Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Trump to pull US out of Paris climate agreement – NYT

RT | November 10, 2024

US President-elect Donald Trump is seeking to overhaul energy and environmental policies, aiming to dismantle the so-called “woke” agenda and eliminate programs that impede the country’s economic growth, The New York Times has reported, citing sources familiar with the matter.

Trump’s energy and environment transition team has already prepared “a slate of executive orders and presidential proclamations on climate and energy,” according to the article published on Friday. The measures reportedly include the US abandoning the Paris Agreement – an international treaty on climate change adopted in 2015.

Reshaping the boundaries of the Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante national monuments in southern Utah to open up land for drilling and mining is also on the agenda. The protected area was expanded by US President Joe Biden in 2021.

Donald Trump’s team is also reportedly set to scrap Biden’s so-called environmental justice initiatives, which favor clean-energy development and pollution reduction. This involves ending the suspension of permits for new natural-gas export terminals, among other things.

The publication noted that Trump is planning to appoint an “energy czar” to replace Biden’s “climate tsar.” The role will be dedicated to streamlining policies related to oil, gas, and coal production in order to boost supply rather than limit demand. North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum, who previously helped open millions of acres of public land for fracking, and former energy secretary Dan Brouillette, are being considered for the post.

Further plans include relocating federal agencies including the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) out of Washington. Previously Trump argued that such federal departments and agencies should be moved to “places filled with patriots who love America.”

“This is how I will shatter the deep state,” he said in a campaign video last year.

While EPA employees disagree with the move, Trump’s allies say that the transition model is based on Biden administration policies in reverse, when “hundreds of staff” were hired on day one to implement climate-change initiatives.

“They have the model of what Biden did the first day, the first week, the first month,” said Myron Ebell, who led the transition of the EPA under Trump’s first term. “We’ll look at what Biden did and put a ‘not’ in front of it.”

At the United Nations climate talks last year, the US and other nations agreed on transitioning away from oil, gas, and coal to combat climate change. The initial calls for a complete “phaseout” of fossil fuels were rejected by major oil exporters such as Saudi Arabia and Iraq.

One of Trump’s election promises was to end renewable energy projects, calling them a “hoax” and arguing that affordable energy is critical to the US economy.

November 10, 2024 Posted by | Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , , | Leave a comment

Iran president urged to skip COP29 climate summit in Azerbaijan

Press TV – November 6, 2024

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has been urged to skip his planned visit to Baku, Azerbaijan, next week to attend this year’s United Nations climate change summit, known as COP29.

The semi-official Fars news agency said in an article published on Wednesday that Pezeshkian should not attend the COP29 summit for various reasons, including reports suggesting that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will be present in the summit.

It also said that Azerbaijan has been “problematic” for Iran in the past years mainly because of its efforts to change the geopolitical maps of the region following its victory over Armenia in the 2020 war on Nagorno-Karabakh.

“Logically, it would be wise for the Iranian delegation not to participate in the summit, let alone that the president attends it,” said the article.

However, the article also criticized United Nations climate change policies and said that agreeing to decisions planned to be adopted in COP29 would be “against Iran’s national interests”.

It added that accepting UN demands on climate change, which requires countries to invest heavily to reform the way they produce and consume energy, would inflict huge financial losses on Iran as a country which still relies on fossil fuels for a bulk of its energy needs.

It said experts are still critical of a former Iranian administration’s decision in 2016 to sign up to the Paris Agreement, which requires countries to slash their greenhouse gas emissions by 12% in a relatively short period.

“That would cause the country’s economy to shrink and will cost some $52 billion,” said the article

The public relations office of the Iranian Presidency said on Monday that Pezeshkian will attend the COP29 summit which is planned to begin on November 11.

November 6, 2024 Posted by | Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , | 1 Comment

The Case Against Net Zero – Unachievable Disastrous Pointless

By Robin Guenier | Climate Scepticism | October 14, 2024

In October 2008, Parliament passed the Climate Change Act requiring the UK Government to ensure that by 2050 ‘the net UK carbon account’ was reduced to a level at least 80% lower than that of 1990; ‘carbon account’ refers to CO2 and ‘other targeted greenhouse gas emissions’. Only five MPs voted against it. Then in 2019, by secondary legislation and without serious debate, Parliament increased the 80% reduction requirement to 100% – thereby creating the Net Zero policy.i

Unfortunately, it’s a policy that’s unachievable, potentially disastrous and in any case pointless. And that’s true whether or not humanity’s greenhouse gas emissions are contributing to increased global temperatures.

1. It’s unachievable.

A modern, advanced economy depends on fossil fuels; something that’s unlikely to change for a long time.ii Examples fall into two categories: (i) vehicles and machines such as those used in agriculture, mining, mineral processing, building, heavy transportation, commercial shipping, commercial aviation, the military and emergency services and (ii) products such as nitrogen fertilisers, cement and concrete, primary steel, plastics, insecticides, pharmaceuticals, anaesthetics, lubricants, solvents, paints, adhesives, insulation, tyres and asphalt. All the above require either the combustion of fossil fuels or are made from oil derivatives: easily deployable, commercially viable alternatives have yet to be developed.iii

Although wind is the most effective source of renewable electricity in the U.K. – because of its latitude, solar power contributes only a small percentage of the UK’s electricity – it has significant problems: (i) the substantial and increasing costs of building, operating and maintaining the huge numbers of turbines needed for Net Zero; (ii) the complex engineering and cost challenges of establishing a stable, reliable, comprehensive non-fossil fuel grid by 2030 as planned by the Government; (iii) the vast scale of what’s involved (a multitude of enormous wind turbines, immense amounts of space iv and large quantities of increasingly unavailable and expensive raw materials); and (iv) the intermittency of renewable energy (see 2 below).v This means that the UK may be unable to generate sufficient electricity by 2030 for current needs let alone for the mandated EVs (electric vehicles) and heat pumps and for the energy requirements of industry and of the huge new data centres being developed to support the rapid growth of AI (artificial intelligence).

In any case, the UK doesn’t have enough skilled technical managers, electrical, heating and other engineers, electricians, plumbers, welders, mechanics and other skilled tradespeople required to do the multitude of tasks essential to achieve Net Zero – a problem worsened by the Government’s plans for massively increased house building.vi

2. It would be socially and economically disastrous.

The Government aims for 100% renewable electricity by 2030 but has yet to publish a fully costed engineering plan for the provision of comprehensive grid-scale back-up when there’s little or no wind or sun; a problem that’s complicated by the imminent retirement of elderly nuclear and fossil fuel power plants. The Government has indicated that back-up may be provided by new gas-fired power plants vii but it has yet to publish any detail. That of course would not be a ‘clean’ solution and it seems the Government’s answer is to fit them with carbon capture and underground storage (CCS) systems: a ‘solution’ that’s very expensive, controversial and commercially unproven at scale.viii This issue is desperately important: without full back-up, electricity blackouts would be inevitable – potentially ruining many businesses and causing dreadful problems for millions of people, including serious health consequences threatening everyone and in particular the poor and vulnerable.ix

Net Zero’s major problem however is its overall cost and the impact of that on the economy. Because there’s no coherent plan for the project’s delivery, little attention has been given to overall cost; but with several trillion pounds seeming likely to be a correct estimate it would almost certainly be unaffordable.x The borrowing and taxes required for costs at this scale could destroy Britain’s credit standing and put an impossible burden on millions of households and businesses. It could quite possibly mean that the UK would face economic collapse.

But Net Zero is already causing one serious economic problem: because of renewable subsidies, carbon taxes, grid balancing costs and capacity market costs, the UK has the highest industrial and domestic electricity prices in the developed world.xi The additional costs referred to elsewhere in this essay – for example the costs of establishing a comprehensive non-fossil grid and of providing gas-fired power plants fitted with CCS as back-up – can only make this worse. Unless urgent remedial action is taken, the government is most unlikely to be able to achieve its principal mission of increased economic growth.

Net Zero would have two other dire consequences:

(i) As China essentially controls the supply of key materials (for example, lithium, cobalt, aluminium, processed graphite, nickel, copper and so-called rare earths) without which renewables cannot be manufactured, the UK would greatly increase its already damaging dependence on it, putting its energy and overall national security at most serious risk.xii It would also mean that, while impoverishing Britain, Net Zero would be enriching China.xiii

(ii) The vast mining and mineral processing operations required for renewables are already causing appalling environmental damage and dreadful human suffering throughout the world, affecting in particular fragile, unspoilt ecosystems and many of the world’s poorest and most vulnerable people; the continued pursuit of Net Zero would make all this far worse.xiv

3. In any case it’s pointless.

For two reasons:

(i) It’s absurd to regard the closure of greenhouse gas (GHG) emitting plants in the UK and their ‘export’ mainly to SE Asian countries (especially China), commonly with poor environmental regulation and often powered by coal-fired electricity – thereby increasing global emissions – as a positive step towards Net Zero. Yet efforts to ‘decarbonise’ the UK mean that’s what’s happening: it’s why we no longer produce many key chemicals and, by closing our few remaining blast furnaces, will soon be unable to produce commercially viable primary steel (see endnote iii).xv

(ii) Most major non-Western countries – the source of over 70% of GHG emissions and home to 84% of humanity – don’t regard emission reduction as a priority and, either exempt (by international agreement) from or ignoring any obligation to reduce their emissions, are focused instead on economic and social development, poverty eradication and energy security.xvi As a result, global emissions are increasing (by 62% since 1990) and are set to continue to increase for the foreseeable future. As the UK is the source of just 0.72% of global emissions any further emission reduction it may achieve would essentially have no impact on the global position.xvii

In other words, Net Zero means the UK is legally obliged to pursue an unachievable, potentially disastrous and pointless policy – a policy that could result in Britain’s economic destruction.

Robin Guenier October 2024

Guenier is a retired, writer, speaker and business consultant. He has a degree in law from Oxford, is qualified as a barrister and for twenty years was chief executive of various high-tech companies, including the Central Computing and Telecommunications Agency reporting to the UK Cabinet Office. A Freeman of the City of London, he was Executive Director of Taskforce 2000, founder chair of the medical online research company MedixGlobal and a regular contributor to TV and radio.

End notes:

i http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2008/27/part/1/crossheading/the-target-for-2050

ii See Vaclav Smil’s important book, How the World Really Works: https://time.com/6175734/reliance-on-fossil-fuels/

iii Regarding steel for example see the penultimate paragraph of this article: https://www.construction-physics.com/p/the-blast-furnace-800-years-of-technology.

iv See Andrews & Jelley, “Energy Science”, 3rd ed., Oxford, page 16: http://tiny.cc/4jhezz

v For a view of wind power’s many problems, see this: https://watt-logic.com/2023/06/14/wind-farm-costs/ This is also relevant: https://davidturver.substack.com/p/debunking-cheap-renewables-myth

vi A detailed Government report: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/65855506fc07f3000d8d46bd/Employer_skills_survey_2022_research_report.pdf See also pages 10 and 11 of the Royal Academy of Engineering report (Note 6 below).

vii See this report by the Royal Academy of Engineering: https://nepc.raeng.org.uk/media/uoqclnri/electricity-decarbonisation-report.pdf (Go to section 2.4.3 on page 22.) This interesting report contains a lot of valuable information.

viii This International Institute for Sustainable Development report on CCS is informative: https://www.iisd.org/articles/insight/unpacking-carbon-capture-storage-technology And see the second and third paragraphs here: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/sep/12/fossil-fuel-companies-environment-greenwashing (the rest of the article is also interesting).

ix This article shows how more renewables could result in blackouts: http://tiny.cc/lnhezz

x The National Grid (now the National Energy System Operator (NESO)) has said net zero will cost £3 trillion: https://www.current-news.co.uk/reaching-net-zero-to-cost-3bn-says-national-grid-eso/. And in this presentation Michael Kelly, Emeritus Professor of Technology at Cambridge, shows how the cost would amount to several trillion pounds: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NkImqOxMqvU

xi The facts, an explanation of why Net Zero is responsible and a proposed solution are cogently set out here: https://davidturver.substack.com/p/uk-electricity-prices-highest-in-world.

xii https://www.dw.com/en/the-eus-risky-dependency-on-critical-chinese-metals/a-61462687

xiii Discussed here: https://dailysceptic.org/2024/07/24/net-zero-is-impoverishing-the-west-and-enriching-china/

xiv See this for example: http://tiny.cc/3lhezz. Arguably however the most compelling and harrowing evidence is found in Siddharth Kara’s book Cobalt Red – about the horrors of cobalt mining in the Congo: https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781250284297/cobaltred

xv A current example: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c70zxjldqnxo

xvi This essay shows how developing countries have taken control of climate negotiations: https://ipccreport.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/the-west-vs-the-rest-2.1.1.pdf (Nothing that’s happened since 2020 changes the conclusion: for example see the ‘Dubai Stocktake’ agreed at COP28 in 2023 of which item 38 unambiguously confirms developing countries’ exemption from any emission reduction obligation.)

xvii This comprehensive analysis, based on an EU Commission database, provides – re global greenhouse gas (GHG) and CO2 emissions – detailed information by country from 1990 to 2023: https://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/report_2024?vis=ghgtot#emissions_table

October 26, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Environmentalism, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | | Leave a comment

Dark Money, Darker Motives: Why is Bill Gates Backing Kamala Harris Using Shady Super PAC?

By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 23.10.2024

Tech billionaire, philanthropist and WEF cheerleader Bill Gates has given Kamala Harris’s campaign a $50 mln boost using dark money super PAC Future Forward. The donation was intended to remain secret, but was uncovered by NYT this week.

What’s Future Forward?

Set up in 2018 by former Obama campaign staffers and coming out of left field in the final weeks of the 2020 race to fund a massive pro-Biden media blitz, Future Forward is a super political action committee funded mostly by Big Tech and venture capital firms, including Meta, Google, disgraced crypto financier Sam Bankman-Fried, Bain Capital and Bridgewater Associates.

The super PAC has raised a whopping $700 mln for the 2024 election cycle, rolling out $75 mln in pro-Harris ads last week.

What’s Behind Gates’ Electoral ‘Generosity’?

2024 is at least the second election cycle where Gates has used a dark money vehicle to support the Democratic Party’s candidate. In 2020, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation contributed nearly $70 mln to the New Venture Fund, a nonprofit belonging to DC consultancy Arabella Advisors, which bankrolls the Sixteen Thirty Fund, a goliath of undisclosed donations for Democratic politicians and liberal causes which raised nearly $390 mln four years ago. Publicly, Gates and his now former wife also gave $500,000 to Biden’s inaugural committee.

Mr. Gates has been an active supporter of Democratic candidates since at least 2008, contributing financially to and praising the campaigns of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

Gates’ ties to the Clintons are deeply rooted, with the billionaire becoming a top donor to the Clinton Foundation, and forging partnerships with the organization for global projects since at least 2013.

In a telling interview in 2016 in which he explained his preference for Clinton, Gates said “there have been questions about vaccines in general where some of the candidates have shown that they’re not as up to date about vaccines in general, and that’s got to be a concern.”

“Science in general, whether it’s GMOs or vaccines, there’s a lot of people out there who don’t give science the benefit of the doubt. In terms of experience, Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton have more experience in global health,” Gates said at the time.

How has Gates profited off the Dems’ agenda?

With Harris’ presidential bid expected to broadly continue the Biden/Clinton line on foreign and domestic policy, it makes sense for Gates to throw his influence behind the VP, given the perceived threat of the Trump brand of red-pill MAGA Republicans and their anti-vax, anti-tech, and anti-interventionist leanings.

“This election is different, with unprecedented significance for Americans and the most vulnerable people around the world,” Gates said this week after info about his $50 mln donation leaked out.

“I think it’s great to have somebody who’s younger, who can think about things like AI and how we shape that in the right way, and I certainly offer up my opinions to the politicians who are interested,” Gates said this summer after Biden dropped out and named Harris his successor.

The Gates Foundation’s fortunes got a big boost under Biden, with its endowment growing from $69 bln in 2020 to $75.2 bln in 2023.

Gates enjoyed a profits bonanza off mRNA coronavirus vaccines mandated by the Biden administration. In 2022, he sold off shares of BioNTech stocks he bought in 2019 as sales slowed. His foundation has also owned shares in Pfizer, CureVac and Vir Biotech going back to well before the pandemic.

The billionaire’s foundation supports the Global Virome Project – an ambitious initiative created in 2018 to predict pathogens that could trigger lethal pandemics, but accused of weaponizing viruses from a network of 150 biolabs worldwide.

Gates has also backed a broad array of World Economic Forum-affiliated initiatives, including projects to reduce emissions and create synthetic meat and dairy. In 2022, The Seattle Times revealed Gates’ secret lobbying to save Biden’s signature $2+ trln Build Back Better social and climate spending package.

Gates has also been a top backer of the Biden administration’s battle against media and online ‘misinformation’, with an explosive MintPress investigation from 2021 revealing that his foundation had bankrolled some $319 mln in media, including CNN, the BBC, Le Monde, the Financial Times, Der Spiegel and others to ensure favorable coverage of his agenda and that of his allies.

October 24, 2024 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

Did you hear the one about the Electric Ferry…?

Geoff Buys Cars | October 2, 2024

This is the story about how the Missunde 3, an electric ferry, replaced the Missunde 2, a polluting, old fashioned diesel ferry, in Germany.

October 12, 2024 Posted by | Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Timeless or most popular, Video | | 1 Comment

Housing prices are exploding and the EU is going to make it worse, warns Polish MEP

Remix News | October 10, 2024

Housing prices are exploding, warns Polish MEP Anna Zalewska, and EU policy backed by commission President Ursula von der Leyen will lead to disaster.

“In the European Parliament, we have recently been discussing crises themselves — the automotive industry, the competitiveness of the EU economy and yesterday, the housing crisis,” said MEP Anna Zalewska. “There is one conclusion from all these debates. Ursula von der Leyen is leading the European Union to the edge of the abyss.”

Zalewska claims that the reason for the housing crisis is EU climate regulations during the 10th session of the EU parliament, according to Polish news outlet Do Rzeczy. She cites the energy efficiency directives, as well as the regulation on eco-design, on construction products, and the certification of CO2 emissions. All of these factors are rapidly driving up the cost of not only modernizing homes, but also the cost of building new ones.

“This will make housing not only a luxury good, but also an unattainable good. What is the European Commission proposing? If someone does not comply with these documents, they will pay fines on how their apartment is heated, among other things. These documents should be thrown in the trash,” Zalewska.

Even left-wing organizations and news outlets have acknowledged that “green renovations” are driving up housing and apartment prices. In many cases, any renovations landlords will need to make to meet energy efficiency and carbon goals will be passed on to tenants.

“With their sights set on energy efficiency, policy-makers neglect that green renovations are driving up rents for the most vulnerable. Only with strong social protections and a shift away from financialization can the basic right to housing be made compatible with curbing emissions,” writes the Green European Journal.

Housing costs across Europe have already soared over the last 10 years, but in many countries, such as Germany, new-build construction has slowed dramatically. Builders cite high building material costs, high costs for labor, and a shortage of labor. In addition, national regulations have placed serious cost burdens on developers and construction companies. Now, EU regulations are expected to cost €1 trillion to bring buildings up to code in Europe in terms of energy efficiency.

However, EU regulations are not the only factors. Mass immigration is also driving up rental and even housing prices in Europe, especially in migrant-heavy countries such as Germany. Many newcomers want to live in the cities, where competition for housing is intense.

For instance, in 2002, Remix News reported that Germany’s apartment vacancy rate has seen its biggest decline in more than 20 years, falling to just 2.5 percent nationwide at the end of 2022, and migration is being fingered as one of the primary causes behind the crisis.

The data, published by consulting institute Empirica and the real estate specialist CBRE, shows that the “market-active vacancy rate,” apartments that can be rented out immediately or offered for rent over the medium term, fell 2.5 percent to about 554,000 residential units at the end of 2022.

“The (drop) in vacancies in 2022 was characterized by the immigration of around 1 million people from Ukraine,” said Empirica CEO Reiner Braun at the time.

Poland, on the other hand, has not seen an influx of foreigners at the same rate as Germany, although hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians have arrived in the country in recent years. Other factors at work are internal migration patterns to larger cities away from rural areas, international investment and speculation, and gentrification trends.

Although housing prices dipped in many countries shortly after the Covid-19 pandemic — which sent asset prices, including real estate, to sky-high prices — real estate prices are already recovering and marching higher, according to a new report from ING.

October 11, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , | Leave a comment

If Green Energy Is the Future, Bring a Fire Extinguisher

Lithium batteries keep bursting into flames

By Steve Goreham | Climate Depot | October 7, 2024

Alternative energy is exploding—literally. Lithium battery fires are breaking out on highways and in factories, home garages and storage rooms. The rise in these fires is caused by government efforts to force the adoption of “green” energy.

Lithium batteries have high energy density, making them valuable for phones and portable appliances. But when they catch fire, they burn with high heat and can even blow up. That’s why airlines prohibit lithium batteries in checked baggage.

On June 24 a battery factory in Hwaseong, South Korea, caught fire, triggering explosions and killing 22 workers. Experts estimate that most were killed by toxic gases emitted by the burning batteries.

Scotland has suffered two major fires in battery-recycling centers this year. On April 8 a large fire broke out at Fenix Battery Recycling in Kilwinning. More than 40 firefighters and personnel from six different stations responded to the blaze, which burned for several days. The Scottish Fire and Rescue Service urged nearby residents to remain indoors with windows closed as long as two days after the fire started.

On June 23 a large fire broke out at the battery-recycling facility of WEEE Solutions in Glasgow. Eyewitnesses reported explosions, noises like gunshots, “steel flying everywhere” and a huge plume of black smoke. Ten fire trucks were needed, and the blaze lasted four days.

E-bike battery fires are a leading cause of fires in New York City, causing 270 blazes last year and killing 18 people. These have become a serious problem in Australia, Canada and other nations as well. E-bicyclists often store their bikes in first-floor storerooms, where they can self-ignite and destroy the buildings. Even high-quality batteries are prone to self-ignition after damage or when connected to a faulty charging system.

Lithium batteries have been used for the past 30 years in phones and small appliances. But the introduction of electric cars led to a massive increase in battery size—and potential destructiveness. On Aug. 19 a Tesla semi truck crashed into trees along Interstate 80 in California. The crash ignited the truck’s large lithium battery. Firefighters required 50,000 gallons of water to extinguish the flames, and the highway was closed for 15 hours. The California Advanced Clean Fleets regulation passed last year requires all new semi trucks to be zero-emissions vehicles by 2036, which in practice means electric trucks with batteries prone to fire.

Automakers have contended with lithium-battery fires for more than a decade. Alfa Romeo, BMW, Ford, General Motors, Hyundai, Porsche, Tesla and other manufacturers have recalled millions of EVs because of battery-fire problems. Batteries can self-ignite while the vehicle is in motion, when connected to a charger, or even when sitting in a parking lot. EVs prone to self-ignition have been banned from parking lots in China, South Korea and across the U.S.

On Aug. 24 a fire broke out in the parking lot of EV manufacturer Rivian in Normal, Ill. More than 50 vehicles were destroyed. The same plant also reportedly suffered three other battery fires in the last year and three more in 2021-22.

On July 26 a truck containing several large lithium batteries ignited after a crash on Interstate 15 near Baker, Calif. The road was shut down for 44 hours as firefighters worked to put out the blaze. Hundreds of motorists were stranded in the desert in 100-degree heat. Ambulances and medical teams with fuel and water were dispatched to the site to help stranded motorists.

How are governments responding to the rash of battery fires? They are doubling down, promoting the use of even larger high-density lithium batteries as part of their efforts to phase out coal, oil and natural gas in favor of wind and solar energy.

Grid-scale batteries are viewed as the solution to wind and solar intermittency. They store excess electricity when wind and solar output is high and release it when wind and solar output is low. The number of grid battery fires is growing, and grid batteries are hundreds of times the size of EV batteries.

October 10, 2024 Posted by | Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , , | Leave a comment

Energy prices cross a critical threshold in Poland, leaving some companies fighting for their lives

By Liz Heflin | Remix News | October 10, 2024

Energy prices have crossed a critical point in Poland, leaving some companies fighting for their lives, according to wnp.pl. The site further says that the EU’s goal of lowering greenhouse gas emissions means higher obligations on those companies that depend on energy usage.

Market participants are finding it increasingly difficult to compete, with those relying on coal burdened by emission fees. “The energy-intensive industry is responsible for over 20 percent of Poland’s GDP,” WNP says, which has led to more and more demand for renewables to lower carbon footprint and remain competitive.

Henryk Kaliś, president of the board of the Chamber of Industrial Energy and Energy Recipients, says the key factor for companies is not the price of energy itself, but whether it allows for profitable production and competition with foreign (non-European) companies. Electricity prices need to be below 60 euros per megawatt-hour to compete, and prices have already surpassed this threshold.

The EU’s climate policy affects companies across the continent and has led to European industry moving to Asia. However, Poland is in a particularly vulnerable position, as gas fuel accounts for 45 percent of the country’s energy system, explains Robert Tomaszewski, head of the energy department of Polityka Insight. Compare this to Scandinavian countries where electricity is mainly supplied by hydroelectric power plants, Spain where nuclear and renewables make up 70 percent of the energy mix, or France which has turned back on their nuclear plants, driving one megawatt-hour of electricity down to €47.

In early August, Polityka Insight’s data had Poland’s average wholesale price of electricity at an average of €90 per megawatt-hour, with higher prices only seen in Ireland (€98.68) and Italy (€95-98)

Mikołaj Budzanowski, who sits on the management board of Poland’s Boryszew Group, says there is no doubt that high energy prices are a major problem for Polish industry.

October 10, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , , | Leave a comment

U.S. Swings and Misses in Energy Competition

By Wallace Manheimer | RealClear Energy | September 30, 2024

Who can develop reliable, cheap, clean power? In the parlance of baseball, the U.S. led early with a leadoff home run. It invented, developed and perfected the first ultra-super critical (USC) coal-powered plant.

Coming online in 2012, the 600-megawatt (MW) John W. Turk Jr. Coal Plant in Arkansas employed new technology, most notably, an advance in metallurgy that allowed pipes and boilers to operate for extended periods at extremely elevated temperature and pressure.

This higher temperature allows efficiency of 40%, instead of the more usual 33%. Also, Turk had the best pollution controls, its emissions being mostly carbon dioxide and water vapor. Power Magazine was so impressed that it gave the plant its highest honor in 2013.

It looked like the U.S. was set to win the game, until it took its eye off the ball and made numerous errors. Instead of exploiting its remarkable technological achievement, U.S. policymakers decided to abandon coal and promote wind and solar.

Powerful environmental groups fought to end coal; Michael Bloomberg bragged that he contributed $500 million to the effort. Companies in the coal industry suffered, some went out of business, and domestic consumption of the country’s most abundant fuel declined. Turk is still the only USC plant in the U.S.

Solar and wind do not provide reliable power, as they fluctuate with the weather and time of day.

Also, they are not cheap. Germans, whose electric system relies heavily on solar, pay more than twice as much for electricity as the nuclear-dominant French and nearly triple the amount paid by U.S. consumers.

Furthermore, solar and wind technologies, contrary to popular belief, are not clean; not where their materials are mined, nor where they are used, nor at the end of life.

First, the mining: These technologies use many exotic and rare earth materials like praseodymium, terbium, cadmium, indium and dysprosium. Such materials are available mostly in Western China and Africa, under who-knows-what environmental and working conditions.

Secondly, where they are used, solar and wind take up tremendous amounts of land – many times the acreage of a coal plant. The average solar power reaching Earth is about 200 MW per square kilometer. Hence, with a perfectly efficient conversion to electricity, a 1,000 MW solar farm would require 5 square kilometers. But maximum solar efficiency is only 20%, boosting the land requirement to 25 square kilometers, space that could not be used for anything else. Even the maximum theoretical efficiency is only 30%.

The numbers for wind are worse: A 1,000 MW wind farm would require a whopping 500 square kilometers – equal to about 27,000 big league baseball fields. This land could be used for crops and grazing animals, but not much else.

Finally, disposal of the huge amount of material used in the fabrication of solar and wind facilities, whose life spans are mere fractions of traditional generating plants, must be disposed of. Many of these exotic materials are not suitable for standard landfills, as their compounds are harmful to humans and are water soluble. Frequently, the solar or wind company has just walked away and left the relics in place for others to worry about.

Solar and wind are more of an environmental disaster than an environmental savior.

With the U.S. relegated to the locker room, China came to bat and staged a tremendous scoring rally. Out of the top 100 Chinese coal plants, 90 are ultra-supercritical units.

Having improved on USC technology, Chinese plant efficiency is around 44%. The new 1,350 MW Pingshan Phase II plant achieves 49% efficiency! The best Chinese coal plant is now cleaner and 22 % more efficient than its American counterpart.

Since 2010, India has constructed more than 90 super critical and ultra-super critical coal plants.

Has the U.S. played its last coal-fired season?

Perhaps- unless America’s free enterprise system were brought fully into the game, with the private sector mostly doing the engineering and the federal government sponsoring long-range scientific research.

However, U.S. policymakers must abandon their obsession with solar and wind as answers for a climatic “existential threat.” Otherwise, sensible people play a fool’s game in a fantasy league that demonizes a gas sustaining all life — carbon dioxide – as others compete in the majors.

Such absurdity is no match for the technical leadership displayed in China and India.

Dr. Wallace Manheimer is a life fellow of the American Physical Society, the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers and is a member of the CO2.Coalition. He is the author of more than 150 refereed papers.

October 7, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , , | 2 Comments

African Energy Chamber Calls Western Funding Withdrawal From Key Projects ‘Immoral’

Sputnik – 27.09.2024

The withdrawal of Western funding for key projects in Africa is outrageous and constitutes “financial apartheid,” NJ Ayuk, the executive chairman of the African Energy Chamber, told Sputnik.

“One of the key things you have to see is that the exclusionary rule, which we call financial apartheid, that you’ve seen from Western countries when it comes to financing Africa and really providing funds, it is wrong. It is immoral. It is outrageous what they’re doing,” Ayuk said on the sidelines of the Russian Energy Week International Forum.

The official pointed to energy projects, saying that natural gas powering Europe was described as green, which was not the case for Africa.

“Africa is still the country where you have so many millions of people without electricity and without access to clean cooking,” Ayuk added.

The Russian Energy Week is taking place in the Russian capital from September 26-28.

September 27, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , | Leave a comment

German Green Party in crisis – board resigns after election defeat

By Patrick Poppel | September 25, 2024

The Greens in Germany are drawing personal conclusions from a series of electoral defeats and are now restructuring the party leadership. The two chairmen Ricarda Lang and Omid Nouripour announced their withdrawal from the party in Berlin on Wednesday.

The Greens had suffered heavy losses in the last four elections (European elections and the regional elections in Saxony, Thuringia and Brandenburg). In Brandenburg they had more than halved their result. The party has left two regional parliaments.

Only in the state of Saxony did they narrowly manage to be represented in the state parliament again. “The election result on Sunday in Brandenburg is a testimony to the deepest crisis our party has faced in a decade,” said Nouripour. “It is not about the fate of one party alone.” It is about the fundamental question of whether in Germany, as “the country with the greatest responsibility in the European Union, it will be possible in the future to continue to make good politics for peace, for Freedom, for justice, for prosperity and for climate protection”.

“It takes new faces to lead the party out of this crisis,” Ms Lang said. “Now is not the time to be stuck to your own chair. Now is the time to take responsibility and we are taking that responsibility by enabling a new start,” she added.

Lang and Nouripour were elected chairmen at the end of January 2022. They are relatively popular in the party. Lang and Nouripour did not comment on their successor.

According to media reports, State Secretary for Economic Affairs Franziska Brantner and Bundestag member Felix Banaszak are in discussion. Brantner is a close confidante of Economics Minister Robert Habeck, who could lead the Greens into the next federal election as their candidate for chancellor.

Banaszak was formerly leader of the Green Party in North Rhine-Westphalia and is an important representative of the left wing. The Green Vice Chancellor and Economics Minister Robert Habeck called the party executive’s announcement a “great service to the party”.

CDU General Secretary Carsten Linnemann called on the government to hold early elections. “Our country will not be able to endure this government for another year!” Linnemann told the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung.

There is no way around new elections. The resignation is a respectable step and the Greens have to fundamentally change their policies, said Linnemann. But how could a party that has become increasingly established in Germany over the last 80 years come to this disastrous point?

Of course, most of the Green Party’s voters are in western Germany and in the big cities. But even there the party faces competition from other left-wing groups. Despite the massive media debate on climate change, which is one of the Greens’ main issues, they suffered such a strong defeat.

Since the AFD (Alternative for Germany) can be seen as the clear winner of all these elections, the question naturally arises as to where the Green voters went. Green voters do not easily vote for a right-wing party. It is therefore very clear that the votes have gone from the political center to the right and the Greens have lost their quota to the center.

But what was the reason for these defeats? Maybe it wasn’t a lack of effort in the election campaign or the constant unprofessional appearances of the Green Foreign Minister. The reason for the problems and possible decline of this party is the increasingly visible distance from its roots. The Green Movement was known for its peace initiatives for decades. And the party has finally moved away from these ideals of peace in recent years.

The harsh words regarding arms deliveries to Ukraine particularly irritated many voters. The Greens used to be against wars and now they are marching at the forefront of escalating forces. Completely absurd political behavior when it comes to migration policy has also led many voters to make a different decision.

When it comes to energy policy, fewer and fewer people trust the Greens. The rise of the AFD and the decline of the Greens show us yet another aspect of German domestic politics. The real political center has clearly shifted to the right and Green voters have moved to the center. Since the consequences of the absurd migration policy and other mistakes will be visible for years to come, this shift from the center to the right will not end any time soon.

Patrick Poppel, expert at the Center for Geostrategic Studies (Belgrade).

September 25, 2024 Posted by | Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Militarism | | 2 Comments

They Think We Are Stupid, Volume 11

Everything you need to know about our ruling class’s opinion of you

By Aaron Kheriaty, MD | Human Flourishing | September 19, 2024

September 20, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries