The Environment Thread

[Mark F]

Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg keeps dashing any hope that the world’s largest social media platform might be a positive force in the fight against catastrophic climate change.

In its latest disastrous move to fight the online epidemic of fake news, Facebook’s fact-checking effort announced last week that it was teaming up with CheckYourFact.com — an arm of the conservative, anti-science media site The Daily Caller.

The Daily Caller, which has published misinformation about climate science for years, was co-founded by the science-denying Fox News host Tucker Carlson and is backed by major conservative donors, including Charles and David Koch, the billionaire fossil fuel barons who are the single biggest funders of climate science misinformation.

https://thinkprogress.org/facebook-fact-checker-koch-climate-deniers-f5288be4c3f9/

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

1 hour ago, Mark F said:

Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg keeps dashing any hope that the world’s largest social media platform might be a positive force in the fight against catastrophic climate change.

In its latest disastrous move to fight the online epidemic of fake news, Facebook’s fact-checking effort announced last week that it was teaming up with CheckYourFact.com — an arm of the conservative, anti-science media site The Daily Caller.

The Daily Caller, which has published misinformation about climate science for years, was co-founded by the science-denying Fox News host Tucker Carlson and is backed by major conservative donors, including Charles and David Koch, the billionaire fossil fuel barons who are the single biggest funders of climate science misinformation.

https://thinkprogress.org/facebook-fact-checker-koch-climate-deniers-f5288be4c3f9/

oh FFS- need a revolution here... 

[Wideleft]

 

 

https://sites.uci.edu/zlabe/arctic-sea-ice-volumethickness/

Edited May 10, 2019 by Wideleft

[FrostyWinnipeg]

https://www.techradar.com/uk/news/cleaning-up-britain-goes-a-whole-week-without-coal-generated-electricity

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

 

[Wideleft]

 

 

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

1 hour ago, Wideleft said:

 

 

[pigseye]

3 hours ago, Wideleft said:

 

 

Funny stuff, he should stick to comedy.

Just once, I'd like to see a warmist come on and actually convince me of the problem, why won't they have debate on the subject?

Kenneth Richard absolutely kills it in todays blog,

https://notrickszone.com/2019/05/13/co2-climate-forcing-in-the-earth-system-context-the-honey-bee-versus-the-sun/

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

22 minutes ago, pigseye said:

Kenneth Richard absolutely kills it in todays blog,

https://notrickszone.com/2019/05/13/co2-climate-forcing-in-the-earth-system-context-the-honey-bee-versus-the-sun/

Is this the same dude who claimed that "Hundreds of papers published in 2017 prove that global warming is a myth." ?

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/400-papers-published-in-2017-prove-that-global-warming-is-myth/

 

Questionable science from NTZ, but Snopes' description of the site is spot on though:

" regurgitated material from a blog called the “No Tricks Zone” (NTZ), which highlights out-of-context sentences from (in most cases) legitimate scientific studies that the author of the blog incorrectly thinks dispute the tenets of anthropogenic global warming. The 400 studies in this latest piece cover topics wholly irrelevant to the question of anthropogenic global warming, including, for example, a study on the effect of wind turbines upon the viability of migratory bat populations."

 

And also, I think there is shady stuff going on with the data:

"numerous scientists listed in the report pointed out their their graphs had been digitally altered by NTZ to omit data, and that NTZ had either misinterpreted their papers or read them so superficially that the author of the post did not realize he was sometimes quoting from general background material and not the actual findings of the papers themselves."

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/400-papers-published-in-2017-prove-that-global-warming-is-myth/

 

The list of dodgey practices and misrepresentation on that site is LENGTHY. So why should anyone take the site at face value and not just outright reject the falsehoods and lies from that site? Is that not the most sane thing to do when dealing with a serial liar that profits from those lies? 

 

Edited May 13, 2019 by wanna-b-fanboy

[blue_gold_84]

You know you've suffered severe brain damage when your source for climate change information comes from a craptacular website like No Tricks Zone.

[Mark F]

This always misguided, ill informed blather about the cause of climate change is over except in certain rapidly shrinking centres of  bad information.   Sometimes intentional, sometimes not. Set the world back at least twenty five years, dealing with this. At a minimum getting off fossil fuels would save thousands of lives, and billions in medical costs, due to heart/respiratory system damage from inhaling toxic air fouled with combustion byproducts.    And......

An electric motor converting stored energy to do work, is substantially more efficient than a combustion engine, so if anyone claims to be concerned about the efficient use of resources, which saves money, they should favour electric cars.

Who ever isn't in favour of energy efficiency and reducing health damage and costs, put up your hand.

Anyway, in the real world...links at reddit/renewable energy.... https://www.reddit.com/r/RenewableEnergy/ (a great source for information.)

Quote

 

European solar deployment is set to surge to 20.4GW this year with a record-breaking 24.1GW forecast for 2020.

SolarPower Europe’s medium-scenario predicts a surge as EU member states look to hit their 2020 renewable energy targets.

“Last year, we again saw strong cost improvements with solar becoming the lowest-cost power generation source in more and more regions,” said Christian Westermeier, president, SolarPower Europe. “At the same time, new applications have quickly progressed, such as floating solar, while corporate renewable Power Purchase Agreements have reached a double-digit GW-level, and a market for merchant solar has emerged in several countries.” 

Leading the way Portugal and Spain, have been particular highlights for the European solar sector.

Impressively, global growth would appear set to continue even as the world’s three largest markets, China, US and India have hit their own unique roadblocks.

“Global solar demand continued to grow last year, as new emerging markets have embraced solar’s attractive business case – a clean, versatile and low-cost power generation source. This market diversification means interest in solar is rising at a rapid pace,” said Walburga Hemetsberger, CEO, SolarPower Europe.

 

2.

Quote

 

Last month Denmark’s biggest energy firm, Ørsted, said wind farms it is proposing for the North Sea will convert some of their excess power into gas. Electricity flowing in from offshore will feed on-shore electrolysis plants that split water to produce clean-burning hydrogen, with oxygen as a by-product. That would supply a new set of customers who need energy, but not as electricity. And it would take some strain off of Europe’s power grid as it grapples with an ever-increasing share of hard-to-handle renewable power.

Turning clean electricity into energetic gases such as hydrogen or methane is an old idea that is making a comeback as renewable power generation surges. That is because gases can be stockpiled within the natural gas distribution system to cover times of weak winds and sunlight. They can also provide concentrated energy to replace fossil fuels for vehicles and industries. Although many U.S. energy experts argue that this “power-to-gas” vision may be prohibitively expensive, some of Europe’s biggest industrial firms are buying in to the idea.

 

3.

Quote

 

The number of solar installations in the United States has officially surpassed 2 million, according to the latest data from Wood Mackenzie Power & Renewables and the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA).

The milestone comes just three years after the industry completed its millionth installation, a feat that took 40 years to achieve.

Wood Mackenzie analysts expect the U.S. to crack the 3 million mark in 2021 and 4 million in 2023.

"The rapid growth in the solar industry has completely reshaped the energy conversation in this country," said Abigail Ross Hopper, president and CEO of trade group SEIA. "This $17 billion industry is on track to double again in five years, and we believe that the 2020s will be the decade that solar becomes the dominant new form of energy generation."

 

 

4.  Toronto Star April 19th.

Quote

 

VANCOUVER—The emergence of a pair of large wildfires in the Kamloops region over the weekend signals an early start to B.C.’s fire season, according to a wildfire research scientist.

But it’s still too early to tell whether the blazes are harbingers of yet another record-breaking fire season for the province, which saw four per cent of its total forested area burned up over 2017 and 2018, said Mike Flannigan, a professor with the Department of Renewable Resources and director of the Western Partnership for Wildland Fire Science at the University of Alberta.

The year 2017 saw 1.2 million hectares of the province consumed by fire — a record at the time. The following year broke that record with 1.35 million hectares burned.

Meanwhile, a new report from federal government scientists with Environment and Climate Change Canada concluded that Canada is warming faster than the world average because of human-caused climate change. The report estimates the average annual temperature across Canada has jumped by 1.7 degrees since 1948 — more than twice the global average increase of 0.8 degrees during that time — and that temperatures are expected to keep rising for at least the next two decades, regardless of mitigation efforts.

 

 

Edited May 14, 2019 by Mark F

[pigseye]

You do realize that over the past 2 months global temperatures have plummeted by an unprecedented 0.6C. And May seems to be right on track to add to it. 

Has this even been publicized anywhere, even just mentioned in passing?

It's the largest temperature change in recorded history and there are no indications that it will change any time soon with the grand solar minimum approaching and expected to last 11 years.

No wonder all the doom and gloom prophecies now about the end of world in 12 years, just happens to coincide nicely with the expected 11 year cooling trend we are entering and would probably spell the end of the green new deal and other carbon tax scams the governments are trying to pull over on the masses.

As for Kenneth Richards, he's a denier, of course he's going to be ridiculed, still doesn't change the facts. If you think his facts are wrong, then argue then, otherwise, just move along, the subject is probably way over your head.  

[Wideleft]

1 hour ago, pigseye said:

You do realize that over the past 2 months global temperatures have plummeted by an unprecedented 0.6C. And May seems to be right on track to add to it. 

Has this even been publicized anywhere, even just mentioned in passing?

It's the largest temperature change in recorded history and there are no indications that it will change any time soon with the grand solar minimum approaching and expected to last 11 years.

No wonder all the doom and gloom prophecies now about the end of world in 12 years, just happens to coincide nicely with the expected 11 year cooling trend we are entering and would probably spell the end of the green new deal and other carbon tax scams the governments are trying to pull over on the masses.

As for Kenneth Richards, he's a denier, of course he's going to be ridiculed, still doesn't change the facts. If you think his facts are wrong, then argue then, otherwise, just move along, the subject is probably way over your head.  

First of all, please provide a source for your data as I cannot find anything that resembles those numbers.

Secondly, a 2-month aberration (if true) does not discount a 100 year warming trend.  It's like pointing to George Burns and saying "See!  Smoking is good for you!"

 

[blue_gold_84]

The irony of someone telling others they don't understand the topic at hand - while polluting this thread with content from trash websites and making statements without evidence. How embarrassing.

[Mark F]

The amusing part of this guy's stuff, is he NEVER responds to anything put to him. Just keeps regurgitating the same stuff.

Completely uninterested in responding to the questions people put to him. Frequently does not read past the headline of the articles he posts.

  His information is so far out on the fringe of this, it's  comic relief. good for a dark laugh, that's about it.

Edited May 14, 2019 by Mark F

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

3 hours ago, pigseye said:

You do realize that over the past 2 months global temperatures have plummeted by an unprecedented 0.6C. And May seems to be right on track to add to it. 

Has this even been publicized anywhere, even just mentioned in passing?

Any reputable links you could share with us? Would be greatly appreciated.

 

3 hours ago, pigseye said:

As for Kenneth Richards, he's a denier, of course he's going to be ridiculed, still doesn't change the facts. If you think his facts are wrong, then argue then, otherwise, just move along, the subject is probably way over your head.  

He's ridiculed because he peddles in falsehoods. He's been proven over and over that he is a fraud and that his data is not reputable. Why should anyone take what he has to say seriously? He has earned the reputation of lying about the data he puts forth. 

Quote

" regurgitated material from a blog called the “No Tricks Zone” (NTZ), which highlights out-of-context sentences from (in most cases) legitimate scientific studies that the author of the blog incorrectly thinks dispute the tenets of anthropogenic global warming. The 400 studies in this latest piece cover topics wholly irrelevant to the question of anthropogenic global warming, including, for example, a study on the effect of wind turbines upon the viability of migratory bat populations."

 

And also, I think there is shady stuff going on with the data:

"numerous scientists listed in the report pointed out their their graphs had been digitally altered by NTZ to omit data, and that NTZ had either misinterpreted their papers or read them so superficially that the author of the post did not realize he was sometimes quoting from general background material and not the actual findings of the papers themselves."

 

So why should we give him any more legitimacy than say... a flat-earther? He certainly hasn't earned any legitimacy. So we should treat his "findings" with as much ridicule and scorn as we would a flat Earther.

 

 

If you have any decent data you want to share or reputable site links you want to share and discuss- then awesome, I would love to hear some good news and that this whole doomsday scenario is in fact a miscalculation. I need facts though, not tinfoil hat theories, cherry-picked data points and half baked pseudo science.  

 

Edited May 14, 2019 by wanna-b-fanboy

[Mark F]

Quote

 

According to an internal 1982 document from Exxon Research and Engineering Company — obtained by InsideClimate News as part of its 2015 investigation into what Exxon knew about the impact of fossil fuels on climate change — the company was modeling out the concentration of carbon emissions several years into the future.

According to a graph displaying the “growth of atmospheric CO2 and average global temperature increase” over time, the company expected that, by 2020, carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would reach roughly 400 to 420 ppm. This month’s measurement of 415 ppm is right within the expected curve Exxon projected under its “21st Century Study-High Growth scenario.”

 

https://thinkprogress.org/exxon-predicted-high-carbon-emissions-954e514b0aa9/

 

[pigseye]

On 2019-05-14 at 11:06 AM, Wideleft said:

First of all, please provide a source for your data as I cannot find anything that resembles those numbers.

Secondly, a 2-month aberration (if true) does not discount a 100 year warming trend.  It's like pointing to George Burns and saying "See!  Smoking is good for you!"

 

I will admit I was wrong, just a brain cramp I guess, I was referring the two years 2016 - 2018

It should come as no surprise that the very same news source they have used for their Global Warming pitch has reported the greatest global two-year cooling event of the last century just occurred. Their data from February 2016 to February 2018 showed that the global average temperatures declined 0.56°C. The last two-year decline was 1982-1984 with a drop of 0.47°C, which took place during their favorite stint to justify global warming era. (see NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (dataset accessed 2018-04-11 at https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/).

[Wideleft]

3 hours ago, pigseye said:

I will admit I was wrong, just a brain cramp I guess, I was referring the two years 2016 - 2018

It should come as no surprise that the very same news source they have used for their Global Warming pitch has reported the greatest global two-year cooling event of the last century just occurred. Their data from February 2016 to February 2018 showed that the global average temperatures declined 0.56°C. The last two-year decline was 1982-1984 with a drop of 0.47°C, which took place during their favorite stint to justify global warming era. (see NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (dataset accessed 2018-04-11 at https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/).

This appears to be a quote from someone without attribution and your link does not provide the information that supports your claim in the unattributed quote.

Also contradicts what NOAA has released.

 

[Mark F]

On 2019-05-15 at 2:19 PM, Wideleft said:

Also contradicts what NOAA has released.

What a surprise. Wrong information from that poster. He is invariably wrong. Is he honestly deluded, or posting misleading information without caring whether it's accurate or not? I would think someone doing the latter might rate getting suspended for a while, polite or not. 

in other news

Quote

 

Indiana utility Vectren South wanted to replace its baseload coal plants with a massive gas plant. In late April, regulators blocked that plan.

The critique holds that massive expenditures for large, centralized assets during a time of rapid change to the electricity industry could become a bad deal for ratepayers.

California has already rejected a few natural-gas plant contracts in favor of clean options like energy storage and renewables, but this is a new outcome for coal country. The Indiana decision joins a growing number of cases where state utility regulators have pushed utilities to consider more decentralized, lower-carbon grid planning. 

“We would expect Vectren South to ensure an enhanced consideration of renewable energy and customer-generator opportunities in future [integrated resource plans],” the decision states.

The warning about relying too much on massive gas plants, to the exclusion of smaller and nimbler assets, echoes decisions from regulators across the country.

“I believe we’re right in the midst of a fast paradigm shift in terms of what is the grid we’re building,” said Bill Corcoran, a regional campaign director for the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal initiative. “Commissioners and others are asking a lot more questions about how investments fit into a more complex system.”

Arizona utility regulators sent a rebuke to the state's utilities by declining to recognize their long-range plans in 2018. Along with that decision, the Arizona Corporation Commission imposed a moratorium on new gas plants, to prevent locking in large capital expenditures on behalf of ratepayers.

Since then, utility Arizona Public Service has focused on building large grid batteries to store solar generation and provide capacity in the evening peak hours.

 

https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/the-energy-transition-comes-home-to-indiana

"Large Centralized assets could become a bad deal"..... goodbye nuclear. So many things wrong with it, good riddance.

Edited May 19, 2019 by Mark F

[Mark F]

https://trib.com/business/energy/officials-coal-s-slide-to-continue-in-us-as-renewables/article_3f194268-5e4b-5cf2-8706-551af86def90.html#tncms-source=infinity-scroll-summary-siderail-latest

 

BILLINGS, Mont. — U.S. demand for coal to generate electricity will keep sliding in the coming months, federal officials said Thursday, despite efforts by the Trump administration to shore up the struggling industry.

Renewable energy sources including wind, solar and hydropower are expected to fill much of the gap left by coal's decline, according to the Energy Information Administration.

It's particularly true for Western states, where renewables will provide almost a quarter of the power to households and businesses during the peak summer season, the agency said in its projections.

Natural gas is expected to remain the fuel of choice for power generation with an expected 40 percent share of U.S. markets this summer.

Under President Donald Trump, officials have sought to ease coal plant regulations and mining restrictions. But after production briefly bumped up the year after Trump took office, almost all coal mining states are now experiencing production declines.

[Mark F]

On 2019-05-15 at 2:19 PM, Wideleft said:

This appears to be a quote from someone without attribution and your link does not provide the information that supports your claim in the unattributed quote.

Also contradicts what NOAA has released. (referring to a post by Pigseye)

This guy Pigseye  has violated the conduct rules continuosly. Part of this, is posting something, then not responding, as in this case, when the post is challenged and refuted, which leads me to think his posts are not in good faith.

 

2. Members are expected to behave in a reasonable manner and with a spirit of goodwill, and opinions should be posted and read in good faith.

 

9. Posting rumours or unsubstantiated news as fact may result in a ban or suspension.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 21, 2019 by Mark F

[FrostyWinnipeg]

https://www.livescience.com/65524-antarctica-ice-unstable.html

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

4 hours ago, Mark F said:

This guy Pigseye  has violated the conduct rules continuosly. Part of this, is posting something, then not responding, as in this case, when the post is challenged and refuted, which leads me to think his posts are not in good faith.

 

2. Members are expected to behave in a reasonable manner and with a spirit of goodwill, and opinions should be posted and read in good faith.

 

9. Posting rumours or unsubstantiated news as fact may result in a ban or suspension.

 

 

 

 

Cool- it pays to read the rules of conduct. 

 

Looks like you are continuing to post quality information that is factual and well supported- keep up the good work! 

 

 

Edited May 21, 2019 by wanna-b-fanboy

[Mark F]

Quote

 

(CNN)Hundreds of thousands of school students around the world walked out of class on Friday to urge their governments to take greater action in slashing greenhouse gas emissions.

Climate protests are planned in more than 1600 towns in over 125 countries and organizers say the number of strikers is expected to surpass the 1.6 million people who took part in the first Global Climate Strike in March.

Inspired by 16-year-old Swedish activist Greta Thunberg's weekly protests, the global youth climate movement has swept the globe in recent months.

The protests on Friday started in New Zealand and Australia, which recently experienced its hottest summer on record.

13-year-old Alexandria Villasenor, who leads the climate movement in the United States, told CNN, "I'm upset with how world leaders are treating the climate crisis. [The youth] need to make sure that people in power start taking action because we don't have time to wait until we can.

 

https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/24/world/global-climate-strike-school-students-protest-climate-change-intl/index.html

shame on us adults for leaving it to children to get this done.