It looks like Chancellor Merkel believes that now that Ex-President Obama has been replaced by President Trump, she is the developed nation’s leader regarding the Paris Agreement.
So, is Germany leading the way? The Chancellor’s plan “Energiewende” (transition to renewable energy) has set out goals with a timetable to reduce CO2 emissions and switch the national’s energy supply to renewables that can replace fossil fuels. The table below summarizes these goals:
The Greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals are spelled out in the table. The goals, for the years 2014 through 2050, are shown as an amount of reduction based away from the1990 emissions of CO2. That was the year of the reunification of East and West Germany. The goal in 2050 is a minimum reduction of greenhouse gases of 80 to 95%.
ExxonMobil lobbied President Trump to stay in the Paris Agreement. Can you figure out why that company would wish to do so?
Here are some pickings from the most recent ExxonMobil global energy forecast:
· Total energy demand by 2040 will be 25% higher than in 2015.
· Global energy supply in 2040 will be 55% from oil and natural gas. Wind, solar and biofuels will supply only 4% in 2040.
· Coal use will decline but will still be the third largest supplier of global energy.
· Global electrical energy demand for transportation will only be 2% of the total global energy demand in 2040.
· Wind and solar electricity supplies will approach 15% of total electrical energy supply by 2040
· Although utilization improves over time, intermittency limits worldwide wind and solar capacity utilization to 30% and 20% respectively.
· By 2040 US and Europe combined CO2 emissions will be about 8 billion tonnes. The total global emissions in 2040 will be about 36 billion tonnes,
· Electric cars are a very high-cost option, at about $700/tonne of CO2 avoided.
Posted in AGW, CO2, Coal, Domestic Energy, Electricity, Electricity from Coal, fossil fuels, Nuclear Energy, Paris Agreement, Personal Automobiles, Renewable Energy, solar cells, Windpower
It is likely that a great many people in the US have been led to believe that solar and wind play significant roles in supplying domestic energy. Further and even more incredibly they are led to believe that solar and wind will replace fossil fuels in the not too distant future. The Paris agreement demands that no fossil fuels be used after 2050
I am too old to make it to 2050, so I will not be around to see if no fossil fuels are being used at that time. If you make it to 2050, I will bet that fossil fuel will still be used.
The Energy Information Administration’s(EIA)**, chart on the primary energy sources for the year 2015 is shown below.
Petroleum, natural gas, coal, renewable energy, and nuclear electric power are primary sources of energy. Electricity is a secondary energy source that is generated from primary sources of energy.
Note that renewable energy is only 10% of total energy produced in the US. And of that 10%, solar is 6% and wind is 19%. Putting the solar and wind as a percent of the total energy consumed in the US has solar at 0.6% and wind at 1.9%. So, in 2015 only 2.5% of the US energy came from those two sources. Is this compatible with what you are learning from the media? And those two are the ones that the greenies are banking on to replace coal, natural gas and petroleum. And though it is counterintuitive, the warmers want to shut down the nuclear plants as well.
Posted in AGW, Alternative Energy, Climate Alarmism, Domestic Energy, Electricity, Electricity from Coal, fossil fuels, Government Regulations, Nuclear Energy, Renewable Energy, solar cells, Windpower
The previous posting, examined the study “A roadmap for rapid decarbonization” published in the Science magazine, and discussed the major obstacles the warmers face in their attempt to persuade the politicians and the voters to undertake decarbonization. And do it rapidly. You may not think thirty years is rapid, but convincing 8 billion people to wipe out the present infrastructure and substitute a new one using as yet unproven methods in 30 years, is moving at a breathtaking speed.
The above noted study, is not the only one that has looked at a way to satisfy the Paris Agreement of holding the global temperature to max.2 ºC rise, with a goal of 1.5ºC rise. A study by 100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water and Sunlight (WWS) led by Jacobson, Delucci , et at. is, on the surface (number of pages of detailed discussion), more elaborate than the previous posting. This WWS roadmap calls for an 80% reduction of fossil fuels by 2030! Only 13 years away.
The WWS study is an all-sector roadmap that is said to show how 139 nations could jointly hold the temperature rise to no more than 2ºC.
Friends of Science critique the WWS study with a response titled “WHY RENEWABLE ENERGY CANNOT REPLACE FOSSIL FUELS BY 2050” . Michael Kelly, Professor of Electrical Engineering at Cambridge says: “Humanity is owed a serious investigation of how we have gone so far with the decarbonization project without a serious challenge in terms of engineering reality”.
That’s what guides this critique. The critique illustrates the enormous number of new renewable facilities needed, the time necessary to put these facilities in to operation and the amount of space they require. It is awesome.
Posted in AGW, Alternative Energy, Batteries, Climate Alarmism, Climate Models, CO2, Electric Vehicles, Electricity from Coal, fossil fuels, Global Temperatures, Nuclear Energy, Renewable Energy, skeptic science knowledge, solar cells, Windpower
I do not think that the developed nations of the world are ready to endorse the actions they have signed onto when they authorized the Paris Agreement (PA). They liked the applause they were receiving from the media and the environmentalists. But they have not responded in-kind to their commitments for reducing CO2 emissions or contributions to the fund that helps the underdeveloped nations. See here and here. Vox posting on 4 October 2016 said “No country on Earth is taking the 2ºC climate target seriously”. The Climateactiontracker.org posted this quote: “Right now, with the policies governments have in place, we are heading to a warming of 3.6C said Prof Kornelis Blok of Ecofys.”The developed nations realize that it is time for them to “put up or shut up”. The “put up” part is bedeviled by the fact that most of them are finding that their renewable energy installations, eg solar and wind, are raising the cost of energy to a point where many can no longer afford it. Further, they are learning that the renewables make their power systems unstable and thus vulnerable to loss of power to supply the customers and industries.
Maybe, just maybe they are becoming aware of the actions they need to undertake to keep the Global temperature rise at no more than the target of 1.5C. The 24 March 2017 Science magazine published a study titled: “A roadmap for rapid decarbonization”.
Posted in AGW, Climate Alarmism, Climate Models, CO2, Environment, fossil fuels, Global Temperatures, IPCC, Nuclear Energy, Oil and Gas Exploration, Renewable Energy, solar cells, Windpower
I am reblogging Adam Piggot’s posting “Dear Climate Alarmists—We Will Never Forget nor Forgive.
The author lays out his complaints about the way the warmers treat the data and as well as how they have treated him. He believes the catastrophic man-made global warming theory is unraveling and the skeptics will be vindicated. So what do you think about the following?
It’s been a rough ten years as a so-called “climate denier”. Every year the climate data would show a complete refusal to follow the accepted and official line, and every year the faith of the climate change faithful only seemed to get stronger and stronger. And their abuse of heretics like myself only got stronger and stronger. I have lost friendships over my stance on this issue. I have been attacked publicly by those around me on numerous occasions. And I have endured the casual mockery at social gatherings where the accepted response has been to pat me on the head in a condescending manner – here he is; our own climate denier. Isn’t he precious?
I have watched landscapes I love destroyed by the looming figures of gigantic wind farms that stand in mute mockery of my continued resistance to this enormous scam. I have observed with silent loathing the hypocrites who swan around in their enormous SUVs while proudly parading their dubious green credentials, even as ordinary families struggle with the reality of paying their ever-increasing power bills. Only a few months ago, a piece I wrote on the climate change scam elicited concerned emails and calls from people I know who cautioned me with the treacherous path I was taking.
But money talks and bulls— walks, and the money is beginning to drop out of this con to end all cons.
Posted in AGW, Al Gore, Alternative Energy, Climate Alarmism, Climate Models, CO2, Electricity from Coal, Environment, Global Temperatures, IPCC, Nuclear Energy, Renewable Fuel Standard, Sea Level
This posting uses an article from the Cosmopolitan magazine. Not a place where you would expect to find something about global warming. The title of the piece is “8 Signs You’re Not the Environmentalist You Think You Are” by Yvette d’Entremont. It is not too profound but it has a lot of honest values that most would be environmentalist never are exposed to. I have extracted just pieces of the author’s reasons why they have been misled. If you read all of her article, she makes some more good points
The following are the eight signs:
1. You buy only organic.
Organic is definitely not better for you, and it uses older, dirtier farming techniques that are, across the board, not as environmentally friendly. Contrary to rumors, organic farming uses pesticides, in some cases equally toxic pesticides that need to be applied more frequently.
Posted in AGW, Al Gore, Climate Alarmism, CO2, Coal, Electric Vehicles, Electricity from Coal, Environment, Nuclear Energy, Personal Automobiles, Renewable Energy, WWF