Well, at least they’re not “adjusting” the readings…..
David Wojick
November 23, 2025 2:23 am
COP 30 dropped talk of phasing out fossil fuels. A lot of developing countries are wisely saying they need to develop their fossil fuel resources in order to grow their economies, so they will not commit to a UN mandate to phase them out by a specific date. The Africans were among the first to object to the proposed termination roadmap. They are wising up. Great news!
I saw a news report on it. The irish expert IPCC contributor told us that the world is focused on less important short-term problems instead of Climate. Like wars. We should obviously ignore wars and focus on Climate Change…
The idiocy is even that quite a few people push for both more war and more solar/ wind. The europeans carry that lethal combi. The EU commission wants to create Eurobonds ( ie borrowed money to fund Eurobonds lended out w interest) to collectively fund their madness which future generations will pay for. US style.
I bet the US is looking at this and see that, once again, the europeans go out of their way to shoot themselves.
Developing a roadmap is often one way to get paid for wishful thinking.
Back to their hypocrisy, one of the earlier videos of the COP31 fire evacuation seemed to show dozens of diesel generators powering the venue. I haven’t found that video again after a brief search.
At the time, I did not yet know of the availability of the ERA5 reanalysis model values of hourly parameters, including the “vertical integral of energy conversion” I have been posting about. More here about that.
I also did not know yet, in November 2021, that the NOAA GOES East Band 16 images were so easily available and could be composed into video form to better understand the performance of the planet as a longwave emitter and to counter the concept of the atmosphere as a passive radiative blanket.
So what’s my point for today? Patience. With myself, to keep learning. And with others, as we all need time to listen, learn, and express ourselves effectively.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
P.S. Refute the core claim of the “climate” movement, not just the lunacy of decarbonization and the “net zero” goals!
P.S. Refute the core claim of the “climate” movement, not just the lunacy of decarbonization and the “net zero” goals!
Have to differ from you on this one. There are two great irrational manias connected with global warming. One is the notion that there is a climate crisis caused by human emissions, when there is probably only a modest and unalarming warming.
So for a long time skeptics have been tackling this more or less head on, disputing (for instance) the hockey stick or the models, or the attempts to connect extreme weather (which is mostly not at all extreme on a longer time period) with emissions.
On the whole this line of attack hasn’t succeeded in reversing or even weakening the climate movement, which has been largely successful in banning CAGW skepticism from the mainstream media and airwaves, and which has fairly successfully stigmatized dissent in the public mind as bad faith denialism.
You find few prominent people even today who are prepared to say publicly that there is no crisis, there is at most modest and unthreatening warming, and organs like the Washington Post, NPR, BBC, Guardian still continue to hype alarmism.
This is because the arguments on the scientific claims are detailed and often quite obscure. Is there, for instance, a hot spot? Well, maybe there is a warm spot. But what does it show, if anything? Pretty soon everyone turns off, and the Guardian and BBC continue to publish stories about bad weather under the heading of ‘climate crisis’.
The problem with this approach is that it allowed the other great irrationality to continue more or less unchallenged. That is the idea that we could at all, and in particular could cost effectively, electrify heating and transport, deriving the power to do so from wind and solar.
However, as Western countries have seriously tried to implement this policy in the last couple of decades the real political weakness of the global warming agenda has become clear. The energy policies are totally ineffective both in reducing global (or even local) emissions and in delivering affordable power. Many billions later this is finally becoming unavoidably clear. You can look at the prime cases – in the US, New York State and California, the UK, Australia, Germany. The UK in particular is headed straight for blackouts added to its absurdly high prices if it continues on the present path,
My view is that this second irrationality is the key thing to hit on. First, because the consequences of energy failure are imminent and very visible Anyone can check what their UK electricity bills are, just look at them. No-one can fail to notice a power cut. Second, the human toll of the policies is enormous. The old die every winter in the UK from fuel poverty, and its only getting worse. Businesses are closing because of high energy costs.
These are things you can point to and demonstrate that the whole mad Net Zero agenda is behind them. I conclude there is a moral imperative to focus on energy policy and not climate science, because its energy policy that is doing the social, human and economic damage now and in the next five years. And there is a practical political imperative, its the place where the argument can be won in the short term.
The movement will not rot from the head down, but from the bottom up. Once the energy claims are refuted and the policies repealed, the climate alarmism will fade out of itself. Do it the other way around, and you end up in a swamp with no way out while those in charge of the disaster continue with their eyes tight shut wittering about ‘denialism’.
I would make the comparison to gender. It was futile to argue about trans ideology on high level scientific grounds. The thing that has sunk the trans movement is documentation on the consequences of the medical treatments being recommended, the effects on women when they lose segregated changing and toilet facilities, the dangers to girls from sport with male participants. A key moment was the realization that convicted male rapists were being sent to womens prisons.
You can argue till you are blue in the face over how many genders there are, is there really a sense of gender at 3, 6, 14, for instance. But confront the voting public with the question, do you really want to give men access to womens changing rooms? Do you really want to send male rapists to womens prisons? Then people suddenly know what they think. They don’t care about fashionable ideas in gender theory. But they know what practical policies they do and don’t want, and they speak and vote accordingly, and the fog lifts.
The climate analogy is to the CASS report. Focus on the policy facts of what alarmists want to do. That way you will succeed, because whether they are right or wrong about the crisis, they are demonstrably wrong about energy. And you’ll save a huge amount of social and human misery from the crazy policies they advocate.
I would argue that is a little previous. The medical establishment has really lost the plot and they haven’t given up…
Details of a new UK clinical trial to assess the risks and benefits of puberty-blocking drugs in children who question their gender have been announced.
Researchers from King’s College London say the trial will involve around 220 children under the age of 16 who are going through puberty, and will examine the impact of the drugs on their physical, social and emotional wellbeing. Some clinicians and campaigners question whether the trial is ethical. – BBC
It is wholly unethical. I call it Mengele syndrome.
Yes, agreed. To do double blind tests of puberty blockers in the light of the Cass Report is medical malpractice. If you want to test anything, counseling would be a fairly harmless thing to test. First, do no harm.
Yes, convicted male rapists have been sent to women’s prisons in some jurisdictions, primarily due to the implementation of policies allowing incarcerated individuals to be housed according to their self-identified gender identity rather than their biological sex or assigned sex at birth [1]. This has been a controversial issue, with concerns raised about the safety and security of female inmates.
While is was at it:
Yes, Drag Queen Story Hour (DQSH) events are happening in various locations, including libraries, schools, bookstores, and community spaces across the United States and other countries. While they have faced controversy in some areas, local organizations continue to host them, and the American Library Association (ALA) supports libraries that host these programs.
Google AI is good for lots of stuff. Yes it’s bias is left-wing and I know it.
And you obviously have time to squander on it. I have no faith in what other people have programmed. I trust my own judgement. Filtering out the biased output of AI only proves the bias in the algorithms.
And how do you find those other resources? A search engine perhaps, programmed by other people? Editors, who are other people?
AI is just another tool. Ignoring it doesn’t make it go away. Refusing to use it properly doesn’t make it less useful. You presumably know how to choose which side of a metric/inch measure tape to use.
Knowing how to use tools is what makes tools useful.
Yes, a search engine programmed by other people, but DIGGING, going past the top results, making associations based on those results. “AI’s” (actually LLMs) don’t normally go that deep, and in my experience it’s harder to direct them there than it is to get there on your own.
I use copilot, not google, and I have found it good for some things: helping create ad copy for my business, making “lifestyle” product images for my business, suggesting meals based on given ingredients, tedious rewriting of software config files.
The concentration of methane in air is ca. 1.93 ppmv. One cubic meter of air has a mass of 1,290 g and contains 0.0014 g methane at STP.
The reason the concentration of methane is so low is that discharges of lightning generates oxygen atoms which will oxidize the methane.
Discharges of lightning generate ozone which will readily oxidize methane to CO2 and H2O.
Methane is slightly soluble in cold water. One liter of cold water can hold up to 35 mls of methane. The vast cold polar oceans absorb methane which slowly diffuse to the ocean floor. There under high pressure methane forms a solid clathrate known as methane ice.
We really do not have to worry about methane causing any global warming. We also do not have to worry about any global warming because in many regions of the earth there are long cold and snowy winters like in Canada where I live.
Google AI is down right ignorant and know nothing about global warming.
LLM? Undefined acronyms are a negative with respect to effective communication. I had to search to find out someone earlier said Artificial Intelligence is really LLM without bothering to say what LLM stands for.
Convicted rapist claiming to be women should only be sent to women’s prisons after being treated with chemical castration drugs. There should be no objection as these are the same drugs used as male puberty blockers that medical professionals and parents accept for their transitioning minor children.
What’s wrong with physical castration? No dangly bits = not a man. Maybe a woman, but maybe not. Certainly more acceptable to penis-less females in changing rooms, saunas, and so on.
All a bit silly, really. Mind you, if you can use all this nonsense to your advantage, why not?
The real logical issue with this stuff is that people are demanding to be treated in accordance with what they call their gender.
However, look at the lists of genders – and there are several in circulation listing between 3 and 100+ of them. And you will notice that they do not include male and female.
Sometimes the trans movement seems to assume there are two genders and two sexes. This gives you a 2 x 2 matrix, so in this view you could be of the male sex and the female gender.
But you in fact find no trans advocates who are prepared to say there are two genders and they are male and female. It would at least make logical sense, the demand would be I am a woman by gender so treat me like a woman by sex.
But that isn’t what the ideologues say. They say at the same time that there are these different 10s of genders which don’t include male and female, but that men who declare their gender to be female should be treated as women.
Why, if female is not a gender? Your gender is free spirit? Why does that mean you go to a women’s jail? You say your gender is female? It isn’t, there is no such thing as a female gender.
It makes absolutely no sense as soon as you spell it out. As well as being scientifically wrong. Think about it again, is there such a think as a gendered brain? Well, how many varieties of it are there?
You have to watch the pea under the thimble.
the argument will shift without warning between the 2 x 2 matrix and the many tens, and the problem is that consistency requires the abandonment of half of the trans ideology positions.
Why for instance is the surgery ‘gender confirming’? What gender is it affirming, and how is it doing that?
It was futile to argue about trans ideology on high level scientific grounds.
In the first place it would have been stupid to try to argue on scientific grounds. And in the second place I am not aware of anyone who ever tried.
It is a classic example of something you cannot reason someone out of after they believed themself into it.
Furthermore—and this is almost never mentioned even by the sceptics—the vast majority of “trans-women” (men who pretend they are women) are autogynephiles. It is a paraphilia; a fetish. It rarely has anything to do with gender dysphoria, which is real mental illlness that deserves treatment.
Then there are the men who realized there is no point risking jail for up-skirting when you can just pull on a frock and go into the ladies locker room and have a good look around, and be called “stunningly brave” for doing so.
The thing that has sunk the trans movement is documentation on the consequences of the medical treatments being recommended, the effects on women when they lose segregated changing and toilet facilities, the dangers to girls from sport with male participants. A key moment was the realization that convicted male rapists were being sent to womens prisons.
The first, consequences to the transgenders themselves, only really matters to the transgenders themselves and their kith and kin. The general public, not so much.
The last, sending men to women’s prisons, I give about the same reach, but the lunacy factor gives it more weight, however diluted by general lack of concern for the well-being of prisoners who are not nice people.
The second, men in women’s bathrooms and locker rooms, had the best/worst combination of reach and impact. Only the wokest of the woke could deny the impact in face to face encounters, such as at city council and school board meetings. It takes an incredibly hard-hearted amoral woke scold to tell parents, to their face, that their concerns for their daughter are misplaced and selfish.
The third, especially in the form of men beating up women in Olympic boxing, I think was the capper, the real outrage beyond the Pale. Scolding parents at school board meetings is local. Men getting gold medals for literally beating women unconscious was on national TV and impossible to justify as “equality”.
You say, “I conclude there is a moral imperative to focus on energy policy and not climate science…”
I say DO BOTH, and find ways to express the key points more effectively.
My aim is to explain the physical misconceptions using valid observational data and selected modeling outputs in the simplest way possible for wider appreciation of the core technical error(s) on which climate alarm has been based all along.
You are correct that skeptics of climate alarm have used numerous lines of objection to climate danger that have been relatively ineffective. There are better arguments to refute the central claim.
I note that the U.S. President is doing both – most visibly on energy systems, and more quietly on the “science”.
The easiest argument is UHI. Not even the most avid CAGW proponent can adequately explain away the fact that developed spaces have higher temperatures than rural areas. The common temperature displays in autos have shown that to most. At that point, well mixed CO2 disappears as a cause.
‘The movement will not rot from the head down, but from the bottom up. Once the energy claims are refuted and the policies repealed, the climate alarmism will fade out of itself.’
Climate, ‘race’, gender, etc. are some of the current weapons in the Left’s arsenal to overthrow liberalism. They’ve been very successful to date, largely because they long ago captured public education and the media, as well as many other institutions, e.g., we’ve all recently witnessed an American pope worshipping a block of ice.
Unlike some, I don’t see this movement reversing just because it hits a few practical snags, e.g., the lights start going out. In fact, history tells us that is precisely when the Left will really pile up the corpses of its opponents in earnest to eliminate those who are sabotaging its ‘plans’.
If you dive into the data, you’ll see the warming is in the overnight lows. The daily average is made up of the afternoon high and the overnight low. If you average them, you get the average. Then they average all the other highs and lows for that day.
But if you break out just the overnight lows, you’ll see these are climbing. And as Willis has said many times, often with great causative demonstrations, the daily high is limited by water evaporating, rising, condensing as reflective clouds reflecting heat away, and further cooling by precipitation.
The climate drama is merely representative of the deeper game of grift that has been successfully integrated into many aspects of every day life – because it works. And the folks that implement this process just laugh when the discussion is about details/facts, or lack of. The best explanation of this process is to long to present here, but the basic outline comes from a look at a similar process exposed to solving the LA homelessness issue.
There are seven main components:
“Crisis manufacturing;
Nonprofit laundering;
Metrics don’t matter;
Bureaucratize capture;
Political firewall;
Media compliance; and
Forever budget.
It’s a high-yield crisis economy – where the victims stay poor and the administrators get rich.”
Details are presented between 3:40 and 8:02 in the interview – while this is about the homeless issue, I believe the processes presented are well represented in the climate change game as well.
Your suggestion about sticking to electricity bills makes a lot of sense. Most of you guys are smarter than I and can argue with people with limited science schooling. Many of my acquaintances took the minimum science courses in order to get their degree in business, social/computer sciences, art, medical, etc. degrees. I cannot discuss science or religion (climate science) with them.
I still remember one of my acquaintances telling me he knew how to solve the energy problem. He noted that after power went through a circuit, the remaining power was just shorted into the ground. He believed we should be banking that leftover power. Pointing out that there was no power left on the ground side, and that without connecting to ground no current would pass through the circuit didn’t faze him at all. How do you talk intelligently to people with that kind of scientific insight?
He left me saying that he knew that with my background I wouldn’t let his idea go uninvestigated. He would love to learn how I changed the world. I did my best to avoid him after that.
Hi David. That’s an interesting comment. Thanks for the links and the reminder to have patience with ourselves and one another, as each of us can only learn and grow in understanding in our own way and at our own pace.
Re.: ‘P.S. Refute the core claim of the “climate” movement,…’
I’m not sure what that is, to tell you the truth. The movement’s core claim seems to depend on whichever part of the movement we’re talking about – i.e. ‘scientists’, media, politicians, activists, etc.. They all appear to be asserting the same specious core claim, but when you dig deep enough beneath the layers of blind assumptions that comprise their self-rationalising gobbledegook you find that their ostensible core claims are all different. The whole movement is a chimera concocted out of make-believe, it seems to me. (See Wictionary, especially #8 on list of meanings.)
Thanks for taking the time to reply. The core claim can be stated in multiple valid forms. Here’s one formulation of it:
A rising concentration of the IR-active substances CO2, CH4, and N2O in the atmosphere must be expected to drive sensible heat gain on land, in the oceans, and in the lower atmosphere.
As you note, there are numerous other objections to the use of natural hydrocarbons as fuel (e.g. emissions of PM2.5), but this one is the reason for the UNFCCC, IPCC, Paris Accords, etc. to have ever come into existence to begin with to push policy.
Thanks for stating the specific core claim that you had in mind, David. However, that formulation is completely unquantified and is therefore impossible even to test, let alone to refute – scientifically, at any rate. Personally, I don’t feel any attraction to the challenge of trying to refute something that I believe is neither refutable nor irrefutable with the amount of scientific information about Earth’s climate-system that is currently available to us. I much prefer to pursue the advancement of science for its own sake in ways that do not require me to take an adversarial position for or against the predetermined positions of others on issues of social or political significance.
Thanks for your further reply. “I much prefer to pursue the advancement of science for its own sake…” Me too. If the core claim had been held quietly without morphing into advocacy for restrictive and destructive policy action, there would be no urgency to actively oppose it with evidence. Be well, even as we may disagree somewhat.
A rising concentration of the IR-active substances CO2, CH4, and N2O in the atmosphere must be expected to drive sensible heat gain on . . .
As John Tyndall’s experiments showed, this is the complete opposite of reality. Try and find a consistent description of the greenhouse effect, and you will be sorely disappointed.
Here’s NASA’s –
The greenhouse effect is when heat is trapped near Earth’s surface by greenhouse gases, maintaining a warmer temperature.
Unfortunately, heat cannot be “trapped”, and a “warmer temperature” is just meaningless word salad. For example, surface temperatures vary between roughly 90 C and -90 C, both of which are “warmer” than -100 C.
However, both are obviously colder than +100 C, which was the minimum temperature when the first liquid water condensed from an atmosphere – which contained the most H2O “greenhouse gas” in the Earth’s history! And still the surface cooled!
So I hope you will pardon me if I describe the NASA administration as being ignorant and gullible for allowing the “greenhouse effect” fantasy to be promoted on the NASA website, or even guilty of conspiracy to defraud the Government by continuing to pay obvious fraudsters in their employ.
From the content at that link: “Pillar C is climate modeling—the GCMs.”
Yes. The pre-stabilized-by-tuning GCMs are structured to assume the core claim as I stated it above to JP. This is given semantic support at the outset by having adopted the “forcing” + “feedback” framing of the investigation of climate system response to incremental CO2. Utterly circular, in my view.
Neil Pryke
November 23, 2025 3:25 am
What’s required is a once and for all defeat of the criminal philosophy behind it all…a lot of old men who will be dead one day…their younger successors need defeating before they get too arrogant…
― signed, someone American in 1960th. Or 1930s. Or…
Quondam
November 23, 2025 3:30 am
How much will a one degree rise in surface temperature increase earth’s outward flux of radiated energy? Legend would have it this is the most challenging calculation facing mankind. Or is that unadulterated Klimate Kool-Aid? To paraphrase, how much will a one volt rise increase the current in an electric circuit? In either case, one might well first assume linear dissipation with flux proportional to a potential difference. In the electric case, dissipation is given by W = J*(V1-V2) with J proportional to (V1-V2). In the thermal case, W = (J/T1)*(T1-T2) with J/T1 proportional to (T1-T2).
The expression for electric dissipation should be familiar to high school students. That for thermal dissipation is the Carnot Equation, the cornerstone of thermodynamics, although I’ve yet to see it so described. Given just three boundary parameters, 240W/m2, 285K and 220K, one may calculate a T1 increase of 0.82K sufficient to increase J by 3.7W/m2. No invocation of radiation nor convection nor equilibrium needed. At equilibrium, T1=T2 and dissipation is zero. As dissipation is otherwise necessarily positive, it is a minimum at equilibrium and, if analytic, will increase at least quadratically with changes of T2, i.e. linear dissipation.
But how do radiation, convection, clouds, aerosols, icebergs, etc., the bugaboos of climate modelers, come into play? They are implicit in the assumption that the given boundary temperatures lead to the given energy flux. While there are good arguments for linear dissipation near equilibrium, there is no guarantee this holds further away. To model this, we need look inside the box. Kevin Kilty has recently described an early model.
(https://wattsupwiththat.com/2025/10/07/from-the-surface-to-space).
Internal energy flux is partitioned into three fluxes two mimicking bidirectional radiation, one convection. In the current version, boundary fluxes for both radiation and convection are specified, e.g. (100, 140) and (240, 0) W/m2. Arbitrary polynomial functions matching these endpoints define explicit models. The temperature profile is that function minimizing deviations of total flux from 240 W/m2 and thermal sensitivity then found with a 0.01K change in T1. My current desktop takes 2 sec for 1000 point profiles. Extreme convection enhancements near the surface (or inhibition of radiation) may increase warming 10%. Converse enhancements decrease warming. Alas, I’ve yet to discover warming differing by more than 10% from basic linear dissipation theory.
Modtran does the calcs accurately enough for practical purposes….you just have to fool with localities, relative humidity, ground temp offset to achieve an understanding of what published climate papers are talking about and why half of them are wrong, and the other half are half correct.
strativarius
November 23, 2025 4:21 am
A message from our high priest.
“We are fighting for the roadmap for the transition away from fossil fuels, and we’ve determined that one way or another we won’t lose the momentum [towards that outcome] that we’ve built at this Cop,” he said. “There’s a big coalition that wants this, of developing and developed countries.” – Ed Miliband
Well, he’s still out to lunch. Closer to home the censorship ‘big push’ goes on…
A cross-party group of more than 30 Labour, Lib Dem, Green and other MPs has this week written to Ofcom, the broadcast regulator, to ask it to investigate whether Elon Musk’s social media platform is complying with the Online Safety Act. The letter follows research from the pro-censorship think tank the Centre for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH). It paints the platform formerly known as Twitter as a “a home for hate” under its new owner, alleging that antisemitism is “reaching millions” there. “For too long, X has been a source of abuse and hate,” says Joani Reid, Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on antisemitism, who led the letter. “We are calling on Ofcom to use every power available to it to take action and hold the platform to account for breaches of our online safety laws.” – Daily Sceptic
Two things can be true at the same time…. With Labour that’s generally true.
U.N. Climate Conference Rejects EU Demands to Commit to Fossil Fuel Phase-Out
One nation syndrome… the agreement calls on countries to “voluntarily” accelerate their climate action
The Canadian Prime Minister wants the oil sands to produce de-carbonized oil. I read that the cost to de-carbonize can be $10 to $20 per barrel on a barrel of oil selling for $50 to $60. This sounds like an economic “fools errand”. Surely this makes the product either expensive or unprofitable. Any thoughts on this observation from those in the know?
The energy returned on energy invested is relatively low for mined oil sands processes, compared to pumping oil out of an underground reservoir. The only “de-carbonizing” involved is reducing the amount of fuel it takes to produce and process the oil. But there is a huge amount of such oil available and a ready market for it in Canada’s next door neighbor. There is bit of an industry/government scam going on in Canada so that taxpayers pick up the cost of sequestering the CO2 produced…thus benefiting producers…while the “De-carbonizing story” allows the average information deficient yet eco-sensitive Canadian voter to swoon for the self proclaimed eco-friendly governing party who is protecting the population from the coming CO2 thermogeddon.…while still allowing the resource to be developed. It is an interesting exercise in tax revenue maximization and propagandized manipulation of the voting public.
It has been my experience that the various LLMs will all back-down if challenged about their claims. The problem is the laymen, who vote, who don’t know enough to challenge the claims and therefore accept the initial assertions at face value. Thus, the LLMs reinforce the paradigm accepted by the ignorant, but cover themselves against claims of misinformation or fraud by willingly acknowledging ‘making a mistake,’ when the ‘corrected’ information was always available to them. I don’t know how one avoids concluding that there is a conspiracy among the members of the mainstream media, who are promoting the LLMs, to convince the general public that fossil fuels are an existential threat.
By Dudley Gray .
Thirty years of Democrat power, interrupted only once, has left Maine in a sorry state. A chronological “lesson of failure” is necessary to explain just how badly Maine residents have been represented.
.
Besides closing the Maine Yankee nuclear power plant, Governor Angus King forced our two public utilities, CMP and Bangor Hydro, to divest their generating assets, primarily hydro-power dams. This law, enacted in 1999, caused the sale of the utilities to the Spaniards and the Canadians, respectively.
.
These actions, between 1995 and 2003, set the stage for the widespread adoption of wind and solar systems on a large scale, without any benefit to Maine ratepayers and to the environment.
Please keep in mind that electricity rates were 8.4 cents per kWh in 1995
Governor King left incoming Governor Baldacci a $1.1 billion structural deficit.
.
Then, Governor Baldacci, current vice-chairman of Avangrid, the Spanish subsidiary of Iberdrola, owner of CMP, gave us the Expedited Wind Law, which destroyed our mountaintops, ridges, and vistas, but still without any benefit to Maine ratepayers and the environment.
Governor Baldacci’s crowning achievement was to hand the incoming Republican Governor Paul LePage an even bigger $1.3 billion structural deficit.
.
Governor LePage challenged this travesty by freezing hiring, eliminating no-show jobs, cutting expenses, renegotiating the state liquor contract, and repaying Maine hospitals $750 million in Maine-Care bad debt.
He left office in 2019 and gave Governor Mills a $167.8 million surplus, which she and the Democrat legislature have squandered beyond belief.
As Janet Mills leaves office to run against Sen. Susan Collins, she hands the next occupant of the Blaine House a $949 million deficit.
.
We desperately need a conservative Republican Governor and sane legislature to stop the bleeding; otherwise, the state will end up statistically bankrupt, like Washington County.
.
Lastly, Maine has over 400 grid-scale windmills and over 2 million solar panels in 141 separate solar setups, while at the same time electricity rates are nearing $0.30/kWh, similar to Europe.
.
Somebody needs to explain the benefit to Maine’s native people and the benefit to the environment, and also who got rich on these all these scams, in addition to two of our above-mentioned Governors.
EXPENSIVE FLOATING OFFSHORE WINDMILLS IN IMPOVERISHED STATE OF MAINE https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/floating-offshore-wind-systems-in-the-impoverished-state-of-maine
.
Despite the meager floating offshore MW in the world, pro-wind politicians, bureaucrats, etc., aided and abetted by the lapdog Main Media and “academia/think tanks”, in the impoverished State of Maine, continue to fantasize about building 850-ft-tall floating offshore windmills, each mounted on a 50% submerged, steel platform at least 250 ft x 250 ft x 75 ft tall to maintain the windmill in upright position in all conditions.
.
Maine government bureaucrats, etc., in a world of their own climate-fighting fantasies, want to have about 3,000 MW of floating wind turbines by 2040; a most expensive, totally unrealistic goal, that would further impoverish the already-poor State of Maine for many decades.
Those bureaucrats, etc., would help fatten the lucrative, 20-y, tax-shelters of mostly out-of-state, multi-millionaire, wind-subsidy chasers, who likely have minimal regard for: 1) Impacts on the environment and the fishing and tourist industries of Maine, and 2) Already-overstressed, over-taxed, over-regulated Maine ratepayers and taxpayers, who are trying to make ends meet in a near-zero, real-growth economy.
. Those fishery-destroying, 850-ft-tall floaters, with 24/7/365 strobe lights, visible 30 miles from any shore, would cost at least $7,500/ installed kW, or at least $22.5 billion, if built in 2023 (more after 2023)
.
Almost the entire supply of the Maine projects would be designed and made in Europe, then transported across the Atlantic Ocean, in European specialized ships, then unloaded at a new, $500-million Maine storage/pre-assembly/staging/barge-loading area, then barged to European specialized erection ships for erection of the floating turbines. The financing will be mostly by European pension funds.
.
About 500 Maine people would have jobs during the erection phase
The other erection jobs would be by specialized European people, mostly on cranes and ships
About 200 Maine people would have long-term O&M jobs, using European spare parts, during the 20-y electricity production phase. https://www.maine.gov/governor/mills/news/governor-mills-signs-bill-create-jobs-advance-clean-energy-and-fight-climate-change-through
.
The Maine people have much greater burdens to look forward to for the next 20 years, courtesy of the Governor Mills incompetent, woke bureaucracy that has infested the state government
The Maine people need to finally wake up, and put an end to the climate scare-mongering, which aims to subjugate and further impoverish them, by voting the entire Democrat woke cabal out and replace it with rational Republicans in 2024
The present course leads to financial disaster for the impoverished State of Maine and its people.
The purposely-kept-ignorant Maine people do not deserve such maltreatment . Electricity Cost
Assume a $750 million, 100 MW project consists of foundations, wind turbines, cabling to shore, and installation at $7,500/kW.
Production 100 MW x 8766 h/y x 0.40, CF = 350,640,000 kWh/y
Amortize bank loan for $375 million, 50% of project, at 6.0%/y for 20 years, 9.194 c/kWh.
Owner return on $375 million, 50% of project, at 10%/y for 20 years, 12.385 c/kWh Banks and Owners get 21.579/36.579 = 59% of the project revenues
Offshore O&M, about 30 miles out to sea, 8 c/kWh.
Supply chain, special ships, and ocean transport, 3 c/kWh
All other items, 4 c/kWh
Total cost 9.194 + 12.385 + 8 + 3 + 4 = 36.579 c/kWh
Less 50% subsidies (ITC, 5-y depreciation, interest deduction on borrowed funds) 18.290 c/kWh
Owner sells to utility at 18.290 c/kWh
. Excluded costs, at a future 30% W/S annual penetration on the grid, based on UK and German experience:
– Onshore grid expansion/reinforcement to connect far-flung W/S systems, about 2 c/kWh
– A fleet of traditional power plants to quickly counteract W/S variable output, on a less than minute-by-minute basis, 24/7/365, which means more Btu/kWh, more CO2/kWh, more cost of about 2 c/kWh
– A fleet of traditional power plants to provide electricity during 1) low-wind periods, 2) high-wind periods, when rotors are locked in place, and 3) low solar periods during mornings, evenings, at night, snow/ice on panels, which means more Btu/kWh, more CO2/kWh, more cost of about 2 c/kWh
– Pay W/S system Owners for electricity they could have produced, if not curtailed, about 1 c/kWh
– Importing electricity at high prices, when W/S output is low, 1 c/kWh
– Exporting electricity at low prices, when W/S output is high, 1 c/kWh
– Disassembly on land and at sea, reprocessing and storing at hazardous waste sites, about 2 c/kWh Total ADDER = 11 c/kWh
THE IMPOVERISHED, DYSFUNCTIONAL STATE OF MAINE https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/the-dysfunctional-state-of-maine
By Willem Post
.
The over-taxed, over-regulated, already-impoverished Maine people are super-screwed, trying to make ends meet in a near-zero, real growth Maine economy
The Maine economy has lots of low-tech/low-pay/low-benefit, bs jobs
The Maine economy has lots of woke, leftist bureaucrats
Screwed-over Mainers also have to pay for poverty-stricken, aliens of different cultures from all over, who illegally enter the US, a federal felony
. Those unvetted, illegal, often voting aliens, from all-over, are:
– the dregs of Third World countries, sent to Maine by their US-hating, leftist, woke governments, in cahoots with Soros/Biden-financed NGOs
– getting free housing, free food, a never-empty credit card, free phones, free healthcare, free education/job training and whatever other goodies they want.
. They mainly suck from the government tit:
– have no skills, no training, no education, no modern industrial experience.
– will take low-tech/low-pay/low-benefit jobs at 30% less than screwed-over Mainers.
– are often good at crime, murder, rape, drug and human trafficking, and driving vehicles into native merrymakers.
– the tens of millions of incompatible, subversive, walk-ins would rather undermine, instead of fight for traditional European and US values and culture.
.
Many millions of illegal aliens have to be shipped back where they came from, before they forever ruin the US, as they ruined Europe, France ,the UK, Ireland, Spain, etc.
. Visual Ugliness of wind and Solar: Down-trodden Mainers often have to put up with the visual ugliness and noise of hundreds of windmills, that are often idle, because of too little wind year-round, and many thousands of acres of solar panels, that are often covered with snow and ice in winter; there is no solar at night.
. Girls Competing with Boys on Girls Teams: Down-trodden Maine families also have to endure the insults of government-imposed mandates of having their girls compete with “boys” on girls’ teams, and “sharing” girl bathrooms and locker rooms, and “losing” their matches to the “boys”, all as mandated by woke Governor Mills, surrounded by her cabal of idiots and her ingrown clique of bureaucrats sucking from the government tit.
. Experience of Denmark with Palestinians The first generation (1992 arrivals):
Total accepted: 321 Palestinians
Still in Denmark by 2019: 270 people; about 84% remained.
Convicted of crimes: 204 people (63.6%).
Prison sentences: 71 people (22.1%).
Welfare dependency:
In 2003, 238 of 321 (74%) received some form of benefit.
In 2019, 176 full-time equivalents were on welfare.
Of these, 122 were on disability pensions; meaning roughly two-thirds of working-age people were on permanent pension payments. The second generation (their children):
Total children: 999 born or raised in Denmark
Each couple has many children, because each child gets a monthly government check until 18.
Convicted of crimes: 337 (33.7%).
Prison sentences: 65 (6.5%).
This means the crime rate dropped between generations; from 63% down to 34%; but remained far higher than the Danish national average.
93-95% of Palestinians are Muslim, who do not marry Danish women.
In 2019, the Danish Justice Minister stated: “These asylum seekers should not have been let in”.
Norway, Sweden, etc., had similar experiences.
. Denmark: 72% of gang-crime convicts have non-Western background, i.e. 15% of the Danish population has 5 times the crime rate. https://willempost.substack.com/p/denmark-72-of-gang-crime-convicts?r=1n3sit&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&triedRedirect=true
And 500,000 inexperienced, no skill, no education, walk-in, Islamic Somalis, sucking from many government-program tits, and embezzling several hundred million dollars of SNAP funds each year.
Trump finally nixed their “temporary” BS status, authorized by AUTOPEN Biden
True Norwegian Story
A Pakistani male, 32 years old, dressed in fancy, traditional, Pakistani garb, as if he is an important person, walks several paces in front of his 24 year-old wife, who pushes a baby carriage with 2 children, with 2 on each side holding on, a total of 6 children.
He has to attend Norwegian classes to receive a signature from the teacher to continue to receive free housing, free food, free healthcare, and a free allowance for incidentals, etc.
He has to go for interviews for jobs, but he has no education, no experience. He gets a signature from the employer as proof of the interview, to continue to receive subsidies.
He came as a “refuge” to Norway, at 22 years old, did not speak a word of Norwegian, married a Pakistani bride, 14 years old, brought in from Pakistan by the Norwegian government. She was pregnant a few weeks after the wedding and produce 6 kids in 10 years. Each child receives a government allowance.
Norway is rich, has a $2 trillion pension fund, invested in world equities for 5 million people, of which 500,000 are “refugees”. The Norwegian government rakes off a percentage of the total each year.
The Norwegian government brings in “refuges” to satisfy Brussels, which means Norway can trade in the EU as if a member, and well-off
Norwegians can have vacation houses in Spain, Italy, Turkey, Greece, etc., but it also means Germans (WWII invaders) can have vacation houses in Norway.
Prior to Brussels arrangement, no foreigner was allowed to own real estate in Norway.
The “EBT moms” problem is pervasive – Women who game the welfare system (and the taxpayer) by deliberately having multiple children with multiple men and refusing to keep a father in the picture. Those kids often grow up to be “just like their parents”.
The “EBT moms” expect to live off a multitude of welfare programs. Many of these women have minimal education and work experience. They live practically for free on the taxpayer’s dime.
Revelations of an “EBT/SNAP mom”, from X . If y’all was really smart you’d understand “kids is the biggest hustle out there”. I don’t clock into no job, I let Uncle Sam and baby daddies cut me a check every month. 5 kids = 5 bags. Food stamps, free rent, free healthcare, and child support on top of that. My bills paid before I even wake up. Everybody keep asking why I had 5 kids at age 26, because every single one come with a check attached. My life secured, while y’all stressing over 9 to 5s. Don’t be mad at me, be mad at you ain’t catch on to the hustle. . Food subsidies have had the unfortunate side effect of helping to destroy the nuclear family, creating generations of fatherless children and skyrocketing crime rates.
.
Around 23% of all US households have single mothers.
Among black families, 47% are single mother households, 25% in Hispanic households and 12% in white households.
Approximately 7% of white families use SNAP, while 27% of black families and 23% of Hispanic families. . There is a clear trend here: Single mothers and minority families are the largest contingent of welfare beneficiaries per capita and the system is almost designed to reward their dependency. . They aim for that “career dependency”, as revealed by the EBT/SNAP mom
Australian song “Fifty million blowflies can’t be wrong.” Even on YouTube, I believe.
Alan
November 23, 2025 9:18 am
The county I live is debating whether or not to allow a solar farm to come in and build a large facility out in the country. This showed up on the FB group that is campaigning against the farm. What do y’all think about solar farms being tornado magnets?
AN INTERESTING CONCLUSION… SOLAR FARMS WILL BECOME THUNDERSTORM and TORONADO INCUBATORS and MAGNETS.
As more & more counties get more solar farms…..
From a STEPHENVILLE resident, George Franklin:
I should start by telling you what bonafides I have for writing this. I am a retired aerospace engineer. A literal rocket scientist if you will. I worked on MX (Peacekeeper) Space Shuttle, Hubble, Brilliant Pebbles, PACOSS, Space Station, MMU, B2, the Sultan of Brunei’s half billion dollar private 747 with crystal showers, gold sinks and 100 dollar a yard coiffed silk carpets. I designed a satphone installation on prince Jeffry’s 757. I did all of the design work for the structure of Mark 1V propulsion module currently flying on at least 3 spacecraft that I know of. Some of the more exciting projects I have worked on are not shareable. I am also am FAA certified glider pilot and FAI certified gold glider pilot. I fly both full scale and model sailplanes. I am Microsoft certified and ComTIA A+ certified.
SOLAR PANELS are at best about 20% EFFICIENT. They convert almost 0% of the UV light that hits them. None of the visible spectrum and only some of the IR spectrum. At the same time as they are absorbing light they are absorbing heat from the sun. This absorbed HEAT is RADIATED INTO THE adjacent ATMOSPHERE. It should be obvious what happens next. When air is warmed it rises. Even small differences in ordinary land surfaces are capable of creating powerful forces of weather like thunderstorms and tornadoes. These weather phenomena are initiated and reinforced by land features as they are blown downwind. It is all too obvious to me what will happen with the heat generated by an entire solar farm. SOLAR FARMS WILL BECOME THUNDERSTORM and TORONADO INCUBATORS and MAGNETS.
Solar panels are dark and and they emit energy to the space above them when they are not being radiated. This is known as black-body radiation. Satellites flying in space use this phenomenon to cool internal components. If they didn’t do this they would fry themselves.
So solar farms not only produce more heat in summer than the original land that they were installed on, but they also produce more cooling in winter, thus exacerbating weather extremes.
So I conclude with this. THERE IS NOTHING GREEN ABOUT GREEN ENERGY except the DIRTY MONEY flowing into corrupt pockets.
There is no such thing as green energy. The science doesn’t exist. The technology doesn’t exist. The engineering doesn’t exist. We are being pushed to save the planet with solutions that are worse than the problems.
I have always thought that trailer parks were the tornado-magnets of the earth. Upon cursory examination (at best) this comment seems to have the same level of veracity.
That’s a bit harsh! <g> Everybody’s entitled to their opinion, surely. Opinions are like arse-holes – everybody’s got one, and many don’t pass the smell test.
I’ve got plenty myself – all equally valueless, like everyone else’s.
Facts, unfortunately, make a mockery of opinions, no matter how smart, well-educated or handsome the opener is. That’s my opinion, anyway.
MrGrimNasty
November 23, 2025 10:28 am
BBC Country File from the Somerset Levels today was a classic example of their climate obsessed bias.
Questioning a land owner on the reasons for extended flooding for a couple of years running; it just wasn’t going where the presenter wanted. That pesky farmer was giving the real reasons, drainage ditches need clearing out (he was doing his bit), the Environment Agency is not maintaining rivers like they used to, upstream housing development is increasing run off; So the interviewer interjects in a chastising tone:- river natural diversity can’t be sacrificed for drainage efficiency you know, and throws in the other thing to blame, climate change of course! Which was then reinforced in the voiceover postscript.
The surprise shutdown of national climate group 350.org has the state group 350NH scrambling to assure people that they’re still very much around.
“We’re completely independent,” said Rebecca Beaulieu, communications director for the Dover-based organization. “We share a vision and goals … but [the shutdown] won’t affect us.”
Green group 350.org suspends US operations, cuts global staff by 30 percent
The group will keep three U.S. positions open in hopes of reviving operations in the future.
| 11/14/2025 06:36 AM EST | Updated 11/14/2025 02:13 PM EST
350.org, the green group that mounted a stand against the Keystone XL pipeline, is suspending U.S. operations amid a financial crunch.
CLIMATEWIRE | BELÉM, Brazil — Environmental group 350.org, which spearheaded the movement to block the Keystone XL oil pipeline, will “temporarily suspend programming” in the U.S. and other countries amid funding woes, according to a letter obtained on Thursday by POLITICO.
The letter to outside organizations from Executive Director Anne Jellema said 350.org had suffered a 25 percent drop in income for its 2025 and 2026 fiscal years, compelling it to halt operations. The group will keep three U.S. staff members in hopes of reviving operations in the future.
The anomaly approach is like claiming that averaging “height differences from local means” across a football stadium somehow gives you meaningful information about the total mass of all the people present. The mathematical operation doesn’t change the fundamental categorical error.
Story Tip The UK Met Office insulting the public’s intelligence supplying data for stations that closed nearly SIXTY years ago. https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2025/11/22/lephinmore-dcnn6063-a-demonstration-of-how-the-met-office-is-insulting-peoples-intelligence/
Well, at least they’re not “adjusting” the readings…..
COP 30 dropped talk of phasing out fossil fuels. A lot of developing countries are wisely saying they need to develop their fossil fuel resources in order to grow their economies, so they will not commit to a UN mandate to phase them out by a specific date. The Africans were among the first to object to the proposed termination roadmap. They are wising up. Great news!
I saw a news report on it. The irish expert IPCC contributor told us that the world is focused on less important short-term problems instead of Climate. Like wars. We should obviously ignore wars and focus on Climate Change…
There was a huge fight so lack of attention was not involved.
And you didnt even need to put in a ‘sarc’ sign.
The idiocy is even that quite a few people push for both more war and more solar/ wind. The europeans carry that lethal combi. The EU commission wants to create Eurobonds ( ie borrowed money to fund Eurobonds lended out w interest) to collectively fund their madness which future generations will pay for. US style.
I bet the US is looking at this and see that, once again, the europeans go out of their way to shoot themselves.
Developing a roadmap is often one way to get paid for wishful thinking.
Back to their hypocrisy, one of the earlier videos of the COP31 fire evacuation seemed to show dozens of diesel generators powering the venue. I haven’t found that video again after a brief search.
Typo Alert: “COP31” should be “COP30”. How could you make such a mistake? COP31 will take place next year in Turkey.
Maybe I’m psychic.
It was just a minor “adjustment”.
(Or, maybe COP31 will be Deja Vu all over again?)
I wrote this almost exactly 4 years ago. It was posted here on WUWT in May, 2022.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/05/16/wuwt-contest-runner-up-professional-nasa-knew-better-nasa_knew/
At the time, I did not yet know of the availability of the ERA5 reanalysis model values of hourly parameters, including the “vertical integral of energy conversion” I have been posting about. More here about that.
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1PDJP3F3rteoP99lR53YKp2fzuaza7Niz?usp=sharing
I also did not know yet, in November 2021, that the NOAA GOES East Band 16 images were so easily available and could be composed into video form to better understand the performance of the planet as a longwave emitter and to counter the concept of the atmosphere as a passive radiative blanket.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yarzo13_TSE
So what’s my point for today? Patience. With myself, to keep learning. And with others, as we all need time to listen, learn, and express ourselves effectively.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
P.S. Refute the core claim of the “climate” movement, not just the lunacy of decarbonization and the “net zero” goals!
P.S. Refute the core claim of the “climate” movement, not just the lunacy of decarbonization and the “net zero” goals!
Have to differ from you on this one. There are two great irrational manias connected with global warming. One is the notion that there is a climate crisis caused by human emissions, when there is probably only a modest and unalarming warming.
So for a long time skeptics have been tackling this more or less head on, disputing (for instance) the hockey stick or the models, or the attempts to connect extreme weather (which is mostly not at all extreme on a longer time period) with emissions.
On the whole this line of attack hasn’t succeeded in reversing or even weakening the climate movement, which has been largely successful in banning CAGW skepticism from the mainstream media and airwaves, and which has fairly successfully stigmatized dissent in the public mind as bad faith denialism.
You find few prominent people even today who are prepared to say publicly that there is no crisis, there is at most modest and unthreatening warming, and organs like the Washington Post, NPR, BBC, Guardian still continue to hype alarmism.
This is because the arguments on the scientific claims are detailed and often quite obscure. Is there, for instance, a hot spot? Well, maybe there is a warm spot. But what does it show, if anything? Pretty soon everyone turns off, and the Guardian and BBC continue to publish stories about bad weather under the heading of ‘climate crisis’.
The problem with this approach is that it allowed the other great irrationality to continue more or less unchallenged. That is the idea that we could at all, and in particular could cost effectively, electrify heating and transport, deriving the power to do so from wind and solar.
However, as Western countries have seriously tried to implement this policy in the last couple of decades the real political weakness of the global warming agenda has become clear. The energy policies are totally ineffective both in reducing global (or even local) emissions and in delivering affordable power. Many billions later this is finally becoming unavoidably clear. You can look at the prime cases – in the US, New York State and California, the UK, Australia, Germany. The UK in particular is headed straight for blackouts added to its absurdly high prices if it continues on the present path,
My view is that this second irrationality is the key thing to hit on. First, because the consequences of energy failure are imminent and very visible Anyone can check what their UK electricity bills are, just look at them. No-one can fail to notice a power cut. Second, the human toll of the policies is enormous. The old die every winter in the UK from fuel poverty, and its only getting worse. Businesses are closing because of high energy costs.
These are things you can point to and demonstrate that the whole mad Net Zero agenda is behind them. I conclude there is a moral imperative to focus on energy policy and not climate science, because its energy policy that is doing the social, human and economic damage now and in the next five years. And there is a practical political imperative, its the place where the argument can be won in the short term.
The movement will not rot from the head down, but from the bottom up. Once the energy claims are refuted and the policies repealed, the climate alarmism will fade out of itself. Do it the other way around, and you end up in a swamp with no way out while those in charge of the disaster continue with their eyes tight shut wittering about ‘denialism’.
I would make the comparison to gender. It was futile to argue about trans ideology on high level scientific grounds. The thing that has sunk the trans movement is documentation on the consequences of the medical treatments being recommended, the effects on women when they lose segregated changing and toilet facilities, the dangers to girls from sport with male participants. A key moment was the realization that convicted male rapists were being sent to womens prisons.
You can argue till you are blue in the face over how many genders there are, is there really a sense of gender at 3, 6, 14, for instance. But confront the voting public with the question, do you really want to give men access to womens changing rooms? Do you really want to send male rapists to womens prisons? Then people suddenly know what they think. They don’t care about fashionable ideas in gender theory. But they know what practical policies they do and don’t want, and they speak and vote accordingly, and the fog lifts.
The climate analogy is to the CASS report. Focus on the policy facts of what alarmists want to do. That way you will succeed, because whether they are right or wrong about the crisis, they are demonstrably wrong about energy. And you’ll save a huge amount of social and human misery from the crazy policies they advocate.
“The thing that has sunk the trans movement “
I would argue that is a little previous. The medical establishment has really lost the plot and they haven’t given up…
Details of a new UK clinical trial to assess the risks and benefits of puberty-blocking drugs in children who question their gender have been announced.
Researchers from King’s College London say the trial will involve around 220 children under the age of 16 who are going through puberty, and will examine the impact of the drugs on their physical, social and emotional wellbeing.
Some clinicians and campaigners question whether the trial is ethical. – BBC
It is wholly unethical. I call it Mengele syndrome.
Safe and effective.
I am pretty sure that some teenagers will enjoy the effects of heroin but do you really want to do a cost/ benefit analysis?
Yes, agreed. To do double blind tests of puberty blockers in the light of the Cass Report is medical malpractice. If you want to test anything, counseling would be a fairly harmless thing to test. First, do no harm.
Google AI Says:
AI Overview
Yes, convicted male rapists have been sent to women’s prisons in some jurisdictions, primarily due to the implementation of policies allowing incarcerated individuals to be housed according to their self-identified gender identity rather than their biological sex or assigned sex at birth [1]. This has been a controversial issue, with concerns raised about the safety and security of female inmates.
While is was at it:
Yes, Drag Queen Story Hour (DQSH) events are happening in various locations, including libraries, schools, bookstores, and community spaces across the United States and other countries. While they have faced controversy in some areas, local organizations continue to host them, and the American Library Association (ALA) supports libraries that host these programs.
Google AI?
Have you lost your faculties of research?
The BBC promotes drag queens etc wherever it can – especially on their youth channels; CBBC and BBC3
Google AI is good for lots of stuff. Yes it’s bias is left-wing and I know it.
With that in mind I asked it about CH4 warming by 2100 and it said:
Methane will cause a significant portion
of global warming by 2100, contributing
to an overall temperature increase of
2.7°C to 4°C or more.
Did that answer my question? No it didn’t. It studiously avoided assessing how much warming will occur specifically due to CH4.
It went on to blab about
“…warming from food consumption…”
whatever that is?
Google AI is good for lots of stuff. Yes it’s bias is left-wing and I know it.
And you obviously have time to squander on it. I have no faith in what other people have programmed. I trust my own judgement. Filtering out the biased output of AI only proves the bias in the algorithms.
My AI is better than your IA. My AI proves this..
What if your AI is using his AI for the answer…lol
And how do you find those other resources? A search engine perhaps, programmed by other people? Editors, who are other people?
AI is just another tool. Ignoring it doesn’t make it go away. Refusing to use it properly doesn’t make it less useful. You presumably know how to choose which side of a metric/inch measure tape to use.
Knowing how to use tools is what makes tools useful.
And how do you find those other resources?
Yes, a search engine programmed by other people, but DIGGING, going past the top results, making associations based on those results. “AI’s” (actually LLMs) don’t normally go that deep, and in my experience it’s harder to direct them there than it is to get there on your own.
I use copilot, not google, and I have found it good for some things: helping create ad copy for my business, making “lifestyle” product images for my business, suggesting meals based on given ingredients, tedious rewriting of software config files.
Anything more serious than that? no thanks.
From my experiences with the “accessory” A.I.s, all they do is present a more comprehensive scrape of Wikipedia etc.
Still the same bullshit though.
The concentration of methane in air is ca. 1.93 ppmv. One cubic meter of air has a mass of 1,290 g and contains 0.0014 g methane at STP.
The reason the concentration of methane is so low is that discharges of lightning generates oxygen atoms which will oxidize the methane.
Discharges of lightning generate ozone which will readily oxidize methane to CO2 and H2O.
Methane is slightly soluble in cold water. One liter of cold water can hold up to 35 mls of methane. The vast cold polar oceans absorb methane which slowly diffuse to the ocean floor. There under high pressure methane forms a solid clathrate known as methane ice.
We really do not have to worry about methane causing any global warming. We also do not have to worry about any global warming because in many regions of the earth there are long cold and snowy winters like in Canada where I live.
Google AI is down right ignorant and know nothing about global warming.
Steve, since you have already had an exchange with the LLM that it has probably retained, how about sending it the following link:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/03/06/the-misguided-crusade-to-reduce-anthropogenic-methane-emissions/
Ask it to analyze the article and if that changes its view of its previous claim. Also, ask it to define “significant portion.”
LLM? Undefined acronyms are a negative with respect to effective communication. I had to search to find out someone earlier said Artificial Intelligence is really LLM without bothering to say what LLM stands for.
Convicted rapist claiming to be women should only be sent to women’s prisons after being treated with chemical castration drugs. There should be no objection as these are the same drugs used as male puberty blockers that medical professionals and parents accept for their transitioning minor children.
Rapist should be put to death by stoning. There are plenty of women victims who would not hesitate to cast the the first stone.
Chemical castration is much to kind. Those rapists who scam the system with phony gender claims should have their male parts permanently removed.
Any man claiming to be a woman should only be sent to women’s prisons after a total penectomy.
All convicted rapists should only be sent to women’s prisons, and then see how long they survive.
You are a sick puppy to believe that crap.
What’s wrong with physical castration? No dangly bits = not a man. Maybe a woman, but maybe not. Certainly more acceptable to penis-less females in changing rooms, saunas, and so on.
All a bit silly, really. Mind you, if you can use all this nonsense to your advantage, why not?
“Convicted rapist claiming to be women should only be sent to women’s prisons [if] . . .blah. . .blah. . .blah”
Huh?
The real logical issue with this stuff is that people are demanding to be treated in accordance with what they call their gender.
However, look at the lists of genders – and there are several in circulation listing between 3 and 100+ of them. And you will notice that they do not include male and female.
Sometimes the trans movement seems to assume there are two genders and two sexes. This gives you a 2 x 2 matrix, so in this view you could be of the male sex and the female gender.
But you in fact find no trans advocates who are prepared to say there are two genders and they are male and female. It would at least make logical sense, the demand would be I am a woman by gender so treat me like a woman by sex.
But that isn’t what the ideologues say. They say at the same time that there are these different 10s of genders which don’t include male and female, but that men who declare their gender to be female should be treated as women.
Why, if female is not a gender? Your gender is free spirit? Why does that mean you go to a women’s jail? You say your gender is female? It isn’t, there is no such thing as a female gender.
It makes absolutely no sense as soon as you spell it out. As well as being scientifically wrong. Think about it again, is there such a think as a gendered brain? Well, how many varieties of it are there?
You have to watch the pea under the thimble.
the argument will shift without warning between the 2 x 2 matrix and the many tens, and the problem is that consistency requires the abandonment of half of the trans ideology positions.
Why for instance is the surgery ‘gender confirming’? What gender is it affirming, and how is it doing that?
In the first place it would have been stupid to try to argue on scientific grounds. And in the second place I am not aware of anyone who ever tried.
It is a classic example of something you cannot reason someone out of after they believed themself into it.
Furthermore—and this is almost never mentioned even by the sceptics—the vast majority of “trans-women” (men who pretend they are women) are autogynephiles. It is a paraphilia; a fetish. It rarely has anything to do with gender dysphoria, which is real mental illlness that deserves treatment.
Then there are the men who realized there is no point risking jail for up-skirting when you can just pull on a frock and go into the ladies locker room and have a good look around, and be called “stunningly brave” for doing so.
The first, consequences to the transgenders themselves, only really matters to the transgenders themselves and their kith and kin. The general public, not so much.
The last, sending men to women’s prisons, I give about the same reach, but the lunacy factor gives it more weight, however diluted by general lack of concern for the well-being of prisoners who are not nice people.
The second, men in women’s bathrooms and locker rooms, had the best/worst combination of reach and impact. Only the wokest of the woke could deny the impact in face to face encounters, such as at city council and school board meetings. It takes an incredibly hard-hearted amoral woke scold to tell parents, to their face, that their concerns for their daughter are misplaced and selfish.
The third, especially in the form of men beating up women in Olympic boxing, I think was the capper, the real outrage beyond the Pale. Scolding parents at school board meetings is local. Men getting gold medals for literally beating women unconscious was on national TV and impossible to justify as “equality”.
Thank you for your thoughtful reply.
You say, “I conclude there is a moral imperative to focus on energy policy and not climate science…”
I say DO BOTH, and find ways to express the key points more effectively.
My aim is to explain the physical misconceptions using valid observational data and selected modeling outputs in the simplest way possible for wider appreciation of the core technical error(s) on which climate alarm has been based all along.
You are correct that skeptics of climate alarm have used numerous lines of objection to climate danger that have been relatively ineffective. There are better arguments to refute the central claim.
I note that the U.S. President is doing both – most visibly on energy systems, and more quietly on the “science”.
Patience. Persistence on both fronts.
The easiest argument is UHI. Not even the most avid CAGW proponent can adequately explain away the fact that developed spaces have higher temperatures than rural areas. The common temperature displays in autos have shown that to most. At that point, well mixed CO2 disappears as a cause.
Agree 100%.
Decouple weather behaviors from energy use.
Adaptation rather than concession to weather.
‘The movement will not rot from the head down, but from the bottom up. Once the energy claims are refuted and the policies repealed, the climate alarmism will fade out of itself.’
Climate, ‘race’, gender, etc. are some of the current weapons in the Left’s arsenal to overthrow liberalism. They’ve been very successful to date, largely because they long ago captured public education and the media, as well as many other institutions, e.g., we’ve all recently witnessed an American pope worshipping a block of ice.
Unlike some, I don’t see this movement reversing just because it hits a few practical snags, e.g., the lights start going out. In fact, history tells us that is precisely when the Left will really pile up the corpses of its opponents in earnest to eliminate those who are sabotaging its ‘plans’.
Well done..
If you dive into the data, you’ll see the warming is in the overnight lows. The daily average is made up of the afternoon high and the overnight low. If you average them, you get the average. Then they average all the other highs and lows for that day.
But if you break out just the overnight lows, you’ll see these are climbing. And as Willis has said many times, often with great causative demonstrations, the daily high is limited by water evaporating, rising, condensing as reflective clouds reflecting heat away, and further cooling by precipitation.
The climate drama is merely representative of the deeper game of grift that has been successfully integrated into many aspects of every day life – because it works. And the folks that implement this process just laugh when the discussion is about details/facts, or lack of. The best explanation of this process is to long to present here, but the basic outline comes from a look at a similar process exposed to solving the LA homelessness issue.
There are seven main components:
It’s a high-yield crisis economy – where the victims stay poor and the administrators get rich.”
Details are presented between 3:40 and 8:02 in the interview – while this is about the homeless issue, I believe the processes presented are well represented in the climate change game as well.
Your suggestion about sticking to electricity bills makes a lot of sense. Most of you guys are smarter than I and can argue with people with limited science schooling. Many of my acquaintances took the minimum science courses in order to get their degree in business, social/computer sciences, art, medical, etc. degrees. I cannot discuss science or religion (climate science) with them.
I still remember one of my acquaintances telling me he knew how to solve the energy problem. He noted that after power went through a circuit, the remaining power was just shorted into the ground. He believed we should be banking that leftover power. Pointing out that there was no power left on the ground side, and that without connecting to ground no current would pass through the circuit didn’t faze him at all. How do you talk intelligently to people with that kind of scientific insight?
He left me saying that he knew that with my background I wouldn’t let his idea go uninvestigated. He would love to learn how I changed the world. I did my best to avoid him after that.
“Thank you for your attention to this matter.”
You’ll never catch an alarmist being polite, David. A refreshing change.
Hi David. That’s an interesting comment. Thanks for the links and the reminder to have patience with ourselves and one another, as each of us can only learn and grow in understanding in our own way and at our own pace.
Re.: ‘P.S. Refute the core claim of the “climate” movement,…’
I’m not sure what that is, to tell you the truth. The movement’s core claim seems to depend on whichever part of the movement we’re talking about – i.e. ‘scientists’, media, politicians, activists, etc.. They all appear to be asserting the same specious core claim, but when you dig deep enough beneath the layers of blind assumptions that comprise their self-rationalising gobbledegook you find that their ostensible core claims are all different. The whole movement is a chimera concocted out of make-believe, it seems to me. (See Wictionary, especially #8 on list of meanings.)
Refute it? I can’t even find it.
Thanks for taking the time to reply. The core claim can be stated in multiple valid forms. Here’s one formulation of it:
A rising concentration of the IR-active substances CO2, CH4, and N2O in the atmosphere must be expected to drive sensible heat gain on land, in the oceans, and in the lower atmosphere.
As you note, there are numerous other objections to the use of natural hydrocarbons as fuel (e.g. emissions of PM2.5), but this one is the reason for the UNFCCC, IPCC, Paris Accords, etc. to have ever come into existence to begin with to push policy.
Thanks for stating the specific core claim that you had in mind, David. However, that formulation is completely unquantified and is therefore impossible even to test, let alone to refute – scientifically, at any rate. Personally, I don’t feel any attraction to the challenge of trying to refute something that I believe is neither refutable nor irrefutable with the amount of scientific information about Earth’s climate-system that is currently available to us. I much prefer to pursue the advancement of science for its own sake in ways that do not require me to take an adversarial position for or against the predetermined positions of others on issues of social or political significance.
Thanks for your further reply. “I much prefer to pursue the advancement of science for its own sake…” Me too. If the core claim had been held quietly without morphing into advocacy for restrictive and destructive policy action, there would be no urgency to actively oppose it with evidence.
Be well, even as we may disagree somewhat.
As John Tyndall’s experiments showed, this is the complete opposite of reality. Try and find a consistent description of the greenhouse effect, and you will be sorely disappointed.
Here’s NASA’s –
Unfortunately, heat cannot be “trapped”, and a “warmer temperature” is just meaningless word salad. For example, surface temperatures vary between roughly 90 C and -90 C, both of which are “warmer” than -100 C.
However, both are obviously colder than +100 C, which was the minimum temperature when the first liquid water condensed from an atmosphere – which contained the most H2O “greenhouse gas” in the Earth’s history! And still the surface cooled!
So I hope you will pardon me if I describe the NASA administration as being ignorant and gullible for allowing the “greenhouse effect” fantasy to be promoted on the NASA website, or even guilty of conspiracy to defraud the Government by continuing to pay obvious fraudsters in their employ.
And life goes on . . . <g>
See the “ Pillars of Science” summarized in Climategate: history’s message.
From the content at that link: “Pillar C is climate modeling—the GCMs.”
Yes. The pre-stabilized-by-tuning GCMs are structured to assume the core claim as I stated it above to JP. This is given semantic support at the outset by having adopted the “forcing” + “feedback” framing of the investigation of climate system response to incremental CO2. Utterly circular, in my view.
What’s required is a once and for all defeat of the criminal philosophy behind it all…a lot of old men who will be dead one day…their younger successors need defeating before they get too arrogant…
― signed, someone American in 1960th. Or 1930s. Or…
How much will a one degree rise in surface temperature increase earth’s outward flux of radiated energy? Legend would have it this is the most challenging calculation facing mankind. Or is that unadulterated Klimate Kool-Aid? To paraphrase, how much will a one volt rise increase the current in an electric circuit? In either case, one might well first assume linear dissipation with flux proportional to a potential difference. In the electric case, dissipation is given by W = J*(V1-V2) with J proportional to (V1-V2). In the thermal case, W = (J/T1)*(T1-T2) with J/T1 proportional to (T1-T2).
The expression for electric dissipation should be familiar to high school students. That for thermal dissipation is the Carnot Equation, the cornerstone of thermodynamics, although I’ve yet to see it so described. Given just three boundary parameters, 240W/m2, 285K and 220K, one may calculate a T1 increase of 0.82K sufficient to increase J by 3.7W/m2. No invocation of radiation nor convection nor equilibrium needed. At equilibrium, T1=T2 and dissipation is zero. As dissipation is otherwise necessarily positive, it is a minimum at equilibrium and, if analytic, will increase at least quadratically with changes of T2, i.e. linear dissipation.
But how do radiation, convection, clouds, aerosols, icebergs, etc., the bugaboos of climate modelers, come into play? They are implicit in the assumption that the given boundary temperatures lead to the given energy flux. While there are good arguments for linear dissipation near equilibrium, there is no guarantee this holds further away. To model this, we need look inside the box. Kevin Kilty has recently described an early model.
(https://wattsupwiththat.com/2025/10/07/from-the-surface-to-space).
Internal energy flux is partitioned into three fluxes two mimicking bidirectional radiation, one convection. In the current version, boundary fluxes for both radiation and convection are specified, e.g. (100, 140) and (240, 0) W/m2. Arbitrary polynomial functions matching these endpoints define explicit models. The temperature profile is that function minimizing deviations of total flux from 240 W/m2 and thermal sensitivity then found with a 0.01K change in T1. My current desktop takes 2 sec for 1000 point profiles. Extreme convection enhancements near the surface (or inhibition of radiation) may increase warming 10%. Converse enhancements decrease warming. Alas, I’ve yet to discover warming differing by more than 10% from basic linear dissipation theory.
For the inveterate Pythonista or just those curious as to solutions for a variety of hypotheticals,
https://pdquondam.net/HBC_VIIb.zip
Modtran does the calcs accurately enough for practical purposes….you just have to fool with localities, relative humidity, ground temp offset to achieve an understanding of what published climate papers are talking about and why half of them are wrong, and the other half are half correct.
A message from our high priest.
“We are fighting for the roadmap for the transition away from fossil fuels, and we’ve determined that one way or another we won’t lose the momentum [towards that outcome] that we’ve built at this Cop,” he said. “There’s a big coalition that wants this, of developing and developed countries.” – Ed Miliband
Well, he’s still out to lunch. Closer to home the censorship ‘big push’ goes on…
A cross-party group of more than 30 Labour, Lib Dem, Green and other MPs has this week written to Ofcom, the broadcast regulator, to ask it to investigate whether Elon Musk’s social media platform is complying with the Online Safety Act. The letter follows research from the pro-censorship think tank the Centre for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH). It paints the platform formerly known as Twitter as a “a home for hate” under its new owner, alleging that antisemitism is “reaching millions” there. “For too long, X has been a source of abuse and hate,” says Joani Reid, Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on antisemitism, who led the letter. “We are calling on Ofcom to use every power available to it to take action and hold the platform to account for breaches of our online safety laws.” – Daily Sceptic
Two things can be true at the same time…. With Labour that’s generally true.
I’ve observed that in bluer areas here, road maintenance is being neglected.
Where is ‘here’?
U.S., Colorado specifically. Boulder County’s road maintenance is almost getting as poor as LA’s.
I bet you have fantastic bike lanes.
That’s true, and bike paths galore.
Trouble at t’ mill
U.N. Climate Conference Rejects EU Demands to Commit to Fossil Fuel Phase-Out
One nation syndrome…
the agreement calls on countries to “voluntarily” accelerate their climate action
https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2025/11/22/u-n-climate-conference-rejects-eu-demands-to-commit-to-fossil-fuel-phase-out/
Miliband will be only too happy to oblige.
The Canadian Prime Minister wants the oil sands to produce de-carbonized oil. I read that the cost to de-carbonize can be $10 to $20 per barrel on a barrel of oil selling for $50 to $60. This sounds like an economic “fools errand”. Surely this makes the product either expensive or unprofitable. Any thoughts on this observation from those in the know?
de-carbonized oil
Er, what?
Ethane is C2H6
Propane is C3H8
etc etc
Decarbonise them…
Diesels could probably be modified to burn pure elemental sulfur. This fuel contains no carbon. It would also reduce tailgating.
Adding some hydrogen in with the sulfur would help with the tailgating problem.
The same process as produces dehydrated water?
Isn’t “de-carbonized oil” an oxymoron?
Isn’t “de-carbonized oil” an oxymoron?
No oxygen involved – just the utterance of a common or garden variety moron.
Well, after decarbonising, you get 6H, 8H, and an explosion.
How will anyone be able to tell if oil flowing out of a pipeline into a tanker has been “de-carbonized”?
I know –
the suppliers will SAY it has been “de-carbonized”.
…… and might as well add “organic”, “non-GMO”, and if they really want to take the piss – “fair-trade”.
What about gluten free? I only want gluten-free oil.
They should concentrate on liquified coal..
The PM is scientifically illiterate. More you do not need to know.
The energy returned on energy invested is relatively low for mined oil sands processes, compared to pumping oil out of an underground reservoir. The only “de-carbonizing” involved is reducing the amount of fuel it takes to produce and process the oil. But there is a huge amount of such oil available and a ready market for it in Canada’s next door neighbor. There is bit of an industry/government scam going on in Canada so that taxpayers pick up the cost of sequestering the CO2 produced…thus benefiting producers…while the “De-carbonizing story” allows the average information deficient yet eco-sensitive Canadian voter to swoon for the self proclaimed eco-friendly governing party who is protecting the population from the coming CO2 thermogeddon.…while still allowing the resource to be developed. It is an interesting exercise in tax revenue maximization and propagandized manipulation of the voting public.
Makes good asphalt for roads, shingles, etc.
Are any of the AI bots neutral regarding climate change?
No, far from it.
You’ll get the same doomism that Wikipedia and Covering Climate Now regurgitate.
It has been my experience that the various LLMs will all back-down if challenged about their claims. The problem is the laymen, who vote, who don’t know enough to challenge the claims and therefore accept the initial assertions at face value. Thus, the LLMs reinforce the paradigm accepted by the ignorant, but cover themselves against claims of misinformation or fraud by willingly acknowledging ‘making a mistake,’ when the ‘corrected’ information was always available to them. I don’t know how one avoids concluding that there is a conspiracy among the members of the mainstream media, who are promoting the LLMs, to convince the general public that fossil fuels are an existential threat.
Describe ‘neutral’
A CHRONOLOGY OF EXPENSIVE WIND AND SOLAR HUBRIS IN IMPOVERISHED MAINE
https://willempost.substack.com/p/a-chronology-of-wind-and-solar-hubris?r=1n3sit&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&triedRedirect=true
By Dudley Gray
.
Thirty years of Democrat power, interrupted only once, has left Maine in a sorry state. A chronological “lesson of failure” is necessary to explain just how badly Maine residents have been represented.
.
Besides closing the Maine Yankee nuclear power plant, Governor Angus King forced our two public utilities, CMP and Bangor Hydro, to divest their generating assets, primarily hydro-power dams. This law, enacted in 1999, caused the sale of the utilities to the Spaniards and the Canadians, respectively.
.
These actions, between 1995 and 2003, set the stage for the widespread adoption of wind and solar systems on a large scale, without any benefit to Maine ratepayers and to the environment.
Please keep in mind that electricity rates were 8.4 cents per kWh in 1995
Governor King left incoming Governor Baldacci a $1.1 billion structural deficit.
.
Then, Governor Baldacci, current vice-chairman of Avangrid, the Spanish subsidiary of Iberdrola, owner of CMP, gave us the Expedited Wind Law, which destroyed our mountaintops, ridges, and vistas, but still without any benefit to Maine ratepayers and the environment.
Governor Baldacci’s crowning achievement was to hand the incoming Republican Governor Paul LePage an even bigger $1.3 billion structural deficit.
.
Governor LePage challenged this travesty by freezing hiring, eliminating no-show jobs, cutting expenses, renegotiating the state liquor contract, and repaying Maine hospitals $750 million in Maine-Care bad debt.
He left office in 2019 and gave Governor Mills a $167.8 million surplus, which she and the Democrat legislature have squandered beyond belief.
As Janet Mills leaves office to run against Sen. Susan Collins, she hands the next occupant of the Blaine House a $949 million deficit.
.
We desperately need a conservative Republican Governor and sane legislature to stop the bleeding; otherwise, the state will end up statistically bankrupt, like Washington County.
.
Lastly, Maine has over 400 grid-scale windmills and over 2 million solar panels in 141 separate solar setups, while at the same time electricity rates are nearing $0.30/kWh, similar to Europe.
.
Somebody needs to explain the benefit to Maine’s native people and the benefit to the environment, and also who got rich on these all these scams, in addition to two of our above-mentioned Governors.
EXPENSIVE FLOATING OFFSHORE WINDMILLS IN IMPOVERISHED STATE OF MAINE
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/floating-offshore-wind-systems-in-the-impoverished-state-of-maine
.
Despite the meager floating offshore MW in the world, pro-wind politicians, bureaucrats, etc., aided and abetted by the lapdog Main Media and “academia/think tanks”, in the impoverished State of Maine, continue to fantasize about building 850-ft-tall floating offshore windmills, each mounted on a 50% submerged, steel platform at least 250 ft x 250 ft x 75 ft tall to maintain the windmill in upright position in all conditions.
.
Maine government bureaucrats, etc., in a world of their own climate-fighting fantasies, want to have about 3,000 MW of floating wind turbines by 2040; a most expensive, totally unrealistic goal, that would further impoverish the already-poor State of Maine for many decades.
Those bureaucrats, etc., would help fatten the lucrative, 20-y, tax-shelters of mostly out-of-state, multi-millionaire, wind-subsidy chasers, who likely have minimal regard for: 1) Impacts on the environment and the fishing and tourist industries of Maine, and 2) Already-overstressed, over-taxed, over-regulated Maine ratepayers and taxpayers, who are trying to make ends meet in a near-zero, real-growth economy.
.
Those fishery-destroying, 850-ft-tall floaters, with 24/7/365 strobe lights, visible 30 miles from any shore, would cost at least $7,500/ installed kW, or at least $22.5 billion, if built in 2023 (more after 2023)
.
Almost the entire supply of the Maine projects would be designed and made in Europe, then transported across the Atlantic Ocean, in European specialized ships, then unloaded at a new, $500-million Maine storage/pre-assembly/staging/barge-loading area, then barged to European specialized erection ships for erection of the floating turbines. The financing will be mostly by European pension funds.
.
About 500 Maine people would have jobs during the erection phase
The other erection jobs would be by specialized European people, mostly on cranes and ships
About 200 Maine people would have long-term O&M jobs, using European spare parts, during the 20-y electricity production phase.
https://www.maine.gov/governor/mills/news/governor-mills-signs-bill-create-jobs-advance-clean-energy-and-fight-climate-change-through
.
The Maine people have much greater burdens to look forward to for the next 20 years, courtesy of the Governor Mills incompetent, woke bureaucracy that has infested the state government
The Maine people need to finally wake up, and put an end to the climate scare-mongering, which aims to subjugate and further impoverish them, by voting the entire Democrat woke cabal out and replace it with rational Republicans in 2024
The present course leads to financial disaster for the impoverished State of Maine and its people.
The purposely-kept-ignorant Maine people do not deserve such maltreatment
.
Electricity Cost
Assume a $750 million, 100 MW project consists of foundations, wind turbines, cabling to shore, and installation at $7,500/kW.
Production 100 MW x 8766 h/y x 0.40, CF = 350,640,000 kWh/y
Amortize bank loan for $375 million, 50% of project, at 6.0%/y for 20 years, 9.194 c/kWh.
Owner return on $375 million, 50% of project, at 10%/y for 20 years, 12.385 c/kWh
Banks and Owners get 21.579/36.579 = 59% of the project revenues
Offshore O&M, about 30 miles out to sea, 8 c/kWh.
Supply chain, special ships, and ocean transport, 3 c/kWh
All other items, 4 c/kWh
Total cost 9.194 + 12.385 + 8 + 3 + 4 = 36.579 c/kWh
Less 50% subsidies (ITC, 5-y depreciation, interest deduction on borrowed funds) 18.290 c/kWh
Owner sells to utility at 18.290 c/kWh
.
Excluded costs, at a future 30% W/S annual penetration on the grid, based on UK and German experience:
– Onshore grid expansion/reinforcement to connect far-flung W/S systems, about 2 c/kWh
– A fleet of traditional power plants to quickly counteract W/S variable output, on a less than minute-by-minute basis, 24/7/365, which means more Btu/kWh, more CO2/kWh, more cost of about 2 c/kWh
– A fleet of traditional power plants to provide electricity during 1) low-wind periods, 2) high-wind periods, when rotors are locked in place, and 3) low solar periods during mornings, evenings, at night, snow/ice on panels, which means more Btu/kWh, more CO2/kWh, more cost of about 2 c/kWh
– Pay W/S system Owners for electricity they could have produced, if not curtailed, about 1 c/kWh
– Importing electricity at high prices, when W/S output is low, 1 c/kWh
– Exporting electricity at low prices, when W/S output is high, 1 c/kWh
– Disassembly on land and at sea, reprocessing and storing at hazardous waste sites, about 2 c/kWh
Total ADDER = 11 c/kWh
THE IMPOVERISHED, DYSFUNCTIONAL STATE OF MAINE
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/the-dysfunctional-state-of-maine
By Willem Post
.
The over-taxed, over-regulated, already-impoverished Maine people are super-screwed, trying to make ends meet in a near-zero, real growth Maine economy
The Maine economy has lots of low-tech/low-pay/low-benefit, bs jobs
The Maine economy has lots of woke, leftist bureaucrats
Screwed-over Mainers also have to pay for poverty-stricken, aliens of different cultures from all over, who illegally enter the US, a federal felony
.
Those unvetted, illegal, often voting aliens, from all-over, are:
– the dregs of Third World countries, sent to Maine by their US-hating, leftist, woke governments, in cahoots with Soros/Biden-financed NGOs
– getting free housing, free food, a never-empty credit card, free phones, free healthcare, free education/job training and whatever other goodies they want.
.
They mainly suck from the government tit:
– have no skills, no training, no education, no modern industrial experience.
– will take low-tech/low-pay/low-benefit jobs at 30% less than screwed-over Mainers.
– are often good at crime, murder, rape, drug and human trafficking, and driving vehicles into native merrymakers.
– the tens of millions of incompatible, subversive, walk-ins would rather undermine, instead of fight for traditional European and US values and culture.
.
Many millions of illegal aliens have to be shipped back where they came from, before they forever ruin the US, as they ruined Europe, France ,the UK, Ireland, Spain, etc.
.
Visual Ugliness of wind and Solar: Down-trodden Mainers often have to put up with the visual ugliness and noise of hundreds of windmills, that are often idle, because of too little wind year-round, and many thousands of acres of solar panels, that are often covered with snow and ice in winter; there is no solar at night.
.
Girls Competing with Boys on Girls Teams: Down-trodden Maine families also have to endure the insults of government-imposed mandates of having their girls compete with “boys” on girls’ teams, and “sharing” girl bathrooms and locker rooms, and “losing” their matches to the “boys”, all as mandated by woke Governor Mills, surrounded by her cabal of idiots and her ingrown clique of bureaucrats sucking from the government tit.
.
Experience of Denmark with Palestinians
The first generation (1992 arrivals):
Total accepted: 321 Palestinians
Still in Denmark by 2019: 270 people; about 84% remained.
Convicted of crimes: 204 people (63.6%).
Prison sentences: 71 people (22.1%).
Welfare dependency:
In 2003, 238 of 321 (74%) received some form of benefit.
In 2019, 176 full-time equivalents were on welfare.
Of these, 122 were on disability pensions; meaning roughly two-thirds of working-age people were on permanent pension payments.
The second generation (their children):
Total children: 999 born or raised in Denmark
Each couple has many children, because each child gets a monthly government check until 18.
Convicted of crimes: 337 (33.7%).
Prison sentences: 65 (6.5%).
This means the crime rate dropped between generations; from 63% down to 34%; but remained far higher than the Danish national average.
93-95% of Palestinians are Muslim, who do not marry Danish women.
In 2019, the Danish Justice Minister stated: “These asylum seekers should not have been let in”.
Norway, Sweden, etc., had similar experiences.
.
Denmark: 72% of gang-crime convicts have non-Western background, i.e. 15% of the Danish population has 5 times the crime rate.
https://willempost.substack.com/p/denmark-72-of-gang-crime-convicts?r=1n3sit&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&triedRedirect=true
Well you could live in MN
Minnesota — land of ten-thousand lakes and 10×10**10 mosquitos.
And 500,000 inexperienced, no skill, no education, walk-in, Islamic Somalis, sucking from many government-program tits, and embezzling several hundred million dollars of SNAP funds each year.
Trump finally nixed their “temporary” BS status, authorized by AUTOPEN Biden
True Norwegian Story
A Pakistani male, 32 years old, dressed in fancy, traditional, Pakistani garb, as if he is an important person, walks several paces in front of his 24 year-old wife, who pushes a baby carriage with 2 children, with 2 on each side holding on, a total of 6 children.
He has to attend Norwegian classes to receive a signature from the teacher to continue to receive free housing, free food, free healthcare, and a free allowance for incidentals, etc.
He has to go for interviews for jobs, but he has no education, no experience. He gets a signature from the employer as proof of the interview, to continue to receive subsidies.
He came as a “refuge” to Norway, at 22 years old, did not speak a word of Norwegian, married a Pakistani bride, 14 years old, brought in from Pakistan by the Norwegian government. She was pregnant a few weeks after the wedding and produce 6 kids in 10 years. Each child receives a government allowance.
Norway is rich, has a $2 trillion pension fund, invested in world equities for 5 million people, of which 500,000 are “refugees”. The Norwegian government rakes off a percentage of the total each year.
The Norwegian government brings in “refuges” to satisfy Brussels, which means Norway can trade in the EU as if a member, and well-off
Norwegians can have vacation houses in Spain, Italy, Turkey, Greece, etc., but it also means Germans (WWII invaders) can have vacation houses in Norway.
Prior to Brussels arrangement, no foreigner was allowed to own real estate in Norway.
The “EBT moms” problem is pervasive – Women who game the welfare system (and the taxpayer) by deliberately having multiple children with multiple men and refusing to keep a father in the picture. Those kids often grow up to be “just like their parents”.
The “EBT moms” expect to live off a multitude of welfare programs. Many of these women have minimal education and work experience. They live practically for free on the taxpayer’s dime.
Revelations of an “EBT/SNAP mom”, from X
.
If y’all was really smart you’d understand “kids is the biggest hustle out there”.
I don’t clock into no job,
I let Uncle Sam and baby daddies cut me a check every month. 5 kids = 5 bags.
Food stamps, free rent, free healthcare, and child support on top of that.
My bills paid before I even wake up.
Everybody keep asking why I had 5 kids at age 26, because every single one come with a check attached.
My life secured, while y’all stressing over 9 to 5s.
Don’t be mad at me, be mad at you ain’t catch on to the hustle.
.
Food subsidies have had the unfortunate side effect of helping to destroy the nuclear family, creating generations of fatherless children and skyrocketing crime rates.
.
Around 23% of all US households have single mothers.
Among black families, 47% are single mother households, 25% in Hispanic households and 12% in white households.
Approximately 7% of white families use SNAP, while 27% of black families and 23% of Hispanic families.
.
There is a clear trend here: Single mothers and minority families are the largest contingent of welfare beneficiaries per capita and the system is almost designed to reward their dependency.
.
They aim for that “career dependency”, as revealed by the EBT/SNAP mom
You forgot to mention the noseeums — black flies.
Very saddened to read this. I lived in Maine from late 1969 to late 1975.
We have black flies in Vermont. If you work in a most area of your field they attack in droves, and leave you with big welts all over.
Then there are horseflies, that attack while taking a walk on a dirt road. They bite something fierce.
When we hunt, we cover ourselves with netting, as otherwise you end up in sick bay.
Australian song “Fifty million blowflies can’t be wrong.” Even on YouTube, I believe.
The county I live is debating whether or not to allow a solar farm to come in and build a large facility out in the country. This showed up on the FB group that is campaigning against the farm. What do y’all think about solar farms being tornado magnets?
AN INTERESTING CONCLUSION… SOLAR FARMS WILL BECOME THUNDERSTORM and TORONADO INCUBATORS and MAGNETS.
As more & more counties get more solar farms…..
From a STEPHENVILLE resident, George Franklin:
I should start by telling you what bonafides I have for writing this. I am a retired aerospace engineer. A literal rocket scientist if you will. I worked on MX (Peacekeeper) Space Shuttle, Hubble, Brilliant Pebbles, PACOSS, Space Station, MMU, B2, the Sultan of Brunei’s half billion dollar private 747 with crystal showers, gold sinks and 100 dollar a yard coiffed silk carpets. I designed a satphone installation on prince Jeffry’s 757. I did all of the design work for the structure of Mark 1V propulsion module currently flying on at least 3 spacecraft that I know of. Some of the more exciting projects I have worked on are not shareable. I am also am FAA certified glider pilot and FAI certified gold glider pilot. I fly both full scale and model sailplanes. I am Microsoft certified and ComTIA A+ certified.
SOLAR PANELS are at best about 20% EFFICIENT. They convert almost 0% of the UV light that hits them. None of the visible spectrum and only some of the IR spectrum. At the same time as they are absorbing light they are absorbing heat from the sun. This absorbed HEAT is RADIATED INTO THE adjacent ATMOSPHERE. It should be obvious what happens next. When air is warmed it rises. Even small differences in ordinary land surfaces are capable of creating powerful forces of weather like thunderstorms and tornadoes. These weather phenomena are initiated and reinforced by land features as they are blown downwind. It is all too obvious to me what will happen with the heat generated by an entire solar farm. SOLAR FARMS WILL BECOME THUNDERSTORM and TORONADO INCUBATORS and MAGNETS.
Solar panels are dark and and they emit energy to the space above them when they are not being radiated. This is known as black-body radiation. Satellites flying in space use this phenomenon to cool internal components. If they didn’t do this they would fry themselves.
So solar farms not only produce more heat in summer than the original land that they were installed on, but they also produce more cooling in winter, thus exacerbating weather extremes.
So I conclude with this. THERE IS NOTHING GREEN ABOUT GREEN ENERGY except the DIRTY MONEY flowing into corrupt pockets.
There is no such thing as green energy. The science doesn’t exist. The technology doesn’t exist. The engineering doesn’t exist. We are being pushed to save the planet with solutions that are worse than the problems.
I have always thought that trailer parks were the tornado-magnets of the earth. Upon cursory examination (at best) this comment seems to have the same level of veracity.
That’s a bit harsh! <g> Everybody’s entitled to their opinion, surely. Opinions are like arse-holes – everybody’s got one, and many don’t pass the smell test.
I’ve got plenty myself – all equally valueless, like everyone else’s.
Facts, unfortunately, make a mockery of opinions, no matter how smart, well-educated or handsome the opener is. That’s my opinion, anyway.
BBC Country File from the Somerset Levels today was a classic example of their climate obsessed bias.
Questioning a land owner on the reasons for extended flooding for a couple of years running; it just wasn’t going where the presenter wanted. That pesky farmer was giving the real reasons, drainage ditches need clearing out (he was doing his bit), the Environment Agency is not maintaining rivers like they used to, upstream housing development is increasing run off; So the interviewer interjects in a chastising tone:- river natural diversity can’t be sacrificed for drainage efficiency you know, and throws in the other thing to blame, climate change of course! Which was then reinforced in the voiceover postscript.
Story tip here is an article from the Journal Science I’m sure the group can have some fun with. https://www.science.org/content/article/global-carbon-emissions-will-soon-flatten-or-decline
Story tip – I submitted this through the form too.
At https://www.concordmonitor.com/2025/11/23/350nh-assures-continued-operation/ I just read this about the New Hampshire branch of 350.org:
The surprise shutdown of national climate group 350.org has the state group 350NH scrambling to assure people that they’re still very much around.
“We’re completely independent,” said Rebecca Beaulieu, communications director for the Dover-based organization. “We share a vision and goals … but [the shutdown] won’t affect us.”
—–
Digging around a bit I found https://subscriber.politicopro.com/article/eenews/2025/11/14/green-group-350-org-suspends-us-operations-ee-00651124
Green group 350.org suspends US operations, cuts global staff by 30 percent
The group will keep three U.S. positions open in hopes of reviving operations in the future.
| 11/14/2025 06:36 AM EST | Updated 11/14/2025 02:13 PM EST
350.org, the green group that mounted a stand against the Keystone XL pipeline, is suspending U.S. operations amid a financial crunch.
CLIMATEWIRE | BELÉM, Brazil — Environmental group 350.org, which spearheaded the movement to block the Keystone XL oil pipeline, will “temporarily suspend programming” in the U.S. and other countries amid funding woes, according to a letter obtained on Thursday by POLITICO.
The letter to outside organizations from Executive Director Anne Jellema said 350.org had suffered a 25 percent drop in income for its 2025 and 2026 fiscal years, compelling it to halt operations. The group will keep three U.S. staff members in hopes of reviving operations in the future.
——–
No mention of these at https://350.org/media/
The Greatest Mass Delusion in Scientific History: How Climate Science Built an Empire on Meaningless Statistics. By Claude Sonnet 4 (Anthropic AI) June 4 2025
See Page 9 of 12