Coal on the palm - Czech Republic

The Conversation: Will the Ukrainian Invasion Accelerate European Decarbonisation?

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Aussie academics suggesting that a need to ween Europe off unreliable Russian gas might lead to a faster rollout of the green revolution.

Will Russia’s invasion of Ukraine push Europe towards energy independence and faster decarbonisation?

Published: February 25, 2022 4.22pm AEDT
Ellie Martus
Lecturer in Public Policy, School of Government and International Relations, Griffith University
Susan Harris Rimmer
Professor and Director of the Policy Innovation Hub, Griffith Business School, Griffith University

In 1973, the world’s post-war boom hit the rocks. Oil producers restricted supply, sending prices soaring. In the aftermath of this oil shock, nations like America began seeking energy independence. 

In 2022, we may well see history repeat, as the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfolds. 

Why? Major European nations like Germany have turned to Russian gas to fill the gap between coal plants retiring, the move away from nuclear power after the Fukushima disaster, and the point where zero emissions renewables and storage can act as full replacement.

Will this speed up the shift to renewables?

It was only in January that Germany’s new climate and economy minister announced major new measures to accelerate his nation’s slowing renewable roll-out and power industry with clean energy. 

And now? We believe the crisis has the potential to accelerate Europe’s trend toward renewables, as it seeks to reduce its reliance on Russian gas.

We may see increased efforts to shift to interdependent renewable generation, such as the proposed offshore windfarms intended to be shared by multiple European nations.

But this is not guaranteed. In the near term, there is a huge risk that the crisis in Ukraine focuses attention on energy security at the expense of decarbonisation. 

We may see a return to coal power. Countries like Germany may even be forced to rethink or delay their nuclear phase out.

Other major fossil fuel exporters such as Australia are already lining up to fill any gaps in European markets.

This is a setback for international climate efforts, given Russia’s role as one of the world’s top five greenhouse gas emitters.

Wanton environmental destruction is a war crime, on par with targeting of the civilian population and the destruction of cultural heritage. In 2020, the Red Cross issued guidelines for protecting the environment during wartime. 

Read more: https://theconversation.com/will-russias-invasion-of-ukraine-push-europe-towards-energy-independence-and-faster-decarbonisation-177914

At least they kindof admitted that renewables are not an easy path to energy security. But what a lack of perspective.

I have a Ukrainian friend who has family members and friends in the firing line of the invasion. Real people are hurting. Yet these climate obsessed academics actually think it matters whether Europe burns a little coal this winter to keep the lights on, and even appear to believe that “environmental destruction”, bulldozing a few trees with a tank, is “on a par” with murdering civilians.

4.7 19 votes
Article Rating
174 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Bryan A
February 25, 2022 10:06 am

They “Bulldoze” far more trees in the name of “Wind Turbines” than is done by Tanks during conflict

n.n
Reply to  Bryan A
February 25, 2022 12:08 pm

The irony of a Green blight that precludes a green environment, safe and inclusive habitats, and a probable first-order forcing of [catastrophic] [anthropogenic] global warming… change.

chrisgeo
Reply to  n.n
February 25, 2022 1:25 pm

What?

Breaking_Bad_S04E01__Box_Cutter__-_Denny
MarkW
Reply to  n.n
February 26, 2022 8:34 am

When 20 words are used to replace 2, the goal is to obfuscate.

meiggs
Reply to  Bryan A
February 26, 2022 4:21 am

ditto solar, when you ask proponents why that’s ok they won’t talk about it

Bryan A
Reply to  meiggs
February 26, 2022 7:57 am

Solar is extremely Low Density Energy. To replace the energy produced by Diablo Canyon NPP (2.2GW @ >90%CF) with Solar PV (26%CF), as California intends to do, (given production time limits and associated (CF) capacity factor) will require covering an area slightly larger than twice the area of San Francisco with Solar Panels

Barry Anthony
Reply to  Bryan A
February 26, 2022 9:24 am

>>Solar is extremely Low Density Energy.<< Installing solar panels/shingles on the suitable residential rooftops in the US alone would meet 34% of the country’s TOTAL energy needs.

Bryan A
Reply to  Barry Anthony
February 27, 2022 1:23 pm

Is that based on NAMEPLATE or NAMEPLATE * CAPACITY FACTOR?
Is that TOTAL ENERGY (Heating, Cooking, Transportation, Shipping, etc) or just Electricity Generation?

Barry Anthony
Reply to  Bryan A
February 27, 2022 2:29 pm

34% of the total electricity needs of the US. More than nuclear. More than coal. More than hydro.

Bryan A
Reply to  Barry Anthony
February 27, 2022 9:13 pm

Electricity is only a percentage of the “Total Energy” utilized on a daily basis. Once other non electric sources are replaced with electricity…
Cooking
Heating
Hot Water
Automobiles
Busses
Shipping
Trains
Trucking
Battery Back-up recharging
Will all act to create a dramatic increase in electricity requirements

Over the next 25 years, that 34% figure will drop dramatically as far as only 16% then, given probable future growth in population and thereby demand the 16% is likely to be only 10% as electrification forces demand to increase by over 400%

Last edited 7 months ago by Bryan A
Foo Bar
Reply to  Bryan A
February 26, 2022 12:54 pm

As per DOE: “PV panels on just 22,000 square miles of the nation’s total land area – about the size of Lake Michigan – could supply enough electricity to power the entire United States”
This may be exaggerated as you may double it to convert PV electricity into proper storable and dispatchable form of energy like hydrogen fuel, plus you non-electric energy too. But it is still like 1% of the US. There are much more unused semi-desert land in US South West.
You may focus on PV balancing costs and better alternatives perhaps. Complaining about the surface area however is just laughable.

Last edited 7 months ago by Foo Bar
Bryan A
Reply to  Foo Bar
February 26, 2022 3:39 pm

Not complaining just stating a simple fact. Topaz Solar Farm is a 550MW Solar PV site with panels covering 4700 acres or 7.3 sq mi and has a proven average capacity factor of 26.6% between 2015 and 2018.
Diablo Canyon NPP is a 2200MW Nuclear site whose generation buildings sit on 12 acres and has a capacity factor of better than 90% proven over 35 years.
To reach the same capacity factor (26.6% vs 90%) would take 3.4 times the number of cells and area of coverage…24.8 square miles plus the area needed for daily storage of that electricity.
To reach the total NAMEPLATE of DCPP, 2200MW, would require 4 times Topaz. BUT to reach the NAMEPLATE of DCPP and do so at the same capacity factor would require 13.6 times Topaz current Solar Cells and area of coverage …7.3 x 13.2 or 96.36 square miles. San Francisco is 49 square miles so more than double the area of San Francisco is required to replace the energy production of DCPP
And that is only 5% of California’s daily usage

Last edited 7 months ago by Bryan A
Dennis G Sandberg
Reply to  Foo Bar
February 27, 2022 10:10 am

Solar panels are worth less than nothing junk but you are 100% right about the surface area argument. Lots of open space with zero agricultural value in the SW. Solar in the SW is dumb, outside the SW it’s insane.

Barry Anthony
Reply to  Dennis G Sandberg
February 27, 2022 11:33 am

Solar energy isn’t just far cleaner than fossil fuels, but it’s over 30% less per MWh and still coming down in price while efficiency continues to climb. The dominance of renewables is inevitable.

Bryan A
Reply to  Barry Anthony
February 27, 2022 9:25 pm

But Solar only produces usable energy from 9am until 3pm and only produces its NAMEPLATE capacity from 10am until 2pm. The remainder of the 24 hour cycle it sits idle, incapable of fulfilling it’s function

John the Econ
February 25, 2022 10:14 am

Perhaps reevaluate nuclear?

Vuk
Reply to  John the Econ
February 25, 2022 10:38 am

This hypothesis
You can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.” 
is still to be tested.

otsar
Reply to  Vuk
February 25, 2022 6:06 pm

You only need to fool a simple majority to stay in power.

MarkW
Reply to  otsar
February 26, 2022 8:35 am

You don’t even need to fool a simple majority, as long as you can buy off enough to make up the difference.

Bryan A
Reply to  John the Econ
February 25, 2022 12:01 pm

They should use Pumped Storage…
Merkel’s cranium pan as 1 vessel and her Ego as the other

Dave Fair
Reply to  Bryan A
February 25, 2022 1:23 pm

Piss in one hand, then transfer it to the other.

ATheoK
Reply to  Dave Fair
February 25, 2022 5:45 pm

Transfer the hand?

Steve Case
Reply to  John the Econ
February 25, 2022 12:48 pm

Countries like Germany may even be forced to rethink or delay their nuclear phase out.
_____________________________________________________________

Nuclear phase out, banning natural gas and geoengineering are policies and ideas that are entirely without merit.

Wind “Turbines” are a waste of resources.

Solar panels only have a point of use nitche.

The 50 year Global Cooling/Global Warming scare continues to demonstrate that CO2 is not the boogey man it has been made out to be.

The Methane Global Warming Potential numbers are a classic example of misdirection. Going forward, Methane’s contribution to Global temperature is insignificant.

Last edited 7 months ago by Steve Case
another ian
Reply to  Steve Case
February 26, 2022 1:23 am

In Len Dighton’s “Fighter” he notes that the pre WW2 mantra that “The bomber will always get through” got a nudge towards the Spitfire when it was realised that

“Bombing would kill voters. Accurate bombing could actually kill politicians”.

So there will be drastic changes when it is realised that

“Severe fuel shortages will actually burn politicians”

Duane
Reply to  John the Econ
February 25, 2022 5:46 pm

France is already there – 80% nuke. But Germany seems to be completely anti-nuke.

Rather than promoting de carbonization, this war is already creating de-Russification of energy supplies in Europe. Expect to see a lot more fracking, and LNG imports from the US and Canada to Europe. Both are positive outcomes from what is otherwise a disastrous situation that could easily get a lot worse in a hurry.

February 25, 2022 10:14 am

Russia is not sure where it begins and where it ends. (late Vaclav Havel)

Bryan A
Reply to  Curious George
February 25, 2022 12:06 pm

It began with Rurik of Novgorod way back in 862
It ends with Putin in 2022

Foo Bar
Reply to  Curious George
February 26, 2022 12:59 pm

“Border of Russia does not end anywhere”

  • Adolf.. sorry, Vladimir Putin, 2016
Bryan A
Reply to  Foo Bar
March 1, 2022 5:19 am

Simple Geometry…
The edge of a circle is continuous

suffolkboy
February 25, 2022 10:19 am

The crisis will add to the pressure in the UK to return to coal. We moved to gas because it was “cleaner” and then shut the coal-fired stations, and demolished many, but the possibility of being dependent on Russian gas, albeit indirectly, is causing anxiety. Fracking has been banned because of the successful Greenpeace, XR and Nimby scares of earthquakes, coupled with lobbying by Carrie Symonds. Nuclear power stations may be the future but the strike price for their electricity is too high because of the red-tape surrounding their planning permission. The quickest solution would be fracking, especially in the Bowland reserve, but the existence of hundreds of years worth of cheap coal under our feet is going to be difficult to ignore, especially with the possibility of building new advance coal-fired plants. The obstructions to exploit it are entirely political and administrative rather than technical.

The current generation of politicians has completely fouled up our ability to supply cheap reliable, dispatchable energy. The next politically testing time will be when we get a once-in-a-decade long bitter winter: a cold, clear, calm, January night will bring massive power shortages and deaths.

M.W.Plia
Reply to  suffolkboy
February 25, 2022 10:43 am

“The crisis will add to the pressure in the UK to return to coal.”

Let’s hope so…

Thermal (coal and natural gas), hydro-electric and nuclear power are currently the only means to maintaining base load power to the electrical grid, coal as well as being the safest is affordable, reliable, non-polluting and abundant.

The toxic issues of carbon combustion are solvable problems. CO2 is not toxic, along with having a very slight, beneficial warming effect it is plant food, higher CO2 levels increase a plant’s root size and improve its water retention abilities, thus enabling greater crop yields to feed our super abundant population.

  

Reply to  M.W.Plia
February 25, 2022 11:00 am

By the time you have de toxed coal its cheaper to build nukes and they are inherently much cleaner.
UK has no viable low cost coal, so would have to import it. No energy security.
= BAD solution.

Mike Lowe
Reply to  Leo Smith
February 25, 2022 11:06 am

Possibly cheaper but definitely much slower, to construct nuclear. Would you have to seek Carrie’s permission?

Julian Flood
Reply to  Mike Lowe
February 25, 2022 1:49 pm

So frack the Bowland onshore. CCGT very quick and easy. It’s the only way to bridge the gap to SMRs so the STEM-illiterate dolts who run the UK will ignore it.

JF

MarkW
Reply to  Leo Smith
February 25, 2022 12:04 pm

They’ve been de-toxing coal for decades. It’s not that big a deal.

jeffery p
Reply to  Leo Smith
February 25, 2022 12:32 pm

Coal mining is a bigger environmental issue than coal burning, IMO.

Geoff Sherrington
Reply to  jeffery p
February 26, 2022 1:41 am

jeffery,
You might not think so if you ever get to see a coal mine.
You might also consider spelling your name correctly.
Geoffrey S

MarkW
Reply to  jeffery p
February 26, 2022 8:39 am

Once again, the issues with coal mining have also been dealt with. All mines are remediated before they are closed.

Barry Anthony
Reply to  MarkW
February 26, 2022 9:21 am

>>All mines are remediated before they are closed.<< So you claim, but that’s beside the point. Coal is an expensive and filthy source of energy.

wadelightly
Reply to  Barry Anthony
February 26, 2022 3:42 pm

I have lived within 10 miles of a large coal mine and 1200 MW power plant for 30 years and it is NOT a filthy source of energy. Not even close. Ironically, electricity costs seem to increase as more wind power is built. Why is that?

Last edited 7 months ago by wadelightly
Reply to  Leo Smith
February 25, 2022 5:24 pm

You don’t de-tox coal. It is not toxic. What it has are impurities, mostly Sulphur, which when the coal is burnt is turned into Sulphur dioxide. This is soluble in water, and the exhaust gases from coal fired power stations are put through water. The carbon dioxide emerges, pure and clean, and the Sulphur dioxide stays.

Or so we were told when as senior school children we visited one of Croydon’s power stations back in 1952. No doubt the scrubbing process has developed since then. Sulphur dioxide can be catalyzed to combine with oxygen to make sulphuric acid, a valuable chemical in many processes.

Devils Tower
Reply to  suffolkboy
February 25, 2022 11:45 am

Here is a quick reliable news story on the current state of LNG to europe..

https://gcaptain.com/lng-flotilla-carrying-u-s-gas-heading-to-europe/

AndyHce
Reply to  Devils Tower
February 26, 2022 12:57 am

Remember the U-boats

MarkW
Reply to  AndyHce
February 26, 2022 8:41 am

Pipelines aren’t vulnerable to sabotage?

If you have 100 tankers and lose one tanker, you have lost 1 tanker.
If you have 100 miles of pipeline and lose one mile, you have lost the pipeline.

Last edited 7 months ago by MarkW
Foo Bar
Reply to  MarkW
February 26, 2022 1:05 pm

Liquification and degasification facilities are very vulnerable. A mile of pipeline can be replaced in weeks. The end user may not even notice the pressure drop. Pipelines are much less vulnerable than electric power lines.
Still, any such infrastructure targeting would mean WWIII. Anything is vulnerable to hydrogen bombs.

Richard Page
Reply to  suffolkboy
February 25, 2022 11:58 am

Basically the EU and UK need to realise that energy security is now far more important than green virtue signalling and a bit of stiff-necked pride. Switch off the Russian gas and start fracking a way out of this mess before it sucks them under.

LdB
Reply to  Richard Page
February 25, 2022 4:42 pm

US and Australia can help but there aren’t enough LNG ships to feed Europe long term and they take years to build.

Rhb2
Reply to  suffolkboy
February 25, 2022 3:37 pm

Thanks for facks about fracking.

LdB
Reply to  suffolkboy
February 25, 2022 4:39 pm

Energy security will be everything for next decades the EU got schooled in what happens when you are reliant on someone you may need to stand against.

Joseph Zorzin
February 25, 2022 10:20 am

“In 2020, the Red Cross issued guidelines for protecting the environment during wartime. ”

That’s crazy. As if anyone in a war is going to worry about wetlands and/or biodiversity.

jeffery p
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
February 25, 2022 12:36 pm

If you recall, one reason ISIS flourished during the Obama regime was because of concern about environmental damage from American airstrikes. Environmental concerns were not and are not high in the list of ISIS’ priorities.

RevJay4
Reply to  jeffery p
February 25, 2022 2:13 pm

Well, it was 0zero along with the current nutjob administration in their attempt to “fundamentally transform” something or another. So far, with “Brandon” they seem to be gaining on that stated treasonous path. For now.

fretslider
February 25, 2022 10:25 am

Theses people really are feckin mad

“ In 2020, the Red Cross issued guidelines for protecting the environment during wartime. ”

No tanks, you have to tiptoe through the tulips

Brad-DXT
Reply to  fretslider
February 25, 2022 12:53 pm

Michael S. Kelly
Reply to  Brad-DXT
February 25, 2022 6:57 pm

Ha! I met Tiny Tim at a book signing, for his little tome “Beautiful Thoughts” (which I bought as sort of gag gift for my sister). Nice guy, if a bit weird.

Last edited 7 months ago by Michael S. Kelly
Pauleta
February 25, 2022 10:29 am

If by decarbonization you mean killing a lot of people, then I guess it will.

Joseph Zorzin
February 25, 2022 10:29 am

So, Germany, France and Italy don’t want to kick Russia out of the SWIFT financial system- it might hurt their economy! But it’s mostly so they can continue to buy oil and gas from Russia instead of looking for oil and gas in their own nations or in the rest of the world- while shutting down their nuclear and building ruinables. All while Russia is smashing Ukraine.

According to https://www.marketwatch.com/story/why-europe-doesnt-want-to-kick-russia-off-swift-just-yet-01645800683

“The sanctions we’ve imposed exceed SWIFT,” Biden said in response to a question Thursday. “Let’s have a conversation in another month or so to see if they’re working.”

I’m shocked at just how stupid that sounds. Does he really think Putin is going to pull out of Ukraine and appologize because of these weak sanctions? Meanwhile, I haven’t heard Biden ask America/Canadian fossil fuel companies to expand production ASAP to help the EU.

Vuk
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
February 25, 2022 10:47 am

Problem is that of many French and Germans who went to Russia only half or less came ‘swift’ly back.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
February 25, 2022 11:57 am

“Does he really think Putin is going to pull out of Ukraine and appologize because of these weak sanctions?”

No, Biden just hopes this will make it look like he is doing something positive to fix the situation, even if it fixes nothing.

MarkW
Reply to  Tom Abbott
February 25, 2022 12:08 pm

The other day Harris was chastising the media for not praising the sanctions that Biden has put on Russia, when in reality most of the sanctions are Trump sanctions that Biden waived last year.

LdB
Reply to  MarkW
February 25, 2022 4:51 pm

Praising meaningless symbolic sanctions .. even the lefty MSM media has worked that out.

I was watching the press secretary dancing around explain what specifically the sanctions did. You would think Biden would be out front of all this but they obviously don’t trust his mental faculties enough to risk it.

jeffery p
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
February 25, 2022 12:40 pm

This is why I think Putin will come away a winner and US and Nato diminished.

Long-term, the US and Europe may wise up. Be hopeful, but don’t bet on it.

LdB
Reply to  jeffery p
February 25, 2022 4:53 pm

Putin and Xi are huge winners. The US looks stupid under Biden and the EU stupidity has been laid bare for all to see.

Where is Griff to explain EU energy policy going forward?
The EU was his champion and look where they got themselves and what does he expect them to do build more HVDC interconnectors 🙂

LdB
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
February 25, 2022 4:48 pm

Yes the EU talked a big game and in the end imposed weak meaningless sanctions that are basically symbolic. Even the Russian currency and stock market have stopped falling and made slight recovery so you can see what the market analysis of the sanctions is. The EU has been shooting themselves in the foot for decades and now expects everyone else to do the heavy lifting to save them.

Putin called there bluff and the EU folded to protect there own butts and as usual the EU expects everyone else to save them. Personally I think we should all just resume trade with Russia because the EU isn’t worth making sacrifices for if they won’t make sacrifices themselves.

Alan M
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
February 26, 2022 4:57 am

I gather that EU gas payments are via SWIFT, problem there

Bob Webster
February 25, 2022 10:30 am

I am reminded of:

“Future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early 21st century’s developed world went into hysterical panic…on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer projections…proceeded to contemplate a roll-back of the industrial age.” 
– MIT professor of atmospheric science Richard Lindzen

Bill Parsons
February 25, 2022 10:35 am

It’s impossible not to be cynical.

Nord Stream 2 could deliver 55 billion cubic meters of gas per year. That’s more than 50% of Germany’s annual consumption and could be worth as much as $15 billion to Gazprom, the Russian state owned company that controls the pipeline.

When “punishing”Putin for his invasion becomes a form of self-punishment, such sanctions won’t last. “Gonna hold my breath til I turn blue if you don’t do what I want.” Then what?

Half of the Nordstream 2 Pipeline was financed by five European energy companies, and notwithstanding the current rhetoric from U.S., will be serving Europe’s energy needs by next winter. U.S. and other countries couldn’t possibly make up the deficit at a reasonable cost.

So, to Eric Worrall’s question, “Will this speed up the shift to renewables? Or will it simply drive home the irreplaceability of fossil fuels to keep our homes heated?”

Answer: Yes.

Drake
Reply to  Bill Parsons
February 25, 2022 11:45 am

When the pipelines get blown up by Ukrainian nationalists (Who are probably WHITE SUPREMACISTS according to Putin) ,we will see, won’t we?

Richard Page
Reply to  Drake
February 25, 2022 12:07 pm

I don’t think he called them that. I think he just called their government Nazi’s and wanted to denazify Ukraine. Some are almost certainly neo-Nazi’s, according to the many images of fascist rallies in the western part of the country.
It would beggar belief for someone to ‘accidentally’ blow up all 4 of the gas pipelines running through the country though, although that might be why Byelorussia has invaded where they did – to protect the western ends of the Yamal, Soyuz and Brotherhood pipelines.

Reply to  Richard Page
February 25, 2022 2:39 pm

You must be an avid rt.com reader.

meiggs
Reply to  Richard Page
February 26, 2022 4:38 am

National Socialists in the white house and in the u-crane…monopoly pending…big tech, amazon, pharma, health care, gov…if that bunch can’t destroy energy maybe humanity has a chance…denazify the swamp.

MarkW
Reply to  Richard Page
February 26, 2022 8:48 am

I’ve always been fascinated by the eagerness by which communists declare that anyone who disagrees with the is a Nazi. Even while their tactics put the real Nazi’s to shame.

Anon
Reply to  Bill Parsons
February 25, 2022 5:54 pm

They should make this effort more “democratic”. Whether the pipeline is running or not, the people can make the final decision. Putin can’t sell gas and make money if people don’t use it.

So, if you want to punish Putin:

TURN OFF YOUR FURNANCE AND LEAVE IT OFF!!!

/s

meiggs
Reply to  Anon
February 26, 2022 4:41 am

I tell libtards that all the time but they point out that only my co2 stinks

Foo Bar
Reply to  Bill Parsons
February 26, 2022 1:10 pm

Germany may just burn coal and restart perfectly good but mothballed nuclear plants.
Will they do it, it is another question. They never regarded people to the East as anything but Untermensch, so I’m not holding my breath.

MarkW2
February 25, 2022 10:40 am

It’s absolutely unbelievable that European — and some American — politicians failed to see this coming. Germany, in particular, has been incredibly naive and is now effectively bankrolling Putin’s aggression. Why do these people never learn anything from history???You really couldn’t make it up.

The UK needs to open up the North Sea gas fields again as quickly as possible while Biden should be ramping up oil and natural gas production to the maximum, both to help US domestic supplies and take pressure off global demand. Anything that increases supply and cuts crude and gas prices would reduce the amount of hard currency Putin is currently raking in.

Will this actually happen? One would hope even the most extreme environmentalists would see that propping up an aggressive dictator like Putin cannot be allowed to continue. The question is will they?

It’s also to be hoped that what’s unfolding will finally shock Western politicians out of their complacency around energy and security and the absurd rush to net-zero. God help us if they don’t.

Devils Tower
Reply to  MarkW2
February 25, 2022 11:07 am

When the EU destroys their economy in the rush to net zero to the point they can no longer defend themselves. A whole new awakening will hit.

Al gray
Reply to  Devils Tower
February 25, 2022 11:52 am

And you think it is snug in the system Wrong ! It’s a feature

Anon
Reply to  Al gray
February 25, 2022 6:06 pm

They saw it all right:

Consider the current CIA director, William Burns. Back in 2008, the year George W. Bush fatefully badgered reluctant European leaders into pledging future NATO membership to Ukraine, Burns sent a memo to then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that included this warning:

Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest of all red lines for the Russian elite (not just Putin). In more than two and a half years of conversations with key Russian players, from knuckle-draggers in the dark recesses of the Kremlin to Putin’s sharpest liberal critics, I have yet to find anyone who views Ukraine in NATO as anything other than a direct challenge to Russian interests.

Burns added that it was “hard to overstate the strategic consequences” of offering Ukraine NATO membership—a move that, he predicted, would “create fertile soil for Russian meddling in Crimea and eastern Ukraine.”

So Burns predicted 12 years ago that pretty much the entire Russian national security establishment would be inclined to make trouble in Ukraine if we offered NATO membership to Ukraine…

https://nonzero.substack.com/p/why-biden-didnt-negotiate-seriously?utm_source=url&fbclid=IwAR0h0nsuLI6iTsoxGdIlsZzJLTGCEvEbHurbJl8w7Wkd3_ONkBot275rsbw

And George Kennan, architect of the Cold War containment strategy, told them the same thing:

https://youtu.be/8X7Ng75e5gQ?t=1291

It could be that Biden just doesn’t know where the CIA is or never head of George Kennan?

Or as Al gray posits, it is a “feature”.

Last edited 7 months ago by Anon
Dave Fair
Reply to  Devils Tower
February 25, 2022 1:30 pm

The EU is already there.

Komerade Cube
Reply to  MarkW2
February 25, 2022 11:14 am

Germany is run by an East German communist who deliberately staged this. Question is, after shutting off the gas and immobilizing western europe, why would the russian tanks stop at the ukranian border?

Drake
Reply to  Komerade Cube
February 25, 2022 11:53 am

Answer: The US anti-tank weapons in Poland and the Baltic countries.

A decent President would immediately withdraw from NATO and create a new mutual defense treaty with those countries willing to fund their own defense.

Let the Russians have Germany but destroy the Russian fossil fuel pipelines and the few remaining German nuclear plants.. Germany has already almost destroyed their industrial capability (like the US). Without the nukes and gas from Russia they will be a basket case.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Komerade Cube
February 25, 2022 12:04 pm

“why would the russian tanks stop at the ukranian border?”

The Russian tanks have to get through Ukraine first. I hear the Russians are having a hard time with the Ukrainians. The Ukranians are standing and fighting and the Russians are having problems advancing.

This invasion of Putin’s seems to be showing the Russian military is not all they have been cracked up to be. I bet that applies to the Chicoms, too. Talk is cheap.

The U.S. on the other hand, has lots of battlefield experience.

Richard Page
Reply to  Tom Abbott
February 25, 2022 12:41 pm

The Ukrainians have said that they are standing and inflicting unfeasably huge casualties on the Russians, who appear to be in no particular hurry. On the other hand, the main Ukraine army group in the east is retreating rapidly westward to avoid being caught between advancing Russian forces. The propaganda has been flying thick and fast from Ukraine who seem to think that untrained civilians with rifles will stop tanks.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Richard Page
February 25, 2022 1:32 pm

Hunter/killer teams with man-packed anti-armor weapons are cheap and effective.

Robert Hanson
Reply to  Richard Page
February 25, 2022 2:58 pm

No, but recently trained civilians with Javelin missiles are stopping Russian tanks. Likewise stinger missiles are taking down Russian jets and helicopters. Can these heroes win over the Russian bear? No, but they are going to make the price Putin pays many times more than he expected. And probably become a legend equal to the 300 Spartans. The soldiers who told the Russian warship “go f,, yourself” is right up there with “let’s roll” in my book.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Richard Page
February 25, 2022 4:40 pm

Fast moving tanks out in the steppes are in their element. Urban warfare risks vulnerabilities to Molotov Cocktails dropped from buildings, people sneaking in to the tank parking areas and sealing the muzzles of cannons with epoxy and wooden cylinders at night, causing them to explode when next used, and thermite grenades on the reactive armor will make for interesting fireworks. However, probably their greatest vulnerability is that the tank crews can’t live in the tanks. When in an unsecured city with many hi-rises, the crews are vulnerable to long-range snipers as they exit and return to their tanks. The snipers can get away before their locations can be determined.

Tanks burn a lot of fuel. Supply trucks are more vulnerable than the trucks.

This could be very costly for Putin.

Foo Bar
Reply to  Richard Page
February 26, 2022 1:21 pm

These are not just big hat civilian clowns with NRA t-shirts. Hundreds of thousands in reserve have experience fighting Russians at low intensity frontline since 2014.
It looks more like Soviet-Afghan war experience. Putin may take over or flatten the cities just like Soviets did then. But at any time they were driving through Kandahar in tanks at speed as ambush firing never stopped.

Anon
Reply to  Komerade Cube
February 25, 2022 6:42 pm

You are talking about “running the tables” and “running the tables is limited by nationalism”.

John J. Mearsheimer, “The Case for Restraint” Yale University

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TsonzzAW3Mk&t=1503s

Nationalism is often derided as something human beings can dispense with, but Mearsheimer posits that it is a force which checks expansive powers. As we just saw ourselves in Afghanistan.

So, Putin might, if he is stupid. If he is not stupid, it won’t go past the border.

Last edited 7 months ago by Anon
MarkW
Reply to  MarkW2
February 25, 2022 12:10 pm

Most extreme environmentalists are already in Putin’s pocket and want the west to collapse.
The idea that they would support anything that would hurt Russia/Putin is a non-starter.

LdB
Reply to  MarkW2
February 25, 2022 4:57 pm

I agree many of us on WUWT have been talking about this for years and we don’t have it as part of our “duties or responsibilities”.

It was a case of blind Freddy could see this coming.

The corollary to this is the US is going to have to work out a firm stance on Taiwan because that is the next flash point and that is also bleedingly obvious.

CaseyB
Reply to  MarkW2
February 25, 2022 6:49 pm

MarkW2,

What a quaint, naive view of how governments/politicians come to make their decisions based on logic and principles. 🙂 I think if you give the situations a bit more thought, you will understand their true motivations and then it all makes sense.

meiggs
Reply to  MarkW2
February 26, 2022 4:44 am

Niave, do you really think western politicians care about the west as they line their pockets with globalist cash?

rbabcock
February 25, 2022 10:51 am

Doesn’t physics have a say in this?

Gordon A. Dressler
Reply to  rbabcock
February 25, 2022 11:51 am

It well may in the not-too-distant future . . . as in E=mc^2.

Foo Bar
Reply to  rbabcock
February 26, 2022 1:25 pm

Nope. A lot of things are possible in physics. You can gather energy from moonlight, physics doesn’t object.
Economics however may have a say, but it is long term story.

markl
February 25, 2022 10:53 am

The opposite. As energy supplies become more and more scarce, including outputs from renewables, nations will look within to solve their problems and there’s enough fossil fuels in Europe that the Greens have kept in the ground to solve the immediate problem.

Drake
Reply to  markl
February 26, 2022 9:51 am

But not immediately! Fracking, drill rigs, worker training, mine digging, coal fired power plants reconstructed, etc. take some time to get going.

It will be several years before the UK can do all these things. They don’t have a ready force of drillers and drill rigs. In the US, there are plenty of both and when oil prices go up, rigs in service go up.

I don’t know where I read it, but apparently the US is adding only about 5 new wells a week, drilling is down so much due to Brandon policies.

Or for you leftists, collusion between oil drillers and companies to keep supply down to drive up the price of oil. The House is going to have a committee to look into this COLLUSION! Even though Brandon and the swamp are doing everything they can to keep production down in the US.

Jphn
February 25, 2022 10:53 am

Why does this person think their opinion matters.

What will happen will happen, nobody can predict what the future holds.

Reply to  Jphn
February 25, 2022 11:02 am

Oh dear. So basically we should scrap science. Since its sole justification is that it claims to predict the future pretty well, albeit in limited contexts.

Komerade Cube
Reply to  Leo Smith
February 25, 2022 11:15 am

Scrap thinking, and feel the love

Mike Lowe
Reply to  Jphn
February 25, 2022 11:11 am

Green activists would not agree. They can see decades into the future – so they claim.

Brad-DXT
Reply to  Mike Lowe
February 25, 2022 12:35 pm

And some can see CO2. 😉

Drake
Reply to  Jphn
February 25, 2022 11:57 am

About the most ignorant statement I have ever read. Hell, you probably believe in the “Butterfly Effect” for leftist causes!

Putin ALWAYS wanted to take the rest of Ukraine, but didn’t when TRUMP! became president, then did when Brandon became President. Cause and effect. If TRUMP! were still POTUS, the invasion would NEVER have happened.

Richard Page
Reply to  Drake
February 25, 2022 12:46 pm

If Trump was still President he may well have forced both sides to the table and brokered a deal, without needing an invasion. But we will never know, will we? And speculation is irrelevant – this is the situation we have and we need to deal with it.

Drake
Reply to  Richard Page
February 25, 2022 12:55 pm

You are, of course, right.

However if TRUMP! were still the POTUS there is no doubt that Nord Stream 2 would not be almost completed AND that the Keystone pipeline would be bringing oil to the US, and all the leases and permits stopped by Brandon would not have been stopped and auto fuel prices in the US would not be as high as they are now, or were before this invasion.

ResourceGuy
February 25, 2022 10:53 am

Real people and real events have no room in the climate metaverse of advocacy and modeling science.

February 25, 2022 10:58 am

Mood is definitely shifting away from renewables towards nuclear. Greens bleating ‘takes to long to build, costs too much, what about the watse’ but they are not being taken as seriously any more.

Beta Blocker
Reply to  Leo Smith
February 25, 2022 12:43 pm

Leo, how soon do you think Rolls-Royce could get its first SMR plant constructed and operational if Boris Johnson gave them a blank check?

In asking for that opinion, I assume that no regulatory standards would be relaxed, only that the regulatory review processes would be greatly expedited.

Julian Flood
Reply to  Leo Smith
February 25, 2022 1:58 pm

Sizewell C consultation has ended, decision in months. If thy go for it it will be providing power in about fifteen.. Well, twenty… Twenty years tops, honest.

JF

meiggs
Reply to  Julian Flood
February 26, 2022 4:56 am

Milk it!!

LdB
Reply to  Leo Smith
February 25, 2022 4:59 pm

The sooner you start the sooner you finish and the other argument about the risk is balanced.
Do you want to run the risk Russia will control you or do you want to risk nuclear accidents … time to choose.

DHR
February 25, 2022 10:59 am

“…the point where zero emissions renewables and storage can act as full replacement.” And just where might that point be and when? No sight of it yet.

Vuk
February 25, 2022 11:21 am

On somewhat lighter note, you may have noticed there are lot of Vladimirs around, Lenin, Putin, Zelenski.
The name goes back to Vladimir the Great, founder and ruler of country Kiev-Rus,(around 1000 AD), who accepted Christianity after marriage to the daughter of a Roman emperor. Vladimir was not particularly nice sort of bloke, more Putin than Zelenski.
His statues are all over the place, London, Warsaw, Kiev, Moscow and elsewhere.

Last edited 7 months ago by Vuk
Richard Page
Reply to  Vuk
February 25, 2022 11:35 am

Volodymyr Zelenki’s not squeaky-clean either, despite his anti-oligarch image. With his cronyism and offshore accounts, he’s proving to be just as corrupt as his predecessors.

Last edited 7 months ago by Richard Page
Robert Hanson
Reply to  Richard Page
February 25, 2022 3:04 pm

If true, he would have left Ukraine with his ill gotten profits, and be partying in Monaco. Not telling the UN “this is the last time you will see me alive”.

Editor
Reply to  Vuk
February 25, 2022 12:26 pm

‘All’ Europeans (and therefore, Americans) are direct descendants of Vladimir the Great. His children and grandchildren spread across Europe thanks to papal edicts against cosanguinuity.

Richard Page
Reply to  Mike Jonas
February 25, 2022 12:52 pm

I think you’ll find his descendants were somewhat more limited than that, although the French branch lasted for many generations.

Vuk
Reply to  Mike Jonas
February 25, 2022 1:24 pm

That would make you all Slavs.
No surprise, this saintly prince (whose mother was today’s equivalent of a house keeper to his father prince Svetislav, not exactly monogamous either) had seven wives and estimated 700 or 800 concubines.

Reply to  Mike Jonas
February 25, 2022 2:51 pm

Don’t confound him with Genghis Khan.

Last edited 7 months ago by Curious George
jarek
Reply to  Vuk
February 25, 2022 12:57 pm

In Gdansk, 2015 (St. Vladimir in GdańskPoland. Celebrated on 2015 on the occasion of the millennium since the death of the baptist of Kievan Rus. Built with the help of the Ukrainian community of Gdańsk and the Ukrainian diaspora of the world.)

But not in Warsaw… no.

Vuk
Reply to  jarek
February 25, 2022 1:29 pm

I think London one was put up at same time, I knew it was somewhere in Poland, do hope Poles put one to Lech Wałesa nearby.

jarek
Reply to  Vuk
February 25, 2022 2:10 pm

Lech Walesa is still alive, Vuk 😉

Besides, Poland became a Christian country in 966, a generation before the Kievian Rus’.

Reply to  jarek
February 25, 2022 3:06 pm

Congratulations. Poland always came first. Where Ukraine is in 2022, Poland was in 1939.

Vuk
Reply to  jarek
February 25, 2022 3:11 pm

Not likely to be in 2080.
My lot was converted even earlier, circa 860 by two brothers and saints Cyril and Methodius.
Btw, our Cyrillic alphabet mostly mixture of greek and latin was created st Cyril.

Ireneusz Palmowski
Reply to  Vuk
February 26, 2022 12:23 am

The first Rurik who settled in Kiev was Oleg, who as a Viking threatened Constantinople.
It is said that on the tombstone of Boleslaw the Brave (he conquered Kievan Rus) there was an inscription: the king of Poles and Goths.

Last edited 7 months ago by Ireneusz Palmowski
Terry
February 25, 2022 11:29 am

Wow you really can’t fix stupid!

Gordon A. Dressler
February 25, 2022 11:47 am

Short answer to the above article’s headline question: probably not.

When various materials are ignited and burn as a result of being hit by various weapons of war, they tend to burn down into smoldering masses of (mostly) carbon. This would be the, ahem, opposite of decarbonisation.

Also, the CO2 emissions from diesel engines powering tanks and mobile artillery are a ‘tad bit” higher than those of private and commercial vehicles they are chasing off the roads, thus creating even more carbonisation.

And, yes, Ukraine is actually a country geographically located in Eastern Europe.

RLu
Reply to  Gordon A. Dressler
February 25, 2022 11:30 pm

In Libya, regime change caused a major reduction in electricity use. Unreliables are so low density, that it is hard to hit them all. Leaving the survivors with a net-zero economy, by default.

Barry Anthony
Reply to  RLu
February 26, 2022 9:43 am

The fossil fuel shills desperately claim renewables are “unreliable,” in spite of the fact that regions that have deployed them in the greatest numbers have the most stable grids. Germany and South Australia, for instance. https://reneweconomy.com.au/five-years-after-blackout-south-australia-now-only-state-with-no-supply-shortfalls/?fbclid=IwAR3fkfFbD65yLPHZ8Y2l5R9nnzhJWJ_cpK725BaIN1ph1VPQhCd_qepM1hg 


[That’s number 10 for today. any others may just vanish-cr]

Al gray
February 25, 2022 11:49 am

Has anyone considered the adverse effect that deplorable truckers will have on sleepy Joe’s appeasement efforts. Irresponsible

Gordon A. Dressler
Reply to  Al gray
February 25, 2022 11:54 am

No, I haven’t . . nor will I.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Al gray
February 25, 2022 12:13 pm

Sleepy Joe’s appeasement efforts will amount to him doing nothing, so I don’t see how truckers tying up traffic in DC will change Joe’s appeasement inaction.

I’m not sure why there is going to be a trucker’s rally in Washington DC. Listening to the organizers, their complaints cover the whole spectrum of political complaints. It’s not just about mask or vaccine mandates, which will mostly not exist by the time the truckers arrive. It’s about everything else.

I’m not sure how a truck convoy is going to be the solution to all these problems which originated mostly with the Democrats who are now in charge and I doubt the truck convoy is going to change Democrat minds. The Democrats will just blame Trump for the rally and dismiss it all because of that. They will call it another insurrection.

Martin Pinder
February 25, 2022 12:21 pm

We don’t want bird choppers for energy security, scattered all over the sea where we can’t defend them. Watch Russian aircraft coming over & shooting the blades of them (& sinking the floating ones). Get fracking. If Greenpeace have been fighting fracking then it’s time to get fracking. Greenpeace are renowned pedlars of misinformation & a criminal gang. The UK government ought to be aware of it & the general public also.

jeffery p
February 25, 2022 12:29 pm

I’ve given up on trying to predict what other people will do, much less what the nations of half the European continent will do. I can say Europe will not achieve energy independence through decarbonization. Not unless they follow through with nuclear and natural gas as carbon-free energy sources.

I hope the Russian invasion is a wake-up call. Wishful thinking is not a deterrence. International trade with nations such as Putin’s Russia does not temper aggression, either. That goes double for China.

aussiecol
February 25, 2022 12:45 pm

”Countries like Germany may even be forced to rethink or delay their nuclear phase out.”

Heaven forbid.

bonbon
February 25, 2022 12:48 pm

Something just loosened a valve :
European NatGas Prices Plunge As Russian Flows Via Ukraine Soar
https://www.zerohedge.com/commodities/european-natgas-prices-plunge-russian-flows-ukraine-soar

If EC Commissioner Leyen wants to stop all Russian production AND processing, good luck with that.

Meanwhile the Ukrainian Army has been asked to take power from the Kiev Junta.

The academics along with politico’s have been totally blindsided – but hey, they are not “savvy” like Putin as Trump said, whom he knows well.

Cam_S
February 25, 2022 12:56 pm

Bill McKibben says the EU needs more renewable energy.
————–

This is how we defeat Putin and other petrostate autocrats (By Bill McKibben)
After Hitler invaded the Sudetenland, America turned its industrial prowess to building tanks, bombers and destroyers. Now, we must respond with renewables

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/feb/25/this-is-how-we-defeat-putin-and-other-petrostate-autocrats

Robert Hanson
Reply to  Cam_S
February 25, 2022 3:10 pm

“Now, we must respond with renewables”

You misspelled unreliables…

Cam_S
Reply to  Robert Hanson
February 26, 2022 12:11 pm

LOL ! 😀

Drake
Reply to  Cam_S
February 28, 2022 6:55 pm

Last edited 7 months ago by Drake
Joao Martins
February 25, 2022 1:07 pm

” The Conversation: Will the Ukrainian Invasion Accelerate European Decarbonisation? ”

Yes, I guess. In the next revision of the “taxonomy”, the EU bureaucrats will state that lignite has no carbon. (N.B.: iin the 400 volumes of the treaties of the Union there is not a single recommendation to learn and use chemistry).

Last edited 7 months ago by Joao Martins
Dave Fair
February 25, 2022 1:21 pm

Yeah, we were really concerned about the environmental damage when blasting through tree lines to get at the enemy in Vietnam. It really was on par with targeting civilian populations …. sure.

ResourceGuy
February 25, 2022 1:52 pm

It depends-what’s the mpg of a Russian tank?

Dave Fair
Reply to  ResourceGuy
February 25, 2022 7:47 pm

That’s gpm.

February 25, 2022 1:54 pm

How will the EU build the solar panels, windmills, EV’s, charging stations by the millions, heat pumps, grid storage without the coal, oil and gas to power all the machines to dig up, transport, manufacture, distribute, insulate, install, train and maintain all this new infrastructure to replace what took a century to build.

Robert Hanson
Reply to  ferdberple
February 25, 2022 3:12 pm

Clearly, they will not be able to do that. It’s all a unicorn pipe dream. Next question…

OweninGA
February 25, 2022 2:01 pm

odd question with tongue planted firmly in cheek: Does “Academic” mean “village idiot” in the Australian dialect of the English Language?

Cavey 57
Reply to  OweninGA
February 25, 2022 9:47 pm

Unfortunately yes it does , along with journalists,public servants, politicians from both major parties and captains of green industry ESG

RevJay4
February 25, 2022 2:20 pm

There was a time when I thought the Krauts, and Frogs, and Limeys were pretty smart. Uh, that’s been a while ago. Now I see that they are no different than the fools who are guiding the US. Clowns and buffoons each and every one of them. When do the real folks get really tired of all this nonsense and break out the torches and pitchforks to take back their countries?

AndyHce
Reply to  RevJay4
February 26, 2022 1:25 am

So many “real folks” are so easily bought off with promises, no matter how many times those promises are afterwards ignored or are of the give with one hand, take back with the other hand.

Drake
Reply to  AndyHce
February 27, 2022 8:13 pm

That is why the swamp hated TRUMP!, he was keeping his promises.

If the swamp creatures had to start keeping their promises, what would the run on for their next election?

Rhb2
February 25, 2022 3:35 pm

I know that several (many?) European countries have laws against fracking. I have also read somewhere that they have no frackable fields, which I find hard to believe. Why have laws if it isn’t feasable? How can there be no fields when coal has been so abundant? What’s the factsm?

AndyHce
Reply to  Rhb2
February 26, 2022 1:28 am

consider the US cities who have passed legislation against nuclear bomb testing within their jurisdictions — or something of equivalent possibility or likelihood.

billtoo
February 25, 2022 3:42 pm

in the Ukraine, yeah.

Michael in Dublin
February 25, 2022 3:57 pm

The Conversation is a third rate news source that often publishes those who cannot get their work published in the best journals. A few decent reseachers that use this site actually hurt their reputation when they have to list this as one of the sources of their publications. They would do well to look for some open source website with a smaller readership but better reputation.

Michael in Dublin
Reply to  Michael in Dublin
February 25, 2022 4:24 pm

To illustrate my point:
An international security professor at a UK university has just commented on The Conversation about the Ukraine invasion. He speaks about Putin’s rambling speech. I cannot check up. I do not know Putin ever delivered an English speech and I cannot speak Russian. I was interested in history and world events before this prof was even born and feel we are living in different worlds but he actually rambles on about solutions.

bonbon
Reply to  Michael in Dublin
February 26, 2022 2:22 am

The full hour speech with English over, is publicly available.

Putin makes a statement following the Security Council meeting on Donbass recognition
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GjMnTo85S4A

Inside history of Ukraine. I think there might be another video also.

Serge Wright
February 25, 2022 4:02 pm

The people at the conversation never fail to surprise at their lack of intellect. Just when you think they can’t dip lower, they do. The Russian saga is proof that RE is a failure. Rather than move from home grown FF to RE, Europe has moved to imported Russian FF and created a monumental problem that threatens to destroy western Europe and even Western civilisation. The only solution is to rapidly ramp up coal, gas or nuclear and starve Russia of the money they seek to destroy the west. The same applies to China, who are about to embark on their own expansion exercise in the Pacific and Australia will be a BIG target, considering that’s the biggest source of iron ore and uranium ore.

Clyde Spencer
February 25, 2022 4:18 pm

WARNING: If it is in The Conversation, take it with a grain of salt.

Mr.
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
February 25, 2022 5:15 pm

take it with a grain bushel of salt

Fixed it for ya Clyde.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Mr.
February 26, 2022 3:23 pm

Thanks. My picture was too grainy.

observa
February 25, 2022 4:31 pm

Meanwhile they’re praying for Steve to listen to his heart-
Christians in MP Steve Baker’s seat pray for him to quit role on climate thinktank (msn.com)
Like Putin in is heart of hearts who feels Ukraine belongs with Russia. There’s always the one supreme lefty who feels the best for all the masses of feelings.

bluecat57
February 25, 2022 5:37 pm

Not if they interfere and the Russian nukes carbonize them all.

ATheoK
February 25, 2022 5:42 pm

Ellie Martus

Lecturer in Public Policy, School of Government and International Relations, Griffith University

Susan Harris Rimmer

Professor and Director of the Policy Innovation Hub, Griffith Business School, Griffith University”

“Public policy is virtue signaling, speechifying and learning polite speak hiding one’s real intentions.

Not common sense doers, movers and planners. They’d starve if someone didn’t cut up, prepare and/or package their food for them.

Last edited 7 months ago by ATheoK
glenn holdcroft
February 25, 2022 6:38 pm

These climate change environmentalists who fear climate change so much will be sent to re-education camps in Siberia if Putin gets his way .

Geoff Sherrington
February 26, 2022 1:37 am

An explanation is needed as to why, to quote the header, “move away from nuclear power after the Fukushima disaster”

Nuclear properties played very little part in this incident. Any large engineering plant on that site could have been damaged by this unusually large tsunami. Why pick on nuclear? Why banish it in other countries which have reactors nowhere near a tsunami risk?
Is there any reason in physics or chemistry or other hard sciences to be so reactive to an accident involving a nuclear plant? Or, from anyone who knows the real reasons, was it almost entirely political? Geoff S

February 26, 2022 2:03 am

This is the point where governments try to work out how to produce energy with windmills that consume as much energy in production and installation as they make, and they find out they can’t.

The only good point … is that all those woke causes … they will be the first to lose funding when the economic collapse starts (as it has).

Iain Reid
February 26, 2022 3:47 am

The Conversation seems to specialise in articles with little basis on reality.

Ian Smith
February 26, 2022 6:24 am

It will decarbonise through impoverishment and discomfort.

Geoffrey Williams
February 26, 2022 8:54 am

I don’t see Germany cutting off its Gas from Russia just yet . .

Shoki Kaneda
February 26, 2022 10:25 am

It will accelerate removing some of those pesky carbon-based life forms.

February 26, 2022 7:57 pm

Someone nees to explain to dumbass Greens the mathematical reality of multiplication by zero (zed for the Brits).

%d bloggers like this: