?

Log in

No account? Create an account
 
 
05 October 2010 @ 11:07 pm
How Stupid Can It Get? Carbon Capture, Huhne Surrealism  
Via Junk Science


Households face £769-a-year rise in power bills to 'rewire the nation' for green energy

A £200billion plan to switch to green energy could cost households an average of £769 a year, it was claimed today.
Industry regulator, Ofgem, said a massive construction plan is needed to build new wind farms, power stations, including nuclear, and a modern national grid.
The first stage, a £32billion plan to build new pipelines and pylon networks, has been given the go-ahead.
Ofgem said this element will cost households a relatively modest sum of an average of £6 a year.
However, industry analysts said the full £200billion cost would put up the average annual bill of £1,194 by £769 a year - or 68 per cent - to £2,000. (Daily Mail)

Legalised robbery


And more in the pipeline:

Britain Still Committed To Carbon Capture: Minister
Britain is still committed to developing carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology as part of its efforts to reduce carbon emissions, Britain's energy and climate change minister said on Monday.CCS may cut the contribution of coal- and gas-fired power plants to global warming by trapping and burying the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide, but it is as yet untested on a commercial scale.
"With a new coal-powered plant opening in China every week, our ability to develop carbon capture and storage on a commercial scale makes business sense," said Chris Huhne at a carbon conference in London. (Reuters)

Why is JunkScience.com so opposed to CCS? (calculations)
[...] Even if we assume Hansen's most extreme climate sensitivity estimate of 1 K/W/m2 to be correct we would be consuming 30% more coal and increasing industrial electricity cost by 50% in a effort to "save" at most 0.15 deg C avoided warming over the 90 years to end of century.

Carbon capture and storage (CCS), the other financial considerations
[...] We also looked at Hansen's claims here and found them ridiculously large but that's another matter, workings are laid out below for all who may be interested.
Let's just assume for the moment that these are legitimate estimates of possible "savings", what are we getting for $135 trillion?
At most 0.15 °C avoided warming.
That means it would only cost 900 trillion dollars to avoid 1 °C -- a bargain, no?
A mere 18% of global GDP for 90 years could save 1 °C of purely hypothetical warming. Aren't you excited?
Of course we couldn't really avoid that much warming since Hansen's numbers simply don't add up. In fact, trying to manipulate global mean temperature by this means would cost us the whole $900 trillion for an insignificant 0.3 °C at most since Earth is not really very sensitive to atmospheric carbon dioxide levels above a few tens of parts per million (100 ppmv yields roughly three-fourths of all the warming CO2 can practically deliver)

We need more nuclear plants, not wind farms
(Kent News, Nigel Farage wrote:)
Britain faces a power crisis of unimaginable proportions. Our generating capacity is degrading at a rapid pace, and according to energy minister Chris Huhne, we face power blackouts in a few years.
Indeed, we are looking at a shortfall of at least 40 per cent as our elderly nuclear and conventional gas, coal and oil power stations reach their dotage. As they close, the spectre of fuel poverty will continue to raise its head.
During last winter, that coldest of cold snaps, according to official statistics, thousands of pensioners died because they were unable to afford to heat their homes. Sadly this is just the beginning.
Our economy runs on power. After wages, the biggest cost to most businesses is energy. We have all seen domestic bills soar in recent years, cutting into our disposable income and making life much less pleasant. How can this be?
It is not as if we don't know that we need power, it is not as if siren voices haven't been warning us for at least a decade that unless we seriously invest in energy generation we will be back to candles and watermills.
Only last week, Mr Huhne was bobbing self-importantly around in the midst of the Great Thanet wind farm. He, too, is worried about the shortfall in our energy supply, and he, like so many of our political and social elite, sees developments like the Swedish Vattenfall's wind farm as the only way forward. It isn't, and here is why. / continues

I disagreed (in comments) with the need for nuclear, suggesting gas as a far more logical, cheaper energy source with half the emissions of coal and abundant, now cheap to recover shale gas within the UK borders.

Clothcap POV
Fraud 2. Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)

Fraud 3. Carbon credits
Fraud 4. The Wind Energy Boondoggle
Supplement to Fraud 4. Wind Energy
Fraud 5. Biofuel Boondoggle

The thing is if senseless (except for Oxburgh's profit) CCS is forced upon the goyim at their expense that means coal and gas, of which there are centuries worth in many countries, is "green" energy and there is even less reason than none to have wind farms and their associated, horrendously expensive infrastructure upgrade and intrusive spy meters, nor is there any point (if there ever was) in hooking up to EU energy.

Reducing CO2 Emissions is a Crime Against Humanity
And nature.
What makes the whole stupendously expensive exercise (pointless wind energy, its prescribed infrastructure, carbon credits fraud, evil biofuels, idiotic CCS) an enormous con against the public is the fact that additions to the atmospheric CO2 reservoir have almost zero effect on the climate yet doubling pre industrial levels would give an average increase in crop yield of 12% that would go a long way towards the calculated 30% increase required for the extra 3 billion mouths anticipated this century. It would reduce reduce the amount of land necessary to produce the extra requirement. That makes the likes of Oxburgh that advocate burying CO2 criminals against humanity and nature. He joins the ranks of the UN and EU, UK and US governments that have caused millions to die by avoiding the use of DDT and by legislating the use of food crops for biofuels so pricing food beyond the reach of many, including aid organisations.
The ugly 10.10 video did the world a favour in showing the true face of the eco fascism that the UN, Cameron, Brown, Blair, the EU and Obama are herding us toward with the aid of the Club of Rome, Madrid, Budapest, the Grantham Institute, Fabian Society, the Royal Society, CRU, GIS, NOAA, NSDIC and others that deceitfully propagandize corrupted science.

.
Accompanying article: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/10/03/watts-up-with-nuuk/


Original with text and other images:
Are Heat Records Due To CO2? Ooops, No New Hot Record Temps In Last 30+ Years

Also:
Has 2009-2010 been the warmest period ever?
Progressive Enhancement of Global Temperature Trends
WUWT guest post by Willis Eschenbach: GISScapades
Inspired by this thread on the lack of data in the Arctic Ocean, I looked into how GISS creates data when there is no data.
Global Temperature Is Warmest on Record, NASA’s Hansen Says: Reality Check

The Improving State of the World
Pielke on ground water extraction causing sea level rise

The NIPCC web site  (Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change) Welcome to the REAL climate.
NIPCC Assessment Report

I find ozone has had a larger than allowed for influence on lower troposphere temperature variation. The following linked article explains some of the ways UV and ozone influence the climate. I'll add my thoughts in a later post.

Climatic Effects of Warming Due To Ultraviolet Chemistry By Joseph D’Aleo. CCM
Recent research by Robert Hodges and Jim Elsner of Florida State University (GRL June 2010) found the probability of three or more hurricanes hitting the United States goes up drastically during low points of the 11-year sunspot cycle related to reduced ultraviolet radiation during the quiet sun which leads to less warming of the upper atmosphere and thus greater instability of the atmosphere. Their work was published this month in the scientific journal Geophysical Research Letter.

Bin Laden is an "AGW by CO2" true believer
That's why his terrorist army sets fire to oil tankers:
Another 20 oil tankers burned as Pakistani Taliban claims responsibility for third attack in three days
On Friday, two separate militant attacks destroyed 27 vehicles en route to the southern crossing, killing a truck driver and his assistant.
Early this morning the attackers, using the same tactics, opened fire on trucks that were parked at a poorly-guarded terminal on the Khyber Pass, before setting them on fire.
A demonstration of the evil of power lust in controlling people via religion. In the West it works through greed and stupidity more so than dogma.