IPCC vs. The Facts: The Case for Climate Realism—pdf download

By Ken Wilson, P.Eng. (ret), Jan. 10, 2023

This essay, available as a PDF download, examines the science underlying the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) from a climate-realist perspective.

This science is supposed to be “settled,” “certain,” and beyond question, based on a reported “consensus” of more than 2,000 scientists who contribute to the IPCC’s reports. The IPCC’s findings are, we’re often told, “The Science,” and non-scientists—politicians, the media and the public—are supposed to accept “the Science” without question.

However, if we do begin to question “the Science,” serious problems emerge, including many claims by the IPCC that do not stand up to scrutiny, including accelerating sea levels (there has been no alarming change in the rate of global sea level rise since 1860), increased frequency of “extreme” weather events such as hurricanes (not happening), and many others.

Above all, the scientific evidence does not support the IPCC’s key claim: that increased levels of carbon dioxide are causing corresponding increased warming. If this isn’t true, then the entire IPCC case collapses.

The article is about 2 mb and can be downloaded by clicking on this link.

If accurate data don’t fit the ‘green’ narrative, then hide the data

BP considers scrapping its annual energy review because report’s numbers undermine company’s rhetoric about its pursuit of alternative energy

By Robert Bryce, Wall Street Journal, Dec. 7, 2022

Reuters recently reported that energy giant BP is “considering ending the publication of its Statistical Review of World Energy, over 70 years after it first published the benchmark report.” The reason? The report’s numbers are supposedly undermining the company’s rhetoric about its pursuit of alternative energy. To give in to such claims and cancel the Statistical Review— one of the most reliable energy resources in the world— would be an egregious mistake.

The review is a benchmark report. No other entity, corporate or public, publishes such a wide variety of data. Because the Statistical Review is published in spreadsheet form, its data can be easily used to detect and illustrate trends in everything from coal use in Vietnam (it’s soaring) to the electricity generated annually by America’s nuclear reactors (it’s falling).

I look at the review almost daily, as do many people in the media, energy and government sectors. That BP would even consider halting publication—the cost of which amounts to decimal dust amid the company’s 2021 revenue of $164 billion—shows how a huge company can be cowed by fashion and fleeting political considerations.

Continue reading “If accurate data don’t fit the ‘green’ narrative, then hide the data”

CBS promotes scientist who predicted billions would die from global cooling and hunger

Stanford University’s Paul Ehrlich continues to spread pseudoscience about climate change and overpopulation

By Michael Shellenberger, Jan. 3, 2023

On Sunday night, CBS’s flagship news program, “60 Minutes,” highlighted warnings from a Stanford University biologist named Paul Ehrlich. In the broadcast, Ehrlich claimed, “humanity is not sustainable… for the entire planet, you’d need five more Earths.”

But that claim was debunked in the peer-reviewed scientific journal, Plos Biology, by leading scientists, including the Chief Scientist of The Nature Conservancy, nearly a decade ago.

And newly available archival footage shows Ehrlich claiming that global cooling, not global warming, would result in global famine. “As you know, we’re already cooling the planet,” he said in a 1970 speech (click on this link).

Continue reading “CBS promotes scientist who predicted billions would die from global cooling and hunger”

Ontario plans for ‘green’ energy completely unrealistic

New power plants and transmission equipment will occupy about 14 times as much land as Toronto, report says

By Ran­dall Den­ley, National Post, Jan. 6, 2023

The Ontario government’s spending on inducements for the electric car industry has been something to behold. The most recent was a $259-million gift to GM Canada, to help it retool an Ingersoll plant to make electric commercial vans.

That was preceded by $513 million in provincial money to further electric car development at Stellantis plants in Windsor and Brampton, and to develop a battery research centre. Earlier, Ford Motor Co. got $295 million to make electric cars in Oakville.

The province is also putting “hundreds of millions” into a $4-billion battery plant being built by Stellantis in Windsor. The government wouldn’t cite an exact figure so as not to prejudice negotiations with other corporations lined up for handouts. A Belgian battery maker is building a $1.5-billion plant near Belleville with substantial, but again, unspecified provincial support.

Continue reading “Ontario plans for ‘green’ energy completely unrealistic”

You can’t get there (Net Zero) from here (there’s not nearly enough battery power)

This is the Executive Summary of a PDF document, “Lack of energy storage makes renewables-only grids a pipe dream,” that exposes the unrealistic assumption that there will be enough battery power to back up ‘green’ energy sources

By Francis Menton, Global Warming Policy Foundation, Dec. 1, 2022

Advanced economies – including most of Europe, much of the United States, Cana­da, Australia, New Zealand, and others – have embarked upon a quest to ‘decarbon­ize’ their economies and achieve ‘Net Zero’ emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.

The Net Zero plans turn almost entirely on building large num­bers of wind turbines and solar panels to replace generation facilities that use fossil fuels (coal, oil and natural gas) to produce electricity. The idea is that, as enough wind turbines and solar panels are built, the former coal, oil, and gas-burning central stations can gradually be closed, leaving an emissions-free electricity system.

But wind and solar facilities provide only intermittent power, which must be ful­ly backed up by something – fossil fuel generators, nuclear plants, batteries, or some other form of energy storage – so that customer demand can be matched at times of low wind and sun, thus keeping the grid from failing.

The governments in question have, then, mostly or entirely ruled out fossil fuels and nuclear as the backup, leaving some form of storage as the main or only remaining option. They have then simply assumed that storage in some form will become available. Their consideration of how much storage will be needed, how it will work, and how much it will cost has been entirely inadequate.

Continue reading “You can’t get there (Net Zero) from here (there’s not nearly enough battery power)”

New Year’s resolutions for Prime Minister Trudeau

The government’s draconian policies on curbing CO2 have failed on every front—spectacularly! It’s time for a new, less extreme approach

By Ron Barmby

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government had a rough year in 2022 on the climate-change file. So let’s review the events and help him make better resolutions for 2023!

2021 ended with the 26th annual Conference of the Parties (COP) in Glasgow, Scotland failing to agree to phase out their fossil-fuel public-enemy number one: coal. Demand rebounded in 2022 and worldwide coal consumption is now forecast to hit an all-time high in 2023.

Early in 2022, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released the balance of its Assessment Report 6 (AR6) series, which the United Nations (UN) Secretary General proclaimed was a “Code Red for Humanity.”

Continue reading “New Year’s resolutions for Prime Minister Trudeau”

Should West be penalized for making the world better off?

If we in the West are to pay damages for the Industrial Revolution, shouldn’t we also consider the extraordinary wealth that process has helped spread around the world?

By Ger­ard Baker, Wall Street Journal, Nov. 22, 2022

The latest synod of our modern church of climate change theologians, otherwise known as COP27, concluded its deliberations in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, with a “breakthrough” agreement over the “loss and damage” provisions of the global governance regime they have established to tackle climate change.

Before they left their air-conditioned hotels and hopped into limousines to take them to their jets for the long journey home, these courageous fighters for carbon neutrality agreed to create a fund on the principle that rich countries like the U.S. should compensate poor countries for the damage caused by climate change. Successive administrations, Democratic and Republican, long opposed this idea, justifiably fearing that it represents an open-ended scheme to funnel American taxpayers’ money to beacons of planet-saving good governance like South Africa, Pakistan and Indonesia.

The idea is that developing countries are being literally inundated with the costs of climate change in the form of rising sea levels, extreme weather and the other horsemen of the meteorological apocalypse. Developed countries are responsible for most of the carbon that’s already in the atmosphere and therefore should be made to pay for the costs of climate damage to small developing countries that have contributed little to the planet’s warming.

There are several problems with this.

Continue reading “Should West be penalized for making the world better off?”

If we’re in a ‘climate crisis’, why are most people better off?

Fossil fuels have dramatically improved humanity’s quality of life. This would not be true if fossil fuels were the enemy climate alarmists want us to believe

A questioner on Quora asks: “If we are in the middle of a ‘climate crisis,’ as is alleged by many, then why is the health, wealth, and quality of life for the majority of people still improving so rapidly?”

A good question, and here’s a possible answer. Look at the following chart, from Alex Epstein’s book The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels, keeping in mind that we measure a country’s fossil-fuel consumption by the amount of CO2 produced:

Fossil fuel use and human progress—the big picture. Source: Alex Epstein, The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels, Chapter 3.

Note that for almost all of the last 2,000 years (and, of course, long before that), the condition of humanity did not substantially improve.

Continue reading “If we’re in a ‘climate crisis’, why are most people better off?”

‘De-growth’ craze another crackpot disaster in the making

What would a ‘post-economic-growth’ world look like? It wouldn’t be pretty. Like Manta rays that must keep swimming or die (sharks too), societies that don’t grow eventually devolve into oppression, chaos, anarchy and then ruin

By Andy Kessler, Wall Street Journal, Oct. 31, 2022

The modern world is constantly subjected to crackpot movements that eventually fail, but not before causing serious damage. Karl Marx was a crackpot. So was the John Birch Society in its mission to fight communism “behind every tree.” The latest is Modern Monetary Theory and unlimited dollar creation for government spending, which caused today’s runaway inflation.

In the 1970s, the Club of Rome insisted that for the world to be ecologically sound, we needed a “no-growth economy.” This was as dumb as the debunked Malthus theory that population growth would outstrip food. The disgraced Club of Rome thankfully went dormant. But it’s baaaack.

Continue reading “‘De-growth’ craze another crackpot disaster in the making”