesting I have fewer rights than Greta?
She will no longer be a teenager in under one year. I wonder what she will become when she grows up.
Lady In Waiting for the next King?
a minute later..
The Queen covered Andrew’s $15 million settlement.
I predict Andrew will be a climate crisis convert soon–for hire if he can find the protest work.
Don’t know why. Chuck could have flogged off a couple of O B E s to fawning Arabs to pay the bill. He and fergie are in the same boat for whoring and cringing to where the big bucks lie . Chuck used to suck up to ceacescu for Christ’s sake . When mum dies let’s have done with the whole royalty farce
She will still be constipated/upset/angry and will need some kind of an outlet.
A Republican/Conservative. Like the rest of us grown ups.
They have been showing Greta on PBS TV here in Michigan, a show about her exploring and traveling and investigating what is going on in the world of how to undo climate change and it provides me with good belly laughs, how liberals get so wound up over NON problems and how additives in cow food reduce methane and such. I just got 5 inches of snow last night so I am about to go shovel some of that white global warming.
I assumed she was on her way on foot to lecture Putin on the huge carbon footprint he’s causing.
At the looong table…
Meanwhile Bolsonaro got the short table :
My new analysis of the wacky Virginia Clean Economy Act.
“Dominion’s VCEA Compliance Plan is Disastrously Unreliable”
A research report
By David Wojick
http://www.cfact.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/VCEA-Reliability-Research-Report.pdf?mc_cid=a4827a5419&mc_cid=8d1127ec83&mc_eid=af7d3e4fc4
Nice exposé of the “renewables” crooks’ latest scam, Mr. Wojick. You took them down with just the hard, cold, facts.
Here’s an interesting article related to a recent WUWT article about exploring the nearest stars.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/scientists-create-laser-system-that-could-get-to-mars-in-just-45-days/ar-AATXiMv
Not only could such a laser system power a vehicle to Mars, it could also power orbital transfer vehiciles all over the Earth/Moon/Mars system.
The lasers could either be ground-based or space-based.
Heating water might be a better alternative to heating hydrogen for short trips in the Earth/Moon system. Water is much less complicated to handle.
Wait, I was expecting the Moties to do that.
The starship Leonora Christine should be arriving anytime now :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tau_Zero
Or maybe Rama.
Rendezvous with Rama – Wikipedia
This graph of Tau and Gamma also, uncannily, describes the hockey stick of alarmism (whether CO2 or Russia) and the credibility of MSM.
From my point of view, that is a book per excellence.
Well that is me… 🙂
I did not see any info about slowing the craft to allow it to enter Mars orbit other than they haven’t figured it out yet. But hasn’t that always been the obstacle? Getting a craft to a fast speed is doable but carrying the fuel to slow it down at the destination is always the problem.
Air brakes? They already make them for trucks. Can’t they just use them on interplanetary explorers?
😉
Yes, slowing the craft down enough to enter orbit is a problem for Mars and for the Stars.
For Mars, they could probably build a laser that orbits there to slow the craft down.
I think the best way to get back and forth to Mars is to use Buzz Aldrin’s concept of human habitats that are put in an orbit that travels from Earth to Mars and then returns to Earth. Once this type of vehicle is put in its orbit, it takes very little propellant to keep it there.
Then, as Aldrin’s “cycling space station” comes near Earth, we send out an orbital tranfer vehicle to match orbits with it and tranfer crew and cargo back and forth, and then do the same thing six months later as the cycling space station comes near Mars.
We don’t need exotic propulsion methods to implement this system.
We will need a way to move the orbital transfer vehicles around. Perhaps lasers would be useful in this application by powering the orbital transfer vehicles. The laser could be used to heat water to the boiling point, and then the orbital tranfer vehicle can “steam” all over the Earth/Moon system. A flying tea kettle. I’m assuming the laser is space-based.
I was having a little fun with the braking problem, but I was lucky to catch your comment. I had never run across Aldrin’s idea.
Thanks, Tom. 👍
How powerful are the lasers? Any danger there?
I think they said a 100MW laser would be sufficient for the Mars vehicle. I think others are talking about a GW laser for interstellar exploration.
From the article:
Also ‘the development of high-temperature materials that allow the spacecraft to break against the Martian atmosphere upon arrival.’
Being able to break against the atmosphere is the trick that will allow for return.
a) When astro-scientists don’t know the difference between “break” and “brake” it makes me nervous.
b) Slamming into an atmosphere at such high speed would be like hitting a brick wall, would it not? If they just skim it to slow down a little, they would be going too fast to be captured into Mars’ orbit and would continue into space.
c) I would love to see the researchers build and test this idea. It would seem to have promise, but I think a more safe and reliable braking system would be required.
d) If they send astronauts by this method, how do they propose to bring them back?
“a) When astro-scientists don’t know the difference between “break” and “brake” it makes me nervous.”
Good one! I laughed out loud! 🙂
The Massachusetts pension fund is joining the climate fight
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2022/02/17/science/massachusetts-pension-fund-is-joining-climate-fight/
effing idiots. I hope the b*stards end up freezing in the dark.
I thought their fiduciary duty was to make the most profitable investments . Could they be sued for not adhering to their fiduciary responsibility?
Bingo!
In Oregon the retirees were guaranteed 8% annually. So, if the fund loses money they get 8%. If the fund makes 20%, they get 20%.
The holders are not really invested in a drive for success, so the managers will likely not be sued if they do something like MA.
How is the MA fund set up? are they guaranteed a minimum return?
Depends on what the fine print says.
Conflict of interest is another cause of action to explore…. Are any of those pension managers or their family benefitting from the promotion of solar or wind or electric vehicles or the like?
Cui bono
“Could they be sued for not adhering to their fiduciary responsibility?”
I think they could be sued for fraud because there’s no evidence that humans can affect the Earth’s temperatures by reining in CO2. Where’s the proof that anything they do can have any effect on the Earth’s temperatures? They don’t have any proof because there isn’t any proof. Claiming they do have proof is fraud.
When radical Democrats talk about “Democracy” they really mean “Socialism”.
When radical Democrats say Democracy is in danger, they really mean Socialism is in danger.
When radical Democrats warn that Republicans are going to destroy Democracy, what they really mean is Republicans are going to destroy Socialism.
When radical Democrats speak for the American people, they are really speaking for the radical, leftwing, American people, but they want us to think they speak for us all.
It’s leftwing propaganda.
and what you write is right wing propaganda.
By world standards US Democrats are barely social democrats, let alone ‘socialists’
That’s only true if you see Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot and Nicolae Ceaușescu as moderates.
That is one reason Canada is going to shit and Venezuela has already arrived.
“By world standards US Democrats are barely social democrats, let alone ‘socialists’”
And yet, dear griff, as you well know the US Democrats are not social democrats, oh no, they are democratic socialists.
For the benefit of those who may be uncertain of the differences....
“Social democracy allows for market forces. In a social democracy, the government can privatise some state-owned industries and utilities. The high profits from the privatised industries are distributed using the tax system. It’s similar to the more ‘right-wing’ socialist parties like the Labour party under the leadership of Tony Blair.
Democratic socialism calls for a mixed economy whereby the state controls all the key industries such as oil, electricity, and gas, water, railways etc. The ‘elected’ government manages all the major factors of production. They are then distributed amongst people through centralised planning. Private industries have the freedom to operate the remaining parts of the economy. The tax system used to redistribute wealth from the rich to the poor is progressive. Allegedly.
DS also calls for the provision of a very generous welfare state.
Marx’s path to communism:
Fascism – govt control of business and capital (the current US)
Socialism – govt ownership of business and capital
Communism – the collective owns business and capital
The US is now controlled by a large, unelected Bureaucratic Hegemony who controls all aspects of our life. Witness the vaccine mandates, almost none of which were passed by elected representatives into law but, instead, imposed by unelected bureaucrats. While there is no permanent dictator there is a party dictatorship – the Democrats.
The expanded welfare state the Democrats are instituting is the first step along the road to Socialism. Sooner or later the government will have to institute business ownership in order to fund its social (welfare) programs Just one more step in the “from each according to ability and to each according to need” meme, with the government deciding what you need.
Not once in history has Socialism ever transitioned into actual communism. Once established the Bureaucratic Hegemony has never been willing to give up its power to the collective. The US will be no different.
The only real ideological difference between communism and fascism is…. ownership of the means of production.
Everything else from youth movements to secret police is the same.
Another difference was that fascism was nationalist and communism was international. Hitler didn’t care what type of government was set up in the countries he conquered as long as they provided Germany the goods and manpower he wanted. The commies do care; they want everyone on the planet to have communist governments.
In practice, not much difference at all, except that the fascists lost the war.
Here’s a note that might interest President Putin in regards to Ukraine –
The second charge in the Nuremberg war crimes trial indictment was for planning, initiating, and waging wars of aggression.
That got a few people hanged, Vlad.
Very good summary. I would quibble just a bit that we have not gotten yet to true Fascism; I think we are in the midst of an Oligarchy phase (the government is being controlled by “oligarchs”, who will ultimately loose to the “government”)…
It’s really the Bureaucratic Hegemony that runs the show in the US today. It’s the rules and regulations they propagate that carries the power. The BC doesn’t really care about the Oligarchs, the BC is not elected and they aren’t beholden to wealthy donors. Fascism doesn’t require a powerful dictator, just an all-powerful government.
Tim, I’m curious about your source. Did Marx use another name for fascism? I believe he was dead by the time fascism came about.
I’m not really sure about the order your evolutionary steps, either. One can argue Red China went from communism to fascism. Both are forms of socialism.
Marx didn’t use the term fascism. But what he described as the steps to communism was the same thing.
Lenin and Stalin didn’t believe in a gradual transposition to communism as Marx described, they used force instead and bypassed the true fascism stage and went straight to Socialism. But they and the bureaucracy wound up never actually transitioning to true communism.
Mao did the same as Lenin and Stalin, violent rebellion to move directly to Socialism with the government controlling everything. China never actually transitioned to communism either. Their dictatorship and bureaucracy just moved back to fascism because it was much easier to control the population that way.
“Fascism – govt control of business and capital”
Refreshing to see someone who remembers the original definition.
TonyG
I don’t think that is correct. Mussolini described it as a partnership between the government and industry, not control of one by the other. He thought it it as the government going into business with the corporations, like a JV. Communism was supposed to be the means of production and management thereof by the people who worked in the facility. Very few workers are capable of consulting effectively, let alone running a business so that was a non-starter. State capitalism is what Russia quickly became, China took more time as the “local ownership” model failed repeatedly.
I am happy that one can study these definitions from a non-partisan perspective as I don’t lie any of them. A game-changer for all these ideologies would be the elimination of parties (factions). When the representatives at the top are only required to follow their conscience – collective or not – a huge set of problems evaporates. A tiny group dictating to the members of a party dictating to everyone is no way to run a country. Freedom of thought has to be the norm.
“Mussolini described it as a partnership between the government and industry, not control of one by the other.”
Ummm, the power structure had the government in control of capital which meant they also controlled the business sector. “Partnership” was just a marketing ploy to make things sound better. When Mussolini (and Hitler) said jump, business jumped. If they didn’t they didn’t stay in business very long.
It really isn’t much different in the US today.
Crispin,
Perhaps, but that’s an argument of nuance. Both what you said and what Tim said are much closer to the original definition than what is currently used.
Merriam-Webster:
a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
Wikipedia:
a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and strong regimentation of society and the economy that rose to prominence in early 20th-century Europe.
Tony,
Fascism doesn’t require a dictatorial leader, just an all-powerful government. leaders can come and go as long as the bureaucracy remains. Presidents can come and go but as long as the Bureaucratic Hegemony remains, at local/state/federal levels, you will continue with a Fascist government. Economic and social regimentation comes from the rules and regulations promulgated by the BC, not from politics.
Nor is Fascism a right-wing ideology. Both Hitler and Mussolini were rabid Socialists early in their careers. They didn’t all of a sudden become right wing. What they found was that Fascism gave them just as much power as Socialism would without the added responsibility of maintaining the economy. Any economic failures could be blamed on the private sector not performing adequately. For proof look at the Nazi political platform:
These are just some excerpts of a few of the party platform planks. These are *very* similar to the Democrat left-wing party platform of today.
Merriam-Webster end Wikipedia are peddling misinformation.
Tim, please refer to my earlier comment to you: “Refreshing to see someone who remembers the original definition.”
I’m pointing out that they have “changed” the definition of fascism to suit their own ideas (and specifically to make it out to be “right-wing” and to equate conservatives with Nazis), and that you and Crispin only disagree over nuance – both of you are far more correct than either MW or Wikipedia. You’re not telling me anything I don’t know here.
Understood. Thanks.
“While there is no permanent dictator there is a party dictatorship – the Democrats.”
Yes.
In 1972 I started work for a nationalised gas industry in the Uk . It was run by very inspired, competent and modestly paid patriotic individuals of high integrity. Our first Gas well was a5 Tcf discovery and our first onshore well was a .5 billion barrel oilfield. I was proud of my modest part in both. Then we were privatised. Public assets flogged off for peanuts. Useless fat-cat CEO’s paid astronomical salaries for indifferent performance. That is where national rot started and carried on with each administration being worse than the last . Thank
https://yournews.com/2022/02/18/2301434/report-democrats-flee-from-associating-with-democrat-party-brand-is/
click-bait griffffffffff strikes again
Griff, in the US we don’t measure the democrats according to world standards because the world standards don’t measure far enough to the left. We have a new measuring system where the left edge of the measuring stick includes: cultural marxism, race marxism, communo-fascism, and facist-communism. No other place on the planet in the last 150 years has gone as far left as the democrats in the US have.
Wrong, as usual
The US is a representative republic so, who cares about democracy or the Democrat party. Democracy is, basically, mob rule like France.
No, USA is a bureaucratic oligarchy. Not a full blown fascism yet, but moving towards.
Look at the Big Picture :
NATOstan’s Mackindergarten is throwing a tantrum!
For the politically challenged, Mackinder’s Geopolitics could start WWIII, and NATOstan has long outlived its usefulness. No difference whether Trump or Biden occupy the WH – the same Mackindergarten is throwing up a stink. Time for adults in the room to call order!
Strange times when a professional comedian come President of Ukraine was only adult in the kindergarten until got brought in line by Biden and BoJo’s re-parroting panic tantrums.
“politically challenged”
Really now.
I checked. Mackinder had a thesis. He talked of a “heartland” consisting of western Europe, eastern Europe, and Asia.
1) if you control the “heartland”, that is all of the above, you control what he called “the islands”.
2) The islands consisted of North America, South America, Australia, and Japan.
3) If you control both the “heartland” and “the islands”, you rule the world!!!
Wow! Such insight. If you control the world, you control the world.
Interesting, in his world view, North America was an “island”, the Mideast did not exist and Africa was of no importance.
Of course he put his thesis out there in 1904. That was before WWI and the emergence of the US a a world player, so yes, to him it was just an island. Same with the Mideast. in 1904, the place hardly rated a second look.
“politically challenged”
*sigh*
Mackinder: An academic geographer with delusions of grandeur, and a vision for World Domination. If you could make him appear truly evil instead of pathetic, you could have the villain in a James Bond movie.
Was King Edward VII’s advisor. Gave us WWI, WW2, Afghanistan (via Brzezinski), Syria, Iraq, and the Caucasus (Arc of Crisis), and Kazakhstan recently.
The World Island geopolitics where China, Russia, Germany, France operate in harmony , sees the Belt And Road Initiative as directly contrary.
Hence Ukraine, totally bankrupt, a stepped upon stone, a landmine.
Academics may claim clean hands – it will not work.
What’s with the “radical” bit?
I assume there are some Democrats who are not radical, so I like to include “radical” in my criticism because that’s who I’m criticizing, the radicals.
I happen to be a registered Democrat and have been all my life, for some practical reasons, but I vote conservative. I’m what would be called in days past a “Reagan Democrat”.
The Democrat Party of today looks nothing like the Democrat Party at the time I registered. The Democrats of today look like radical socialists and anarchists.
The radical Democrats of today will ruin this nation if given the chance.
FFF
(Fauci Funded Flu) Credit really should be given where it’s do.
VERY IMPORTANT
If you have investments at Vanguard or Fidelity or T. Rowe Price or BlackRock or American Funds or any other mutual fund manager,
BE SURE to let that organization know that you do not want them voting in favor of activist-sponsored “climate change” corporate proxy proposals.
If you own company shares directly, be sure to vote.
The Carbon Disclosure Project, of the Great Reset, that BlackRock et al, and the EU, all now follow, originated with major Tory donor Goldsmith. Symonds worked as press-agent for both top donors, Goldsmith and Aspinall. BoJo’s position easily explained.
So one should ask why these financial behemoths are following British policy.
Oh, wait – the City of London is actually their HQ.
I still see an opportunity for a shareholder class action lawsuit against Blackrock and others for putting their pet projects about shareholder value. How is their activism aligned with their fiduciary responsibility?
And sell Octopus Energy quick
Right on, Elon! Trudeau’s Canada is like Germany in 1933.
THE LIBERALS’ COVERT GREEN PLAN FOR CANADA – POVERTY AND DICTATORSHIP October 1, 2019
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/10/01/the-liberals-covert-green-plan-for-canada-poverty-and-dictatorship/
TODD CALLENDER: GENETIC-ALTERING VACCINES COULD NULLIFY HUMAN RIGHTS
Feb 18, 2022
Today on TruNews, founder and host Rick Wiles is joined by disabled rights activist attorney Todd Callender, who is actively defending US servicemen from being forced to take the operating system jab. They also discuss the history of the development of mRNA injections, and their future in altering human DNA, ending in the nullification of human rights.
Excerpts, at circa 25 minutes into the video:
– The 2005 International Health Regulations Treat commit almost 200 countries to give full authority to the World Health Organization to deal with pandemics. That is how the Covid-19 scam was perpetrated in so many countries.
– There was no significant increase in all-cause mortality during the height of the so-called “Covid-19 pandemic” in 2020.
– All-cause mortality in the USA military (ages 18 to 40) increased by 1100% in ten months of 2021, caused by the toxic Covid-19 “vaccines”. The forecast for 2022 is an increase of all-cause mortality of 5000% in 2022.
– Deaths were accelerated by injections of potentially toxic drugs including Remdesivir, Midazolam, Morphine, Fentanyl, etc.
– Insurance companies are denying death benefits, saying the taking of experimental Covid-19 “vaccines” constitutes “suicide”.
That’s all for now, dear Mudbloods, from the Right Reverend Billy-Bob Bayou.
Regards, Allan (he, him, Pureblood, gotcha, satire!)
Please consider the implications of these plots in respect to the concept of water vapor feedback. The claims of harmful warming depend on the amplification of the direct radiative absorption and emission effect of CO2. This amplification is attributed mostly to water vapor.
There are links below to three plots, all from the ERA5 reanalysis product from ECMWF. Yes, it is a model. But a reanalysis model does not purport to predict. It is tied to observed conditions in the atmosphere such as temperature and humidity to calculate the bulk properties and mass and energy flows as realistically as possible.
The plots are for a single gridpoint near where I live in the mid-latitudes. Hourly values for all of 2019 are given, for total column water (vapor + droplets + ice crystals – the values for vapor-only are not much different) and for downward longwave radiation received at the surface, on which the poorly-named “greenhouse effect” depends. The third graph is a scatter plot of one versus the other.
Such plots will take on a different shape from the tropics to the poles, but the points remain the same:
The total column water is highly variable on short time intervals in all the seasons.
The downward longwave energy received at the surface is also highly variable on short time intervals as the seasons pass.
When you plot one versus the other, it becomes clear that the static concept of “water vapor feedback” can never explain the climate outcome at a single gridpoint or any gridpoint. It’s not static at all. So neither can it drive the composite climate result for the planet. It is far too variable for that. And the ready reservoir of very dry air at altitude keeps it all working as the atmosphere’s own highly self-regulating performance as a heat engine necessitates.
Another way to look at it: Sure, warm air “holds” more water vapor, but you can’t keep it there. The heat engine operation of the atmosphere will not let it accumulate as a consequence of what non-condensing greenhouse gases do.
So, as I see it, the “feedback” due to water (mostly vapor) in the atmosphere is already fully spent. Will the slowly rising concentrations of GHG’s be able to make it stronger? I don’t see how. There is no new source of energy being supplied to the land-ocean-atmosphere system. There is simply an incremental increase in the radiative coupling of the atmosphere to the surface that helps drive the heat engine.
Another way to look at this is from the viewpoint of the water vapour IR absorption spectrum. The absorption bands are so strong and saturated that even if the atmospheric moisture content were to increase, it would have little effect of the total IR absorption and hence global temperatures. See the link http://www.ijaos.org/article/298/10.11648.j.ijaos.20210502.12
Thank you. I saved and read the paper. As you say, it addresses the question of water vapor feedback from a different viewpoint, which I would describe as a “static” analysis. What I take away is that even if one considers the Earth to be a single emitter, and evaluates equilibrium climate sensitivity to increases in GHG concentrations using a static approach, there is no reason for alarm.
Here’s how the misleading Global Warming Potential
numbers for methane are derived:
Due to these difficulties, the simpler and purely
physical GWP index, based on the time-integrated
global mean RF of a pulse emission of 1 kg of some
compound (i) relative to that of 1 kg of the
reference gas CO2, was developed (IPCC, 1990) and
adopted for use in the Kyoto Protocol. The GWP of
component i is defined by
where TH is the time horizon, RFi is the global
mean RF of component i, ai is the RF per unit mass
increase in atmospheric abundance of component i
(radiative efficiency), [Ci (t)] is the time-
dependent abundance of i, and the corresponding
quantities for the reference gas (r) in the
denominator. The numerator and denominator are
called the absolute global warming potential (AGWP)
of i and r respectively. All GWPs given in this
report use CO2 as the reference gas.
Source: IPCC AR4 Chapter 2 Page 210
I’m thinking that if that formula were run with
water vapor as the reference gas, the GWP number
for methane would be astronomical.
Steve, try to find how RFi is determined from basic principals, as in have someone show an example calculation….you will have entire university environmental science departments shrug their shoulders….
Thanks for the reply (-: Yeah, I’m guessing no one is going to try to figure out the CH4 GWP based on H2O^. But if you think about it, CH4 is on track to increase by about 0.5 ppm (0.00005%) by 2100. So if water vapor increases by 0.00005% how much will that run up temperature? Since water vapor is somewhere between 2 and 3% it’s a stupid question. Well the calculation for CO2 at 415 ppm increasing to 415.5 ppm and figuring out the temperature increase is also stupid for the same reason, but that’s what climate science is doing.
I rag on about methane because policy makers actually believe that the GWP numbers really mean something and they are passing some very stupid regulations based on them. For example:
Scientific American
California Adopts Strict Rules for Methane Emissions
One of the biggest challenges will be to figure out how to
reduce emissions from the state’s 1.4 million dairy cows
The insanity needs to stop!
Leave the cows alone!
I wonder if an electric car battery started this fire.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/ship-carrying-thousands-of-cars-burning-and-adrift-in-atlantic-ocean
What else could it be?
It’s a good thing it didn’t make it to port and U.S. dealers near you. Maybe VW should stick with software cheating–it’s more efficient.
Will be interesting to see what happens to this hot mess of a ship and its cargo.
My bet is on a electric car battery starting the whole thing.
So if they then stop shipping EVs worldwide, we here in NZ should be free from the Lefties’ crazy conversion plans!
It seems odd that a crew of 22 could not put out a fire onboard but had to be evacuated. It happened yesterday, is there anything in any european news outlets about this?
Well, I suppose the crew could have filled all cargo spaces with sea water – as recommended by firefighters in the U.S. It’s been tried before for different reasons. Titanic. Andrea Doria. ………..
That the fire suppression response was, essentially, “Abandon Ship” is strong evidence that electric vehicles were involved. (See below — the captain of the Mitsui ship followed the protocol suggested in the Hellenic Shipping News article) Even if a BEV did not start the fire, once one caught on fire, there is no putting out that fire and other BEVs are highly likely to catch fire, also.
A BIG RISK for insurers. Thus, in the coming weeks, look for: 1) the price of property casualty insurance for marine vehicle carriers to go UP; 2) insurers such as Lloyds looking to taxpayers to fund that price – for, the cost will be too high for their insureds to pass on to consumers via vehicle price.
Supporting cites:
… the crew should know if and where BEV, HEV or FC vehicles are on board. This information is highly valuable for emergency services in the event of a fire. (p. 42)
(Source: https://maritimesafetyinnovationlab.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/BMBVS-Study-on-fire-safety-in-connection-with-the-transport-of-vehicles-with-electric-generators-or-electrically-powered-vehicles-on-ro-ro-and-ro-pax-ships-2013.pdf )
It is not possible to reduce the risk because, if and when the event occurs, it will be rapidly catastrophic in the immediate area and there is no effective structural fire spread prevention within existing CO2/hi. ex. zones.
In my opinion, where carried on current fleets, the fire safety strategy for Li-ion battery EVs should be one of presumption of a large fire at the outset that will be beyond any manual first response. Therefore, on discovery, the available fixed installation should be discharged and the vessel should seek refuge or assistance.
(Source: https://www.hellenicshippingnews.com/vehicle-carriers-risk-from-lithium-ion-li-ion-battery-electric-vehicles-evs/ )
And, even though it is only a big hunk of metal and I am so glad that the entire crew is safe, my heart weeps as the Felicity Ace burns.
She is dying. 😥
Felicity Ace cargo hold fire burning out of control, February 17, 2022.
(Source: https://gcaptain.com/car-carrier-felicity-ace-abandoned-after-catching-fire-in-atlantic-ocean/ )
Probably a really stupid question but, what if EV’s were transported in a segregated, sealed part of the ship whereupon, if a fire broke out, the ‘EV hold’ could be pumped full of seawater in a short space of time?
I think it’s a great question, HotScot.
Tomorrow, when I can use the wifi at work (between 9:30AM PST and 6PM PST) and have more than my phone to use (DO YOU HATE TYPING ON A PHONE AS MUCH AS I DO?! grrrr) I will research that for you.
One incident comes to mind which you might want to look up was a vehicle cargo ship (ro-ro, I think, i.e., “roll on-roll off”) which caught fire off the Gulf Coast of the U.S. state of Louisiana (or Mississippi? ) within the past 5? years. The investigation report might address your question. There, the cause was failure by crew to properly disconnect cargo vehicle battery(s)).
Also see the first link in my 11:18 AM 2/18/22 comment above; the Maritime Safety Innovation Lab has a lot of suggested procedures for managing an EV fire).
As I close my eyes in slumber, you will likely be opening yours to a new day. So, I wish you a hearty “Good mornin’.” 🙂
Your ally for data-driven science,
Janice
They ought to tow the EV’s on a barge behind the ship, and if the barge catches fire, let it sink
Good afternoon to you, HotScot,
Well, here is the National Transportation Safety Board’s December, 2021, report of the roll-on/roll-off vehicle carrier Höegh Xiamen (in Jacksonville, FL, USA, as it turns out).
https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/MAR2104.pdf
There are some interesting observations in it, but, what stood out most to me was there was no mention of special handling of lithium ion batteries. Perhaps, the focus of the report was not how to fight the fire, but, to prevent it in the first place (proper disconnecting of vehicle batteries). Nevertheless, how to prevent it from becoming an out-of-control fire was not addressed (except to scold the master for not engaging the fixed fire suppression system soon enough).
*********************
And now, please forgive me, but I am realizing that I will have less down time at work to research this than I thought last night. So, I just leave you with these thoughts:
There are probably lots of informative comments there.
2. EVEN IF a part of the ship could be sealed and filled with water in which all the BEV’s would be stowed, that would be very costly. Further, given how heavy water is and how critical it is to keep the vessel balanced, this method is not likely possible on a large enough scale to make it cost-effective.
Bottom line:
If electric vehicles had to pay their own way (insurance, shipping, cost of production and maintenance, etc.) with a free market price, they would NEVER be marketable (with current or likely to exist in the foreseeable future technology).
Solution: END ELECTRIC VEHICLE SUBSIDIES/MANDATES IMMEDIATELY.
Until then, noble ships will become burnt out hulks in the scrapyard, people’s beautiful $300,000 dream cars (also aboard with the BEV’s) will go up in flames, and people will burn to death in parking garages.
HotScot.
Please, don’t ask me (in your “Reply to Janice Moore” above) any more questions unless you are interested in reading my answer. I realize that my answer wasn’t especially thorough, but, if you would at least acknowledge my attempt. As it appears, you simply never came back. Thus, I took quite a bit of trouble for you for nothing.
Just a “Thx” or ANYTHING to acknowledge…
You remind me of a man I thought cared deeply for me who couldn’t be bothered even to write one word to acknowledge my plea for a response. He showed me! He did, indeed…
But, it hurt deeply, thus, here I am writing about him, years later…
Lol, on an open thread, you might find just about anything — even this therapeutic comment by me.
Take care, HotScot. If you ever come back here — I waited around quite awhile….
Janice,
sorry I didn’t get back to you but my time online is limited thanks to family commitments.
I have read your answers and appreciate your time taken to research and post them.
Yay! Thank you for telling me! 🙂
2,500 cars including these. Salvage rules will apply!
Some US customers are for sure worried.
Second time this happened to these cars. In 2018 a ship sunk after a fire with chemicals on board.
The fire actually started Wednesday afternoon. This story has more details.
https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/felicity-ace-felicity-ace-cargo-ship-burning-ship-carrying-porsches-audis-lamborghinis-drifts-in-atlantic-2774938
Just wow. Apparently electric cars fires are not at all uncommon on freighters.
“Now, after what it describes as the “umpteenth case” of a fire breaking out in vehicles transported by cargo vessels, Grimaldi has called for tighter regulations on what can be transported at sea.”
https://theloadstar.com/latest-containership-fire-leads-grimaldi-to-demand-tighter-regs-on-ocean-cargo/
So if an EV battery catches fire and can sink a ship, who is going to want to park an EV in their garage?!?
An arson? Insurance anyone?
EVs will be banned from all public garages. Private multi-family housing garages will follow suit. Insurance rates will be raised significantly on all EVs.
But as with pit bull owners, their EV is harmless.
Wait till the first one goes off in a city parking garage
At the end of the linked article it mentions the increasing number of catastrophic fires on the large car carriers. I would think that modern car carriers would have very robust fire-fighting systems installed. In the event of a lithium battery fire, whatever they have will not be enough. The recent articles on this ship fire mention the cargo as Porsche and VW vehicles. Plenty of EV on board this ship in that case.
https://gcaptain.com/car-carrier-felicity-ace-abandoned-after-catching-fire-in-atlantic-ocean/?subscriber=true&goal=0_f50174ef03-73c299bae7-169617561&mc_cid=73c299bae7&mc_eid=146c97e6b3
Speaking of Wednesday and fires…
https://www.livingstondaily.com/story/news/local/community/brighton/2022/02/17/three-alarm-blaze-damages-solar-panel-business-brighton-township/6829631001/
The Green Panel specializes in installing solar panels on houses and charging stations for Tesla and other EVs.
This was just one warehouse bonfire. Imagine when the alarmists get what they want and the batteries get large enough to back up more than one little charging station.
A couple of questions spring to mind.
Is an uncharged EV batter a fire hazard?
Are the batteries of EV vehicles in transport charged?
Are the batteries ‘connected’ i.e. essentially live, or are they connected at the dealership?
How does an insurance company assess the risk?
How will the loss of, perhaps, dozens of EV’s along with other vehicles impact on transport?
How would ‘segregated’ transport affect the price of EV’s?
Is the loss of a single shipload of cars worth bothering about?
Scientists agree: Climate change is real and caused by peopleScientific academies, professional societies, associations, governmental and nongovernmental organizations and published research worldwide are aligned.
https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2022/02/scientists-agree-climate-change-is-real-and-caused-by-people/
Later in this article it mentions “the consensus” and the glorious work of John Cook.
Who needs food, energy, and shelter anyway when all it arrives at your door, or at least some doors?
Fertilizer Markets Roiled by Belarus Potash Force Majeure (yahoo.com)
Not Even $200 a Barrel: Shale Giants Swear They Won’t Drill More (yahoo.com)
Builders are waiting months to get cabinets and garage doors (cnbc.com)
I know, let’s race in the wrong direction based on climate advocacy agendas.
Museums are in a race to save America’s treasures from climate change (cnbc.com)
from UnScientific American
Earth Could Surpass Ability of Ecosystems to Recover from Warming
Scientists outlined the risks of climate inaction ahead of a major IPCC report later this month
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/earth-could-surpass-ability-of-ecosystems-to-recover-from-warming/
What I can’t understand is how those who disseminate this kind of stuff can never explain how none of these predicted catastrophes have never happened during all of the other times in earth’s history when it was much warmer. About the only half-arsed response they can come up with is ” this time is different from those times” but can’t explain why, save for the fact that humans are now using fossil fuels. But of course, correlation doesn’t imply causation… The last glaciation period (end of the ice age) ended rather quickly, and no doubt humans alive then might have thought the world was coming to an end. Especially people living on the coasts and in areas prone to flooding. But, the world didn’t end, and animals and plants either adapted or they perished.
IMO these clowns are no different than the guys you used to see on street corners with “end of the world” signs. So many failed predictions, yet apocalyptic cults still persist. And sadly, we have seen some that brought destruction on their own followers on purpose, perhaps to justify their failed predictions. I fear these green-mongers will do the same. People won’t suffer and die from a couple of degrees of warming, but rather will do so from cult leaders’ attempts to ” do something” about climate change.
“thrusting some ecosystems past the point from which they can recover”
What these idiots need is a good course in historical geology- so they can undersand that oceans come and go- mountains rise and waste away- continents tear apart and smash into each other- meteors/comets hit the Earth- aggressive species like humans arise- and the Earth still survives- but they’re terrified of a POSSIBLE few degrees rise in temperature from which the Earth may not be able to recover- and there’s hardly a journalist out there willing to challenge them.
They don’t have the ability to challenge them. That is why they are professional wordsmiths instead of scientists.
Of course one can challenge them :
here a MSM alarmist hockey stick (CO2, Russia, take your pick) :
Alarmism exponential stratospheric, credibility, not asymptotic in the floor.
One need to take a relativistic approach.
The money needs of the elitists helps explain the climate positioning appearances and endorsements.
Prince Harry lawyers say he feels unsafe bringing kids to UK – ABC News (go.com)
Certainly keep them away from uncle Andy.
from Discovery Magazine
Warm Waters Are Causing The Earth To Dim
Satellite data reveals that cloud cover is disappearing over the Pacific, leading to less reflectivity
That sounds like the study where the uncertainty of the nominal 0.5 w/m^2 was (+/- 0.5)! That is, the ‘decline’ was somewhere between 0 and 1.
Our region in the southwest of Ontario just imploded the last remaining structure this week of a large coal fired generating plant. The closure, and demolition was started by the previous Liberal Party Government that was likewise demolished in the most recent Provincial Election. They were as woke as it gets. While not as visible yet to the general public as it is in other jurisdictions, the Provincial electricity grid has been hollowed out. Hollow only works in the mildest of physical, and economic conditions.
Instead of batteries that are VERY expensive, last at most 15 years, and may catch fire, it would be much better to have pumped hydro storage power plants, which last 100 years and NEVER catch fire.
He is an example of what is required in New England.
EXCERPT from:
RE FOLKS HOLD HIGH-LEVEL MEETINGS REGARDING WIND AND SOLAR BRINGING WORLD PEACE
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/re-folks-hold-high-level-meetings-regarding-wind-and-soal
PUMPED STORAGE HYDRO PLANTS, IF 100% WIND AND SOLAR
Hydro power plants, with large reservoirs, can deliver a steady power output on a year-round basis.
Typically, such reservoirs have at least one river, and a large surrounding watershed, to keep the water in the reservoir at desired levels.
Wind and solar systems can be used to power pumps, which would return water from below the power plant dam to the reservoir.
Such a plant is called a pumped-storage hydro plant.
Example of Pumped Storage Hydro Plant
A very large reservoir could be created, if the Connecticut River has a 150 ft high dam. Large areas of land would be flooded, whole towns with people would be displaced, which is OK, because we are trying to reduce CO2 emissions from evil fossil fuels to save the world from climate change.
If we assume the reservoir area would have 1,000 square miles, and the water level drops by only one foot, about 52,185 MWh of electricity would be sent to the grid. See table
New England total electricity loaded onto the grid is about 115 billion kWh/y, or 115 million MWh/y, or an average daily grid load of 0.315 million MWh, about 315068/52185 = 6 times greater than from one foot of water level drop. See Note
It would take about 10,799 MWh to return the water to the reservoir, for a net gain of 41,386 MWh per daily roundtrip
The electricity production would be about equal to the average daily grid load, if a 6-ft drop were allowed and the reservoir sides were vertical. See Note
Working Storage for All of New England, if 100% wind and solar
The total reservoir area would be about 10 million MWh/(41,386 MWh x 365) = 662 sq miles to provide 10 million MWh of working storage:
1) If all NE electricity were from wind and solar
2) If a 6 ft drop were allowed and the reservoir sides were vertical. See Note
3) To cover seasonal variations of wind and solar outputs
NOTE: If sloping sides, the reservoir surface area would become less, and the electricity produced per foot of drop would become less, i.e., at least 1,000 sq miles would be required.
https://cetulare.ucanr.edu/files/82040.pdf
http://convert-to.com/conversion/water-weight-volume/convert-us-gal-of-water-volume-to-pound-lb-of-water-weight.html
I can’t see the greens allowing a dam to be built, because, you know, there might be some kind of rare fish or frog living in the river. Yes, hydroelectric and pumped storage are clean and green, but greens tend to be anti-dam.
Even the resurgence of beavers is annoying in New England. It would be much worse with two-legged megabeavers.
Student Campaigners at Five Major Universities File Legal Complaints Against Fossil Fuel Investment
https://e360.yale.edu/digest/student-campaigns-at-yale-princeton-stanford-vanderbilt-and-mit-file-legal-complaints-calling-for-divestment
There’s no stupid quite like “young and stupid.”
Thirty years from now, they’ll be embarrassed by the misguided actions of their youth.
Open Thread Question:
What do you get when you cross a (sometimes) Murderous Dictator with a (usually) Slutty Debutante?
A dictator tot?
I didn’t really have an answer, but I thought ‘sparkly socks’ might be in there somewhere.
WWIII on wednesday?
Don’t worry, Kamala has everything under control.
On the Hydrocarbon Market reset Front. US oil producers are holding the line on production while making huge profits. They say they just don’t have enough sand. Ditto the NG producers. Why supply? No one is sure how high the prices for Hydrocarbon fuels will go.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/frackers-hold-back-production-as-oil-nears-100-a-barrel-11645150760
What is the solution? 55mph speed limit, price ceilings, turn thermostat down to 62, STAY HOME, work virtually, don’t go on vacations or become Iran’s best friend, arm a Shiite uprising in Iraq, foment revolution in Saudi Arabia or scare the hell out the Tsar.. or impose a windfall profits tax, or build an awesome NG infrastructure. Those days are long gone the reset has happened.
“What is the solution?”
Fire Biden, and hire Trump.
Power prices crash as Storm Eunice drives wind turbines
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/02/18/ftse-100-markets-live-news-oil-price-ukraine-retail/
can anyone substantiate this?
Further down the page:
“Chart: Wind power outstrips gas
Here’s an illustration of just how much of an impact Storm Eunice is having on the UK’s power supplies.
Over the last week, wind power has outstripped gas, with energy generation from turbines averaging 11.48 gigawatts, compared to 7.2GW for gas.
It’s good news for the push to renewable energy and provides a much-needed breather amid a recent surge in wholesale gas prices.”
So we can all look forward to living in ‘extreme’ weather conditions to justify the use of wind turbines……………
Further to the Greenwashing thread….
Headline:”Businesses ‘throwing away’ money on unscrupulous green advisors
UK Indy
That expensive lux EV from overseas you were thinking about just got a whole lot dearer-
EV batteries could complicate recovery of burning cargo ship with thousands of cars (msn.com)
Why are Germans antinuclear? This seems a strange contradiction. Germany is a leading nation in the charge to “clean” carbon free energy, with its “Energiewende”. But paradoxically the country is rejecting the most powerful and probably the only significant carbon-free alternative to fossil fuels: nuclear power generation.
That’s why so far Energiewende had made Germany’s carbon emissions more, not less. Some element of antinuclearism is clearly more important to Germany than CO2 and climate. What could this be?
Germany is becoming isolated in its stubborn antinuclear stance. But Germans are in denial of this isolation. In a DW video article (Germany’s CNN), a young talking head was aggressively justifying their anachronistic antinuclear-ism. An interviewer put the point – is Germany isolated on this? The defiant head robustly replied “no!”. Austria is also anti-nuclear! Austria! LOL! The green Anschluss is complete. But – umm – having just Austria in tow doesn’t quite end German antinuclear isolation.
https://youtu.be/uXMKld2IUXw
So who else is with Germany and Austria in this revival of 1970’s hippy antinuclearism? Well there are a few further north European allies, it turns out. Denmark, for one. And – IIRC, Norway and maybe Sweden. But I think that was it. (Maybe Lichtenstein as well.)
Pop quiz question – what do all these nations in this grand alliance of retro-70’s antinuclearism, have in common? Well the answer is easy – they’re all Germanic. While only Germany is actually Germany, on paper, Austrians also speak German, of course. And Denmark, Norway and Sweden all speak Germanic languages.
Yes the Anglosaxon world also has a strong and influential antinuclear movement and community. The Angles and Saxons were both Germanic tribes, after all. So why wouldn’t they?
So the neo-hippy antinuclear revival is a Germanic thing. But why is this? Why is it German to be antinuclear? What could the connection possibly be? It seems an odd one.
After all, Germany practically brought us the atom and the atomic age. It’s called the “Bohr atom” for a reason – Niels Bohr kind of discovered it. Along with giants of 20th century physics like Planck, Heisenberg, Einstein and Schroedinger. OK they got beaten to the atom bomb by the Americans under the German-named Oppenheimer. Whose cold-war nuclear missiles were perfected by Werner Von Braun. But I digress.
So the atomic age seems as German as salt-crusted pretzels and sausages with sauerkraut. Then why has modern Germany turned its back on the atom, as a source of energy? Why do they stubbornly reject nuclear power generation? At first sight this seems curious and illogical.
The answer to this question is a somewhat dark one. It’s about the psychology of purity. We have to dive into the darkest part of Germany’s (recent) history to understand this. This is a painful thing to examine of course, and no disrespect is meant to Germany or any Germans, by this. But it is what it is, and unfortunately some of it is still with us today.
Out of the cataclysm of Germany’s WW1 defeat, and the economic collapse with disappearence of the “middle class” aided by the vindictive reparations of Versailles, the toxic culture of Hitler emerged. This coalesced around an idea of racial superiority – no, supremacy – of the “Aryans”. And a key element of this supremacy was purity. The skin was white as cleanest snow, the eyes as blue as purest sky.
A powerful and deadly idea took hold that the German “Aryan” people represented a pure humanity. And that anything else was a contaminant. To be either exterminated or – if allowed to live – to do so only as servants of the Aryan lords. Worst of all of course were the Jews – who were off the scale, racially radioactive.
Germany has of course utterly repudiated the politics and policies of the Nazis, and to their credit changed their national culture more than any other country, post-war. But underlying attitudes and mindsets are harder to change than politics and even culture. Especially if mind-memes such as the purity idea probably predated the 1930’s and the Third Reich.
Racist supremacist thinking was in no way exclusive to Germany of course – it was prevalent in the early 20th century, including in Britain, America and Scandinavia, where the Eugenics movement was powerful and popular.
But the point here is not about racism, but about one of the psychological ingredients of racism – the purity ideal. It is not a coincidence that environmentalism in Europe came into existence largely in Nazi Germany, where the pure race ideal merged with the ideal of a pure environment. A green movement with white skin and blue eyes.
Fast forwarding to today, what is left of this purity ideal? A lot, unfortunately. Old fashioned racism and supremacism won’t ever go away completely, sad to say. Germany has left behind its world war history and become largely a force for good in the world. However, in Germany and elsewhere, the purity ideal hasn’t gone away.
My point – or conjecture – is this: antinuclear sentiment feeds from a purity ideal that – subconsciously – has racist roots. In this (scientifically false) view of the world, radioactivity and ionising radiation are impurities and contaminants in an otherwise pure world. A stable atom is pure, and unstable one – not so much.
The airy whiteness and light coloured decor of an IKEA megastore remind us of the purity ideal that lingers in the mindset of all Germanic nations to this day. And in the sphere of energy and power engineering, this purity ideal with its dark psychological origins manifests itself as a strong antinuclear prejudice which is harmful and unhelpful in the search for long term sustainable energy solutions.
Radioactivity is not an alien contaminant but has always been an integral part of the world and even the biosphere. Bacteria in deep rock even metabolise energy of ionising particles. Without the uranium series radioactivity the earth would never have developed its layered structure and convective tectonic movements. Life has always existed in a radioactive milieu. Every second you have been reading this article, ten thousand or so radioactive disintegrations took place in your body. Radioactivity is not an enemy.
Of course, ionising radiation is – above a threshold – harmful and people must be protected and shielded from it. But of all toxins and dangers it is the easiest and most convenient to safely measure and detect. Because of what it is – a leakage from the vast energies of the atomic nucleus, detectable remotely and cleanly by a hand held Geiger counter.
So ionising radiation particles or waves should be instead seen in a positive way, as harbingers of a wellspring of enormous and beneficial power for humanity. Not a label of impurity. When properly managed and engineered, and separated from weapons and armaments, nuclear power should not be thought of as dirty or impure, or as a source of contamination. As an energy source it is, all things considered, way cleaner than all the alternatives.
It is the Morgenthau Plan for total de-industrialization of Germany, which could not be imposed after defeat, in 1948, now in full swing. Green Party platform of 1986 :
German industry is a “threat to peace,” during the debate at the Hanover convention. Nuclear power and big industry are “a declaration of war against the people.”
That Platform included drug legalization, as does today’s .
The US is getting a taste of this Morgenthau Plan right now. Today it is called the Great Reset.
It is well known if high density energy flux is removed from modern industrial economies massive population reduction is guaranteed. And just look at all the so-called anti-nuclear groups – openly stating maximum ‘sustainable’ populations of 1 billion.
So to eliminate 5 billion people is indeed racist – an attack on the human race that would make Goebbels blush.
Prince Phillip’s openly stated wish to be re-incarnated as a deadly virus to do something about overpopulation gets to the point, what?
Yes the odious misanthropy behind Eugenics, the Na3is, Paul Ehrlich etc still lives on in the likes of Phil the Greek (May he rest in peace) and even some early quotations from David Attenborough. Some of our resident trolls like Griff probably also think the earth is grossly overpopulated – which it’s not.
That’s why it’s so cool that Elon Musk says, “there aren’t enough people”.
I suppose you have seen this :
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jul/19/queens-nazi-salute-video-pressure-mounts-on-royals-to-open-up-archives
video here , The Sun , 2015 :
FOOTAGE shows Edward VIII leading Her Majesty, Princess Margaret and the Queen Mother in doing fascist gesture
a wind turbine breaks in western Mass.
https://www.recorder.com/Berkshire-East-wind-turbine-blade-breaks-45164283
I’ve got a question regarding NOAA’s GHCN-Monthly Adjusted v4 data set. Anyone know what the requirements are for a station to be used in a 30-year series?
There are 27,697 stations in the data set, 12,151 that were still recording in 2021. Of those, 2958 have at least 350 valid monthly average values between Jan 1992 and Dec 2021.
Of those 2958 stations, 1291 are in the US. Another 887 are in Russia, China, Japan, Germany, Australia, and Canada. That accounts for 2,187 out of 2,958 worldwide stations. That leaves 780 stations scattered around the world.
NOAA’s web site says of the GHCNm data set: “The Global Historical Climatology Network monthly (GHCNm) dataset provides monthly climate summaries from thousands of weather stations around the world.”
I suppose that a little under 3,000 stations with good temp data counts as “thousands,” but it seems a little sparse, and I’d love to know more about how it’s decided to include a station or not.