Guest essay by Larry Hamlin
The AP’s climate alarmist propaganda reporter Seth Borenstein wrote a ridiculous article that was published in the Orange County Register (shown below) that grossly misrepresented global energy and emissions reality in an attempt to falsely justify the need for the world’s developed nations to commit energy suicide (abandon cost effective reliable fossil fuels while foolishly increasing use of costly unreliable renewable energy) which has led to energy and economic debacles in the UK and EU with U.S. Democrats pushing this same energy incompetence and idiocy in the U.S.
The AP article supported the contrived proposition that “it’s the wealthiest nations who cause more carbon pollution” and therefore “it’s best to look at the major northern emitters to begin with” in establishing future global energy policy to address the world’s growing emissions that are driven by these “wealthiest nations consumption patterns.”
The AP article deceptively and dishonestly conceals the reality of global energy use “consumption patterns” as presented in the EIA IEO 2021 Report data shown below.
The world’s wealthiest nations are represented by the OECD countries (the AP articles “major northern emitters”) with the EIA data showing that these nations year 2020 energy use “consumption patterns” accounted for only 38.7% of world energy use while the non-OECD developing nations energy use “consumptions patterns” accounted for 61.3% of total year 2020 global energy use.
Furthermore, EIA data projects that the non-OECD developing nations growing energy use “consumption patterns” will further increase these nations share of the world’s total energy use to 68.3% by year 2050 while the OECD nations energy use share declines to only 31.7% by year 2050.
Therefore, by year 2050 EIA projects that the growing energy use “consumption patterns” of the world’s non-OECD nations will account for over 83% of the world’s growth of total energy use from year 2020.
The EIA IEO 2021 Report also presents global population data from year 2020 to year 2050 as shown below.
The year 2020 data shows that the OECD nations represent only 17.7% of the world’s population compared to the non-OECD nations global population share of 82.3% with this latter figure further increasing to 84.7% by year 2050. These huge population numbers for the non-OECD nations account for why these nations energy use “consumption patterns” dominate total global energy use which the AP article deceptively and dishonestly conceals.
The AP article headline highlights that the world is getting “hotter” but failed to provide recent global temperature anomaly trend data addressing this issue. Climate alarmists first established a “climate emergency declaration” in year 2016 and have been hyping that alarmist propaganda claim for the last 7 years.
NOAA’s latest global temperature anomaly trend data covering the last 7 years as shown below establishes that the global temperature anomaly trend has been declining since 2016 at a rate of -1.3 degrees C per century.
This declining global temperature anomaly trend since 2016 established by NOAA is also present in other global temperature anomaly measurement systems including the NASA GISS, UAH and RSS systems with the average declining trend measured by these systems being about -1.56 degrees C per century since the “climate emergency declaration” was hyped by climate alarmists.
During the period of this global temperature anomaly decline world energy use has increased by more than 8.6% with the world’s non-OECD nations energy use “consumption patterns” climbing by 15.8% while the OECD nations energy use “consumption patterns” were decreasing by -1.3% according to the year 2022 BP World Statistical Energy Report.
The world’s OECD energy use “consumption patterns” data presented here along with the clearly established world dominance of the energy use “consumptions patterns” by the non-OECD nations does not support the incompetent climate alarmist propaganda demands that the OECD nations commit energy use suicide in the future as demanded by energy and climate clueless Democrats in California and Congress including our so called “President”.
“carbon pollution”
Utter nonsense.
The weather this week every day so far has made me ask where is the warming? Even on my quick trip to Vegas it was unexpectedly cold.
Further, having a window seat on my way out, I was reminded how empty this part of the country is, for the most part. The ability for a modern city like Vegas to survive in the desert is remarkable, perhaps mostly possible because of the damming of the Colorado.
They have a clever recycling scheme which allows them to stay within the yearly NET allocation of 480k acre feet of Lake mead water.
‘Because nearly all indoor water in Southern Nevada is treated and returned to the wash, it has allowed Las Vegas to focus its conservation efforts on aggressive turf removal. This, combined with water recycling, has meant that Nevada has under-used its Colorado River apportionment. ”
Las Vegas Wash or surface/groundwater flow which empties into lake Mead
https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/nevada-again-looks-to-deep-conservation-as-the-colorado-river-dwindlesefbfbc
Las Vegas is downhill from Lake Mead.
If Las Vegas is pumping their treated water into a wash, that wash empties into the Colorado below Lake Mead.
Otherwise, Las Vegas must pump their treated water miles to the northwest to reach a wash that flows into Lake Mead.
“The AP article supported the contrived proposition that “it’s the wealthiest nations who cause more carbon pollution””
I’d have at least a minimal amount of respect for such idiots if they could at least say “CO2 pollution” rather than carbon pollution. Not much, but at least I’d know what the hell their trying to say.
Media is filled with photosynthesis deniers and corruption deniers.
Or per Capita emissions. Most of the “Rich” countries have a good supply of natural resources and energy relative to their population. There seems to be a cause and effect scenario that some countries like Japan are able to overcome through responsible governance and ambition of their population.
For the next century at least, carbon pollution is on sale at 66% off (actually more than 70% by mass).
We should take advantage of this and produce as much CO2 as we can, knowing that only a third of its atoms are carbon.
When the glaciers start advancing again- the climatistas will be demanding that we burn more coal.
The weather this early winter is reminding of the 70’s when the narrative was the start of a new glaciation. Here’s the situation in Buffalo, NY.
https://twitter.com/BbqhonchoRoy/status/1593965384352370694?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1593965384352370694%7Ctwgr%5Ec30c2343a836c161bfac857ce0c86e6a09fe3413%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fweather%2Ffirst-images-reveal-snowmageddons-aftermath-across-buffalo
It was low 70s here also in Massachusetts recently and I didn’t see anyone complaining other than a few climatistas who would have prefered a more typical November day of freezing, damp weather.
Nice.
It was in the 60’s in Vegas and I didn’t hear anyone say anything good about the weather and no one was swimming outside. At least it wasn’t windy, so the golfers were fine.
The PDO is already deep in negative territory and Joe Bastardi is saying what is happening seems to portend the AMO heading for negative territory.
NO, they will be declaring victory in spite of increased fossil fuel use by most of the world. God is on the side of the righteous!.
Back in the 70s, they were blaming modern pollution for the coming ice age, so that’s doubtful. Did you really think their religion would ever tout solutions that run contrary to their core sacraments?
The wealthier OECD nations are busy buying all those polluting products from the poor browbeaten non-OECD nations so of course they are responsible.
I would like to confront Seth Borenstein with the sitution in just one African country, South Africa. The country had a reliable supply of very cheap electricity 30 years ago. Today the supply is in a complete shambles while this and other countries are made to believe renewables will solve their problems.
Eskom (the public electricity utility) said on Tuesday it has burned over R12 billion ($690 million) worth of diesel over the course of the year – double what it initially budgeted – trying to keep the country’s light’s on.
The utility, which is waiting for more details on government’s plan to take on a significant portion of its R400 billion ($23 billion) debt, says that it is now financially untenable to burn more diesel at its Open Cycle Gas Turbines.
SA municipalities currently owe Eskom around R52 billion ($3 billion).
“We will be forced to implement load shedding because we don’t have the money to burn diesel,” COO Jan Oberholzer said at Eskom’s state of the system briefing.
He said those municipalities that owed Eskom needed to consider their role in causing more load shedding.
Load shedding has hit a record 159 days thus far. The utility’s forecast for the rest of summer and winter next year predict even more load shedding and diesel spend. (my emphasis)
In reality, if South Africa cannot even manage power supply with plentiful fossil fuels, it will be even worse with unreliable renewables. If they cannot succeed neither will other African countries. Enforcing renewables will mean increased poverty, starvation and civil wars in African countries with even greater numbers fleeing to Western countries in the hope of work or generous welfare.
On a related topic, also according to Borenstein, in a set back to negotiations, the fully jabbed and boosted John Kerry has covid-19 and is experiencing mild symptoms.
https://www.ddtonline.com/us-envoy-kerry-positive-covid-un-climate-talks-drag#sthash.4QqC6SGW.dpbs
You (industrial age humans) are the carbon they want to eliminate.;
Showing a graph of the global land and ocean temperature anomaly beginning in 1996 (super El Nino) is as disingenuous as Borenstein’s article.
While I understand the distaste for “cherry picking,” the entirety of the climate fascist pseudo-science is essentially a cherry pick, by beginning their time series for measuring “climate change” during the Little Ice Age.
Six years with a significant down trend is not nothing, El Nino starting point or not, since it shows the ridiculous assertion that CO2 “traps heat” to be absolute nonsense.
Reverse correlation also (as it does in many places in the climate record) shows that CO2 is NOT the driver of the Earth’s temperature.
No it’s not. The climate alarmist propaganda machine picked the year 2016 to hype their phony “climate emergency declaration” hype. Its entirely appropriate to review climate data since that “proclamation” to evaluate scientific support for their politically contrived ridiculous claim.
Descent to their level is not progress.
Responding to a nefarious claim of the data twisters with evidence mirroring theirs is not to “descend to their level.”
The EIA IEO 2021 report on Table A10 shown below identifies year 2020 global CO2 emissions total 34.343 billion metric tons.
The worlds developing nations (non OECD) represent 66.6% of that total or 22.847 billion metric tons. The developed nations (OECD) represent only 33.4% of these emissions or 11.496 billion metric tons.
EIA projects that by year 2050 global emissions will rise to 42.839 billion metric tons with the non OECD nations accounting for 71.8% of emissions (30.752) with the OECD nations accounting for only 28.2% (12.087) of total global emissions.
Thus by year 2050 the non OECD emissions growth will account for 93% of the world’s CO2 emissions growth.
The data presented above shows that the non OCED nations dominate global energy use “consumptions patterns” and resulting CO2 emissions at year 2020 and increase that dominance hugely by year 2050 by accounting for 83% and 93% of global energy use and emissions growth respectively from year 2020.
John Kerry has left the climate distortion building.
With a mild cough.
He got COVID
He may get on one of his private planes to go home to recuperate from all the GW BS
Have these people no shame, peddling the same world-impoverishing lies for decades?
I think the “consumption patterns” in question are per capita, not per country. It is central to green doctrine that we “over consume” on a per capita basis.
Hey Seth, since consumption is the theme of the day does this include consumption of coal-fired polysilicon production and Chinese panel shipment to Europe and North America? Does it include consumption of coal-fired steel for wind towers? And does it include consumption related to keeping up on sovereign debt payments?
In its C&EN news magazine, the American Chemical Society said that melting sand turns it into silicon.
They and Seth have turned into reality deniers.
So we just need to wait a while and solar panels will self-assembly
Well that’s interesting, a comparison of NOAA and NASA anomalies for 2016 to 2022 shows that of the 82 months reported so far. NASA bumped up 53 of them an average of 0.06° and 24 monthly anomalies were bumped down an average of -0.046 NASA’s rate per century is 0.01°C Per century compared to 1.013°C for NOAA.
So NOAA bumped up twice as many entries as bumped down and they were bumped up more plus NASA shows a lesser rate of decline than NOAA.
Should they be exactly the same? Well no, but should they show a consistent bias to cooling the past and warming recent temperatures? This goes on month after month after month. A few days ago NASA’s Land Ocean Temperature Index (LOTI) for October was published and 175 monthly readings were changed compared to what they reported in September. LOTI Files retained from the Internet WayBack Machine since 2002 and more recently as they were published show an average of about 325 changes per month.
Re: policy to address the world’s growing emissions
Since about 1990, growth of fossil fuel emission increased by about 300%; growth of total CO2 did not change.
Net global CO2 emission (all sources and sinks, natural and human) does NOT resemble IN THE SLIGHTEST the human CO2 emission rate. Human CO2 and net CO2 emission data are incoherent, i.e., net global CO2 evolves INDEPENDENTLY OF HUMAN EMISSION.
Summary for Executives:
“The world’s growing emissions” are not a problem that needs addressing.
See also:
It’s going to take a lot more splaining when the AMO and global tempts are falling cyclically in a few years with CO2 rising. But I’m sure the climate communicators and media consultants will be ready to deflect reality. Maybe the satellites and ocean buoys can be defunded by then.
Nice graph. No (heh), they won’t be defunded, they will be “down for routine maintenance” which lasts for years.
How many years?
Whatever it takes, man. Whatever it takes.
********************
Note (to anyone interested): Climate 4 You, https://www.climate4you.com/
is an excellent source.
Yes, down for maintenance like the Nordstream pipeline.
Count, count, count, until our candidates win?
They will just flipflop as they did after the coming ice age fearmongering of the 70′. The population will drink the new Kool-Aid and the AGW BS will fall into oblivion.
A Zimbabwean journalist knows, just like Seth Borenstein, exactly what he must write to appeal for climate money:
Can Africa Expect Climate Justice at COP27?
Despite being the lowest carbon emitter, Africa is suffering disproportionately from the effects of climate change – an injustice the continent believes makes its cases for loss and damage compensation at COP27.
Then as proof the writer refers to Cyclone Idai three years ago. Africa is huge with various climate zones and range of weather conditions. He evidently had not read and thought about the article in the Washington Post in 2021: A lack of weather data in Africa is thwarting critical climate research. There are relatively few weather stations across the continent and very, very few go back more than a hundred years.
That is why he can go on and write:
These losses continue to grow daily, as catastrophes that range from cyclones and super-storms to droughts, floods, locust invasions and everything in between – all effects of climate change caused by the relentless release of carbon emissions into the atmosphere – become more frequent.
Having lived there nearly 40 years ago I feel great sorrow that the journalist has uncritically swallowed, hook line and sinker, the alarmist lies because he is not helping his people. His country is impoverished and in dire straits because of political incompetence and corruption – not climate.
The global average may be falling but the place that really matters from a climate change perspective is the Arctic and sub-arctic. Average temperates in that region are still rising rapidly per attached.
Rising minimums where there is little to no sunshine can only occur with increasing snowfall. Extrapolating this data means that by 2050 the land in the Arctic and sub-arctic region 55 to 75N will again be accumulating snow over annual cycle on any elevated ground.
The current cycle of glaciation began 600 years ago. Accumulation should be obvious by the end of the current century.
Climate modellers are so inept that they have misdiagnosed the most significant climate change in recorded history.
Borenstein should be publicly caned for writing such drivel. Several times.
At least the Swedes are starting to see sense. Let’s hope rationality is contagious.
https://www.euronews.com/2022/10/18/devastating-consequences-as-new-swedish-government-scraps-environment-ministry
Merriam-Webster says ‘Data’ is “factual information (such as measurements or statistics) used as a basis for reasoning, discussion, or calculation.” HOW can speculation or predictions running decades into the future be presented as “data”???
Exactly.
The West simply can’t afford to indulge in anymore delusional thinking-
https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/other/peter-hitchens-i-warned-there-would-be-a-price-to-pay-over-covid-now-do-you-believe-me/ar-AA14jq4w