In the article “Climate Change: How Heatwaves are Affecting Power Grids,” Sustainability Magazine (SM) claims that human-caused climate change is increasing the frequency and intensity of heat waves, which are allegedly placing growing strain on power grids worldwide. This claim is at best, highly misleading, and at worst, outright false. Data does not support the notion that heat waves are increasing in frequency or intensity on a global scale. Evidence instead suggests that localized temperature increases, especially in urban areas where power grids are concentrated, are primarily driven by the Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect—not global climate change. Evidence also strongly suggests that to the extent power grids are being stretched to the limits it is due to the addition of intermittent power in the form of industrial wind and solar facilities to the grid.
“Human-caused climate change has increased the frequency and intensity of heatwaves since the 1950s and is set to continue to do so according to the World Meteorological Organisation,” says SM. “As temperatures continue to stay hot, power grids and markets are facing strain.”
The narrative pushed by SM is belied by the fact that there is no long-term upward trend in heat wave frequency or intensity when global datasets are correctly adjusted for the UHI effect. For example, Climate Realism carefully analyzed heat wave claims in several articles, here, here, and here, which explain that despite fluctuations year to year, the occurrence of heat waves over the last century has not trended upward globally. In fact, the hottest years in U.S. history for sustained heat waves remain in the 1930s, a period with significantly lower atmospheric carbon dioxide levels than today.
It is critical to emphasize that heat waves are driven by weather patterns, particularly persistent high-pressure systems that block cooler air from moving into a region. These atmospheric blocking patterns are not new, nor are they caused by minor increases in the global average temperature. The distinction between weather and climate is often blurred in popular reporting, but they are fundamentally different. Weather is immediate and local; climate is long-term and regional or global. Heat waves are, and always have been, weather events.
The UHI effect is a well-documented phenomenon where cities experience significantly higher temperatures than surrounding rural areas due to heat retention by concrete, asphalt, and other man-made surfaces. This effect can elevate temperatures at the very locations where electrical infrastructure resides, potentially exacerbating stress on those systems. However, this localized warming is often misinterpreted as evidence of widespread, climate-driven heat wave intensification. In reality, it is a localized artifact of urbanization and poor siting of weather stations, not a signal of planetary-scale change.
The article’s claim that 2025 has already seen heat waves striking China, the United States, Canada, France, and the United Kingdom is presented as though this constitutes evidence of a crisis. Yet the historical record shows that heat waves have periodically occurred in these regions, throughout history, long before the modern industrial era, sometimes simultaneously. There is currently no sound data to support the idea that simultaneous heat waves in multiple countries are exclusively a modern phenomenon caused by fossil fuels. Heat waves are episodic weather events, not unprecedented crises.
Furthermore, the suggestion that the power grid is under exceptional strain due to climate-induced heat waves is a deflection from the real problem: energy policy failures. As covered in detail on Watts Up With That in the articles “Media Chases ‘Climate Enhanced’ Heat Waves, Misses Data Showing They are Less Frequent” and “The Grid Speaks,” power grids in the U.S. and Europe are increasingly fragile because reliable baseload generation from coal and nuclear plants has been intentionally phased out in favor of intermittent renewable sources like wind and solar. These renewable sources often underperform during peak demand events, including heat waves, exacerbating grid instability. Solar panels, for example, lose efficiency, meaning the power they generate declines, during periods of high heat.
SM acknowledges that solar panel efficiency drops by up to 25% during heat waves without a hint of irony. If hot weather undermines solar power output during periods of peak electricity demand, that is a glaring indictment of our growing dependence on solar energy, not a call to double down on it. This vulnerability to heat is a well-known design flaw of solar panels, yet the article glosses over it in favor of advocating more renewable energy.
Also, extended heatwaves are regularly accompanied by no or low wind currents, one reason heat domes or heat waves linger over multiple days. When that occurs wind turbines aren’t generating power, either.
In “Powering through the heat: how 2024 heatwaves reshaped electricity demand, “ Ember’s analyst claims that higher air conditioning use is causing grid stress, this conveniently ignores that robust grids with sufficient dispatchable power have historically handled peak loads without widespread blackouts. The problem is not ramped up air conditioner use—it’s that grid operators in most western countries have been forced, by politicians, to heavily rely on solar and wind power sources that can’t always deliver power when it’s most needed, as seen in the figure below:
SM’s mention of power plants reducing output due to warm cooling water is also framed as though it’s a new, climate-driven problem. In reality, power plants have always had to manage cooling limitations during hot weather, and operational procedures to address this have been in place for decades. This is not a new vulnerability, nor does it signify an accelerating climate crisis.
Heat waves are not a novel threat, nor are they becoming more dangerous due to a minor uptick in average global temperatures. They are part of natural weather variability and have occurred throughout history, including during periods when global temperatures were cooler than today. For example, Climate Realism shows that heat waves in the 1930s were both longer and more severe than anything experienced in recent decades, even as carbon dioxide levels were far lower.
Blackouts during heat waves are dangerous, but blaming such failures on climate change instead of on poorly managed energy policies and fragile grids dominated by weather-dependent renewables is a complete abdication of responsibility.
In closing, Sustainability Magazine should be ashamed of this sloppy, one-sided piece that parrots climate alarm talking points without the slightest attempt to critically examine the underlying data or consider alternative explanations increasingly stressed power grids. This article reads less like journalism and more like advocacy masquerading as science. It is precisely this sort of lazy, echo-chamber reporting that erodes public trust and undermines rational discourse on energy and climate. If Sustainability Magazine wants to be taken seriously, it would do well to start by doing its homework.
Anthony Watts is a senior fellow for environment and climate at The Heartland Institute. Watts has been in the weather business both in front of, and behind the camera as an on-air television meteorologist since 1978, and currently does daily radio forecasts. He has created weather graphics presentation systems for television, specialized weather instrumentation, as well as co-authored peer-reviewed papers on climate issues. He operates the most viewed website in the world on climate, the award-winning website wattsupwiththat.com.
Originally posted at ClimateRealism
The only thing that’s “growing in intensity” about any weather event is the media hype. We’ve been there, done that, for all of them.
The problem is the shortening of the winter season, and the lengthening of the summer. Certainly farmers in Australia have noticed. They have also noticed that rainfall in the South West of Australia has dropped by 15% since 1975. It’s close to that in the South East. This has been “balanced” by a major increase in rainfall in the Northern latitudes, leading to increased flooding. So it’s fun all round. Craig Kelly (look him up) characterizes this by saying rainfall over Australia hasn’t changed since 1975. Unfortunately, he’s right.
And this is all pinned on CO2 then? Pfft. Climate/weather fluctuates constantly and for long to short periods. Not much you can do about it as the earth-system is much more in control of such things than a trace atmospheric gas is…a gas that is CRITICAL to life on earth.
Every year the alarmistas in Europe are getting ready to push the panic button every time it gets above 25 degrees Celsius. They have been patiently waiting through the cold and damp until they and their mates can finally play the alarm game again. And they LOVE heatwaves because those periods signify Climate Change Alarm. They like to see people (allegedly) die from heat as to use the evidence for their alarmism. A few days ago on BBC radio the news presenter talked about a woman who ‘possibly’ died from a heartattack caused by the recent heatwave. I..kid..you..not. ‘possibly’. In the official BBC news. Trusted sources apparently..
Weather dependent sources can’t handle cold snaps, either, as 2021 showed in Texas. Unraveling subsidy mining is proving to be a very slow process.
With articles like that, Sustainability Magazine won’t find itself sustainable.
Just like climate alarmist Scientific American is no longer scientific nor American.
When climate fantasy finally hits the wall of reality, reality always wins. Some pending examples:
Separate but related comment. The Congressionally mandated US 2014 National Climate Assessment (NCA) chapter 1 used worsening heat waves as one of five ‘climate change’ induced worsening weather extreme examples. (The others included blizzards (irony lost on them), floods, droughts (irony again lost), and tropical storms.) Essay ‘Credibility Conundrums’ in ebook Blowing Smoke showed all five 2014 NCA alarms were either contrived, false, or both.
The other problem with the US 2014 NCA was that in 2012, the IPCC itself issued a special report on worsening weather extremes, SREX, saying there weren’t any.
Same tripe in the most recent NCA.
Glossy propaganda that did not align with the IPCC summary.
Fifty years ago, I studied electrical engineer at the University of Queensland. Our depertament had a world class high voltage laboratory when we could recreate lightning strikes. The research effort was aimed at making the South East Queensland grid less susceptible to lightning strike, which often blacked out large regions due to faults from lighting strike.
The research over a number of years gradually improved the resilience of the regional grid from adverse weather. Now we have climate botherers doing the reverse – making the grid far more susceptible to weather events.
“… a world class high voltage laboratory…”
If that was still the same lab that they had built when they moved from George St to St Lucia in the 1950’s, then the chap who designed it would appreciate the ‘world class’ compliment. My father.
Dam hot here in Wokeachusetts. But my garden loves it- as long as I spend much of the day keeping the plants hydrated! And I have 2 bird baths which I clean up and fill with fresh water every day. I see the birds love them. I watched a robin today truly enjoying it. She stayed for a long time splashing herself. This seems to be a big year for rabbits. I keep chasing them out of the yard/garden before they can eat all my lettuce. I’ll be eating tomatoes real soon. I planted them in early June, earlier than recommended since we can get late frosts. But now they’re growing like crazy. I planted several varieties. My 6 fig trees are also doing great. Got about 60 figs that are maturing fast. Fresh tomatoes and figs. Don’t get any better. 🙂
B-b-but….it’s a catastrophe. Pay the govt to fix it! /sarc
Well, it is New England- the weather mostly sucks. Get one or two days/month that are fabulous- the rest are too hot, too cold, too dry, too wet. That’s NORMAL here. I should have moved to the SW when young. I noticed that in my several long camping trips out there, my sinus problems vanish. And I love seeing mostly blue skies- and I love the geology and flora and fauna.
Very nice Anthony. There are a couple simple solutions.
Number one we know there is an upper limit to how much wind and solar can power the grid. Figure out that limit (insuring a large safety limit). Because there is a limit all mandatory requirements giving wind and solar preference are withdrawn.
Number two give all weather/climate related government departments 72 hours to stop using class five stations for any official purpose. Failure to comply will result in immediate management firing, lots of it. After a suitable amount of time do the same thing with class four. These actions will eliminate most ammunition for the CAGW clowns.
Our weather/climate departments can and should be the best in the world. We need to insure that they are.
USCRN (installed around 2005) is probably as good as surface sites can get.
It shows a bulge/step through the 2016 El Nino and a bit of a spike at the 2024 El Nino…
…. otherwise it shows basically no warming.
UK Met is so incompetent that well over half of sites they have installed this century are Class 3,4 or 5.
Australia’s BoM has also made zero effort to set up sites that are not likely to be corrupted by urban warming etc.
I would like to hear people’s opinion about the energy grid mix and the percentage/ limits of unreliables.
The trouble is i think that unreliables will always involve running a two tier system so maybe less= good?
We have run the experiment and we can state conclusions..
Forty years ago when I worked in the utility industry, the push was against acid rain. The goal was to get rid of coal fired generation (nuclear was dying thanks to TMI), but lots of smart people figured out a way to (expensively) remove sulfur and nitrogen oxides, and keep coal plants in operation. CO2 is different–you can’t burn coal or natural gas or oil without emitting CO2, and a lot of it. The whole point is to get rid of coal and other fossil fuels. Now the fossil fuel opponents are realizing that “renewable” energy simply cannot replace reliable dispatchable baseload power plants when the goal is keeping the lights on. At this point I don’t think they care about keeping the lights on, maybe until they are now on.
PS after all that, the acidity of rain is about the same. So lots of money for no results.
The acidity of rain is true, but it is partly do to dissolved CO2 creating carbonic acid.
CO2 is roughly 420,000 ppb (parts per billion).
SO2 was (when acid rain become the nova scare) roughly 400 ppb (depending on which report).
Based on numbers, bet on CO2.
Nukes… I am all for nukes. Not because of the dreaded, much feared global warming but because it is the most bang for the buck and they will be absolutely necessary for our energy rich and dependent needs going forward, but the natural gas, oil etc… will need to be around for quite a while in interim.
Repeatedly, I have presented data showing Australian heatwaves derived from official raw data going back to the 1850s.
The Establishment claims that our heatwaves are becoming longer, hotter and more frequent is not supported. The basis for their questionable claim comes from studies that seldom commence before 1950, that often use adjusted historical temperatures and that can be difficult to reproduce on a national scale because of the use of area-based weighting factors to combine individual weather station temperature data.
The Australian population is largely around the coastline, but the heatwaves are commonly generated 1,000 km distant, in the hot centre where there are few people. Some weather and people factors reported for north America are different for Australia. However, we reach much the same conclusions, that these common weather events are not cause for global fright about harm. Many studies show that cold weather is more to be feared than hot weather, if fear is your chosen weapon for manipulating people. Geoff S
Totally off topic.
Did anyone know that 7th July is World Chocolate Day ?
Yes, and I had a Snickers Bar and later a chocolate chip brownie with ice cream.
Cadbury make a block called “Black Forest” which I am rather partial to 🙂
Their “Old Gold” dark chocolate “Bailey’s” is also a fav. ! 🙂
Don’t you realize that a burning world melts chocolate?
/h
Lights Out, Europe: The Cost of Brussels’ Energy Fantasy
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/lights-out-europe-the-cost-of-brussels-energy-fantasy
By Javier Villamor
.
Spain’s leading energy companies – Iberdrola, Endesa, and EDP – remain stunned. After the nationwide blackout that cut power across Spain on April 28, the government has yet to provide a clear explanation or take responsibility…
.
The companies, represented by the employers’ association Aelec, have denounced “surprising omissions” in the official investigation.
They demand that the extreme voltage spikes recorded in the days leading up to the collapse be included in the analysis.
They have criticized the preliminary report from ENTSO-E—the European network of electricity operators—for claiming that “the system was operating normally” just seconds before the failure.
Meanwhile, severe voltage swings were recorded, going beyond safety limits and triggering automatic shutdowns of high-voltage substations and key refineries.
How many economic losses from climate-related events has Europe suffered since 1980?
This episode is far more than an isolated incident.
It is a metaphor for the erratic direction taken by the European Union’s energy policy.
In the name of climate change, Brussels has embarked on a radical overhaul of its energy model driven not by technical or economic realities, but by an ideological agenda imposed by political and bureaucratic elites.
.
What was marketed as a smooth transition toward renewable energy has turned into a forced green agenda, with no viable alternatives and little regard for its impact on competitiveness, system stability, or citizens’ well-being.
At the root of this drift lies the REPowerEU plan, launched after the start of the war in Ukraine with the stated aim of “fully decoupling” Europe from Russian energy.
.
What initially appeared to be a justified geo-strategic measure quickly became, in the hands of the European Commission, a pretext to push through renewable energies at any cost.
This led to a rushed and uneven transition, with citizens and businesses footing the bill.
.
This leap into the void has destabilized key sectors such as agriculture, transport, and industry, forcing them to absorb rising costs without receiving real technological upgrades.
Countries like Germany, which shut down their nuclear plants, due to liberal woke mantras, have now had to reopen coal-fired stations in a contradictory reversal.
Meanwhile, state propaganda continues to promote green energy self-sufficiency, while households face record electricity bills and companies lose competitiveness.
.
The structural failures of the European power grid are becoming increasingly evident. The continental grid was designed for dispatchable, stable and predictable hydro, gas, oil, coal, and nuclear sources.
The mass introduction of weather-dependent, variable/intermittent, grid-destabilizing sources, like wind and solar, makes larger and larger imbalances increasingly more difficult and more costly/kWh to manage.
Wth too little wind or sun, and insufficient, hot standby, quick-reacting plant capacity (MW), generation collapses;
With too much wind and sun, the grid becomes dangerously overloaded, and major, timely curtailments are required.
.
On April 28th, the Iberian Peninsula experienced those consequences firsthand.
Abnormally high voltage levels were detected in several substations throughout the morning.
To grasp the gravity: a “voltage oscillation” involves a sudden and significant fluctuation in the grid’s voltage, which can damage equipment, trigger automatic disconnections, or, in extreme cases, cause a total blackout. .
.
At the Lancha substation, voltage reached nearly 250 kV on a line rated for 220.
Another line, rated at 400 kV, surpassed 470 kV just before the collapse.
According to Aelec, these anomalies began as early as 10:00 a.m.
.
Beyond technical and political issues, the forced energy transition takes a human toll.
European households are paying more for electricity, hitting middle- and lower-income families especially hard.
EV transport, promoted by lawyers, legislators/bureaucrats, enviros, without any technical knowledge, is raising the cost of mobility due to a lack of reliable charging infrastructure.
.
Farmers and truckers, already squeezed by unmanageable climate regulations, face growing expenses while being pressured to make investments they cannot afford, because business income is poor, with a near-zero, real-growth European GDP, and stagnant real wages.
.
“European households are paying more for electricity, hitting middle- and lower-income families especially hard.”
AKA Climate Justice. How best to help “our most vulnerable…”
“Helping the most vulnerably”, due to an expensive hoax imposed on the people by the elites, will screw all of us in the end, unless we the people revolt using the guillotine.