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.
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.
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.
Prospective German chancellor calls for end to arming Kiev
Alice Weidel speaks to reporters at an AfD convention in Berlin, Germany, December 7, 2024 © Getty Images / Maryam Majd
RT | December 7, 2024
The co-leader of the right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, Alice Weidel, has said that she will oppose any arms supplies to Ukraine if she succeeds Olaf Scholz as the country’s chancellor.
AfD nominated Weidel as its candidate for the post on Saturday, in the party’s first bid for the chancellery in its 11-year history. It has steadily risen in popularity since its founding in 2013, and is currently Germany’s second-strongest political force.
Speaking to reporters after the nomination, Weidel promised to introduce drastic immigration restrictions, to roll back Scholz’ climate policies, and to cut off military aid to Ukraine.
”We want peace in Ukraine,” the 45-year-old said. “We do not want any arms supplies, we do not want any tanks, we do not want any missiles. We do not want Taurus for Ukraine, which would make Germany a party to the war,” she added, referring to a type of German-made cruise missile that would require German military personnel to be deployed to Ukraine to operate.
The AfD, Weidel declared, is a “peace party.”
Scholz, along with his Green and Free Democrat coalition partners, overturned decades of foreign-policy pacifism in 2022 when they decided to supply weapons to the Ukrainian military. Since then, Berlin has sent Kiev almost €17 billion ($17.9 billion) in military, economic, and humanitarian aid, according to government figures. Although initially reluctant to supply heavy weapons, Scholz has authorized the transfer to Ukraine of tanks, artillery guns, anti-air missiles, and armored vehicles.
Before 2022, Germany relied on Russia for 55% of its supply of natural gas. Scholz’ decision to halt Russian energy imports, coupled with his government’s green policies, has led to soaring electricity costs, forcing some of the country’s manufacturing giants – including Volkswagen and BASF – to close plants and lay off workers.
Amid economic decline and disputes within his coalition, the Scholz government collapsed last month. The chancellor is expected to lose a confidence vote in parliament later this month, after which a snap election will likely be held in late February. His center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD) is currently polling at around 15%, with AfD at 18% and the center-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU) at 32%.
Weidel has little chance of winning the chancellery. Even if the AfD were to emerge as the largest party in February, all of Germany’s other mainstream parties have ruled out entering a coalition with the right-wingers. After a string of regional election wins this year, 113 members of the 733-member Bundestag put forth a motion last month to ban the AfD as a “Nazi party” whose beliefs clash with the German constitution. Most of the lawmakers behind the proposal were Greens, joined by 31 members of the SPD and just six from the CDU.
Bankers plot ways to get paid carbon credits for emissions they might have emitted, but didn’t
By Jo Nova | December 5, 2024
What other industry gets paid for what they could have done, but didn’t?
The carbon market is the perfect scam-quasi-tax currency for our banker overlords. They were always trading reductions in an invisible gas, now they’re trading reductions from an imaginary increase that may never have occurred.
Carbon credits were always atmospheric nullities that “might theoretically change the weather”. Now they’re less…
It’s a nice gig if you can get it. This elastic game can expand to cover as much of the economy as feasible. The bankers payout is limited only by how much they can squeeze out of their political vassals. Homeowners will not get a “carbon credit” for turning a heater off that they might have left on, or for not-buying a second-hand Dodge Challenger Hellcat. This is a game only the uber rich money-changers can play. The Blob has effectively set up a secondary fiat currency in the world that has a Byzantine web of rules that they control but has no physical products for delivery.
As Steve Milloy says — Coming soon: Unending bank climate fraud
Bankers Find Way to Claim Credit for Avoided Emissions
Bankers will soon be able to claim credit for emissions they say their financing has helped avoid, as the world’s largest voluntary carbon accounting framework for the finance industry works on broadening standards.
Under the approach, banks can assume a counterfactual scenario in which emissions remain elevated, and contrast that with the CO2 avoidance their loans or bonds enable, according to the Partnership for Carbon Accounting Financials.
Note the galactic size:
PCAF’s proposed standards are part of a larger package of changes and additions that will result in at least 90% of assets under management globally being covered by the carbon accounting system.
Why stop at 90%? When will it end?
The idea came from the Monster Banker Cartel, so we know it will benefit the bankers:
The Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero, the largest finance sector climate coalition, introduced the idea of a new metric last year to drive transition finance, calling it expected emissions reductions (EER). The basic principle is that finance firms compare the emissions associated with the entity or asset in a business-as-usual scenario with those achieved if that company implements a science-based transition plan, or if a polluting asset is eventually shut down. The so-called delta is the EER.
Of course, companies drop inefficient products in favor of better ones all the time, but now, they’ll be able to say they’ve reduced the emissions they expected to have, and thus earn some carbon credits that they can sell to some other sucker, or use to offset their charter jet flights to Azerbaijan.
This will work best for corporate behemoths who can afford to pay “climate lawyers” to fill in the forms, and “climate lobbyists” to bend all the rules to suit themselves. It’s another tool to make life harder for small businesses and customers but easier for the Big Guy.
Note there is another monster banker cartel called PCAF — in this case with assets of $92 Trillion.
PCAF was created by Dutch financial institutions during the 2015 Paris Climate summit to encourage banks and investors to play their part in delivering a transition to a low-carbon economy.
Since then, the number of financial institutions committed to or already applying its accounting methods has climbed to more than 550, with combined financial assets of $92.5 trillion, according to PCAF’s website.
It’s time for a monster round of Anti-Trust suits.
Cost of switching off UK wind farms soars to ‘absurd’ £1bn
By Paul Homewood | Not A Lot Of People Know That | December 3, 2024
Cost of switching off UK wind farms soars to ‘absurd’ £1bn
British bill payers have spent an “absurd” £1bn to temporarily switch off wind turbines so far this year as the grid struggles to cope with their power.
The amount of wind power “curtailed” in the first 11 months of 2024 stood at about 6.6 terawatt hours (TWh), according to official figures, up from 3.8 TWh in the whole of last year.
Curtailment is where wind turbines are paid to switch off at times of high winds to stop a surge in power overwhelming the grid. Households and businesses pay for the cost of this policy through their bills.
The cost of switching off has reached about £1bn so far this year, according to analysis of market data by Octopus Energy which was first reported by Bloomberg. This is more than the £779m spent last year and £945m spent in 2022.
The jump in curtailment follows the opening of more wind farms at a time when the country still lacks the infrastructure needed to transport all the electricity they generate at busy times.
The real problem currently is the lack of transmission capacity between Scotland and the South, where demand is. But that is ignoring the real issue, which is that we should never have built wind farms in remote places where there is no demand in the first place. And the cost of new transmission capacity should have been built into the business case before construction went ahead. If that had been done, wind farms in such places would never have been viable.
The Grid of course are now planning to spend over £100 million on upgrading the transmission network, but the real problem going forward is that there will huge amounts of surplus wind power once Miliband has quadrupled wind power capacity. As the Telegraph notes:
According to the National Energy System Operator (Neso), curtailment costs are on course to surge to £6bn by 2030 if the status quo continues
Return Funding for Reliable Energy to the World’s Poorest
By Brenda Shaffer | Real Clear Energy | November 25, 2024
A centerpiece of President Biden’s agenda was a government led effort to greatly reduce production and consumption of fossil fuels. One of the key policies Biden enacted to pursue this goal was ending of public finance for fossil fuel projects. This policy attracted little public attention or scrutiny, since it had little impact on Americans. The policy mainly impacted the global poor, especially in Africa, which lost access to funding to develop electricity capacity. While ending public finance for fossil fuels provided a feel good moment for the Biden administration and governing elites in other wealthy countries, it hurt the world’s poorest, did not impact climate change and created an opportunity for China to increase its geopolitical influence in Africa and beyond. Cancellation of these restrictions on public finance for fossil fuels should be on the day one list of the incoming Trump administration.
States in the developing world have difficulty attracting commercial investments in their domestic energy sectors, especially for electricity provision. While rich countries that pay high prices for electricity can rely on the private market to develop power capacity, developing countries rely on loans and grants from public finance institutions, like the World Bank and regional development banks, and foreign aid to develop electricity for their populations.
In 2021, the United States together with the G-7, ended finance and loans for fossil fuel based energy projects, leaving the developing world with few finance options for electricity development, which is key to economic growth and poverty reduction. As part of Washington’s climate policies, in August 2021, the U.S. Department of the Treasury announced guidelines to Multilateral Development Banks stating that the “United States will promote ending international financing of carbon-intensive fossil fuel-based energy.” The U.S. has top influence at the multilateral banks, as the main donor thus frequently the World Bank adopts U.S. led policies. In 2019, the World Bank had already stopped funding for fossil fuel production. In December 2021, the G-7 member countries formally ended public finance for fossil fuel projects, including natural gas. At the UK sponsored COP26 in Glasgow, the signatories declared: “we will end new direct public support for the international unabated fossil fuel energy sector within one year of signing this statement.
Through cutting finance to fossil fuels, the Biden administration and the G-7 states believed they could force the developing world to establish renewable projects instead of fossil fuel based electricity. However, most countries rejected this offer. Their energy professionals understood better than the bureaucrats sitting in Washington or Brussels, that today’s renewable energy cannot provide the stable and affordable power that will allow their publics to move up out of poverty. Moreover, wind and solar require baseload power from fossil fuels to provide constant power. Thus, even renewable projects require funding for fossil fuels.
Reducing access to fossil fuels does not mean that pollution and emissions will decrease. In fact, lack of access to stable and affordable electricity produced from fossil fuels, will likely lead to an increase in pollution, emissions and threats to public health. Humans need energy for basic functions, such as heating, cooking and purifying water. If energy is not available, humans will burn dung, lump coal, wood and other biomass. This generates greater pollution, carbon emissions and health threats, than production of electricity from fossil fuels, especially natural gas.
There are several geopolitical implications of the West’s halting of public finance. One, China can reap geopolitical influence through its role as the main funder for energy projects in the developing world. Second, the West’s retreat from finance for fossil fuel projects can generate antagonism in the developing world against the West, as indifferent to the suffering caused by energy poverty. Third, lack of reliable power in the developing world contributes to increased instability in many affected parts of the globe. Fourth, the cessation of public finance for fossil fuels can lead to a slowdown in expanding electricity access in the developing world. For the first time in close to a century, global electricity access declined in 2022 and in 2023 it remained close to flat. Today, one in ten people on the globe do not have access to regular electricity.
The new administration should overturn this prohibition and encourage the G-7 to do the same. The new administration should clarify to the World Bank its support for funding for natural gas and other fossil fuel projects that would benefit the world’s poor. Luckily, Trump’s nominee for Secretary of Energy, Chris Wright is passionate about extending energy access to the world’s poor and has been involved in philanthropy that enables clean cooking for many years.
Reversing this policy and many other Biden era energy policies will not be simple. While some energy policies can be eliminated through Congressional legislation and executive orders, the ban on public finance for fossil fuels was adopted by multi-lateral frameworks, including the G-7, and international agencies, such as the World Bank. The Trump administration will encounter headwinds in attempting to change the policies. It is important to clarify widely that these policies have hurt the world’s poor and need to be reversed. Washington should consider withholding funding to agencies it funds that deny the world’s poor access to funding for electricity.
Austria heads towards record number of bankruptcies in 2024
Remix News | December 2, 2024
Austria is heading for a record year in terms of bankruptcies, with more than 7,000 companies forecasted to go under by the end of 2024. That equals an average of 22 firms going under every single day in a population of only 10 million.
Notably, the country is experiencing many of the same issues neighboring Germany is facing: high energy costs, lower demand for goods, an aging workforce, high inflation input costs, and anti-business policies.
According to Austrian media outlet Horizont, 2024 is expected to produce the most bankruptcies in Austria in 15 years.
“Austria is heading for a new record year of corporate insolvencies. The reason is a toxic mix of declining exports, collapsing domestic consumption, and high costs. High unit labor costs, high material and energy costs together with excessive regulation are making it difficult for more and more companies to be successful in Austria,” said Gerhard Weinhofer, an official at the creditor protection association Creditreform.
The Freedom Party of Austria (FPÖ), which won national elections this year but was sidelined from power by rival parties who formed a coalition against it, is using the case to illustrate the crisis presented by the ruling government.
“This year, Austria is heading for a record year of bankruptcies. More than 7,000 corporate bankruptcies are forecast for 2024 – a new record in 15 years. ÖVP Chancellor Karl Nehammer and ÖVP Economics Minister Martin Kocher in particular have caused severe damage to the economy and Austria as a business location,” said FPÖ economic spokesman Axel Kassegger.
Kassegger notes that the new government, referred to as the traffic-light coalition, is likely to make matters worse. “And it is to be feared that the planned traffic light coalition will not be able to clear away this unique economic policy mess. This will prolong the left-wing anti-citizen and anti-business course of the black-green coalition, fuel inflation and further weaken our business location.”
Austria is not only facing bankruptcies; wage and job cuts are plaguing the country, along with plant closures.
“Our country urgently needs the long overdue reforms for it as a business location, relief measures for companies and employees. Our companies are still suffering from the very high costs of energy and transport, as well as from wage costs, which have increased sharply due to the still high inflation,” said Kassegger.
Last month, Russia entirely cut off natural gas supplies to Austira. The FPÖ argues for peace negotiations with Russia in order to restore the country’s cheap energy supplies.
“Electricity and gas network costs are rising massively, which will lead to enormous additional burdens for the Austrian population. Industry is still waiting for the extension of the Electricity Price Cost Compensation Act to relieve the burden on energy-intensive industry in particular. An extension of these measures this year is therefore a must, because time is of the essence,” he added.
Fake Food, Bill Gates’ Involvement in Animal-Free Milk and the Bigger Agenda
A Better Way with Dr Tess Lawrie, MBBCh, PhD | November 30, 2024
The food industry is undergoing major meddling by billionaires and multi-national corporations and our food is changing. World Council for Health recently wrote about BOVAER additives in animal feed. Well, there are also companies like Remilk leading the charge towards “animal-free” alternatives to traditional dairy. While these innovations are framed as breakthroughs in ethical consumption, this growing “fake food” trend has dangerous implications for both health and sovereignty.
With BOVAER designed to reduce cow farts by messing with their digestive system, Remilk, an Israeli startup, boasts that it can create dairy proteins without cows through a process that uses fermentation to produce proteins identical to those found in milk. Worryingly, this fake milk company has recently appointed executives from corporate monsters like Danone, PepsiCo, and Nestlé, to its board of directors.
This year, Canadian regulators gave Remilk the green light to market and sell their lab-grown, artificial ‘milk’ product in Canada. There are troubling long-term implications of this ‘fake food’ trend—especially considering the involvement of Bill Gates with his views on depopulation. Gates is a key investor in Remilk through his Breakthrough Energy Ventures fund. Thus, the deeper question remains: What is the true agenda behind this rapidly growing sector?
Gates’ investment in Remilk is not just a passive financial stake; it is part of a broader ideological commitment to using technology to reshape the world, including food systems. Through Breakthrough Energy Ventures, Gates has backed several companies focused on food tech, many of which advocate for lab-grown, synthetic foods. While proponents use ‘greenhouse gas’ reduction as their argument in favour of these unnatural technologies, they may well serve a more insidious purpose—undermining traditional agriculture and facilitating the centralization of food production under corporate control.
The involvement of Gates, whose “philanthropic” ventures serve his population control agenda as well as his bank balance, raises serious red flags. Gates openly advocates for the use of “innovative” technologies to manage global population growth. The push for synthetic, lab-grown food serves to further his ideological objectives—by consolidating power in the hands of a few, controlling what people eat, and pushing us toward a future dominated by genetically engineered foods and alternative proteins.
Moreover, Gates’ backing of the fake food industry ties into broader concerns about transhumanism, the belief in using advanced technology to change human beings to ‘transcend’ natural characteristics. Through genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and bioengineering, the push to alter human genetics is being orchestrated not only through food, but in the guise of ‘vaccines’ and other drugs.
The long-term effects of consuming synthetic proteins are largely unknown
Marketed as environmentally friendly and animal cruelty-free, the health risks associated with eating these lab-grown products foods are not well understood, and the potential for unforeseen consequences—whether in human digestion, long-term health, or the biodiversity of our food systems—is high.
On the surface, these innovations may appear to offer solutions to social and environmental challenges. However, beneath the surface, they represent a dangerous convergence of corporate interests, technological control, and ideological agendas. As this trend accelerates, it is essential that we critically examine who is driving these changes, and why. overcoming indifference is key. It is time to get active and withdraw our support of multinational corporations; it is time to support local food producers.
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.
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.
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
Featured Video
Israelis SUDDENLY Mass Deported From Many Countries
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
Elite Western universities are a corrupt, parasitic empire
Instead of high-quality education, these institutions are fostering a global neo-feudal system reminiscent of the British Raj
By Dr. Mathew Maavak | RT | May 30, 2025
In a move that has ignited a global uproar, US President Donald Trump banned international students from Harvard University, citing “national security” and ideological infiltration. The decision, which has been widely condemned by academics and foreign governments alike, apparently threatens to undermine America’s “intellectual leadership and soft power.” At stake is not just Harvard’s global appeal, but the very premise of open academic exchange that has long defined elite higher education in the US.
But exactly how ‘open’ is Harvard’s admissions process? Every year, highly qualified students – many with top-tier SAT or GMAT test scores – are rejected, often with little explanation. Critics argue that behind the prestigious Ivy League brand lies an opaque system shaped by legacy preferences, DEI imperatives, geopolitical interests, and outright bribes. George Soros, for instance, once pledged $1 billion to open up elite university admissions to drones who would read from his Open Society script.
China’s swift condemnation of Trump’s policy added a layer of geopolitical irony to the debate. Why would Beijing feign concern for “America’s international standing” amid a bitter trade war? The international standing of US universities has long been tarnished by a woke psychosis which spread like cancer to all branches of the government.
So, what was behind China’s latest gripe? ... continue
Blog Roll
Recent Comments
seversonebcfb985d9 on Villains of Judea: Philip Esfo… loongtip on Report warns that ‘Jewish terr… Craig Nelms on New study shows that toxic gas… loongtip on A Funny Thing Happened on the… loongtip on EU free trade pact on hold as… John Edward Kendrick on Regime Change In Iran Is The F… Bill Francis on Australia Passes New Hate Spee… seversonebcfb985d9 on Australia Passes New Hate Spee… Bill Francis on Britain’s AI Policing Plan Tur… loongtip on Miami Beach Resident Questione… loongtip on Israeli agricultural export co… loongtip on The War On Free Speech In Aust…
Aletho News- Mom Tells Trump: Dumping Sewage Sludge on Farmland Won’t Make America Healthy Again
- NIAID Funds Gain-of-Function Study Engineering Novel Influenza Viruses
- Villains of Judea: Philip Esformes and the Largest Healthcare Fraud in American History
- US sanctions Popular Conference for Palestinians Abroad over alleged Hamas links
- You reap what you sow: Ukraine’s blackout is Zelensky’s failure
- Ukraine Blackouts Caused by Zelensky’s Terrorist Attacks on Russia
- Orban Hits Out at EU Green Light for $1.5 Trillion Ukraine Aid
- World has had enough of confused clowns: Araghchi to Zelensky
- Jordan using Israeli software to monitor journalists, rights defenders: Report
- Israelis SUDDENLY Mass Deported From Many Countries
- If Americans Knew
- ‘Permits of Humiliation’: How Israel Strangles Christian Education in Jerusalem
- “The world sees death, destruction and injustice – and they see dollar signs” – Not a ceasefire Day 105
- War criminal Netanyahu kills 11 in Gaza, joins Board of Peace – Not a ceasefire Day 104
- Another baby dies of cold in Gaza, as Rafah crossing remains locked down – Not a ceasefire Day 103
- Brutal Beatings, Arson, and Impunity: A Palestinian Plant Nursery Becomes a Target for Settler Pogroms
- On Iran’s protests, Israeli hypocrisy knows no limits
- A Cease-fire for Israelis and a War for Palestinians
- ‘When will Baba come back?’ Gaza’s widows and orphans struggle to survive
- Genocide research institute levels accusations against Germany for denying Israel’s genocide against Palestinians
- Over 1,200 Israeli truce violations in Gaza – Not a ceasefire Day 102
- No Tricks Zone
- New Study: Sea Levels Rose 20 Times The Modern Rate During The Roman Warm Period
- As German Gas Storage Dips Dangerously Low…Shortage Hardly Avoidable
- New Study: Brazil’s Relative Sea Level Was 2+ Meters Higher And SSTs 3-4°C Warmer 6000 Years Ago
- Philosopher Schopenhauer: Climate Science Certainty Stems From Stupidity, Ignorance
- New Study: Species Extinction Rates Declining Since 1980 – ‘Climate Change Is Not An Important Threat’
- Denmark Places Climate Protection Above Animal Welfare, Poisoning And Culling Cows
- New Study: Greenland Was 3-7°C Warmer And Far Less Glaciated Than Today 6000-8000 Years Ago
- German Media Report That Current Frigid Weather Can Be Explained By Arctic Warming!
- Berlin Blackout Shows Germany’s $5 Trillion Green Scheme Is “Left-Green Ideological Pipe Dream”
- Modeling Error In Estimating How Clouds Affect Climate Is 8700% Larger Than Alleged CO2 Forcing
Aletho News 