Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Support

 

Twitter
Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« Seitz is no guarantee | Main | The subsidy cuts and the pea under the thimble »
Tuesday
Dec222015

US usurps EU's role of climate fool

In the Wall Street Journal, Benny Peiser explains (£) that the outcome of Paris appears to be that the EU has allowed itself leeway to move in a more rational direction on climate energy policy, while the USA is going in precisely the opposite direction.

The toothless nature of the Paris agreement finally allows EU member states to abandon unilateral decarbonization policies that have damaged Europe’s economies and its international competitiveness. Under such circumstances, the unconditional climate policies of President Obama would be left out in the cold. The U.S. administration has pledged to cut carbon emissions by 26%-28% by 2025, no matter what China, India and the rest of the world do in coming decades.

 

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (98)

Breath of Fresh Air

It's Whitlee Farm. It's windy today, ideal weather for those lovely turbines. NOT.


If I stand on the roof of my house I can see it clearly*. Its address is Moor Road, Eaglesham The same village Rudolf Hess crashed his plane into in WWII. Seems appropriate.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitelee_Wind_Farm

* I haven't tried this, but according to a detailed computer model I made, I should be able to see 71% of the turbines. I can see them from a nearby hill.

Dec 22, 2015 at 7:19 PM | Unregistered Commenteresmiff

Ps John
My guess is that the Beeb are using just released 2015 Q3 figures.

It was one of the wettest summers on record.
Hydro therefore did the heavy lifting helped by Jet Stream supercharged wind.

Dec 22, 2015 at 7:27 PM | Unregistered CommenterThe Dork of Cork

Unfortunately, this thread has been overwhelmed by an infestation of irrelevant, rambling dorkness.

Dec 22, 2015 at 7:40 PM | Registered CommenterSalopian

It's not really me Salopian

I am merely pointing out the juicy bits of the latest energy trends publication
(HIGHLIGHT, electricity production down 6%)

Add in UK real goods trade data ( it's deficit with the euro 28 has doubled to 80billion Sterling these past few years)
Have some understanding of Manchester style liberal economics 19th century style ( importing cheap food /energy)
And ice it with a peripheral colonial boys perspective of British Mordor and you have a Christmas Cake of basic but functional knowledge.

Dec 22, 2015 at 8:02 PM | Unregistered CommenterThe Dork of Cork

Benny Peiser's Op ed is available the GWPF website.
Peiser is saying that the EU's pledge to cut carbon emissions by 40% below 1990 levels by 2030....was and remains conditional on all major emitters adopting legally binding targets. The COP21 agreement do not make targets legally binding, so Peiser argues that adopting the targets will put the EU at a disadvantage. Others have pointed out in the comments that many EU countries are not following, nor are they willing to follow, this target. In particular Germany. But also Greece, Spain, Portugal, Poland and Italy are unlikely to do so for economic reasons.

Dec 22, 2015 at 8:22 PM | Unregistered CommenterKevin Marshall

Dork;

"It's not really me... I am merely pointing out bits of the latest energy trends publication"

Yes it is you; and your constant regurgitation of "latest energy trends publication" and 19th century economics is becoming more than just irritating. Please do us all a big favour and stick a very large cork in it.

Dec 22, 2015 at 8:23 PM | Registered CommenterSalopian

@auralay, Dec 22, 2015 at 5:55 PM

I had a shock watching BBC Wales news at 6.30pm yesterday (21/12). After a couple of reports on the plight of the Welsh steel industry, presenter Jamie Owen was interviewing Jo Stevens - Labour MP for Cardiff Central. At one point he said:-

"I mean a big chunk of this problem is the cost - the high cost - of energy and the last Labour government must take it's fair share of the blame for visiting on industry in the UK this high energy tariff. That's fair isn't it?"

This is as close to criticizing the climate change act as I have ever seen on the beeb. I hope he isn't made an un-person.
(Needless to say Jo Stevens did not answer the question; she blathered about the need for the government to have a policy to mitigate the problems caused by ...)

I would love to see that.

I have recorded the episode on Sky+ but have not seen it on iPlayer. Can any-one tell me if I can legally upload from Sky+ ?

No, it breaches BBC copyright. However, BBC have a relaxed view* about that when it relates to material they will not be selling.

Anon upload to https://vid.me

*Before it was FAST/MPAA'd torrrent site UKNova released most UK programmes and they had informal agreements with BBC, ITV and C4 permitting this provided the torrents were removed as soon as DVD box-set announced. They were even invited to attend and speak at BBC and C4 seminars. No doubt readers will be wondering why BBC etc condoned this copyright infringement. Answer is mone (saving off): torrent releases are frequently available minutes to hours before available on catch-up services. Thus, fewer downloads from catch-up equals reduced bandwidth and lower CDN costs.


@John Constable, Dec 22, 2015 at 6:39 PM

6pm radio 4 news tonight - 'Half Scotland's electricity comes from renewables' - is this true

That will probably be installed capacity, not real world output which is less than 25% of capacity.

Dec 22, 2015 at 8:39 PM | Unregistered CommenterPcar

John Constable:
"6pm radio 4 news tonite - 'Half Scotland's electricity comes from renewables' - is this true?"

Not inconceivable, but only when the wind blows moderately. But no wind or too much then they rely on some hydro, some diesel (on the islands) + England.
When the wind drops - no lights plus infestation of midges. Delightful.

Dec 22, 2015 at 8:54 PM | Unregistered CommenterPhilip Foster

@Salopian
Perhaps is my different view of history annoys your preconceived notions.

The mean standard of living on these Isles crashed for 300+ years thanks to Big Henry and his Usury band of not so merry men.
Only recovering in the 20th century thanks in part to enormous flows of oil energy.
Needless to say it was far far worse on the periphery.

These are I am afraid the facts.
It is not the Victor annual of great energy daring , it is a relentless poverty of spirit.

The EU is a repeat of the older 19th century British union.
With large (until recently) increases in the energy flux and paradoxical massive declines in the standard of living.
People in the periphery understand these dynamics on a real level.
This recent (pointless) rise of energy consumption post 1990~ remains fresh in our minds.

As the UK (I assume you are living in England ) had a more relatively stable recent energy past and have remained completely divorced from the remaining aspects of European peasant life for many centuries unlike what remained in (degraded) places such as Ireland and Spain until the 60s.
I therefore assume you do not have a clue.
Sorry mate.

Dec 22, 2015 at 8:54 PM | Unregistered CommenterThe Dork of Cork

Obama is the Toussaint Louverture of the US but thanks to limitations of the US Constitution, will not be there much longer to continue his dictatorial rampage. Europe now has so many problems to deal with from its 1,000,000 Islamic visitors, that it is rapidly losing interest in the CO2 boondoggle. As more and more people notice that there are much bigger and more pressing problems in the World than the increase of plant food, the CAGW theory will slowly fade away like the smile on the Cheshire Cat.

Dec 22, 2015 at 8:56 PM | Unregistered Commenternicholas tesdorf

If it is unlikely that many EU countries will choose to adhere to the 40% reduction target. Where does this leave the UK with its Climate Change Act 2008? This Oldbrew at 12.07pm pointed to an online copy of the Act. I prefer the pdf version.
Paragraph 1 lays out the 2050 target of reducing emissions by at least 80% of 1990 level. Paragraph 2 is below (badly formatted)


2 Amendment of 2050 target or baseline year
(1) The Secretary of State may by order—
...... (a) amend the percentage specified in section 1(1);
...... (b) amend section 1 to provide for a different year to be the baseline year.
(2) The power in subsection (1)(a) may only be exercised—
...... (a) if it appears to the Secretary of State that there have been significant
developments in—
......... (i) scientific knowledge about climate change, or
......... (ii) European or international law or policy,
that make it appropriate to do so, or
...... (b) in connection with the making of—
......... (i) an order under section 24 (designation of further greenhouse
......... gases as targeted greenhouse gases), or
......... (ii) regulations under section 30 (emissions from international
......... aviation or international shipping).

I would contend that COP21 does not allow for the Secretary of State to amend the targets. COP21 failed to impose any legally binding targets, so International Law is unchanged. The EU may not adhere to 40% target, but it is not doing so anyway. There have been no significant changes to the scientific knowledge about climate change through there being significant barriers to challenges to the climate consensus. The subject has ossified, is still pseudo-scientific and still says virtually nothing about the real world.
There are elements that are missing. For instance the policy was sold as the Britain taking a lead on climate change. There is no escape if, as has happened, other countries have failed to follow that lead. So regardless of whether or not Britain meets its emissions targets, global emissions in 2050 will be largely the same. Neither is there a requirement to independently evaluate policy effectiveness, with a get-out clause if, as has happened, the policy is a complete disaster.

Dec 22, 2015 at 9:23 PM | Unregistered CommenterKevin Marshall

John Peter
[...]Not so here in UK with our Government, Parliament and opposition. No chance they will disband the Climate Change Act. [...]

Never give in. When the mess they have created becomes obvious then attitudes may change. And quickly.

Imagine how I will vote once I have sat for a few hours in candle light. I'm thinking that 'Green' will look somewhat less attractive?

People with 'plenty' always support nonsense like the CMA right up until they are sitting around with no electrical power. Then they vote for other 'representatives'.

Democracy is a crappy system except when compared to all the others. The CCA will be repealed right about the time that the lights go out or unemployment hits new records.

Dec 22, 2015 at 9:41 PM | Unregistered Commenter3x2

Dork;

I think your "different view of history" is probably down to beer-goggles, rather than intellect or insight. Please give it a rest.

Dec 22, 2015 at 10:11 PM | Registered CommenterSalopian

It really doesn't matter a damn. New technologies like LENR will make it happen anyway.
Industrial Heat's commercial 1 MW LENR plant has now run for 303 days and the results of the 350 day trial are due in about two months.

Dec 22, 2015 at 10:44 PM | Unregistered CommenterAdrian Ashfield

I like my beer but my understanding of things comes from walking the Earth Kung Foo style.
Car dependent people in the main have no comprehension of how the pre modern system actually worked in practice.

Grasshopper, you need to open your eyes.

Dec 22, 2015 at 11:04 PM | Unregistered CommenterThe Dork of Cork

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yyw7Wh1HnF

Dec 22, 2015 at 11:09 PM | Unregistered CommenterThe Dork of Cork

Does the Bishop always celebrate a sun worshiper at the winter solstice ?

Rome wants to know.

Dec 22, 2015 at 11:23 PM | Unregistered CommenterRussell

Dork, you sound like you picked up all of your lines from and episode of Kojak: "Walking the earth kung foo style"

Your comments are absolute drivel and make little to no sense.
Bish, can you stop Dork from commenting here please?

Dec 23, 2015 at 12:25 AM | Unregistered CommenterDavid Smith

Fuel inputs down 6 % in Q3 electricity .....but demand disappears also.
UK then imports more product from remaining fossil fuel zones.....
Claims it is green.
It is merely a green belt.
A park.
Production / consumption not looked at holistically.

Dec 23, 2015 at 12:27 AM | Unregistered CommenterThe Dork of Cork

@David.
There was me thinking this walking the earth lark was a British tradition......
You take yourself too seriously .
You need to walk with a donkey like Stephenson perhaps

You need to look at real British trade data if you do not believe me.
Its called the Pink book (no seriously)
All of mercantile Europe and a lesser extent the world is feeding deficit England.
Its clearly the center of world usury.
If production / consumption in Europe ever went national or sub national in each region the UK would implode.

Dec 23, 2015 at 12:39 AM | Unregistered CommenterThe Dork of Cork

Adrian Ashfield - please post the test results on this "LENR evidence thread" when you have them:

http://bishophill.squarespace.com/discussion/post/2564294?lastPage=true

From what I have seen of it, I think Rossi and Industrial Heat are running a complete scam, so I look forward to examining your evidence when available. I have provided a couple of links of my own - if you want more, simply Google "Rossi LENR scam".

Dec 23, 2015 at 12:54 AM | Unregistered Commenternot banned yet

This is not some sort of new crazy history.
Population moves to England because that is where the worlds money gets concentrated.
Product and energy then flows to England to feed the monster.

Its a demonic loop .
Very well known , Irish washing up on 19th century Liverpool docks. Etc etc.
The world is darkly absurd and so may not seem real.
I mean what sort of world do yee
chaps inhabit. ?
I do not want to dance the Holocaust jig but Ireland had the resources(food) in the 19th century but needed to export its wealth to get money.

Capitalism always and I mean always destroys the village .
Its the enemy of localism.

Living so close to the Dragon really screws with your perspective I guess.

Dec 23, 2015 at 12:57 AM | Unregistered CommenterThe Dork of Cork

Dave Smith,

I totally agree.

Dec 23, 2015 at 1:42 AM | Registered CommenterSalopian

It was not George who slew the Dragon.
It took a Mick....

Jaysus how I hate such straight laced conformists.
"Oh I totally agree, yes I agree also...hmm yes.... absolutely "

Guys who talk of energy and who do not understand the mechanisms of urban formation.
Yee guys crack me up.

Dec 23, 2015 at 1:53 AM | Unregistered CommenterThe Dork of Cork

Breath of Fresh Air: "… not a blade was turning due to moderately high winds."

Those near me, Washington State, are "parasitic" below wind of 9 mph and reach peak output at 31 mph.
Above a steady 56 mph (25 m/sec) they shut off.
Using Google Earth – Latitude & Longitude:
47.011970, -120.200658

The company has a page with "Fast facts" here:
http://www.pse.com/aboutpse/Facilities/Pages/Wild-Horse.aspx

Example: "11,750 cubic yards of concrete" for each foundation.

Dec 23, 2015 at 2:07 AM | Unregistered CommenterJohn F. Hultquist

Simple question
Does a individual enter a city to access resources or to access money?

Obviously the hinterland feeds the city.
The city does not feed the individual.

But what happens when the hinterland / city dynamic begins to break down?
Obviously London's hinterland is not the home Counties, it is the world.
This requires enourmous energy redirected toward distribution / transport and not more direct production consumption.

How can anybody disagree with this observation?

Current complexity is not adding to the standard of living.
This is a manifest fact on the ground.

Dec 23, 2015 at 2:09 AM | Unregistered CommenterThe Dork of Cork

notbannedyet,
See http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/a18673/cold-fusion-essay/ and follow the link to Huw Price's essay given at the end.
Possibly you will then understand.

Dec 23, 2015 at 2:14 AM | Unregistered CommenterAdrian Ashfield

John F Hultquist

11,750 cubic yards of concrete

Should that be a decimal point rather than a comma between '11' & '750' , or is that an English v American thing?

11.75 cubic yards of concrete would seem about right if going onto solid ground or bedrock, but not very much if there was poorly consolidated ground/earth/dirt

Dec 23, 2015 at 2:26 AM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

Dork,2:09am:

Simple answer:

Please, please please F OFF you stupid irritating C**T.

Dec 23, 2015 at 3:00 AM | Registered CommenterSalopian

Salopian, I think tDoC just needs to be a bit more on-topic, and a bit more succinct when that proves difficult to communicate. And a bit less frequent when the first two conditions are not met.

Dec 23, 2015 at 4:26 AM | Unregistered Commentermichael hart

So Dork

Rainy cold Dublin must be due a Climate Conference. Al Gore selfie sipping a pint of Guiness.
Black coloured squits through the eye of a needle later.

Germany and China are powerful enough to ignore any Coal bans or sink a drain pipe in the dirt and collect Methane from the Coal Bed or get a man in a High ViZ jacket and a hard hart to carry on digging Coal out with a JCB and then replace the top soil and make a Golf Course.

So Dork do you agree with Prince Charles and Kevin McCloud of Grand Designs fame thats it's an honourable way to live for children in India and Africa scavenging through rubbish tips in bare feet ,no gloves ,no masks for 18 hour a day for less than 30 pence an hour and instead of calling it grinding poverty call it recycling.

Because in the developing world or call it the third world Children also dig Coal out the ground with their bare hands and sell it to local dealers.

Now being very green and recycling here in the Eco Friendly Western World in somewhere like Edmonton North London the local council they get machines to sort through their refuse not malnourished local shanty town kids.

In the Western World we have Nuclear Power ,Fracking Rigs ,Gas ,4 G Broadband ,Smart Meters .Wheelie Bins ,Wind Turbines made from high tensil Steel ,Solar Panels blah blah ,basically we got the Infrastructure full maguffin.

So when it comes to energy and standard of living the U S and the E U (except Germany ) we can live without Coal unfortunately in the third world ,the people you say you,re trying to help ,well they cant.

Dec 23, 2015 at 5:14 AM | Unregistered CommenterJamspid

Tut, tut, old shrew, - tDOK is merely a jester.

A fool is something else entirely :

http://vvattsupwiththat.blogspot.com/2015/12/are-they-related.html

Dec 23, 2015 at 6:30 AM | Unregistered CommenterRussell

As the Americans say 'the stupid of it hurts' It seems to me the only recourse that we have is to ridicule this madness. Here is my effort to laugh at it all - otherwise one might be forced to weep.
At least here there is some stirring music as an antidote to the 'stupid'.

https://youtu.be/ILLOpOvsjVI

Dec 23, 2015 at 7:01 AM | Unregistered CommenterDouglas

Australia is certainly pushing ahead with LNG, and I think that it is about the third largest exporter (behind Qatar and Malaysia). Whether the UK will buy this is another thing, especially since shipping from Qatar must be much cheaper.

LNG is obviously good news. The US even though it did not sign up to Kyoto did more than any developed nation to reduce its CO2 emissions and his was achieved by switching from coal to gas.

There is no doubt that gas produces less CO2 per unit of energy when compared to coal (and way less when compared to biomass which produces more CO2 than coal). Of course gas produces water vapour so the overall GHE (if any) may not be less but of course the IPCC conveniently ignores water vapour (which is the most abundant of the so called GHGs) .

The solution for the UK is fracking. Lets get our own reserves into production, and that would save the CO2 (and sulphur) involved in shipping LNG over large distances.

Dec 23, 2015 at 7:12 AM | Unregistered Commenterrichard verney

There are a few commenters on here that I almost always agree with and whose comments add value.

Take a bow, Philip Bratby, for one.

Most others are pretty good.

A few, not so much.

Some posters (Smiffy for one) are almost invariably worth reading. Sometimes I agree, sometimes not so much.

The Dork has started posting here. Some comments are a little esoteric. Some just strange. But I think they are interesting and must be at the very least worth the effort of scrolling past, if you're not in the mood. He is at least a man of wit. I can imagine having a great night sharing a few porters with him in an old West Cork pub. If they haven't all been preposterously ''re-developed' (=destroyed) like the ones in Donegal. I would be very upset if he was banned, not that Andrew is likely to do that. The old chap believes in free speech, pretty much. And, as a far older chap, so do I.

Lighten up.

If we must start banning, the egregious VVussel would be an infinitely better candidate. I can accept the fact that he is a troll and presumably has to fill his quota, but I've never yet seen anything that he posts which isn't bilge. And bilge presented with arrogance and snark. The fact that he sucks at the taxpayers' teat whilst no doubt filling his unfortunate students' heads with bilge makes him even more contemptible.

Dec 23, 2015 at 8:10 AM | Unregistered CommenterMartin Brumby

We have the internet nowadays -no need to just make stuff up! Scotland is a net exporter of energy to England and that 50% renewables number is half of demand, not capacity.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-35160271
"Department of Energy and Climate Change statistics showed almost half (49.7%) of Scotland's electricity demand came from renewable sources in 2014. Scotland exported 23.7% of what it generated. With that figure taken in to account, renewables provided 38% of electricity generated - above both nuclear, at 33%, and fossil fuels, at 28%. Scotland has a target of generating 50% of its energy from green sources by 2015. In 2014, Scotland generated 49,929 GWh of electricity with renewable electricity generation delivering 18,962 GWh. Renewable generation for last year was up 11.9% on 2013, which was a previous record."

Dec 23, 2015 at 8:30 AM | Unregistered CommenterJamesG

Does anyone have a figure for Scotland's total generation from wind as a proportion of total UK consumption ( latest figures available)?

Dec 23, 2015 at 9:25 AM | Unregistered CommenterSpectator

'Half Scotland's electricity comes from renewables'

I heard that too, but assumed it was just for a few moments, latched onto by the BBC, who think that a 2MW windmill produces exactly that all the time (about 1300 houses in Blue-Peter units).

Dec 23, 2015 at 10:46 AM | Registered Commenterjamesp

tDOK says:

Capitalism always and I mean always destroys the village .
Its the enemy of localism.

Goldsmith said the same earlier , and more poetically:
"Ill fares the land , to hastening ills a prey
where wealth accumulates, and men decay"
-"The Deserted Village"

Don't muzzle the Dork please .

Dec 23, 2015 at 10:47 AM | Unregistered Commentermikewaite

The Scots dump excess wind energy to England, increasing England's fossil fuel use/CO2 emissions by destabilising the Power Grid.. The purpose is to enrich the ~200 Renewable Subsidy Farmers who bankrolled the SNP to power.

In time the English population will react to this part of the climate scam and insist on phase switches at the 'border'.

Dec 23, 2015 at 11:00 AM | Unregistered CommenterNCC 1701E

A way to handle his Dorkyness is not to ban him but give him a limit of 3 on topic posts per thread.

So he is not banned but has limited access so must make them count or they are wasted, and unused posts on other threads are not transferable.

Dec 23, 2015 at 11:35 AM | Registered CommenterBreath of Fresh Air

Now who was it that was dead against unilateral nuclear disarmament?

Dec 23, 2015 at 11:50 AM | Unregistered CommenterBrianJay

NCC
Just as the South are subsidising the windmills in the North so are the North subsidising solar panels in the South. And try not to forget about the city shysters bankrolling the Tory party or the Marxist union bosses bankrolling the Labour party. There are two sides to every story.

Dec 23, 2015 at 12:24 PM | Unregistered CommenterJamesG

@JamesG: the concept of renewables' subsidies to enrich the elite of all parts of the UK (and Ireland) is wrong.

I saw this scam develop 14 years ago when the Mafia in the W. Midlands and in Scotland got their captive NuLaber politicians to set up the subsidies. Two wrongs do to make a right; time to call a halt.

Dec 23, 2015 at 12:44 PM | Unregistered CommenterNCC 1701E

NCC 1701E, it is a sad reflection on political belief systems, when NuLabour policies from the Climate Change Act caused restriction of supply and choice of supplier allowing a few wealthy capitalists (in red braces) to exploit a monopoly position to extract maximum profit from the common people. The people who pay the bills have received no benefit in quality of service or price, and to make it worse, the wretched poley bears seem to be thriving too.

You would have thought that Miliband, with all his extra free time, could afford to go the the Arctic sea ice with an AK-47 and 'adjust' poley bear numbers, with the same enthusiasm and lack of guilty conscience, that temperature records get adjusted by climate scientists. If it is for the common good, apparently anything can be justified, and there is no shortage of AK-47s.

Dec 23, 2015 at 1:24 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

Scottish renewables will probably be mostly long installed hydro. It does appear, though not very clearly in the reports, that Scotland is able to significantly beat the world averages on Windows utilization vs capacity. It's worth looking into just what factors contribute to this important success

Dec 23, 2015 at 11:15 PM | Unregistered Commenterhunter

He'll be gone in a year. Any promises he makes are pure PR - it's what the US Senate will ratify that counts.

Dec 23, 2015 at 11:48 PM | Unregistered Commentermojo

Hunter:
Likely the hydro power released from the closure of the aluminium smelters helped somewhat and Scotland is easily the windiest part of Europe so wind downtime is not so much of an issue. ie it does make some sense. The higher 100% equivalent target depended on the now abandoned CCS. However hydro power could be increased. Some time ago they released a plan for 128 new dams that would give another 50%:
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2008/sep/02/water.scotland

However, environmentalists residing in London would certainly oppose that idea...

Dec 24, 2015 at 11:36 AM | Unregistered CommenterJamesG

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>