Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

The 2050 Net Zero Climate Scam

By William Levin | American Thinker | December 29, 2024

Twenty fifty is the official date for net zero emissions. According to the experts, it is the last chance to stop a catastrophic rise in temperature. The leading source for climate change science, the U.N. IPCC, says so. Corporations run commercials helpfully informing the public that net zero is a top priority. Few can outdo Delta Air Lines, which promises compliance using “a fully sustainable long-haul aircraft [that] has yet to be invented.”

The urgency is palpable and the science compelling. Humanity itself is at risk without net zero CO2 and non-CO2 emissions.

Politically, 2050 is the ideal climate date because it is close enough to justify immediate action, and just far enough as to be unprovable for climate disaster.

For a science so settled and a date so specific, there must exist a wealth of data scientifically supporting the hypothesis that 25 years from now marks a deadline and turning point for the Earth’s future.

An A.I. query provides the answer:

The target year 2050 for achieving carbon neutrality is primarily driven by scientific consensus and international agreements aimed at limiting global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the Paris Agreement outline that reaching net-zero CO2 emissions by 2050 is crucial to avoiding catastrophic climate impacts.

A.I. is correct that the IPCC and the signatories of the Paris Agreement are the parties responsible for promoting 2050 net zero.  But who exactly are these organizations, and do they deserve our trust?

The IPCC is a political body consisting of 195 member-governments, charged with providing assessments in support of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change. In theory, the IPCC mandate is to collect the best available climate science. The IPCC expressly commits that its “reports should be neutral with respect to policy.” And by its own admission, “the IPCC does not conduct its own research.” Its role is to summarize the objective science.

The signatories to the Paris Agreement are likewise 195 nations convened under the auspices of the U.N.  But unlike the IPCC, the Paris Agreement signatories make no pretense to being a scientific body, and indeed, no one is confused on this point. The signatories are a political body and the Paris Agreement a purely political document.

With an overlapping membership, it should come as no surprise that the two organizations coordinate their efforts.  In the process, the IPCC has become the loudest and most strident advocate for existential change in human activity.  In the latest IPCC report, deepening red gradient shadings convey that the Earth is a looming inferno.

According to the IPCC, the danger of imminent collapse due to rising CO2 and non-CO2 emissions, particularly methane, requires immediate action. Humanity must downsize and restructure the global economy, including, in their modest terminology, “governments, private sector, and civil society.” Everyone is responsible, and everyone must contribute.

Not only must GDP be lowered, but the world must immediately and drastically curtail fossil fuels; limit global agriculture output based on emissions, not feeding the world; spend and redistribute upwards of $125 trillion; rely on expensive, unreliable, discredited solar and wind for global power needs; and virtually ignore nuclear power, all the while “prioritizing equity, climate justice, social justice, inclusion and just transition processes.” To make the math work, governments and the private sector must implement on a global scale yet-to-exist carbon capture technologies, of unknown cost and consequence.

There is no imputation here that climate science is not real. It is the political choices of the IPCC at issue, specifically the 2023 Sixth Assessment’s Summary for Policymakers, as opposed to the physical scientists reporting as Working Group 1. As summarized by scientist Roger Pielke, “it is not within the IPCC’s mandate to call for action or to implore urgency.”

The IPCC task is to vet and summarize thousands of complex models and scientific papers produced annually. In each instance, a climate model incorporates assumptions not easily aggregated. The IPCC solution groups the models into five arbitrary scenarios based on forecasted warming in 2100. At no point does the IPCC ever declare one set of scenarios more likely than another.  Indeed, as aggregators, they have no scientific basis for making any such assertion. In these scenarios, 2050 does not exist as a scientifically significant year. It is simply a point on the curve connecting the current temperature to the 2100 end point.

To get to 2050, and urgency, the IPCC needs to import the political findings of the Paris Agreement.

In 2015, the Paris Agreement signatories reviewed the then most current IPCC report, the 5th Assessment. These 195 government actors arbitrarily concluded that “well below 2 degrees Celsius” of warming was the maximum threshold the Earth could survive. Nothing in the IPCC 5th Assessment supports the “well below 2 degree warming” as a scientific consensus. No IPCC evidence identifies a scientific threshold for global warming beyond which the Earth tips into collapse. Especially relevant, the signatories to the Paris Agreement in no manner highlighted 2050 as a year of special climate meaning, nor would it matter, scientifically speaking, if they had.  Following the 5th Assessment, the Paris Agreement target date is merely a “long-term temperature goal,” with one reference to “the second half” of the century.

The Paris Agreement signatories went farther, deciding by imperial fiat that the temperature goal needed a guardrail, the now infamous, endlessly repeated 1.5-degree-warming “limit.” In popular parlance, many, many people will swear that 1.5 degrees of warming is a scientifically valid statement of the limit to global warming, beyond which climate catastrophe ensues.

As important to note, all IPCC warming targets, including the Paris Agreement, start from the pre-industrial period 1850–1900. According to the IPCC, 1.1 degrees of warming has already occurred, meaning the Paris Agreement target at present is a mere 0.4 degrees over 75 years to the IPCC 2100 model date. This equates to an imperceptible 0.005 degrees of annual warming — hardly the stuff of headlines and catastrophic collapse.  And nothing compared to the 10 degrees of warming observed in the Earth’s last interglacial warm period in Siberia some 115,000 to 130,000 years ago.

It needs to be said as loudly as possible. The 1.5-degree climate tipping limit has no basis in any finding of the IPCC. It is the arbitrary finding of 195 political actors, in defense of the non-scientific “well below 2 degree” catastrophe, magically transported by the IPCC from 2100 to 2050.

How does the IPCC move the climate clock back 50 years, in violation of its 2100 science? By intentional sleight of hand, the IPCC provides a science answer to a policy question. How much CO2 can be emitted before the 1.5-degree target is breached? The sole source of the 1.5 degrees is the Paris Agreement.

Pro-IPCC climate scientists confirm that the global warming limit, whether it be 1.5 degrees from the Paris Agreement or some other number, is based solely on “value judgments and choice,” not “climate science.” (See page 7 chart.) The IPCC would have readers believe the exact opposite: that the global warming limit is scientifically determined, and those who disagree are “science deniers.” It is a deception of massive consequence.

Twenty fifty, as it turns out, is a long con between 195 governments and the IPCC.

As part of his Day One actions, President Trump needs to, once again, remove the U.S. from the Paris Agreement and disavow the overtly political IPCC Sixth Assessment Summary for Policymakers. The IPCC global prescription is not scientific, and it most certainly is not benign.

January 5, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , | Leave a comment

2025 Looks Bleak For Germany… Energy The Most Expensive In Europe … Growing Speech Tyranny

2025 in Germany will be a year of more energy inflation and loss of free speech rights

By P Gosselin | No Tricks Zone | January 1, 2025

Effective today, Germany’s CO2 surcharge will rise from 45 euros a tonne to 55 euros, which will further fan inflation and social discontent.

Already Germany’s electricity prices are among the highest in the world, and the most expensive in Europe:

Chart: strom-report.com/ 

Germany clamps down on dissenters, free speech

2025 will not be an easy year for dissenters and critics of the government, as this is increasingly being criminalized in Germany thanks to recently passed laws and acts that aim to suppress free speech in Germany.

The former head Germany’s Constitution Protection Authority (Bundesverfassungsschutz), Thomas Haldenwang (CDU Party), suggested last February when presenting measures to fight right-wing extremism, that human thoughts and speech patterns need to be under surveillance and become the business of the government: “It’s also about shifting verbal and mental boundaries. We have to be careful that thought and language patterns don’t become embedded in our language.”

Mocking the state now verboten

Haldenwang’s boss, Federal Minister of the Interior Nancy Faeser (SPD Party), wants to treat vocal conservative protesters in the same way as organized crime groups: “Those who mock the state must deal with a strong state.”

“We want to take account of the fact that hate on the internet also occurs below the threshold of criminal liability,”said Federal Minister for Family Affairs Lisa Paus (Greens) at her press conference on February 13 on the topic of ‘Hate on the Internet’.“Many enemies of democracy know exactly what falls under freedom of expression on social media platforms,”

Meant by “enemies of democracy” here are opposition forces, even when democratically elected.

Unwanted election results may be annulled

In response to comments in favor of the conservatives made by Elon Musk, German President Frank Walter Steinmeier hinted he would annul the results of the upcoming February 23 national elections if he doesn’t like the results.

So in Germany, it’s watch what you say and, if the old parties don’t like the election results, then they might just annul them. Germany is slipping back quickly to darker times.

January 1, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Economics, Full Spectrum Dominance, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | | Leave a comment

11 Reasons why the “EV Transition” will NEVER happen

MGUY Australia | December 25, 2024

Mark P Mills gave an extended talk on EV mandates in November, at Hillsdale College, Michigan, and in this video I’ve extracted 11 key points that explain why the much vaunted “EV transition” will never happen.

Go and watch the full video here:    • EV Mandates vs. Freedom | Mark P. Mills  

Ten Reasons why you should NEVER buy an EV:    • TEN reasons why you should NEVER buy …   #electricvehicle #electriccar #evfire #ev

☕️ Want to support this channel? Buy me a coffee! ➜ https://m-g.uy/donate

December 29, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Video | 2 Comments

Decline of German Greens the result of stupid energy policy and war madness

By Patrick Poppel | December 25, 2024

The Green Party is currently preparing for the federal election. To this end, they also put original green concerns up for discussion. The Greens’ entire election campaign is now tailored to their top candidate, Federal Minister of Economics Robert Habeck, a special election campaign where a personality is put in the foreground.

Criticism of the minister should be avoided as much as possible, at least until the date of the federal election. But the concept didn’t fully work. Some Greens close to the climate movement, such as Luisa Neubauer, noted that Habeck simply questioned a central goal of green climate policy in an interview.

In an interview that Habeck gave at the industrial summit, he answered the question of whether the date of the coal phase-out was in question: “Yes. For me, energy security is always the current priority.” Now the answer is also fodder for the many Habeck opponents in the parties, who have for years accused Habeck of an ideological energy policy that leads to the de-industrialization of the country.

In mid-December, when Habeck gave the interview, the price of electricity on the exchange had risen massively due to the dark season, no wind and hardly any sun. Even a steelworks in Saxony had to be disconnected from the energy grid for a short time because of this. Of course, this is not good news for a Green candidate for chancellor.

But Habeck avoided discussing his statements further. He preferred to talk about the fact that the construction of new gas-fired power plants was intended to compensate for the electricity loss caused by nuclear and coal-fired power plants being taken off the grid.

However, due to the premature end of the federal coalition, the Power Plant Act can no longer be implemented during this government period. Whether it will be back on the Bundestag agenda after the new elections also depends on whether the Greens will return to government responsibility.

According to current surveys, the CDU/CSU (Union Party) is likely to become the strongest party and could enter into an alliance with the SPD (Social Democrats) or the Greens. At the same time, there are politicians in the CDU and even more so in the CSU who almost see Habeck as their main opponent and, above all, no longer want to see him in the Federal Ministry of Economics.

But it’s not just about the reputation of the party’s top candidate. So now everyone asks themselves the question; what are the themes of the party, which at the beginning of its existence campaigned for peace in Europe and the protection and improvement of the ecology.

When it comes to peace and weapons disarmament, the Greens have finally switched to the other side since the beginning of the Ukraine conflict in 2014. No other party is as committed to escalation with Russia as the former green “Peace Party”. Both the Union Party and the Greens want to send Ukraine even more and accurate weapons against the Russian army.

But this course is also causing more and more Green voters to think, as this decision goes exactly against the party’s original direction. But in addition to the peace issue, the failure and unclear approach to energy policy is certainly also a point that will have a negative impact on the election.

First the party was against nuclear energy, then for solar power and wind turbines, then against coal-fired power plants and now against gas from Russia. Many voters are no longer familiar with this issue and are confused.

It is particularly tragic that the Greens are completely failing on exactly these two core issues of peace and energy. If this course continues, the future of this party is very uncertain.

Of course, the Greens are always a very interesting junior partner for large parties, as the current situation shows that they make a lot of compromises in order to be able to become part of a government. But with this behavior they regularly lose favor with their voters and always receive poor results in the following elections. All surveys show this clearly.

Since the Greens lost a lot of power, especially in the last regional elections in eastern Germany, it is clear that this party is unlikely to be successful in the federal elections. The Green Party of Germany has put itself in a situation from which it will be difficult to get out.

The only role this party can play in the future is as an extremely small, compromise-ready junior partner of other parties, which are trying by all means possible to prevent the patriotic forces from participating in the government.

Patrick Poppel is an expert at the Center for Geostrategic Studies in Belgrade.

December 25, 2024 Posted by | Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Militarism | | Leave a comment

EU risks losing gas supplies from Qatar – energy minister

RT | December 22, 2024

Qatar will stop gas shipments to the EU if member states enforce new legislation on carbon emissions, the Gulf nation’s energy minister Saad al-Kaabi has told the Financial Times (FT). Qatar has become an important supplier to the bloc after Brussels resolved to wean itself off Russian gas following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022.

If any EU country imposes penalties on Qatar under the bloc’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, Doha would stop exporting its liquefied natural gas (LNG) to the bloc, al-Kaabi told the outlet on Sunday.

QatarEnergy, the state-owned energy company, has long-term LNG contracts with several EU countries, including Germany, France, Italy, and the Netherlands.

The EU’s corporate due diligence rules, adopted in May 2023, are part of the bloc’s strategy to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. The legislation states that non-compliance is punishable with fines of up to 5% of the company’s annual global revenue. Al-Kaabi argued that such fines would significantly impact QatarEnergy’s revenue, which directly supports the state of Qatar and its citizens.

”If the case is that I lose 5% of my generated revenue by going to Europe, I will not go to Europe… I’m not bluffing,” Kaabi said. “I cannot lose that kind of money – and nobody would accept losing that kind of money,” he pointed out.

It would be impossible for an energy producer like QatarEnergy to align with the EU’s net-zero target as stipulated by the directive because of the amount of hydrocarbons it produces, the minister explained.

If slapped with hefty penalties, QatarEnergy would not break its LNG contracts but would try and find legal avenues.

”I will not accept that we get penalized,” he said. “I will stop sending gas to Europe.”

Following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022, the EU started replacing Russian pipeline gas with more expensive LNG from the Middle East and the US. The bloc still gets pipeline gas from Russia via Ukraine’s transit network but the agreement between Moscow and Kiev is set to expire on December 31. The authorities in Kiev have repeatedly stressed that the deal will not be renewed.

December 22, 2024 Posted by | Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , | 1 Comment

Geopolitical auto-asphyxiation: Here’s why Germany is heading for irreversible decline

Berlin is unable or unwilling to finally abandon a pernicious groupthink that subordinates its interests to Washington’s misguided political agenda

By Tarik Cyril Amar | RT | December 22, 2024

Oops, he’s done it again: Tech mogul, richest man in the world, and also now new bestie of American President-elect Donald Trump, Elon Musk has used his massive social media clout – as owner of X and a personal account with more than 200 million followers – to post about politics. And here we don’t mean his unhelpful recent intervention in how Americans – barely – keep their rickety government contraption from stuttering to a halt for lack of cash.

Nope, this is about Germany: With regard to Europe’s Sick Man on the Spree (there is another one on the Seine, of course), in his first post Musk waltzed in, guns blazing to support the right-wing AfD (Alternative for Germany) party in the run-up to the snap elections on February 23.

Only the AfD, he pronounced with typical modesty, can “save Germany.” In a second post, a few days later, Musk reacted to a murderous attack on a German Christmas market in the city of Magdeburg. This time, he called Germany’s lame-duck Chancellor Olaf Scholz “an incompetent fool” who should resign forthwith.

Some Germans are aghast. How dare Musk, an American, intervene in our elections? Deeply unpopular German minister of health Karl Lauterbach, for instance, went almost comically Victorian with his performance of righteous ire for public display, calling Musk’s statements “undignified and highly problematic.” Shocking, shocking indeed!

Interestingly enough, most of the same Germans still have no problem with Joe Biden, also an American, having helped Ukraine blow up their vital energy infrastructure and then mightily promoting the de-industrialization of Germany and the EU as a whole by subsidizing companies which move to produce in the US. Others think it’s totally normal that German politicians, such as Michael Roth – head of the German parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee, no less – massively interfere in the politics of, say, Georgia, not only by messing with its elections but also trying to literally instigate a coup. Judge not, lest ye be judged…

So, let’s cut out the daft pearl-clutching: I am German, and I find it very objectionable when Musk fails to post about the genocide in Gaza, instead taking the side of the Israeli perpetrators. But I could not be less concerned about him stating his opinion – it’s not more than that – about what party would be best for Germany, even thought I do not agree at all. As to calling Scholz what he actually is, go ahead Elon. There, I am even on your side.

Once we dispense with the huffy-puffy theatrics, what is really at stake here? And why would it even matter so much to some Germans what Musk has to say about their politics?

It’s not complicated: Musk has hit a very sore spot. And the name of that very sore spot is Germany. Yes, all of it, or at least, everything that has to do with its tanking economy and, frankly, delusional politics. Here’s how:

On December 16, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz lost a confidence vote in the German parliament. That was no surprise but the plan from the beginning. Or to be precise, since November 6, when the former governing coalition of Greens, Free Democrat market liberals, and Scholz’s own Social Democrats imploded with a nasty bang. After that, the no-confidence vote – even if it came with some predictable yet pretty fake drama and backbiting – was merely a formality on the way to snap elections, scheduled for February 23.

On the face of it, the above may look like a minor politics-as-usual hiccup: Sometimes coalitions don’t work out and a country needs new elections to – hopefully – start over with a new government. In postwar Germany (the Cold War Western version and the post-unification one together), this procedure – based on article 68 of the constitution – is not unprecedented; it has been used 5 times before.

But this is not that sort of case. Rather, the snap elections are only one small symptom of a much deeper, all-pervasive malaise: By regularly reading the news about Germany, you could easily come to feel that Europe’s former economic locomotive and political first-among-not-so-equals is now a very unhappy country, economically in severe, persistent decline and politically – to put it kindly – badly disoriented. And you would be right. Except things are even worse, and I write that, let me remind you, as a German.

For what’s really gloomy – indeed, quite literally hopeless – about the current German doom is that no one with even a remote chance at political power in Berlin is prepared to honestly face the root causes of the country’s misery. Germany is not merely in a mess; it also has a dysfunctional non-elite that is in total denial about how to fix that mess. But before we get to that elephant in the misery room that almost all German politicians fail to acknowledge, with stereotypical thoroughness, let’s look at the wasteland their failure has made.

Take a few highlights. There are 84 million Germans. According to a major research institute in the country, a quarter of them have found out that their income is insufficient to make ends meet. In a similar vein, another new study based on official government data pays special attention to the cost of having a roof, any roof, over your head. It has just found that 17.5 million Germans are living in poverty. That is 5.4 million more than previously assumed. The reason they had escaped the traditional statistics is that the cost of their abodes had simply not been factored in. Once you, realistically, do so, a whopping 20 percent of Germans fall under the official definition of “poor.”

No wonder then that ever more Germans need soup kitchens – in German “Tafeln” – to simply have enough to eat. Indeed, demand for housing has grown so much that they even have to ration the food they are doling out.

More and more Germans have to abandon their pets because they simply can’t afford them anymore: cats and dogs are becoming a “luxury item,” and keep people in a “poverty trap.” Germany’s business mood, meanwhile, is “slumping,” according to Bloomberg.

We could go on, but the picture should be clear enough: Germans may be a little on the “Angst” side in terms of temperament, but this time, they are really in trouble. How did that happen to the industrial powerhouse and export champion? The core of the problem is, of course, the economy. It takes not a grain of alarmism – ask Bloomberg again – to observe that its very future is in danger: It is “ravaged” by an energy crisis; Chinese competitors squeeze it, while Chinese markets are being lost; and then there is US President-elect Donald Trump and his threats of brutal tariffs. And all of that on top of persistent stagnation entering its fifth year.

Indeed, for two years already the German economy has simply “flatlined,” and business is (not) looking forward to yet another year of no growth. Germany, a long report has just summed it up, is “reaching a point of no return,” on a “path of decline that threatens to become irreversible.”

Here is the crux: The mainstream parties now contesting the snap elections recognize that the situation is dire. How could they not without being laughed out of the room? They all offer suggestions, as you would expect, for what to do about it. Let’s set aside that such suggestions look a little silly when coming from the parties that made up the last government coalition. Why didn’t they implement their ideas then, after all?

Let’s just note that everything is rather predictable: The Social Democrats stress public spending and infrastructure and make unfounded promises to protect ordinary Germans from social decline, as if that process were not well underway already.

The mainstream Conservatives (CDU-CSU) emphasize lower taxes, budget cuts, less bureaucracy and red tape, and the magic powers of the market to unleash new growth. The market liberals from the Free Democrats do the same, just more extremely. And the Greens promise everything somehow, and then some, while making no sense at all. Everything as usual, in other words.

And yet, none of the above even dare name the one key issue that a new government could resolve quickly and that would have a decisive and fast impact on the German economy: namely the cause of that energy crisis that has hit crucial “energy-intensive” sectors the hardest but is, of course, affecting every single business and all the households, that is, consumers, one way or the other. The reason for that odd blindness is purely political, because that cause is very easy to identify. It’s the “structural blow” of “the loss of cheap Russian energy,” as even Bloomberg acknowledges.

It is true: Germany has an abundance of problems, some long predating the war in and over Ukraine: demography, under-digitalization, the infamous “debt brake,” a public debt limit so primitively designed it makes reasonable deficits impossible, and so on. And yet, the politically produced and self-imposed (Russia did not cut off the cheap energy, the West did, including via violent sabotage as in the Nord Stream attacks) energy crisis is decisive.

Imagine Germany, if you wish, as a past-their-prime, somewhat out-of-shape middle-class type. In principle, there is no reason such a person cannot rebuild by pursuing a healthy diet and decent exercise. Except, of course, you also cut off their oxygen supply by strangling them.

The added irony: Germany – with plenty of help from its big brother “ally” America and its dependent sponger Ukraine – is strangling itself. Auto-asphyxiation is, of course, a well-known and potentially lethal perversion, but usually it’s associated with aging rock stars in lonely hotel rooms. Seeing a whole country do it is peculiar.

In the current German party system, only two parties show signs of being willing to address this core issue instead of avoiding it: The far-right/right-wing AfD under Alice Weidel and the left-conservative BSW under Sarah Wagenknecht. What do they have in common apart from that? Nothing. Except, they both won’t be able to influence German government policy, at least not soon, and not after the February elections. The AfD is, actually, the second-strongest political party after the CDU-CSU Conservatives, according to current polls. Think what you will about Musk’s political tastes (absolutely not mine), but it’s a fact that he has spoken up for a party that almost a fifth of German voters prefer.

However, the mainstream parties swear that they will not allow it into a governing coalition. The BSW is doing reasonably well for a newcomer but may even be struggling to clear the five-percent barrier to gain seats in the new parliament, and it is certainly far from gathering the amount of votes that would make it indispensable for coalition building.

Here’s the final irony: Germany’s fundamental problem is not actually economic. The economy is in catastrophic shape, make no mistake. But the reason for that is political and even intellectual and moral: The inability or unwillingness to finally abandon a pernicious group think that subordinates obvious and vital German interests to the misguided political agenda of, ultimately, Washington and does not allow for what is obviously needed urgently: re-establishing and repairing a rational relationship with Russia.

Tarik Cyril Amar is a historian from Germany working at Koç University, Istanbul, on Russia, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe, the history of World War II, the cultural Cold War, and the politics of memory.

December 22, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Russophobia | | Leave a comment

IS GREEN ENERGY GOING ATOMIC?

The HighWire with Del Bigtree | December 12, 2024

As big tech goes all in on artificial intelligence, the monumental amount of energy expected to be needed in the coming years has the 4 of the biggest US tech companies turning to nuclear energy. With lofty net zero goals appearing to not be coming to fruition, will nuclear be the new green energy?

December 13, 2024 Posted by | Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Nuclear Power, Video | | Leave a comment

Merkel Testing Public Opinion With Recent Praise of Russian Gas, German Politician Suggests

Sputnik – 12.12.2024

The head of the German Council for Constitution and Sovereignty, Ralph Niemeyer commented on national politics in the light of governmental crisis.

Former German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s recent remarks about the benefits of past gas supplies from Russia could have been an attempt to test public opinion on the possibility of resuming such supplies under a future government involving the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), the head of the German Council for Constitution and Sovereignty, Ralph Niemeyer, told Sputnik.

Merkel said on Tuesday that she did not consider the years-long gas imports from Russia to Germany a mistake, noting that the arrangement was mutually beneficial.

“It is possible [that the statement was a test of public opinion]. A good quality of Friedrich Merz [CDU leader and chancellor candidate] is pragmatism. If he sees no other way forward, he quickly changes his approach,” Niemeyer said.

Merz could pragmatically disregard earlier promises to Volodymyr Zelensky and work to rebuild relations with Russia, he added.

The German government collapsed in early November after Chancellor Scholz fired Finance Minister Christian Lindner, the Free Democratic Party (FDP) leader, citing his unwillingness to greenlight new proposals for the 2025 budget and more aid for Ukraine.

As a result of the government split, February 23 has been set as the potential date for a snap general election. Scholz will submit a written request for a vote of confidence to parliament on December 11, with a vote to be scheduled for December 16.

If Scholz survives the vote of confidence, he will enter coalition talks with rival parties in a bid to prop up his minority government, which consists of the Social Democrats and the Greens. This scenario is considered unlikely due to a near-universal agreement in parliament on the need to hold an early election.

December 12, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Russophobia | | Leave a comment

Slovak MP Slams EU Leadership’s ‘Idiotic’ Russian Gas Sanctions

Sputnik – December 11, 2024

Reducing energy dependence on Russia became one of the European Union’s top priorities after the West unleashed its sanctions campaign against Moscow in 2022. The move has backfired on the continent, leaving Europe facing a crippling energy crisis, while Russia retained its position as the world’s largest gas exporter in 2023.

If the EU wants to drive its economy off a cliff, its self-destructive goal of halting Russian gas flows will get that result, Andrej Danko, deputy speaker of the National Council of the Slovak Republic, told Sputnik.

Ending imports of Russian gas will be a huge problem, he warned, adding that “whoever claims that this is not true is a fool.”

“Therefore, we need to talk about this problem, and a solution is needed,” Danko underscored.

The Slovak politician is set to visit Moscow in January to discuss prospects for Russian gas supplies in 2025.

He weighed in on EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s crusade of totally banning both Russian piped gas and LNG, specifically, recent remarks about wanting to discuss with US President-elect Donald Trump an increase in purchases of liquefied natural gas (LNG) from the United States to replace Russian supplies.

The Slovak lawmaker admitted he was puzzled by her proposal.

“How much would US gas imports cost? What was the purpose then of Nord Stream 1, Nord Stream 2? What do they want to achieve? This will be a problem for Germany, where Ursula is from originally… If she wants to live in America later, then I get it. But if Ursula is going to live in the European Union, it’s impossible to understand her… It’s inconceivable for a person of her rank to say something like that,” Danko said.

Gas prices exceeded $500 per thousand cubic meters in Europe in November, with European gas futures reaching around €46 ($48.6) per MWh as Russia suspended fuel deliveries to Austria’s OMV. Furthermore, Ukraine is about to stop the transit of Russia’s gas through its territory by the end of the year, which could affect several European nations, including Austria and Slovakia.

Unless the EU changes its self-harming policy course, it won’t exist in 10 years’ time, Danko speculated. EU sanctions on Russian energy have generated a terrible situation, according to him, and people like Ursula von der Leyen are only driving the bloc’s economy into the ground.

He also voiced hope for dialogue between Moscow and Washington under incoming President Donald Trump. As for Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky, he “does nothing for his people, he only creates problems,” Danko noted, likening the expired Kiev regime leader to a chattering “con artist.”

The EU’s energy problems are also linked to the Green Deal, Danko said, which “some jokers had come up with,” and foolhardy talk about scrapping nuclear energy.

He claimed the biggest problems were created by shutting down nuclear power plants under Germany’s then-Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Codified in a 2002 law, the nuclear phase-out in Germany was finalized after the 2011 Fukushima disaster in Japan. The country’s last trio of operating nuclear power plants, Emsland, Neckarwestheim 2, and Isar 2, were finally shuttered on April 15, 2023.

Berlin’s move to join the West’s energy sanctions against Russia and give up Moscow’s reliable and abundant energy supplies, along with the Nord Stream pipeline sabotage and the “green agenda” aimed at replacing fossil fuels and phasing out nuclear energy, have all contributed to Germany’s dismal economic data and looming deindustrialization.

Assessing the litany of mistakes made by the European Union, Danko speculated that if the continent hopes to achieve progress in energy and the economy, a fresh influx of “parties of the people” is needed to breathe new life into the EU.

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

Wind and Solar Are Fragile

By Steve Goreham | Master Resource | December 2, 2024

Wind and solar have been growing as a share of US electrical power generation over the last two decades. State and federal mandates and subsidies have driven the expansion of renewables because of their inherently dilute and intermittent nature. But it’s clear that renewable electricity sources have a third strike: they are fragile and prone to weather damage and destruction.

Twenty-three states now mandate Net Zero electricity by as early as 2035. Their aim is to replace coal- and gas-fired power plants with wind and solar generators. Wind and solar have grown from near zero in 2000 to 14.1% of US electricity generation in 2023 (10.2% wind and 3.9% solar).

Weather Risk

Wind and solar systems are located on ridge lines, on plains, and offshore, and are exposed to weather forces that usually don’t affect building-housed coal and gas generators. In addition, these systems require about 100 times the land area of traditional generators to deliver the same average electricity output, increasing the chances of storm damage. Damage incidents are rising as more and more systems are deployed.

In May 2019, a massive hailstorm in West Texas destroyed 400,000 solar modules of the Midway Solar Project, about 60% of the facility. The project was only one year old. The system was rebuilt, costing insurers more than $70 million.

On June 23, 2023, the Scottsbluff solar system was destroyed in western Nebraska. Baseball-sized hail falling at up to 150 miles per hour smashed most of the 14,000-panel system. The system had only been operating for four years of its 25-year lifetime and had to be completely rebuilt.

Solar loss insurance claims from hail damage now average about $58 million per claim. Hail damage claims have increased to account for about 54% of solar insurance loss claims. Analysis by Iowa State University shows that severe hail (greater than one inch in diameter) can occur for 20 to 30 days per year in Great Plains states, a wide area of the country stretching from North Dakota to Texas and Colorado to Indiana.

“Fighting Jays Solar” became operational in July of 2023, 40 miles northwest of Houston, Texas. Less than one year later, on March 15 of this year, hail destroyed much of the system, with repair costs estimated to be hundreds of millions of dollars. The system had not yet completed full construction.

Hail is not the only weather hazard facing solar installations. This fall, a tornado associated with Hurricane Milton destroyed much of the Lake Placid Solar Plant in Sylvian Shores, Florida. The facility had only been operating for about five years.

Insurance and Liability Ahead

As a result of hail and other weather damage, insurance premiums for solar facilities are skyrocketing, in some cases up by as much as 400%. In addition, policy coverage is being capped at as little as $10-15 million, requiring system developers to obtain multiple policies to try to cover their projects.

The federal government has been promoting the installation of wind systems off the US East Coast. Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, South Carolina, Rhode Island, and Virginia are constructing or planning offshore wind systems. But offshore wind must operate in one of the world’s harshest environments, buffeted by wind, waves, lightning, and salt spray that is very corrosive to man-made structures.

To date, most offshore wind systems have been deployed in China, Europe, and Vietnam. These systems are prone to weather damage. Turbines deployed in Asia coastal areas suffer typhoon wreckage. Eighty percent of the turbines installed in Europe’s North Sea have required repairs due to weather damage.

The London Array, east of England, the world’s largest offshore wind system, required extensive repairs after only five years of operation. Danish wind operator Ørsted needed to repair undersea cables to offshore wind systems in the North Sea at a cost that exceeded $100 million.

But turbines sited off the US East Coast must survive brutal weather, more severe than offshore turbines in Europe. Tropical storms, hurricanes, and nor’easters periodically traverse the coastal sites planned for new offshore wind systems.

For example, historical data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration shows that 26 hurricanes and 51 tropical storms passed through New Jersey coastal waters during the last 170 years, or almost five storms each decade. Wind installations will be vulnerable to these weather systems.

In 2018, Hurricane Maria passed over Puerto Rico, ripping blades from many turbine towers. East Coast wind systems will likely suffer the same fate.

Wind systems are designed to try to protect wind towers and blades in high winds. When winds exceed 55 MPH, a braking system brings the rotor to a standstill to try to avoid turbine damage. Tower blades are also “feathered” or oriented so that they no longer catch the wind.

But near the eye of a hurricane or tropical storm, violent winds can change direction instantaneously and powerfully, too fast for damage-prevention systems to react. The result will be destroyed blades and damaged towers.

Conclusion

In July, a 351-foot-long offshore wind blade splintered and washed up on the beaches in Nantucket, Massachusetts. Beaches were closed and clean-up crews collected six truckloads of fiberglass and plastic debris from the single destroyed blade. Wind operations were temporarily shut down.

Residents, beachgoers, fishermen, and local businesses posted signs, complained to the press, and spoke out at board hearings. But this was just one turbine blade. Image the outcry when a whole offshore system is destroyed by a hurricane, producing mountains of beach debris at Myrtle Beach, Virginia Beach, Atlantic City, or Long Island?

Media headlines claim that weather is becoming more extreme because of human-caused climate change. But to solve the problem, it’s proposed that we install more and more wind and solar systems, which are fragile and vulnerable to violent weather. Incidents of weather destruction of wind and solar installations will continue to rise.

—————-

Steve Goreham is a speaker on energy, the environment, and public policy. His books include the bestselling Green Breakdown: The Coming Renewable Energy Failure.

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

Russian gas was ‘win-win’ – Merkel

RT | December 10, 2024

Buying natural gas from Russia was a good deal, former German Chancellor Angela Merkel has said, rejecting suggestions that it may have been a strategic mistake.

Merkel, who served as chancellor from 2005 to 2021, was in Paris this week to promote her memoir. She gave an exclusive interview to state TV channel France 2, in which she was asked about Germany’s energy relationship with Russia.

“The gas trade with Russia has a deep-rooted tradition. It began during the Cold War and continued throughout my time in office. I do not think it was a mistake, because we obtained Russian gas at a favorable price,” Merkel said in the interview, which aired on Monday evening.

“It was a win-win situation,” the former chancellor added.

Following the escalation of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, Germany had to source gas elsewhere because “prices exploded,” Merkel said, noting that this would have happened much earlier had Berlin stopped doing business with Moscow during her term.

“I believe it is reasonable to procure the most affordable gas,” she told France 2.

Earlier on her press tour, Merkel also defended the decision to build Nord Stream 2, noting that she had “no support from the business community to stop the gas trade with Russia” at the time. The project was launched in 2015 and the first pipes were laid in 2018.

While the government of Merkel’s successor, Olaf Scholz, has accused Moscow of “shutting off” gas to Germany, his coalition partner Robert Habeck had moved to end the energy trade long before the Ukraine conflict and EU sanctions on Russia provided the pretext. The Green Party leader presented giving up gas for “renewables” as an environmentally responsible policy choice.

Berlin thus refused to certify the newly finished Nord Stream 2 pipeline in January 2022. Nord Stream 1 was destroyed by a series of underwater explosions in September 2022. Investigations by Germany, Sweden, and Denmark have not pointed to a culprit yet, though German media reports have blamed a “rogue” group of Ukrainians.

One of the lines of Nord Stream 2 survived the bombing unharmed and could still deliver gas to Germany should Berlin change its policy and certify the pipeline.

The loss of Russian gas and reliance on the far more expensive US alternative has since pushed energy prices in Germany beyond what a lot of industrial enterprises could afford, triggering a wave of shutdowns and bankruptcies.

In a December 2022 interview, Merkel revealed that Germany and France considered the Minsk Agreements – a framework to peacefully resolve the dispute between Kiev and the two Donbass republics – as a play for time until the West could arm Ukraine for a confrontation with Russia. Former French President Francois Hollande has confirmed her claim.

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

Iran’s gas is the answer to world’s energy woes

Press TV – December 8, 2024

With the role of natural gas in future power generation being under debate by world countries amid a race to dramatically reduce carbon emissions, Iran is hosting a ministerial meeting of the Gas Exporting Countries Forum (GECF).

Organizers say the meeting is an opportunity to exchange views among the member and observer countries as well as experts and specialists in the gas industry about the mechanism of consensus-building and strengthening communication and coordination on supply policies and related affairs.

While the future role of gas in the energy mix is the source of much contention among countries, the global gas consumption grew unprecedentedly in 2023, GECF Secretary General Mohamed Hamel told the forum’s opening in Tehran on Sunday.

He touched on the resilience of gas to regional conflicts and geopolitical strains which have exposed significant fragilties in the post-pandemic global energy system. Since the formation of the GECF in Tehran in 2001, global demand for natural gas has grown 70 percent, Hamel said.

The race to rapidly decarbonize and digitize the global economy under the net zero energy initiative has been subsumed by geopolitics that remains anchored in realist power struggles. The Ukraine war has undermined interdependence and prompted unprecedented levels of economic statecraft.

The need to rapidly move away from fossil fuels and fossil raw materials has exposed countries to a myriad of compliance risks with dire financial repercussions, leading to deepening instability, injustice and energy poverty.

Even the most optimistic clean energy projections indicate that by 2050, at least half of the world’s energy needs will still come from oil and gas resources. Hence, the rush to eliminate fossil fuels from the global energy system is unrealistic, threatening the world’s energy security.

According to the Energy Studies Institute of the International Energy Agency, gas will continue to play a significant role as a clean and cost-effective fuel in the global energy mix, accounting for 28 percent of the total by 2050. Forecasts indicate that by 2050, natural gas production and consumption will increase to more than 5.9 trillion cubic meters per year.

Asia-Pacific has emerged as the world’s largest net importer of natural gas. In 2023, China was the largest consumer of natural gas in the region, with around 405 billion cubic meters. Japan was the second-largest, with a consumption of around 92.4 billion cubic meters. The region’s gas consumption is forecast to hit 1.6 trillion cubic meters by 2050.

Also, predictions show that the largest share of the increase in natural gas production in the world will be from Russia, Iran, Qatar, and Turkmenistan.

Hence, the role of the Gas Exporting Countries Forum as a leading platform for dialogue and cooperation in order to provide a level of stability beneficial to both exporters and consumers and supporting the gas industry which requires significant effort and financing is of particular importance.

Iran, as the second largest holder of gas reserves in the world, has an important role to play in the gas diplomacy and guarantee its national interests and the interests of the other members.

The GECF countries hold 70% of the world’s proven gas reserves and produce some 40% of the world’s gas.

Despite years of sanctions, Iran has made significant progress in expanding its gas sector. The country now produces 275 billion cubic meters of natural gas annually, and gas accounts for more than 70 percent of its energy consumption.

Iran’s overall proven natural gas reserves excluding shale gas deposits and huge hydrocarbon reserves in the Sea of ​​Oman and possibly the Persian Gulf and Caspian Sea are put at 34 trillion cubic meters, or about 17.8% of world’s total.

Assuming that the current unbridled consumption of about 250 billion cubic meters per year continues and with the pessimistic assumption that no new gas fields are discovered in the coming years, the existing supplies are enough to meet Iran’s needs for the next 130 years.

With investment and production from unconventional shale reserves which the country has already discovered, Iran’s gas supply capacity can rise more than twofold in the coming decade.

Exploratory research in the Sea of ​​Oman has indicated the existence of gas hydrate reserves in Iranian waters in larger quantities than the huge South Pars field.

Further development of more than 20 fields currently producing gas can add another 500 million cubic meters a day to the country’s gas production capacity.

This huge capacity can be tapped to supply gas to the world markets through building new pipeline networks to neighboring countries and sending LNG to the rest of the world.

December 8, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , , , | 1 Comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »