GREEN THINKING:  Geopolitical considerations

Ed Hoskins

Subsequent to outbreak of war and Russia’s invasion of  the Ukraine, it is clear that the whole of “GREEN THINKING” is the outcome of a long-term fifth column operation supported by Russia and promoting the damaging activities of Putin’s “useful idiots” in “environmental” organisations, in Western academia and in Governments throughout the Western world. 

This undermining process was already recognised by NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen in 2014.  An excellent way to damage Western economies has been to render their power generation unreliable and expensive. 

That objective of GREEN THINKING has been imposed by Government policy but with no popular mandate throughout the Western world.  Western actions alone, without worldwide Global acceptance would have insignificant influence over Climate and could never save the World from “Man-made Climate Change”. 

But Western Climate policies and actions have already done untold and fruitless self-harm to Western economies and Western populations.

Man-made Climate Change

Bjorn Lomborg is correct that Man-made Climate Change from now on is a comparatively minor Global problem amongst many others, that could be much cheaper to address and would have vastly more worthwhile results.  Any extra relatively minor warming is likely to be advantageous rather than detrimental.

Man-made Global Warming is certainly not an immediate and existential global catastrophe caused by the burning of fossil fuels.

The problem of Man-made climate change has deliberately been blown out of all proportion and is used as a mechanism to undermine the West.

There is no reason to destroy the economy of the Western world to combat Man-made Global Warming.

The logarithmic diminution of the effectiveness of CO2 as a warming agent, means that the effect any future Man-made CO2 emissions can now only ever be marginal.  This view is well rehearsed by Professor Will Happer, former scientific advisor to the US government.  It is also well understood by the IPCC, (the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change).  It is included in their detailed reports, but the crucial diminution effect, making future Man-made Climate Change irrelevant is never admitted in the IPCC Summaries for Policy Makers.

“Renewable Energy” can never properly support a developed Nation

The productivity or capacity percentage of “Renewables” for power Generation is poor compared to dispatchable conventional generation:  reliability of production really matters.

As Professor David Mackay FRS, (eminent Cambridge physicist and former chief scientific officer at the UK Department of Energy), finally admitted in an interview before his untimely death in 2016, that the promotion of “Renewable Energy” is an “appalling delusion”. 

The delusion has been perpetrated by people who do not understand the mathematics, engineering and practicalities of Energy technologies.

Would anyone ever buy a car that only works one day in five and when you never know which day that might be?  And then try to use it to support your whole economy.

When the US  EIA comparative cost estimates for various Power generation technologies are combined with their recorded  productivity, “Renewables” turn out to be very expensive for the unreliable power they generate and supply to the Grid.

Note on the author:

Supporting documents:

4.5 16 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
March 19, 2022 6:07 am

One might ask, who are the allies in this delusion?

Reply to  Scissor
March 19, 2022 7:44 am

China for sure as well as any other oppressive regime. The goal of the IPCC/UNFCCC has always been to deprecate Western ‘hegemony’, which means eliminate the advantages that Western nations have, whose biggest one is freedom. This is why the developed world and the free world are one in the same and have done so much better than the rest. Of course to do this, dissent must also be eliminated, especially given the obvious flakiness of the fake science used to support their goal, and this is where the useful idiots play an important role, many of whom are oblivious to the harm they are causing having been brainwashed into thinking they’re saving the planet.

Reply to  co2isnotevil
March 19, 2022 8:56 am

co2isnotevil: “[…]and this is where the useful idiots play an important role, many of whom are oblivious to the harm they are causing having been brainwashed into thinking they’re saving the planet.”

👍👍 for the whole comment.

As for useful idiots, the useful idiots are always so surprised when they are no longer useful and are often eliminated altogether. After all, they are idiots and someone else might convince them that their former manipulators need taken down. Can’t have that.

March 19, 2022 6:26 am

Sure I’d buy that car. And to ensure better than even odds of a working vehicle on any given day, I’d buy 6 more so I could cross my fingers and and hope one might work every day of the week.
– Said No One Ever, specifically on the 5th of 1990 never.

Last edited 1 year ago by rhs
Reply to  rhs
March 19, 2022 8:38 am

In general, diversification is a good thing but guess what? They all don’t work on the same day.

Ron Long
March 19, 2022 6:32 am

Great opening paragraph, and at least part of the explanation of this reckless Greenie nonsense. Maybe griff can explain how his views are derived from sources paid by Russia to spread disinformation, wherein western economies are damaged and Russia benefits?

Jan de Jong
March 19, 2022 6:55 am

Blaming Russia is too easy.

Reply to  Jan de Jong
March 19, 2022 7:14 am

As part of the Brady Bunch generation, I find it easy to blame Russia, Russia, Russia.

Paul Rossiter
Reply to  Jan de Jong
March 19, 2022 7:17 am

Agreed. One has to factor in the role of Schwab and the World Economic Forum, their Global Leaders Program and other networks around the globe, and the arrogant elites that believe they know what is best for the world simply because they are good at making money. They have now permeated all of the globalist agencies such as the UN and WHO as well as many governments and NGO’s. Of course, the last thing they would want is a plebiscite of the population at large.

Reply to  Jan de Jong
March 19, 2022 7:19 am

Russia isn’t wholly to blame, and the article didn’t say they were. However the funding from Moscow has made the problem a lot worse.

Gary Pearse
Reply to  MarkW
March 19, 2022 8:52 am

Is China safe from criticism even here? The greens love China even though they are churning out coal fired plants at home and in the 3rd World. China actually pretends to go along with the greenery because they see a real opportunity for becoming the leader of the “West”. Russia invading Ukraine shows no ambition to rule the “West”. They are hated already.

Reply to  Jan de Jong
March 19, 2022 7:33 am

OK, it was China and Russia.

Reply to  Mike Haseler (aka Scottish Sceptic)
March 19, 2022 8:58 am

And the GEBs.

Jay Willis
Reply to  Jan de Jong
March 19, 2022 8:26 am

I blame the scapegoats.

Reply to  Jay Willis
March 19, 2022 8:59 am

Is that you, Mr. Cleese?

March 19, 2022 7:26 am

The Bjorn Lomborg view is correct that Man-made climate change from now into the future is a comparatively minor Global problem amongst many others. 

The fact that Lomborg and the author of this piece still believe that Man-made climate change is a problem, minor or not, shows that Putin’s “useful idiots” are not all warmist alarmists.

You can useful to Putin by just being a lukewarmist.

Jim Veenbaas
Reply to  leitmotif
March 19, 2022 9:47 am

This is totally incorrect. You have a much better chance of derailing the green agenda by tearing down net zero. Arguing that man made climate change does not exist is not useful and has not worked for the last 35 years. It doesn’t matter if you are correct or not, telling people that CO2 is not a greenhouse gas doesn’t make sense on a gut level – even if you are right. Do you want to be right or do you want to end the green madness?

Reply to  Jim Veenbaas
March 19, 2022 11:15 am

Straw man. I didn’t tell anyone that CO2 is not a greenhouse gas.

I want the junk science of the GHE to be shown to be what it always has been. Sophistry.

Do you just want to beat the green blob by pandering to junk science?

Reply to  Jim Veenbaas
March 19, 2022 1:55 pm

So your advise is to agree with a lie. No thank you.

Right-Handed Shark
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas
March 19, 2022 6:09 pm

Greenhouse gas or not, the so-called “greenhouse effect” of CO2 has never been detected in open atmosphere. It only exists in a laboratory experiment and in GIGO computer models. This “inconvenient truth” needs to be more widely known.

Reply to  Right-Handed Shark
March 19, 2022 7:20 pm

I am not sure that is true, but its late, I am half asleep, so I’ll leave it at that. Personally I think the greenhouse effect is real enough, but the climate is dominated by negative feednback that render the CO2 part of it pretty much irrelevant.

Reply to  leitmotif
March 19, 2022 7:17 pm

I think that is unfair on the lukewarmists.

I would find it very hard to defend the proposition that CO2 has absolutely no effect on climate. As equally I would find it hard to defend the proposition that all late 20th/early 21st climate change is dominated by it, causally.

CO2 almost certainly has some effect. My guess is that strong negative feedback and alternative radiation models limit it to something small enough to be disregarded, like a fraction of a degree °C.

Lukewarmists are very important as they are trying to provide a bridge from outright MannTasy back to some sort of sober appraisal.

The truth is an unreachable ideal, and so are simple explanations. In the real world we have an economic and a political problem being caused by unbridled warmist propaganda. What seems to be happening is that politicians are scared of the counter narrative not because they believe in global wariming, but because they believe that the electorates believe in global warming. That is they believe that rational energy policies would lose them elections.

Once they start to believe differently, the luke warmists are there to give them and easy out.
“Yes, CO2 is bad blah blah, but the latest thinking is it’s not as bad as we thought blah blah so gas blah blah and, we think, nuclear blah blah blah and that’s why you need to vote for me. ”

“You were wrong ” is not going to be digestible for too many people, whereas “you were right, but fortunately its not as scary as we thought” is a smooth transition to a more healthy worldview.

Burl Henry
Reply to  Leo Smith
March 19, 2022 7:44 pm

Leo Smith:

“CO2 most certainly has SOME effect”

No, it has ZERO effect

See “Experimental Proof that Carbon Dioxide does NOT Cause Global Warming”

March 19, 2022 7:31 am

Green : gullible, naive, easily fooled and led, inexperience etc.

Reply to  Chaswarnertoo
March 19, 2022 8:14 am

Well, that’s enough about Boris …….

Mike Lowe
Reply to  leitmotif
March 19, 2022 1:53 pm

But is Boris REALLY Green? Or just easily led by the threat to withdraw privileges in the bedroom?

Reply to  Mike Lowe
March 19, 2022 5:50 pm

I like Boris but …… he has trouble understanding stuff.

Reply to  leitmotif
March 19, 2022 7:26 pm

Exactly. smart guy, done his PPE, but never actually handled mioney for profit or done science.

He is I am afraid, an ArtStudent™.

Last edited 1 year ago by Leo Smith
Reply to  Mike Lowe
March 19, 2022 7:24 pm

Boris just wanna have fun. Hos think tanks and his mussus and hois focus groups all tell him that the next big thing is net zero. So Boris, wanting to be heroic and loved, and re-elected, champions it.
I mean in a sort of bumbling way he is rather adorable, like Prince charles, who has just as little understanding of matters scientific.
Beacsue he does respond to focus groups, market surveys etc. it is important that the pressure is kept up in the blogosphere…
Be a hero
Kick Net Zero
No ifs, no buts
Kick it in the fookin Nutz.

Reply to  Chaswarnertoo
March 19, 2022 10:01 am

As Charles Mackay wrote about 200 years ago –
“Popular Delusions And The Madness Of Crowds”.

My takeout from this classic book is that human naivete doesn’t diminish just because access to knowledge has improved thousands-fold.

In fact the more that provable facts become available, the more people are conned by bullshit.

I give you Al Gore.

March 19, 2022 7:32 am

I’ve been thinking about how people think and that’s bad enough, but “green thinking” = thinking about how people don’t think. I suppose it must be like those gurus who say “empty your mind of all thoughts, of all common sense, of all rational thought …”

Reply to  Mike Haseler (aka Scottish Sceptic)
March 19, 2022 7:30 pm

No, that’s very different.

The battle is between received wisdom ‘some expert says so and he is smarter than you, so there’ and critical thinking ‘so show me your assumptions, and your workings’
Dont knock the zen thing. That is more about ‘stop sthe stream of mental chatter, and thereby understand how your life is dominated by it, for better or for worse.’

Steve Case
March 19, 2022 7:34 am

The article tells us that the logarithmic diminution of the effectiveness of CO2 is well understood by the IPCC, but does not appear in their Summaries for Policy Makers.

This is because the scientists don’t write the Summaries for Policy Makers, politicians or their minions do that.

We are also told that the late Dr. David Mackay said the promotion of “Renewable Energy” is perpetrated by people who do not understand the mathematics, engineering and practicalities of Energy technologies.

I’d say that the big kahunas of the green fifth column operation know all too well what those practicalities of technology are and know exactly what they want to accomplish. Nikita Khrushchev said, “We will bury you.” He wasn’t alone in that desire. When the USSR collapsed Christmas 1991 his like minded compatriots didn’t sit back and twiddle their thumbs. Today they probably direct their minions to write the IPCC summaries for policy makers.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Steve Case
March 19, 2022 12:45 pm

The SPMs written by politicians are sent to the Lead Authors for the purpose of modifying their original conclusions. UN IPCC CliSciFi, especially models, is a pile of lies, as is the U.S. National Assessments. Worldwide climate extremes are as they ever were, evidenced by validated studies, especially by Dr. Roger Pielke, Jr.

March 19, 2022 7:56 am

Would anyone ever buy a car that only works one day in five and when you never know which day that might be?”

It’s worse than you think

Russia is at best an excuse and funder of green groups. But Putin is not in charge in the West. In London – within the ring road known as the North/South Circular – we have an ULEZ; an Ultra Low Emissions Zone.

If you own a petrol car/van/truck etc older than 2005, or a diesel car/van/truck etc older than 2015 you have to pay a daily charge of £12.50

Yes, that is 365 days per year (£4,562.50) just for having it. This obviously hits the poorest hardest and has forced them to get rid of their cars/vans etc

Now Mayor Khan (who got 52% of the vote on a 40% turnout) wants to expand that to the entirety of Greater London. Many more poorer people are going to be hit by this. Many of them will be black and Asian people. Yet in Khan’s delusion

Sadiq Khan: ‘Climate crisis is a racial justice issue’ as black and Asian Londoners most affected

And now with the cost of living crisis and the energy crisis heaving into view he wants to make their lives even harder.

Last edited 1 year ago by strativarius
Andrew Wilkins
Reply to  fretslider
March 19, 2022 1:48 pm

Khan is detested by many of us here in London. After the UK govt dropped their mandate for everyone to wear face nappies, he insisted on people still wearing them on the London Underground. Loads of us (me included) ignored his diktat.
While he has been busy financially crippling the poor with his green virtue signalling knife crime in the city has rocketed. He isn’t addressing the real problems London has.

Reply to  Andrew Wilkins
March 19, 2022 7:35 pm

Khan is appalling. But he gets the tribal vote, and the more he gets it, the more everyone but the tribes moves out of London. Then business will move out and it will become a stinking third world ghetto.

Andrew Wilkins
Reply to  Leo Smith
March 20, 2022 6:09 am

“tribal vote”
I like that – sums it up perfectly. I’ll be nicking that phrase.

Reply to  fretslider
March 19, 2022 7:32 pm

Dont, I just payed £118 to fill my car up tonight….(getting on for $150…)

Joao Martins
March 19, 2022 8:07 am

Good choice of picture.

Algae usually grow in seldom frequented and badly upkept places and equipment.

Richard M
March 19, 2022 8:35 am

The graph on warming from increased concentrations is wrong. There is actually no warming produced by CO2 even at substantially lower concentrations than now exist. The warming is found by looking only at increases in downwelling IR. It does increase as CO2 emissions increase. It just doesn’t cause any warming.

The reason is actually pretty simple. The increase in downwelling IR is matched by an even bigger increase in upwelling IR. This increase is ignored by claiming that upwelling IR is headed to space anyway so what happens to it is not important. WRONG.

The confusion occurs by not understanding the change in energy signature that occurs. The original blackbody radiation from the surface is assume to have caused the upwelling IR. That it would all head to space without absorption by GHGs is true, but essentially irrelevant.

You see, 99.94% of the IR in the 15 micron CO2 absorption wavelength is absorbed in the first 10 meters of the atmosphere. The very bottom of the atmospheric boundary layer. There is almost no blackbody radiation available to CO2 molecules above this point. So, what is the cause of the 15 micron IR energy that is measured higher in the atmosphere?

It is created by CO2!!!! That’s right, CO2 in the boundary layer is energized through kinetic energy transfers with other molecules and then half of the radiation is sent upward. It is no longer blackbody radiation. It it now very specific to CO2 and almost invisible to all other gases.

When you understand this it now becomes clear there is no more radiation for CO2 to “trap”. In addition, any increases in upwelling IR come from energy that was removed from the atmosphere. It does not come from the surface. And, since all of the energy is coming from the atmosphere, the upwelling IR is very important. It is cooling the atmosphere.

The bottom line: increases in upwelling IR, which overshadow the increases in downwelling IR, lead to a net increase in the cooling of the atmosphere as CO2 levels increase.

Last edited 1 year ago by Richard M
Dave Fair
Reply to  Richard M
March 19, 2022 12:48 pm

Negative knowledge from Richard M again.

Richard M
Reply to  Dave Fair
March 19, 2022 1:10 pm

If you have something that refutes what I stated, please pass it on. I’m sure everyone would like to see it.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Richard M
March 19, 2022 2:56 pm

I’ll let real physicists like William Happer school you. Read more real science and stay away from novel maths.

Richard M
Reply to  Dave Fair
March 19, 2022 4:08 pm

I’d be glad for Dr. Happer to explain why he ignored the changes in upwelling radiation. Probably because no one else has examined it either. I expect his downwelling results are pretty accurate. Of course, they aren’t much different than previous ones.

Since it’s now obvious you didn’t understand my points I can only guess why you commented at all.

Reply to  Richard M
March 19, 2022 7:36 pm

Its not because we don’t understand your points, its because they dont gybe with science.

March 19, 2022 8:53 am

This undermining process was already recognised by NATO leader Anders Fogh Rasmussen in 2014.

This is the problem right here. It had to be obvious that the “environmental movement” was overrun with communists right from day 1.
Original Earth Day – Lenin’s birthday. Any Earth day ever since, look around, what do you see?
Chairman Mao’s “Little Red Book”, Che Guevara tee shirts, and communist groups.
And especially – CPUSA: Communist Party of the United States. CPUSA was straight up the US branch of the Soviet Communist Party, now of course, Russian CP.
Nobody Knew, nobody saw????
Go the the twin anchors of the party, Greenpeace and Sierra Club. Both booths handing out Marxist literature and even Soviet literature. Neither group made any bones about it.
Soviet influence was up front and in your face since day one. It has been that way ever since. Yet we are told that nobody saw nothing. Sure.

The anti-fracking protest movement from about ~2012 on. All funded by Russian money funneled through Bermuda.
Nobody knew nothing, nobody saw nothing. Right, got it.

Bruce Cobb
March 19, 2022 9:59 am

“Green thinking” is an oxymoron.

Old Man Winter
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
March 19, 2022 10:49 am

They are a good indicator of what the worst possible answer or solution is.
Saying or doing the opposite is probably the best answer/solution.

Desert Bob
March 19, 2022 10:11 am

@Ed Hoskins. That CO2 warming effect remaining chart is great! Can you point me to the original source?

Reply to  Desert Bob
March 19, 2022 12:37 pm

You may find this post helpful especially the Physics elucidated by Prof Will Happer

Reply to  Ed Hoskins
March 20, 2022 6:15 am

That’s a circular link, it looks like all the links on that page redirect to itself.

Jeff Alberts
March 19, 2022 10:15 am

The Bjorn Lomborg view is correct that Man-made climate change from now into the future is a comparatively minor Global problem amongst many others.”

I’ve heard Lomborg say, in interviews, that climate change is a serious problem that needs to be dealt with.

Reply to  Jeff Alberts
March 19, 2022 7:38 pm

Well if we are heading into an ice age, it definitely is.

That doesn’t preclude an interpretation that natural climate change is a serious problem and needs to be dealt with. Droughts and floods are things that need to be dealt with, for example

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Leo Smith
March 27, 2022 8:55 am

That’s not Lomborg’s stance, and you know it. He thinks warming is a problem.

March 19, 2022 1:09 pm

Very enlightening. This needs wide publication.

March 19, 2022 1:25 pm

There are other countries in the world other than “the West” , Russia and China.
What about non western but developed countries such as Japan, Korea, Singapore, UAE.
What about SEA ( Philippines, Indonesia et al)
What about South America
What about Africa
What about the sub-continent.

India needs a specific mention with 1.2B population, India is both improving in economic development and world political power.

All these above nations need to be able to improve themselves and have a say how the world is run.
Currently, they don’t give a @#$& about CAGW.

March 19, 2022 2:28 pm

I think the environmental movement, which has steadily been growing in power since the 1960’s, has had something to do with it as well.

Reply to  David Wojick
March 19, 2022 7:40 pm

Who took over and funded the environmental movement? Ousting peole likePatrick Moore?
Effing Marxists did.

March 19, 2022 3:23 pm

Regarding the table – Percentage of warming effect of CO2 remaining at increased concentrations,
Earth is currently experiencing an Ice Age and has been in that state for more than two million years if you accept that an Ice Age as being defines simply as any period when there is permanent ice in both the North and South Hemispheres. Less than 6% of the Earth’s 4.5billion year Geological Time Scale has seen Ice Ages

During this Ice Age, Earth has cycled between glacial and inter-glacial periods and ice core data indicates that during glacial periods CO2 levels fell to and appeared to stabilize at 180ppm then rising and stabilizing at 280ppm during inter-glacial period.

Item 180ppm should be relabeled to CO2 level during inter-glacial – plants just survive
Item 300ppm item should be relabeled 280ppm – CO2 level during inter-glacial period (per-industrialization 1750)

CO2 level of 300ppm was not reached till the 20th Century.

March 19, 2022 4:55 pm

Britain returns to coal burning to de-Russify energy.

Well at least its racially pure carbon – that makes it OK, doesn’t it??

Reply to  Phil Salmon
March 19, 2022 7:40 pm

Its certainly very BLACK.

March 19, 2022 7:00 pm

I kinda agree with you, but who is where and what the motivations are is, I suspect more complicated.
Certainly Al Gore and Enron played their part to get more gas sales.
It is as you say entirely to Russias advantage to have the West travveling diwn te reneable blind ally and destroying itslelf, and there is a certain jihadistic mentality from certain other oil producing nations with similar ambitions: the West is hated because of its success.
And there do seem to be financial links between green activists and Russia as well.
Whty Putin wants to take over the world is beyond me – anything for a quiet life, that’s me – but it seems he does. Power and glory man, dreaming of Heroic and Glorious Conquests.
Well if that us where he’s at, throwing a few billion at the hard left and green groups would seem to be excellent use of cash. He pretty much owns Germany now, it seems

Matthew Sykes
March 20, 2022 4:15 am

Those links are useless/dont go anywhere

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights