The Global Warming Policy Foundation 2024 American speaking tour is now set for next week. Dr. Benny Peiser, Director of the GWPF, and I will be speaking at three events on June 11, 12 and 13 on the topic of “Europe’s Net Zero Rebellion, European elections, and the coming U.S. reckoning.” My piece is the “U.S. reckoning,” while Benny will cover the backlash against Net Zero currently beginning to boil up in Europe.
The June 11 and 12 events are public and all are welcome to attend. On June 11 we will appear for a luncheon event at the Texas Public Policy Foundation in Austin, Texas. The in-person event will be at the TPPF building at 501 Congress Avenue in downtown Austin, 11:30 AM to 1 PM. This event will also be live-streamed for those who cannot attend in person. If you would like to attend this event remotely, go to this link. The following day’s event on June 12 will then be at the 3 West Club, 3 West 51st Street in Manhattan, at 6 PM. (The June 13 event will be private.)
All the events will follow immediately after the European elections, which will have taken place on Sunday June 9. These are not the national elections of any country, but rather the elections for members of the European Parliament. The European Parliament has substantial authority in some areas, and not so much in other areas. One area where it has substantial authority is climate and energy policy, so that has become a big issue in these elections, indeed maybe the biggest issue.
Benny is the expert on the current politics of the so-called energy transition in Europe. I’m looking forward to learning from him much more about the particular political situations in the various countries, and also to hearing his post-mortem on the elections.
Meanwhile, take note: there is clearly a political earthquake gathering force in Europe against the green energy takeover. Exactly how much force it has gathered so far is something we will learn much more about after June 9. But whether the shift in this election is small or large, either way it will be significant. That is because until now there has been in Europe essentially an all-party consensus on the necessity, if not moral urgency, of abandoning fossil fuels as soon as possible and replacing them with “zero emissions” alternatives, mainly wind and solar generation of electricity. Up until just now, all political momentum pushed toward the suppression of fossil fuels and the development of subsidized wind and solar replacements. Now, we are looking not just at a slowing of this momentum, but rather reversing it. Reality has set in.
To whet your appetite for our programs, consider just a few data points:
An Australia-based energy realism site called Stop These Things has a report from the Netherlands dated May 31, headline “Grand Energy ‘Transition’ Unravels: Power-Starved Dutch Ditch Renewables & Go For Gas.” You might think that the Dutch are the ultimate virtue signalers and groupthinkers on matters of green energy, but it looks like even they have their limits.
[L]ike most of their European neighbours, the Netherlands has squandered billions of subsidies on chaotically intermittent wind and solar, with little to show for it – other than ruined landscapes and unliveable homes. Now the hard cold reality of sunshine and/or weather-dependent power generation is starting to bite. Various provinces simply can’t keep the lights on, and have called timeout on the grand ‘transition’ to sunshine and breezes.
STT cites a Belgium-based source called the Brussels Signal reporting that the Dutch province of Utrecht has been forced to revert to electricity generation from natural gas because the wind and sun are insufficient and unreliable:
The outgoing Dutch Climate Minister Rob Jetten, leader of the Democrats 66 (D66) party, along with local grid operators, announced a set of measures to fight the power-grid overload in Utrecht province. It is expected to be the first of many regions in the country that will have to take action to avoid future problems. To maintain electricity provision to the public and businesses in Utrecht, there will be a switch back to gas. At moments of peak demand, the local Government will deploy gas generators.
And this, citing the Dutch public service broadcaster nos:
nos reported that the projected shortage equals the needs of 125,000 homes in Utrecht. . . . Without implementing appropriate measures, the province is forecast to experience frequent electricity blackouts, which would jeopardise the construction of new housing and industrial complexes, nos said.
Wait until they figure out that if natural gas is the backup, you must maintain natural gas generation capacity equal to the entirety of peak usage to account for a worst-case wind/sun drought — even though the natural gas plants may run infrequently. This is a great way to double and triple the cost of electricity to consumers.
And then there’s more of same from Scotland, again seemingly a home of ultimate climate virtue signalers. Scotland by its Emissions Reduction Targets Act in 2019 adopted the most aggressive of all emissions-lowering targets among the countries of the world, a mandatory 75% reduction in emissions (relative to a 1990 baseline) by 2030. On April 18 that all fell apart. From Reuters, April 18:
Scotland on Thursday scrapped its target of cutting climate-damaging greenhouse gas emissions by 75% by 2030, blaming the central British government, but said it still intends to meet a 2045 net zero target. The move came in response to a critical report published last month by the independent Climate Change Committee (CCC), which said Scotland was so far behind what was needed to meet the 2030 target that it was no longer credible. Mairi McAllan, the Net Zero Secretary for Scotland’s devolved government, . . . said Scotland was constrained by cuts to the capital funding it receives from the British government and an overall weakening of climate ambition by British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak.
Or in other words, the plan was to do this with other people’s money, but now that that is not forthcoming, never mind.
And don’t forget the major watering-down of emissions reduction goals by the UK itself that took place last fall. From CNBC, September 20, 2023:
U.K. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak on Wednesday said his government would take a new approach to meeting its emissions targets as he announced a delay on the ban on the sale of new gasoline and diesel cars. The ban will move from 2030 to 2035. . . . Sunak [also] said people needed more time to make the transition away from gas boilers and that households in some areas would get a delay on existing targets for the ban on new fossil fuel boilers.
All these moves result from political push-back from the masses as the costs of the supposed green energy transition increasingly manifest themselves. Lots more of this is coming, as it inevitably must. Come to our events (or tune in) to learn much more.
Im pretty sure the dutch connection is mistaken. The dutch are NOT going back to their natural gas, at least not on land where the dutch state who owns the gasfields are putting concrete down the shafts. They are looking at drilling off shore. BUT, they have sold the rights to…wait for it..russian and other foreign oligarchs who will take the money and run. Imagine that, you have abundant energy (natural gas) right under the land and halting production simply because of some unaddressed light tremors that couldve been fixed. The Greens have managed to shut down production and the new government seems too devided to have a rethink.i think the focus is on imported liquid gas fr abroad. D66 and the greens would very much control people’s energy use. But they will be out of power soon.Watch that space..
Btw, i am from Holland so have a keen interest.
As a side note: the oil and gas experts knew long ago that unreliables would never take over hence their general support. They want to be there to set the rules, play along and offer their help when the unreliable ship hits the reality wall. And form a mutual ram against their arch enemy: nuclear energy.
“concrete down the shafts”
crazy, crazy, crazy!
Vandalism.
Here in Wokeachusetts, whenever they shut down a coal power plant, they immediately blow up the tower- with a big celebration. I think they’re all gone by now.
They’ve done similar things here. I guess they take some kind of symbolic meaning, perhaps even delight, when the explosive charges go off and the cooling towers etc are levelled.
Premature celebration, in my view.
They’re ecstatic that they’re saving the planet!
A green wet dream
No doubt there’ll be a big celebration when Ratcliffe closes in September.
Half of me hopes for a cold windless winter across Europe the other wants to stay warm.
Yes but, IF the dutch decide to go back to their gas reserves they will. It is not that hard. A bigger issue might be the dismantling of their entire gas pipe network that runs throughout Holland. Atm, they are looking at alternatives. The good thing about the next government is that they will halt overambicious projects. That alone is positive considering all the climate panic..
I believe the goal was to get of natural gas (for homes) by X date. But they got back on those plans because is not achievable. Power grid is congested and to get home of gas it costs just too much money.
“And form a mutual ram against their arch enemy: nuclear energy.”
Not sure why ff companies should consider nuclear as an enemy. Maybe they do but that makes no sense.
Let’s just say nuclear energy is the competition for both parties. Has been since at least the late 1960s, for obvious reasons.
For both the hydrocarbon industry and the greens it is clean abundant energy threatening their position. For oil/gas it is market share, for the Greens it is malthusian ideology.
“You might think that the Dutch are the ultimate virtue signalers”
Not after the last Dutch elections.
Nobody has really pushed back in the UK, save for a loony Hydrogen experiment. No matter what EUers do, we’re going to beat them to the bottom.
“Great British Energy, with £8bn of investment, forms the centrepiece of Labour’s promise to decarbonise the electricity supply by 2030. “
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jun/06/could-labour-gb-energy-plan-future-proof-power-generation-uk
The wild card is Reform UK – the only outfit against net zero. At least Nigel has saved us from the most boring election of all time. Day 1 and milkshaked straight away.
Reform are just talking to themselves over climate change. They are mocked by mainstream journalists over the issue. Did you see the ITV interview on Tuesday night with Richard Tice?
So they will sneak away from the issue and bang on about johnny foreigner coming over here, stealing our beer… And thus they will get less MPs than the Welsh Nationalists.
What they should do, and if they had any integrity, what they would do, I’d put out huge billboards showing the Mauna Loa CO2 record with a circle over 2020 and the line, “Covid Restrictions didn’t dent CO2. We won’t go for Net Zero. The other Parties want Lockdown Forever”.
The should defend their Net Zero position. But they won’t.
Ultimately, they want to join the club
In the UK, we have a choice between having …
Net Zero & high bills
or
High bills & Net Zero
As Strat says “we’re going to beat them to the bottom.”
We have to succeed at something!!
The only way is down…. baby.
I think it will start to change when we have black outs , can’t get to work or travel . The British winter is cold and wet and when working age people struggle to get to work and heat thier homes , people will get really fed up a bit like the poll tax riots . Especially as much of the world doesn’t see climate change if it exists as a problem.
Then the greens will say “the problems are due to not investing enough in clean and green energy”.
Or delayed grid upgrade which still would not work. Ok, can we just say:’ anything, but us’, otherwise known as:’mistakes were made but not by us’.
The problem is that half of the UK’s CCGT plants date back to the 1990s, so they’re coming to the end of their lives, and nothing is being done to replace them.
So we’re likely to see half of our reliable generating capacity retire within the next 5 years or so, at which point it’s going to be far too late to build new plants, at which point we can look forward to years of rolling blackouts every time the wind stops blowing, and all the chaos that entails.
Madness.
You do not have a choice, until you vote out the net zero idiots, who have more or less despotically hijacked the conversation and turned it into their diktats, and taken command/control over our resources.
Right now, you have no idea yet how screwed you will be, because of all the lies and obfuscation and hiding of data, according to expert STEM people, usually retired, which gives them some measure of freedom.
Excerpt from
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/hunga-tonga-volcanic-eruption
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/natural-forces-cause-periodic-global-warming
Important Role of CO2 for Flora and Fauna Growth
Plants require require at least 1000 to 1200 ppm of CO2, as proven in greenhouses
Many plants have become extinct, along with the fauna they supported, due to a lack of CO2
As a result, many areas of the world became arid and deserts.
Current CO2 needs to at least double or triple
Earth temperature increased about 1.2 C since 1900, due to many causes, such as fossil CO2, flora CO2, and permafrost methane which converts to CO2.
.
CO2 emissions of fossil fuels are a blessing.
CO2 ppm increased from 1979 to 2023 was 421 – 336 = 85, about 15% increase in greening, per NASA.
CO2 ppm increased from 1900 to 2023 was 421 – 296 = 125, about 22% increase in greening
Increased greening produces oxygen by photosynthesis. It forms a filter in the upper atmosphere that absorbs harmful UV radiation, with wavelengths below 240 nm, 2) Increased world fauna, 3) Increased crop yields per acre, 4) Reduced world desert areas
.
Fossil fuel CO2 was 37.55 Gt, or 4.8 ppm in 2023, about 68% of total human CO2. One CO2 ppm = 7.821 Gt
Total human was 4.8/0.68 = 7.06 ppm. See summary URL.
https://gml.noaa.gov/webdata/ccgg/trends/co2/co2_annmean_mlo.txt
To atmosphere was CO2 was 421.08 ppm, end 2023 – 418.53, end 2022 = 2.55 ppm; natural increase is assumed zero
To oceans 3.5 ppm (assumed); to other sinks 1.01 ppm
Mauna Loa curve shows an annual variation of about 9 ppm during a year, due to: 1) seasonal absorption by photosynthesis, 6CO2 (from the air) + 6H2O (from the ground) + sunlight → C6H12O6 (glucose for flora energy) + 6O2 (to the air), and 2) ongoing decay.
We need more biomass (plant more trees) that uses CO2 to produce O2. See URL
.
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/new-study-2001-2020-global-greening-is-an-indisputable-fact-and
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/co2-is-not-pollution-it-s-the-currency-of-life
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/summary-of-world-co2eq-emissions-all-sources-and-energy-related
https://issuu.com/johna.shanahan/docs/co2_pitch_4-3-24_baeuerle_english
.
Oceans Absorb CO2
Sea water has 3.5% salt, NaCl, by weight.
CO2 molecules continuously move from the air into sea water, per Henry’s Law of partial pressures
CO2 and NaCl form many compounds that contain C, O, H, Cl, Ca
They sustain flora (plankton, kelp, coral) and fauna in the oceans.
At the surface, seawater pH 8.1, and CO2 421 ppm, the % presence of [CO2], [HCO3−], and [CO3 2−] is 0.5, 89, and 10.5; “Free” CO2 molecules at the surface, is only 0.5%; CO2 out-migration is minimal, given the conditions.
The oceans are a major sink of CO2 (human + natural) in the atmosphere
https://tos.org/oceanography/assets/docs/14-4_feely.pdf
.
“This event will also be live-streamed for those who cannot attend in person.”
Be sure to inform all the MSM- as I’m sure they’ll want to broadcast some of it. /s
In Belgium 20 years ago the greens and liberals decided to close nuclear power plant by 2025. Now they haev to extend and will cost 500 million of tax payer money. I still wonder when we can start enjoying that cheap green energy.
Politicians have a phrase for “when we can” etc and it goes like this:
Jam tomorrow.
Needless to say, ‘jam tomorrow’ is an expression for a never-fulfilled promise, or for some pleasant event in the future, which is never likely to materialise…. Hat tip to Lweis Carroll.
Lewis Carroll…
I do hope Benny will cast well founded doubt on the role of CO2 on the climate as well as emphasizing Net Zero futility. What chances of checking the Keeling curve? None.
The German summer temperatures and the clouds
When the sun “pops” in midsummer and a cloud moves in front of the sun, you immediately feel a refreshing cooling. This is an everyday, mundane experience. Clouds provide shade and help lower temperatures on summer days. This is different in winter, when diffuse solar radiation accounts for a larger proportion. Cold winter nights are always accompanied by clear skies, while a blanket of clouds keeps you warm. Overall, cloud cover is a powerful climate factor that has literally dwarfed the greenhouse effect of carbon dioxide, at least in the last 20-25 years, as shown by several satellite studies ( https://doi.org/10.3390/cli11090179 ). .
Krishna, your linked reference article by Soon, Connolly, et al is very good, and should be required reading for all us armchair climatologists…
“..Scotland was constrained by cuts to the capital funding it receives from the British government…”
There’s nothing so unimportant that you can’t spend someone else’s money on it.
“It’s always so attractive,” Milton Friedman said, “to be able to do good at somebody else’s expense.”
The SNP government is so incompetent that it can’t even spend someone else’s money when it is there to be spent.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/why-snp-ministers-are-reportedly-set-to-hand-back-450m-of-eu-funding-to-brussels/ar-BB1nu1BR
Remember that if you are not in the ”green” camp you must be a far right neo-Nazi. The problem is that the nazis would have been in the ”green” camp.
One has to wonder how much solar energy can be generated in the Netherlands (> 52 degrees latitude) or Scotland (> 55 degrees latitude) in autumn and winter. Meanwhile, both countries are relatively close to the North Sea oilfields.
I’m not sure about Scotland, but there has been a revolt of Dutch farmers against proposed restrictions on food production, supposedly to reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides from fertilizer. If these farmers show up at the ballot box, there could be a hard right turn in Holland.
The problem being that farmers are far outnumbered by deluded city dwellers that believe in the imaginary ‘crisis.’
And said city dwellers are too stupid to see that they are voting themselves into starvation.
European consumers and voters have good reason to reject the EU’s climate policies. Renewables like wind and solar are not only costing people more for their energy but also they have never proved on any large scale anywhere to be able to supplant fossil fuels, hydro or nuclear in the first place. Yet politicians fell for the dream world theories of those who stood to benefit from a switch to wind and solar, and saddled citizens across most of the continent with higher energy bills for products that have continually been proved to be of limited reliability. The whole thing just sounds like the promotion of EVs with a few variations. So if voters want to show their common sense, they’d be wise to choose candidates who favor a common-sense approach to energy policies, not fantasy chasers.
Keep up the good work.