136 thoughts to “Open Thread Non-Petroleum”

    1. Tidings of comfort and joy, comfort and joy. Merry Christmas! 🎄🎄🎄✝

  3. I continue to be amazed at how, in the midst of a vast catastrophe [the pandemic], we ignore the profound lessons to be learned therein, chiefly about the ways in which natural variation and selection work in the real world.

    The SARS-CoV-2 phenomenon, as it has unfolded, has functioned for me as a massive parable about how a Darwinian world works. We occasionally hear references on the news to “mutation,” “selection,” and even “evolution,” but we are never treated to a comprehensive, evolutionary description about why the delta strain usurped the alpha strain, only to lose its hegemony to the new omicron strain–and so suddenly and utterly. The principle behind it all is competitive exclusion, or Gause’s principle. [Ron has described this in the link at the top of the POB page.]

    Basically, two varieties of a single species (or even members of different species) that occupy the same niche will NOT cooperate to share the niche: instead, one will drive the other out. The other either goes extinct or adapts itself to a similar niche nearby. Darwin, of course, saw it before anyone else:

    “… each new variety or species, during the progress of its formation, will generally press hardest on its nearest kindred, and tend to exterminate them.”

    There is no place within the human population for alpha, beta, gamma, delta AND omicron. They compete against, defeat and exterminate each other, in succession. Currently, omicron reigns. (And with such a vast repository of unvaccinated people helping to replicate the virus, history is certain to repeat itself. We will run out of Greek letters after omega, just as with hurricanes.)

    Here’s where the parable comes into play: As the varieties of Covid-19 struggle for preeminence and persistence within the niche of the human population, so Homo sapiens competes, defeats and exterminates other species on the planet. [Again, see Ron’s piece, above.] How can that be? Because Homo has evolved an adaptability that is appalling in its comprehensiveness. (This may be explained by a new hypothesis, variability selection, by Rick Potts). Instead of a singular niche, like SARS in the respiratory system, Homo occupies them all. The competitive exclusion principle will not cease until we have driven them all out. (Extinct hominins, q. v.)

    As a cultural Darwinian, I even see the parable working on the level of societies. For example, people act surprised that the political landscape in the USA has become so riven with division–but that is the way of the world. Left and Right cannot occupy the same niche: they will struggle until one drives the other out.

    We see the principle of competitive exclusion playing out before our very eyes, but we seem not to recognize it: omicron drives delta towards oblivion, the human species drives all other species to extinction, and politics leads (inevitably?) to extermination.

    (Oh, btw: Merry Effing Christmas. Peace On Earth, Goodwill &c.)

    1. And with such a vast repository of unvaccinated people helping to replicate the virus, history is certain to repeat itself. We will run out of Greek letters after omega, just as with hurricanes

      That’s just not true. There have been pandemics prior to vaccines and they all ended. The spanish flu was more or less over within one and half years, and the influeza virus mutation rate is higher than sars-cov-2. The way you word it is as if prior to vaccines pandemics would last forever. There is 0 evidence for that assumption.

      Comparing the virus and homosapiens and their activities. I agree with that. It is actually a very good comparison. Especially with regards to omicron outcompeting delta. Reminds me of homosapiens out competing neanderthals.

      In my opinion omicron should be the end of the pandemic. The virus is near the optimal replicating zone where it doesn’t kill the host.

      1. You’re right that my wording is unfortunate: I did not mean to suggest it would last forever. Only that, slowed but not defeated by vaccines, it could persist. Luckily, the latest vaccine developed by Walter Reed really sounds awesome.

        I would observe:

        1. SARS-CoV-2 has continually gobsmacked the experts. Just yesterday, I heard a doc on TV say, “No one could have foreseen omicron.”

        2. The “low” mutation rate of the virus scarcely matters when you’ve got hundreds of millions infected.

        3. Highly vaccinated areas exist cheek-by-jowl with huge, unvaccinated populations. The selection pressures must be immense.

        Maine is a case in point: In Cumberland County, the vaccinations rate is over 90%. One would think the epidemic would be on the wane; but, no, upcountry we have counties such as Franklin County, where the rate is in the high 60s percent. Who could have foreseen that, two years on, I would be vaccinated, boosted, and still have to mask and distance!

        Further, it is just horrifying that on the continent of Africa the overall vaccination rate is about 10% (depending on which source you consult). There is still a lot of tinder out there for the virus to burn through.

        It’s not hard to imagine this thing persisting longer than people think. The H1N1 epidemic in the teens ended quickly because it could just rip through the population. You were either exposed and recovered, or dead (or remote from the epidemic). Now, you’re either exposed and recovered, vaccinated, or dead.

        1. Hi Mike B,

          Vaccines are just one factor here. Look at Gibraltar. They have 140% vaccination rate. 100% double dosed, 40% triple dosed. And their case numbers quite high, i believe they are in lockdown for Christmas.
          https://www.news.com.au/world/coronavirus/global/most-vaccinated-place-on-earth-told-to-cancel-holiday-plans-amid-exponential-rise-in-covid-cases/news-story/1954572a25f48e39b7825e562129b9bc

          Where as Africa, like you mentioned. Around 6% vaccination rate i believe, and they have one the lowest infection rates and death rate in the world.

          As usual the situation is much more complex as with most things in our world. Some factors for Africas success could be:

          * They have a younger median population age.
          * low obesity rate
          * They are more outdoors. Being outside they get more vitamin D which is a big factor for immunity. ( This is the most comprehensive information I read about vitamin D, it is a huge article so you can use the “Go to” to choose the section of interest.
          https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3897598/

          Regarding vitamin D and innate immune health
          https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3897598/#__sec13title

          Cod liver oil was used in the mid-1800s to treat tuberculosis.73,112,113 In the early 1900s heliotherapy was promoted for treating both skin and pulmonary tuberculosis.69,114 It was also recognized that young children with rickets had a much higher risk of developing pneumonia and upper respiratory tract infections and were more likely to die of them.8,14,115,116 Therefore sun exposure and vitamin D were used in the early 1900s to treat and prevent tuberculosis113,114,117 and upper respiratory tract infections.72

          Africa has a high rate of incidental covid-19. Which means the patient came to the hospital for other reasons and they tested positive for covid. Meaning one can deduce Africa has a high rate of asymptomatic cases. (Due to the possible reasons stated above)

          I think omicron might be added to be list of coronaviruses associated with the common cold, along with huge list of other common cold viruses. Common cold viruses will never be irradicated since they mutate rapidly and are seldom lethal to the host.
          I hope omicron ends up like that anyways.

          Happy holidays.

        2. The “low” mutation rate

          There is no mutation rate, only a variation rate.

          “In biology, a mutation is an alteration in the nucleotide sequence of the genome of an organism, virus, or extrachromosomal DNA.”

          1. True, although the term “mutation rate” is often bandied about. Most mutations are not variations (they are silent).

      2. I feel that comparing a covid virus to an influenza virus is a poor analogy for assessing future trends. Apples and oranges.
        I remember when everyone was saying covid would be gone after three waves because that’s what 1918 flu did.
        I suspect more variants will emerge. Perhaps they will be less lethal. Perhaps not. There is no certainty, which means risk is high.

        1. Covid infects multi species—-
          The likelihood of extinction is almost zero.

          “Recent experimental research shows that many mammals, including cats, dogs, bank voles, ferrets, fruit bats, hamsters, mink, pigs, rabbits, racoon dogs, tree shrews, and white-tailed deer can be infected with the virus.”

    2. I’m not clear on how competitive exclusion would work with viruses. Would two variants have to infect the same person simultaneously? Would the the two variants have to be somehow aware of each other, and take some kind of offensive action towards the other?

      1. Nick- with two virus particles its simply competition for cell membrane binding sites.
        Timing, numbers and binding affinity.
        Nothing more. These particles aren’t even alive.

          1. Very very rare, especially if you are talking about simultaneous disease in a particular cell, or at the level of a whole person, caused by two different variants of coronavirus.
            That is not the mechanism by which a variant becomes predominant.
            Almost always a particular cell, or person, just gets showered by one version.
            One of the mechanisms by which a version becomes a winner is by having a higher shed rate prior to the person being symptomatic. This happens with Omicron more than the others- for 2-3 days before someone knows they are infected it is shed in vast numbers.

            1. Then the variants are simply reproducing independently of each other. That suggests that “competitive exclusion” doesn’t apply, right?

            2. Unlike Delta, Omicron seems to exhibit symptoms before, even PCR, tests show up.
              But very fast—-

  4. Interesting movie out- ‘Don’t Look Up’

    As you watch it, consider that the message is very relevant if you replace the target (comet) with the issues of global warming, or peak energy, or simply general overshoot.

    “I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather,
    not screaming in terror like his passengers”
    Jack Handy

    1. Hickory,

      I watched this movie last night. It frustrated me to the point of anger. Even though a parody, it speaks volumes on the state of mind of the majority of the world. Very good movie.

      1. Ye-, anger is appropriate,
        as is disgust, amusement, nausea, bewilderment, and a sense of profound familiarity.
        A prescient comment on the state of human civilization.
        Its a tiktok world.

        1. The subtext of the movie: Even though scientists can accurately predict the trajectory of a comet colliding with Earth, they can’t predict the occurrence of the next El Nino. Apparently, we understand Newtonian physics when solids are involved but not when it comes to fluids. In fact, the next big El Nino will cause billions of $$$ in damages and probably kill scores of people via heat waves, droughts, or flooding depending on their geographic location.

          Dissection of the movie’s science in predicting a comet’s path
          https://youtu.be/Hqi5ir5iET8

          How to predict the next El Nino
          https://geoenergymath.com/2021/12/31/climate-dipoles-as-crystal-crypto/

          I can relate to Leonardo’s character

  5. Just happened to see this. Seemed relevant to recent discussions.

    “Research conducted by the Yale School of Environment and published recently in the journal Nature Communications addressed the claim that when supply chain emissions for electric cars and emissions from generating electricity to power them are combined, the environmental advantages of electric vehicles disappear. In fact, the detractors argue, EVs are actually worse for the environment than internal combustion vehicles!

    How can that be? Well, EV batteries require a lot of nickel, lithium, and cobalt. More EVs means more mining and we all know mining is a dirty business. More mining means more emissions, right? Not only that, electric cars need electricity (there’s a shocker, huh?) and a lot of electricity comes from burning coal, so more electricity means more emissions. It’s as plain as the face on your nose!

    Those are the sorts of claims the Yale researchers dug into. Here’s what they found. “The surprising element was how much lower the emissions of electric vehicles were,” says postdoctoral associate Stephanie Weber. “The supply chain for combustion vehicles is just so dirty that electric vehicles can’t surpass them, even when you factor in indirect emissions.

    According to lead researcher Paul Wolfram, “The elephant in the room is the supply chain of fossil fuel-powered vehicles, not that of electric vehicles.” He adds that the faster we switch to electric vehicles, the better, especially in countries with a significant supply of renewable electricity such as the U.S. The researchers conclude:

    “While it is expected that direct emissions of BEVs are lower than those of ICEVs, it is surprising that in fact non–tailpipe emissions are also lower. This sheds new light on the current public debate about ‘dirty’ batteries and electricity. In fact, the simultaneous reduction of both direct and indirect emissions indicates a win–win situation for climate change mitigation, meaning that climate policy with very high shares of BEVs represents a no–regrets strategy in terms of emissions (but only if electricity continues to decarbonize as has been assumed in our main scenarios).”

    Fossil fuel apologists are always yapping about what they want is a level playing field. But they never talk about the massive damage extracting oil and methane does to the Earth, the trillions in direct and indirect subsidies they get from governments around the world every year, or the egregious impact the use of their products has on human health. In other words, the last thing they want is a level playing field where all the facts are known so people and governments can make rational decisions.

    In simplest terms, they lie through their teeth because they want to protect their massive profits regardless of the cost to society. It’s a “heads we win, tails you lose” strategy designed to throw sand in the gears of change in order to preserve their planet-killing business practices for as long as possible. These people should be in jail for crimes against humanity, not rewarded with a fat bonus for destroying the Earth.”

    https://cleantechnica.com/2021/12/24/lying-liars-the-lies-they-tell-about-electric-cars/

      1. What you need to know about California’s new composting law — a game changer for food waste

        Californians will ring in the new year with the unfurling of a groundbreaking law that will change how they dispose of their organic waste, particularly leftover food and kitchen scraps.

        Senate Bill 1383 requires all residents and businesses to separate such “green” waste from other trash, but the program will be rolled out gradually for homes and businesses in the coming months, with the actual startup date varying, depending on the location of your home or business.

        Fines can be levied for failing to separate organic refuse from other trash. But those charges aren’t scheduled to begin until 2024.

        Can’t climate-warming gases also be curtailed by simply reducing food waste?

        Yes. Keith Lilley, deputy director of Los Angeles County Public Works, urges residents and businesses to “shop purposefully, store food mindfully, preserve food and learn how to manage excess food.”

        Where will all this extra food waste go?

        Most will go to large composting centers or to plants that will convert it into natural gas. Los Angeles County alone has projected that about 1.9 million tons of food waste a year will be diverted. It could take a dozen anaerobic digestion plants to process all of that, at a projected cost of $840 million.

        Who’s going to pay for all this?

        You are. A survey by the League of California Cities found that most local governments expect refuse collection rates to increase less than 20%, with 1 in 5 cities saying they expect charges to go up more. Costa Mesa, an early adopter of curbside green recycling, estimates that over nine years, monthly rates will have risen a total of $6.10, to $24.10 a month, by 2023-24.

        https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/smallbusiness/what-you-need-to-know-about-california-s-new-composting-law-a-game-changer-for-food-waste/ar-AAS9zTj?ocid=msedgntp

        1. Thanks for the link HB. I love composting.
          I live in a sea of Trumpsters, Qtards and Patriots; many of whom would make better fertilizer than they do human beings.
          Happy Holidays!

  6. Using ammonia as hydrogen carrier/ ammonia for green energy storage/ ammonia as heavy transport fuel.

    https://www.ammoniaenergy.org/articles/4-4-million-tonnes-per-year-renewable-ammonia-in-chile/

    Not new, but interesting developments. Don’t often see much mention of this here and wonder why? The almost total emphasis on EV solutions in transport puzzles me. We have a huge sunk capital investment in ICE, particularly the rolling stock of heavy trucking/trains. While ammonia energy density is not near diesel (about 60%) the diesel engines of today can be converted to ammonia with a change of the engine block head to alter the compression ratio. Rather simple mod and keeps the sunk capital costs of our system useful. I know there are emissions, particularly NOx, using this fuel, but the technology to mitigate that is present and understood. What am I missing with using ammonia, home heating here in Maine is 60% oil. We could convert furnaces to be ammonia based. A bit more volatile than #2 oil…, Still, why is this not part of the discussion?

    1. Tom there is a vocal cadre here who have disdain for adaptation /innovation mechanisms or technologies, and many such topics get little attention.
      There have been a series of interesting articles on ammonia if you are interested in more material-

      https://cleantechnica.com/2020/11/29/le-chateliers-principle-sparks-new-green-ammonia-breakthrough/
      https://cleantechnica.com/2021/12/09/solar-ammonia-for-shipping/
      https://cleantechnica.com/2021/12/11/solar-ammonia-in-a-climate-crisis-electrolysis-is-no-barrier-to-low-cost-renewable-ammonia/
      https://cleantechnica.com/2021/12/14/solar-ammonia-in-a-climate-crisis-bunker-fuels-final-days-cant-come-soon-enough/

    2. Tom

      I used to head an automotive research department for our provincial government. We were shown an ammonia powered vehicle by a developer, Greg Vezina, in the mid 80s. This is what I can remember.

      Just like cars running on gasoline emit unburnt hydrocarbons, we could smell unburnt ammonia. Looking into it we found that the flame speed of ammonia was much lower than gasoline and that could have been one source. In other words the speed of the flame front did not sweep through the whole charge. The other source, like gasoline, is unburnt NH3 in the boundary layer of the walls. Maybe today’s technology could do better but I don’t think it could be eliminated totally.

      The other concern was the production of nitrosamines which have carcinogenic potential, during the combustion process.

      He has continued to work on his ideas regarding Ammonia and I am not aware of his current situation.

      https://www.ammoniaenergy.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/NH3-Energy-2017-Greg-Vezina.pdf

        1. Do you survivalists and militiamen up in North Idaho use a lot of public transport?

          1. Someone’s been keeping a dossier lol. One thing I like about this area I’m in is the abundance of hydro electric power.

            I couldn’t tell you what the militia nuts are up to; I don’t hang out with those clowns. I’m more of a Hard Lefty. I would however assume they do not. I find that it is the ‘patriots’, and I use that term loosely, who seem to like America the least.

            https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy

            https://bonnersferryherald.com/news/2021/feb/04/spot-bus-ridership-down/

            https://bonnersferryherald.com/news/2021/nov/04/boosting-idaho-energy-innovation-help-meet-environ/

            https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_Rifle_Association

            Enjoy the famine. Pro tip- tinned gravy and hot sauce makes ANYTHING taste good.

            1. The only thing I can say about North Idaho is that I have never been to anywhere in the US where casual racism is so openly and proudly on display thanks to the militias and those “patriots” you mention. One might be led to think Kootenai County wasn’t just part of the Confederacy, but still fighting the war, due to the number of Confederate flags on display, even in businesses.

            2. The number of confederate statues in the PNW is quite shocking. From what I understand many were put in place during the 80’s. Never done a deep dive on the matter, but it is quite a concern.

              My preference is for extremely equitable policies. The billionaires (Gates, Musk, Bezos) have all offered their thoughts on solutions to the climate change problem, although taking away their money isn’t mentioned as being one of them.

              I feel the ‘patriot militia survivalist’ types around here are majority cosplay clowns. Most are “preparing” for all the wrong things, and are only roll playing their favorite paranoid fantasy.

              Having done plenty of national service myself, I find their cavalier attitudes towards violence offensive.

              To paraphrase Greg Rucka; It’s not that one bullet with your name on it that you have to worry about…it’s all those other ones marked ‘To whom it may concern’.

            3. However,:
              “In Blaine County, ID 67.1% of the people voted Democrat in the last presidential election, 30.3% voted for the Republican …”

              Hint: Sun Valley– where you have rich, well educated people.
              Not Northern Idaho.

        2. I love electric trains. Fast, quiet, very safe – your own chauffeur. You can rest, read, work if necessary. It’s great.

          Sadly, public transport is only affordable and fuel-efficient if it’s in a high density area. It really can’t provide most transportation. Even in Europe it only provides about 11% of travel miles.

          In the US, carpooling provides more passenger miles than mass transit.

          1. Seems like things might need to change, then. Curios that you feel public transportation service rates are so locked in, and that I haven’t noticed you advocating for more of it. I get it, everyone’s an egalitarian, until they have to ride The Bus. Not much of a revolutionary thinker are you, Nick?

            Is Green Capitalism a Paradox

            “if solutions within this system are so impossible to find then maybe we should change the system itself” ~ Greta

            https://www.humanrightspulse.com/mastercontentblog/is-green-capitalism-a-paradox

            1. To cover all passenger transportation with mass transit would be extraordinarily expensive, both in capex and opex, and use more energy.

              Mass transit has to provide frequent and 24 x 7 service to ALL locations in order to replace personal vehicles. That means a lot of empty (or almost empty) trains and buses. That’s far more expensive in anything but the densest areas.

              Have you ever looked at buses late at night, even in really big cities? They’re kind of sad and lonely: one or two people on a big bus, along with a driver. Buses might get 4 miles per gallon, and drivers are maybe $4/mile, so they need a lot more passengers than that to be energy or cost efficient.

              The physics and costs of mass transit are the same under capitalism or socialism.

            2. It seems to me that perhaps EV public transport will require less batteries to be made than would a personal EV or two in every home. The materials for manufacturing batteries will likely be the limiting factor for mass EV deployment.

              As well, communities where I have lived often ran various size buses, depending on the route and time of day. Also a few runs had ‘dial a bus’ after certain hours so that routes were not covered unless requested.

              You seem perhaps more interested in hocking personal EVs than looking for solutions to transportation in the context of climate crisis and overshoot. Honestly, pushing back against EV powered public transport exposed your true agenda.

              The myth of electric cars: Why we also need to focus on buses and trains
              “Governments need to massively invest in public transit, cycling and walking infrastructure to make them larger, safer and more reliable. And we need to reassess our transportation needs and priorities.”
              https://theconversation.com/the-myth-of-electric-cars-why-we-also-need-to-focus-on-buses-and-trains-147827

              When Electric Buses Make Sense, & When They Just Don’t
              https://cleantechnica.com/2021/08/22/when-electric-buses-make-sense-when-they-just-dont/

              There aren’t enough batteries to electrify all cars — focus on trucks and buses instead
              https://theconversation.com/there-arent-enough-batteries-to-electrify-all-cars-focus-on-trucks-and-buses-instead-142545

            3. Survivalist,

              I liked the article about buses vs light rail. It’s a bit superficial about the time and money needed to build light rail, but as I mentioned above, I like electric rail a lot. In dense areas it’s a wonderful thing.

              The articles about EVs are superficial and unrealistic: note that there are very few numbers to put things into context, just broad vague claims. As I argued recently, there really aren’t significant material resource limits for batteries: nickel and cobalt aren’t used in one of the major current battery chemistries (LFP), lithium is abundant and available in many locations, and even lithium isn’t essential (see comment below about CATL). Yes, battery production needs to be expanded a great deal, but that is a normal manufacturing problem.

              My basic point remains the same: bus drivers and fuel are very expensive for low density areas: you’re basically talking about chauffeurs covering 24 hours and 7 days a week, every 15 minutes. That’s mindbogglingly expensive and fuel inefficient for most areas, even with smaller vehicles, on-call systems (which aren’t very “mass transit” – they’re more like municipal taxi/Uber services, which is a big topic in it’s own right) or electric buses. Plus transit is very, very slow for the majority of travel: you have to wait for a pickup and one or two transfers to get most places, and buses have to travel substantially slower than light vehicle traffic (the majority of the time they’re in traffic and have to move at the same speed, and the rest of the time they’re stopped loading & unloading). A 20 minute car ride can take 90 minutes on a bus, and often far more.

              Buses don’t work well for disabled passengers. Bikes and walking don’t work at all for them, nor do they work well for parents, food shoppers, etc.

            4. “Bitcoin alone emits more carbon dioxide than New Zealand”

              Is Green Capitalism a Paradox

            5. Hightrekker,

              That seems a bit simplistic. The Soviet Union and the PRC both have been responsible for astonishing amounts of pollution.

            6. hint:
              The Soviet Union has not existed for 30+ years.
              (1988–1991) was its last gasp.
              Time to get in with contemporary reality.

            7. Hightrekker,

              Sure. Still, when the USSR existed it created a nightmare of pollution. That’s not an example of “clean socialism”. So: are there examples of socialist societies that have done better about environmental protection?

              Scandinavian countries have some accomplishments here, but they’re scarcely socialist. Cuba has some accomplishments, but they’ve also used as much fossil fuel as they could get their hands on, and they’re really not an example of a country with equal and free political participation.

              It seems to me that blaming our problems on capitalism is a vast over-simplification: Marx, for example thought socialism would only come after capitalism had solved problems of scarcity. He thought socialism would then come to solve problems of inequity and unequal and limited political participation.

    2. For medium sized cars and for busses you don’t need nickel and cobalt – not even lithium. CATL is ramping up a sodium battery, they even have eliminated the copper interconnectors.

  9. Good afternoon,

    It was 67 degrees in Kodiak, Alaska on Sunday.

    https://news.yahoo.com/67-degrees-in-alaska-climate-change-continues-to-topple-temperature-records-193405514.html

    “The temperature readings in Kodiak did not merely edge out some previous record by a degree or two; the 65 degrees reported at the airport was 20 degrees higher than the previous high temperature record of 45 degrees set on Dec. 26, 1984, the National Weather Service reported.”

    “In addition to setting a statewide record, #Kodiak obliterated the daily record by TWENTY degrees, It is the warmest temperature on record for anytime between October 5th and April 21st…meaning this would’ve set monthly records in Nov, Jan, Feb, and Mar as well.” (NWS Anchorage on Twitter)

    1. Weather has been topsy-turvy lately, possibly because the current solar cycle is in an increasing sunspot phase. And it’s not just all presumed warmth, either, for example Calgary, Canada has seen temperatures of less than -30*C in recent days and California recorded the most snow ever in December. The monthly forecast for January is for western Canada, eastern Alaska, the north-central US, and the Pacific Northwest to be very cold.

      1. The monthly forecast for January is for western Canada, eastern Alaska, the north-central US, and the Pacific Northwest to be very cold.

        Wow. That’s shocking.

      2. Timothy, I noticed it was less dark at night.
        I guess that must be the sunspots too?
        Damn spots.
        I prefer it dark at night.

        1. I’ve noticed that on occasion the moon comes out in the day, though I’ve never seen the sun come out at night.

        2. I don’t get it. You disagree that sunspots are on the rise within the current solar cycle? The data clearly shows that in fact they are increasing, which typically is a predictor of above normal temperatures on earth.

          1. Climate explained: Sunspots do affect our weather, a bit, but not as much as other things

            Sunspots have been observed continuously since 1609, although their cyclical variation was not noticed until much later. At the peak of the cycle, about 0.1% more Solar energy reaches the Earth, which can increase global average temperatures by 0.05-0.1℃.

            One-tenth of one degree C can be hardly noticed. It can be detected in the climate record but just barely. And it reoccurs on an 11-year cycle, (average). Sunspots are not a player in climate change.

      3. The weather’s been weird lately… What could possibly be causing it?!!

        Must be that the current solar cycle is in an increasing sunspot phase. A conclusion supported by no evidence at all.

        Couldn’t possibly be that OTHER conclusion. The one supported by mountains of evidence compiled over decades.

        Jesus fucking Christ. They get stupider every time.

    2. I’ve been working outside for the last week in a short sleeved t shirt. Haven’t had a fire in the wood stove, and have turned off the little high efficiency thru the wall oil furnace we use for back up heat as well, just wearing a sweater in the house late at night.

      This in the mountains in the western end of Virginia.

      I wonder how many more years I’ll be able to use the wood stove. Sooner or later I’m going to have to get a heat pump, but the longer I put it off, the more likely it will be that I’ll never have to spend any money working on repairing it, lol…… and I can invest the money in the meantime, and earn a lot more than I could save by having one.

      I’m beginning to think I’ll probably never have a solar power system of my own…….. at least not one big enough to really matter. The cost of such systems is still falling so fast that I can save more by delaying the purchase from one year to the next than I could save on juice from my utility for the year.

      But maybe this coming summer I’ll get enough panels and associated stuff to run the absolute essentials in case of a long term black out….. refrigerator, freezer, well pump, a few lights, small power tools, etc.

      1. This year up near Seattle we had the largest annual temperature swing ever recorded in the short history of thermometer deployment (1860’s).
        High 111, Low 9 degree
        Many thanks for Nat Gas.
        There is lots of wood up here, but not too many have woodstoves these days.
        Thus the air is clear. Thank for that.

      2. I’m sitting on my tractor in Maine right now, in just a sweatshirt, waiting for a brush pile to burn down. Lovely. Weird.

  10. Sometimes you find pro environment and pro common sense news in places you wouldn’t expect to see it.

    Check this out for the content on electric ships and planes. I don’t follow this site because it’s mostly right wing, politically, so I was surprised to run across this newsletter.

    https://thehill.com/policy/equilibrium-sustainability/587545-equilibrium-sustainability

    Today is Tuesday. Welcome to Equilibrium, a newsletter that tracks the growing global battle over the future of sustainability. Subscribe here: thehill.com/newsletter-signup.

    “The Danish energy company Ørsted announced on Monday that it had begun producing power from the second phase of an enormous four-part offshore wind farm in the North Sea, 55 miles (89 kilometers) off the shore of the U.K.

    The Hornsea project represents the largest offshore wind farm in the world. Once it is complete, Ørsted says it will be the world’s largest wind farm — period — and the farthest large-scale one from shore, according to TechXplore.

    The project is a sign of both the ambition of Ørsted and of the growing capacity of renewables more generally, which continued to come into their own in 2021.

    Today we’ll look at how far the renewables revolution has come — and how far it has yet to go.

    For Equilibrium, we are Saul Elbein and Sharon Udasin. Please send tips or comments to Saul at selbein@thehill.com or Sharon at sudasin@thehill.com. Follow us on Twitter: @saul_elbein and @sharonudasin.

    Let’s get to it.

    A long road for battery-powered transport
    Electric car

    2021 saw the release of tantalizing prototypes of electric freight trains, ships, aircraft and an array of electric automobiles — promising benchmarks in renewable energy generation, battery storage and battery-powered transportation.

    But while electric modes of transportation benefit from falling wind and solar costs, to become more than niche luxury goods they will need mature supply chains, long-term investment and their own government support.

    Progress: “We’re building constituencies in the clean energy space that are a long way from being as politically powerful as the dirty energy space — but they’re a lot more powerful than they were 10 years ago,” Rep. Sean Casten (D-Ill.) told Equilibrium.

    Casten pointed to one key fact: According to a Bloomberg analysis, about 46 percent of the world’s population now lives in countries where it is more profitable to build new solar or wind infrastructure than run existing natural gas or coal power plants.

    Is the United States one of those countries? No. In the U.S., where oil and gas are heavily subsidized, existing gas power plants are the cheapest generation option.

    But even here, things are changing: Two-thirds of next year’s new electricity generation capacity is expected to be either large-scale solar or energy storage, according to pv magazine.

    Twenty percent of U.S. electric power currently comes from wind, water and solar power, and more than 180 U.S. cities have passed policies requiring all-renewable electricity, according to a Stanford study.

    A diminishing danger of power failure: A common fear around renewable power is that it doesn’t work when rivers are low, skies are cloudy or winds aren’t blowing — leading to power failures in an all-renewable economy unless long-term battery storage can be developed.

    But the Stanford study found these fears might be overblown: a series of short-term batteries, linked together and constantly cycling electricity between them, providing long-term battery power on existing technology — or releasing their full charge simultaneously to meet sudden short-term “heavy peaks” in demand.

    There are knock-on economic benefits, too: Building and operating the renewable energy grid could offer 4.7 million permanent jobs and save 53,200 lives a year from reduced health care costs, with about $700 billion in savings, researchers found.”

    “But while zero-carbon airliners and long-haul container ships are still years away, battery technology is now far enough along to power small aircraft and smaller cargo-carrying vessels with fixed, short-haul routes.

    For example, a new 100 percent battery-powered ship called the Asahi will now carry fuel to container ships in Tokyo Bay, Ship & Bunker magazine reported. And a battery-powered, autonomous container ship now plies Norways fjords, delivering fertilizer, Electrek reported.

    The global ferry trade group Interferry also announced in October that it was embarking on a global lobbying push to persuade countries and ports to build the necessary infrastructure for electric passenger ferries, Ship & Bunker reported.”

    “If the cost of carbon and the public health cost of air pollution is factored in — or if rail companies can take advantage of wholesale electricity — battery-electric trains may soon be the same cost as current diesel-electric models, according to a study published last month in Nature Energy.”

    Sometimes we forget that even hard core right wingers can see which side their bread is buttered on, and do the right thing because them ” libtard commie dimrats” have shown them it can be done at a profit.

    Texas isn’t leading the USA in wind power because the” libtards “own the state legislature, lol,. My personal guess is that Texas will be the biggest per capita producer of solar power as well within another ten years or so.

    Texans can count. They can make more money using wind and solar electricity and selling oil and gas than they can burning it at home , and they’re going to do it.

    It would be altogether amusing to hear Cruz and company blaming blackouts on renewables if it weren’t so scary….. given that more than half the people in Texas are either ignorant or dumb enough or both to believe him and vote for him.

    1. Texans (the republican ones) are like everyone- they will become huge solar and wind advocates when they realize it is an economic benefit to themselves. They are just very slow to realize it.
      They will never acknowledge that Al Gore, Californians, or Democrats were decades ahead and correct on this issue while they were just flat out wrong.
      Like so many other issues, such as human rights.

      1. “They will never acknowledge that Al Gore, Californians, or Democrats were decades ahead and correct on this issue while they were just flat out wrong.”

        Hickory’s dead center in the ten ring again, lol.

        1. Well, they’ll never admit it in words, but they’ve long ago admitted in with their actions.

          Texas is a major leader in wind power, and has been for years. George Bush has solar panels on his ranch.

          Actions speak.

    2. And yet world population grew by 74,000,000 in 2021.

      Does that help?

  11. Quote of the day

    “You have to get used to the fact that new advances in science get further and further away from common sense.” David Deutsch: The Multiverse

    David Deutsch comments on his opinion that there are millions of copies of yourself in parallel universes, doing almost the same thing as you are doing right now.

    1. Do you think quantum mechanics reflects human common sense?

      Do you think your speculation that a “Cosmic Entity” that evolved out of nothing reflects common sense?

      Deutsch is taking accepted Quantum Mechanics and interpreting them.

      Obviously he may be wrong. What is your interpretation?

      1. I agree with the majority of physicists like Roger Penrose who called the Many Worlds Theory “reductio ad absurdum”. Reductio ad absurdum is Latin for “total absolute bullshit”. Well…. that’s not an exact translation, but close enough. 🤣

        Deutsch, I am not anti-quantum mechanics. And the many worlds theory is far from an accepted theory of quantum mechanics, though as many as 25% may accept the theory. In his book Farwell to Reality: How Modern Physics Has Betrayed the Search For Scientific Truth Jim Baggott reports this survey:

        “At a scientific workshop on the interpretation of quantum theory held in August 1997, the participants conducted an informal poll. Of the 48 votes recorded, 13 (or 27 percent) were cast in favor of the Copenhagen interpretation. The second most popular choice, attracting eight votes (17 percent) was the many worlds interpretation.” Page 218

        That was in 1997. The number of many worlds theorists has since risen to perhaps 25%. And they all disagree with each other. Some believe the original Everettian theory, that universes just pop into existence every time there is a wave collapse, while others, like Deutsch, believe that almost an infinite number of universes exists, therefore many of them are bound to have exact copies of this world, and you and me, therefore, there is no such thing as superposition. Schrodinger’s Cat is alive in one universe and dead in another.

        If you think that is “accepted quantum mechanics” then you are as deluded as David Deutsch

        1. I didn’t say the Many World’s was accepted, but the underlying mechanisms (interference) that he is using to make his interpretation are accepted and make extremely accurate predictions.

          I believe all Deutsch is saying is that all particles including the ones in our bodies take all possible paths. All those possible paths are equally as real.

          From the point of the big bang everything was the same, then diverged from that point.

          There would be infinite scenarios where nothing resembling any of us would exist.

          We just can’t experience the other paths or interference or whatever.

          Deutsch might be the top Quantum Computing guy in the world, he is no slouch.

          I don’t know if he is right or wrong.

          1. You wrote: I believe all Deutsch is saying is that all particles including the ones in our bodies take all possible paths. All those possible paths are equally as real.
            And:
            There would be infinite scenarios where nothing resembling any of us would exist.

            No, that is the exact opposite of what David Deutsch is saying.

            Deutsch, you do not have to “believe” what David is saying. It is abundantly clear what he is saying. Just watch this video, you can start at 10 minutes into the video:
            David Deutsch, The Multiverse

            Quoting him: “You have to start thinking of yourself not as an entity existing in one universe but as an entity existing in the multiverse as a whole. So there are other copies of you, and of me, in other universes. Some of these copies are completely identical to us. Now in those cases, it’s just a matter of words to say whether there are other universes or whether they are the same universe because they are completely identical. There are other universes that are very like this one but differ only in the position of one atom somewhere. Those universes are interfering with ours, and they are producing interference effects which we could detect in the laboratory if we wanted to. And there are others where the interference is so small that we will never see them. But they form part of the explanation of the things that we do see. So you exist in multiple copies. I exist in multiple copies. And there are other universes where I am sitting here talking to you about something slightly different, And there are other universes where I have just got up and gone to have a cup of tea.

            That is exactly what he believes because that is a direct quote from him. And you can believe that he: might be the top Quantum Computing guy in the world, but I think that is the biggest line of bullshit I have ever heard in my lifetime. And about 75% of physicists agree with me.

            1. David Elieser Deutsch FRS[6] (/dɔɪtʃ/ DOYTCH; born 18 May 1953)[1] is a British physicist at the University of Oxford. He is a Visiting Professor in the Department of Atomic and Laser Physics at the Centre for Quantum Computation (CQC) in the Clarendon Laboratory of the University of Oxford. He pioneered the field of quantum computation by formulating a description for a quantum Turing machine, as well as specifying an algorithm designed to run on a quantum computer.[7] He has also proposed the use of entangled states and Bell’s theorem for quantum key distribution[7] and is a proponent of the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics.[8]

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

            2. Deutsch Bag, you are changing the subject. The subject is what David Deutsch said and obviously believes. Not his credentials. His credentials have nothing to do with this debate.

              Have you any comments on my last post where I quoted him from the video? If not, you can just post more of his credentials, knowing that they have absolutely nothing to do with this debate.

  12. Special treat for Survivalist. Your bot with look and and sound just like Elon…someone to pal around with.
    You are set.

    “Elon Musk says that he is considering Tesla Bot becoming more than just a humanoid robot to perform useful tasks but to have it potentially develop a unique personality and be a companion.”

    1. I wonder if he can take a punch? I could use a sparring partner lol

      1. I think it’s fair to say, Elon has been your punching bag as he has become the richest man in the world this year.

        Karl “Marx’s critical theories about society, economics, and politics, collectively understood as Marxism, hold that human societies develop through class conflict. In the capitalist mode of production, this manifests itself in the conflict between the ruling classes (known as the bourgeoisie) that control the means of production and the working classes (known as the proletariat) that enable these means by selling their labour-power in return for wages.[14] Employing a critical approach known as historical materialism, Marx predicted that capitalism produced internal tensions like previous socioeconomic systems and that those would lead to its self-destruction and replacement by a new system known as the socialist mode of production. For Marx, class antagonisms under capitalism—owing in part to its instability and crisis-prone nature—would eventuate the working class’s development of class consciousness, leading to their conquest of political power and eventually the establishment of a classless, communist society constituted by a free association of producers.”

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

        A Marxist Lefty(swinging and missing) ?

        Maybe you can shed some light on why Trumpsters act against their own best interest(in the name of freedom).

        Have a safe Happy New Year

        1. thinking of starting a real estate company to sublease the square miles of rent-free space I apparently occupy in shitlibs’ brains

      2. Watch the movie ‘Don’t Look Up’
        perhaps you can identify one of the characters who is partly comprised of a Musk characterization

        To be clear, I don’t pray to or idolize anyone, but I do recognize the incredible contribution of Musk to the evolution of global transportation and energy storage technologies. Roughly just in time for peak oil.
        Big applause for that.
        Beyond that, I don’t give him much thought. As long as he stays away from politics/power, and pays his taxes (which is another subject but should be much higher for all the uber-wealthy).

        1. one of the characters who is partly comprised of a Musk characterization

          That character seems to be a mix of all of the tech billionaires: he gets his money from cell phones like Tim Cook and looks and sounds like Cook, but Cook doesn’t dabble in rockets like Musk and Bezos.

          Which gives me a quibble with the movie. The movie seems to be aiming primarily at climate denial, yet tech billionaires and (rare earths) aren’t the problem here: it’s the old extractive industries that are the primary problem (yes, cell phones use some mined materials, but it’s nothing compared to power generation and transportation).

          I suspect they were trying to appease the far right by aiming some of their satire at new tech. And…that’s basically an example of the far right succeeding in intimidating it’s critics into softening and confusing it’s criticism of the real problems: climate change and far right attacks on the government that’s needed to deal with climate change.

          1. Nick, when i watched it i thought they were poking fun/angst at everyone.
            Well deserved as I see it.

            1. Agreed, the shitlibs got critiqued just as well as the cons did.

              shitlibs will not save us from fascism or climate change — pass it on

            2. shitlibs will not save us from fascism or climate change

              That’s a rightwing talking point. It’s absurd to suggest there isn’t a dramatic difference between Republican and Democratic policies. And, of course, Democratic policies would be much more aggressive about things like economic inequality and climate change if voters weren’t confused about which party was doing the right things. As it is, Democratic politicians have to tiptoe around these things because they’re afraid of losing votes!

            3. shitlib ~ Portmanteau comprising the words “shit” and “lib.” Used in leftist political discourse as a perjorative, mocking the spinelessness, stupidly, hypocrisy, and willful ignorance of American Democrats.

              It’s a left wing talking point, Nick. I teach self defense to physically disabled LGBTQ folks, pro bono; I can assure you that I know my left from my right.

              Not all criticism of The Democrats, or BlueAnon as I like to call them, comes from the political right.

  13. Peak coal you say.

    CHINA FIRES UP NEW GIANT COAL POWER PLANT

    “The Shanghaimiao plant, located in the country’s top coal-producing region of Inner Mongolia, said on Tuesday that its first of four 1,000-megawatt units was online after passing a 168 hour period of trials. The plant will supply power to China’s eastern coastal Shandong Province. The thermal power plant is operated by the Guodian Power Shanghaimiao Corporation, a subsidiary of the centrally-owned China Energy Investment Corporation. China, where coal-fired plants generate more than two-thirds of its electricity, pledged to reduce its reliance on coal as part of global efforts to tackle climate change, but to do so only after 2025. China’s State Grid Corporation said in a December report that energy security concerns mean the country is likely to build as much as 150 gigawatts (GW) of new coal-fired power capacity over the 2021-2025 period, bringing its total to 1,230 GW ahead of its 2025 deadline.

    https://www.theepochtimes.com/china-fires-up-new-giant-coal-power-plant-in-face-of-calls-for-cuts_4183280.html?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=ZeroHedge

    And, if that wasn’t enough,

    COAL POWER’S SHARP REBOUND IS TAKING IT TO A NEW RECORD IN 2021

    “The amount of electricity generated worldwide from coal is surging towards a new annual record in 2021, undermining efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and potentially putting global coal demand on course for an all-time high next year, the International Energy Agency said in its latest annual market report. Overall coal demand worldwide – including uses beyond power generation, such as cement and steel production – is forecast to grow by 6% in 2021. That increase will not take it above the record levels it reached in 2013 and 2014. But, depending on weather patterns and economic growth, overall coal demand could reach new all-time highs as soon as 2022 and remain at that level for the following two years.”

    https://www.iea.org/news/coal-power-s-sharp-rebound-is-taking-it-to-a-new-record-in-2021-threatening-net-zero-goals

    1. Yeah, coal plants have been badly overbuilt in China, and unnecessary plant construction is continuing: provinces see it as a nice jobs program.

      The EIA chronically underestimates the transition away from fossil fuels, but it makes sense that coal would be the swing producer: coal plants are badly underutilized, while wind and solar will typically produce at maximum levels given their low costs.

      Coal will, of course, start it’s longterm slide again after the covid recovery is over, as wind and solar generation continue to grow much more quickly than overall consumption.

      Again, Doug: you’re finding misleading news items, which seem intended to discourage people about the transition away from fossil fuel. I think you’re smart enough to understand that these are misleading: you’re quoting the Epoch Times, a climate denier publication and copying EIA speculation. So…why do you do that?

      1. Oh for gawd’s sake Nick, shut the fuck up. Why can’t you just read what someone posts without having to read something into it?

        1. Well, there’s history here that you may not be aware of. You see, Doug has actively opposed any moves away from fossil fuels with a variety of comments like this. I would be pleased to discuss that and try to change his mind, but he has refused to discuss the idea of moving away from FF. This was another attempt to start that discussion.

          You agree that we need to move away from fossil fuels, right?

            1. Almost all climatologists argue that we should work intensely to reduce climate change.

              The idea that nothing can be done so nothing should should be done is another evolution of the climate denier argument:

              An analysis of the evolution of climate denialism.

              “In a study out this week in the journal Nature Scientific Reports, researchers found that outright denying the science is going out of fashion. Today, only about 10 percent of arguments from conservative think tanks in North America challenge the scientific consensus around global warming or question models and data. (For the record, 99.9 percent of scientists agree that human activity is heating up the planet.) Instead, the most common arguments are that scientists and climate advocates simply can’t be trusted, and that proposed solutions won’t work.

              Researchers found that attacks on “climate solutions” are also on the rise. People who want to delay action often argue that renewable energy can’t replace fossil fuels. They also say that climate policies will hurt working families, ruin the economy, and raise prices. Typically such arguments overlook how pollution from burning fossil fuels shortens lifespans and how climate-charged disasters like wildfires, flooding, and heat waves are already ruining people’s lives and costing billions. They tend to ignore estimates that the changing climate could cost the U.S. 10.5 percent of GDP by the end of the century.

              “Climate solutions misinformation is really the future of climate misinformation,” Cook said. It has been the predominant argument from conservative think tanks since 2008 and recently became the second-most common point made on anti-climate blogs, beating out the increasingly unbelievable claim that the Earth isn’t warming.”

              https://grist.org/politics/study-charts-show-rising-attacks-on-clean-energy-and-climate-policy/

        2. Edgy,

          Just consider my comments counterpoint to Nick’s mindless blather which amounts to EVs-will-save-the-world, Nick who attempts to preach his views while generating mindless dialogue by making false accusations. Don’t get sucked in. For the record, I have NEVER advocated not getting off fossil fuels, ESPECIALLY coal, the continuing use of which is obviously hastening the destruction of our planet’s biosphere. Somehow, reporting construction of huge new plants in Asia constitutes advocating coal — in Nick’s mind. Some wouldn’t understand this but reporting an asteroid about to collide with earth doesn’t amount to bolstering a pro-asteroid impact view. Monkeys and idiots employ the “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil” rule, well maybe monkeys don’t. 😉

          1. Nick’s mindless blather which amounts to EVs-will-save-the-world, Nick who attempts to preach his views while generating mindless dialogue by making false accusations.

            It’s a bit ironic to falsely accuse someone of claiming that EVs will save the world while complaining that he is making false accusations.

          2. I have NEVER advocated not getting off fossil fuels, ESPECIALLY coal,

            That’s great! We’re in agreement.

            Now…do you agree that if we get off fossil fuels, we’ll need replacements? Those would include wind and solar power, probably hydro, possibly nuclear: all of those produce electricity.

            Getting off fossil fuels means that we stop using oil, right?
            Do you agree that we’ll still need transportation?
            Then we’d need to use electricity to power transportation, which means using electric vehicles.
            So: you agree that EVs are essential?

            1. I agree to the extent that renewables will have a crucial role in the struggle against climate change. How long will it take for meaningful implementation to occur (on a world scale) remains an open, and very big, question. If things don’t change in the right direction fast enough, Earth will warm to catastrophic levels and talk becomes academic. And obviously climate change is a multivariate matter. For example, agriculture, food production and distribution are an important part of the equation. I will be dead long before any of this is sorted out but worry about my family, other humans, and all the other creatures that inhabit this planet.

            2. I agree to the extent that renewables will have a crucial role in the struggle against climate change.

              That’s unclear.

              I agree that the risks of climate change are very large. I agree that our current trajectory of reduction of GHG emissions is waaay too slow. But…

              The vast majority of climatologists argue that we need to advocate very strongly for the implementation of solutions. They include non-fossil fuel sources like livestock methane and land-use change. But: they say that coal, oil & gas are the primary source of GHGs, and renewables and EVs are the primary solutions.

              Do you agree with them when they say that very strong advocacy of renewables and EVs is essential??

            3. EVs and “renewables” will have a prominent place post-collapse. They will allow the wealthiest in the western nations to continue a semblence of business as usual while offering them a salve to their consciences. Nothing is more addictive to the conspicuous consumers of the liberal west than “renewable,” “regenerative,” and “green” technologies.

              The rest can go pound sand.

            4. Mike B,

              The right-wing likes to pretend to be advocating for low income folks. They attack those “elite green liberals”, but they’re really just protecting the fossil fuel industry.

              Don’t be fooled.

  14. OT:

    824,052 today

    800,000 is starting to get in the rear view mirror.

    1. Total cars delivred till date 2 million . Rejection 475000 = 25% of total production . I am going to form a corporation to make EV’s that will have a rejection rate of 50% and thus become richer than Musk . 🙂 . The countdown is on already down and out . Nikola, Lucid, Lordsdown . Rivian would already be there but pumping up their IPO gave them breathing space . EV’s are nothing but the shift of carbon from tail pipe to the smoke tower pipe . When this ponzi breaks it will leave shale biting the dust .
      P.S : Save yourself and me the trouble posting about China and NIO . China is the mother of all ponzi schemes .Read HHH , Eulen on the other thread .

      1. HiH,

        Come on. Recalls to fix things are not rejections. It’s not that big a deal.

        EV’s are nothing but the shift of carbon from tail pipe to the smoke tower pipe

        Whether you know it or not, that’s an unrealistic climate denier talking point. If you’re ready to listen to real info say so, and I can provide sources.

    2. So, that comment is another attack on Tesla, the leading EV maker. EVs are a primary solution to climate change.

      An analysis of the evolution of climate denialism.

      “In a study out this week in the journal Nature Scientific Reports, researchers found that outright denying the science is going out of fashion. Today, only about 10 percent of arguments from conservative think tanks in North America challenge the scientific consensus around global warming or question models and data. (For the record, 99.9 percent of scientists agree that human activity is heating up the planet.) Instead, the most common arguments are that scientists and climate advocates simply can’t be trusted, and that proposed solutions won’t work.

      Researchers found that attacks on “climate solutions” are also on the rise. People who want to delay action often argue that renewable energy can’t replace fossil fuels. They also say that climate policies will hurt working families, ruin the economy, and raise prices. Typically such arguments overlook how pollution from burning fossil fuels shortens lifespans and how climate-charged disasters like wildfires, flooding, and heat waves are already ruining people’s lives and costing billions. They tend to ignore estimates that the changing climate could cost the U.S. 10.5 percent of GDP by the end of the century.

      “Climate solutions misinformation is really the future of climate misinformation,” Cook said. It has been the predominant argument from conservative think tanks since 2008 and recently became the second-most common point made on anti-climate blogs, beating out the increasingly unbelievable claim that the Earth isn’t warming.”

      https://grist.org/politics/study-charts-show-rising-attacks-on-clean-energy-and-climate-policy/

      1. Interpretation: We need someone to blame for our overall incompetence.

        1. Speak for yourself B

          “Blame is the Weapon of Cowards!

          It has been said that BLAMING is the Root Cause of all Negative Emotions!

          Psychologists suggest that inside all Negative People lies a secret justification that its someone or something else’s FAULT for the way they are”

          https://medium.com/@rappingyogi/blame-is-the-weapon-of-cowards-cc25bed8d09c

          “To blame others is an act of cowardice. We blame in an attempt to hide our shame. This is not the way of the warrior. The warrior understands that to blame is not simply an abdication of responsibility but a relinquishing of power. You cannot change what you do not take responsibility for.”

          https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/10089993-to-blame-others-is-an-act-of-cowardice-we-blame

          “Blame is the coward’s solution to his fear of accountability.”

          ― Craig D. Lounsbrough

          https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/8849306-blame-is-the-coward-s-solution-to-his-fear-of-accountability

          1. HB, you have misunderstood. It’s my interpretation that the Grist article is blaming THEM (think tanks, etc.) for the incompetence of the whole human race and its addiction to FFs. All of the quotations Nick reproduces from the article try to assign blame.

            1. So now your “blaming” me for misunderstanding your comment.

              How do you get this – “We need someone to blame for our overall incompetence”

              Out of this – “Researchers found that attacks on “climate solutions” are also on the rise. People who want to delay action often argue that renewable energy can’t replace fossil fuels. They also say that climate policies will hurt working families, ruin the economy, and raise prices.”
              “The study also tracked how arguments against taking action changed over time. In general, misinformation around solutions ramped up before international climate conferences or at times when Congress debated climate legislation, such as the American Clean Energy and Security Act in 2009.”

              Again, speak for yourself. Your original comment should have said- I need someone to blame for my overall incompetence

        2. “All of us assign blame in our own best interest, right?
          If we assign blame in our own best interests, that means blame is relative. And if blame is relative, then one of the important functions of society becomes who controls the blame pattern. Why is it that large bodies of workers, like in my country, assign blame downward to some welfare chiselers at the bottom. They say “tryna’ get a little something for nothing” and they never assign blame upward to the handful of big time chiselers at the top that get a whole lot of something for doing nothing at all. Well, that’s because the blame pattern is manipulated.”
          ~ Utah Phillips

          https://youtu.be/TjpTClVlrd8

          Happy New Year!

          1. “All of us assign blame in our own best interest, right?”

            WRONG, but I’m not surprised you would believe the above.

            “Objective- adjective 1. (of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.”

            Character traits are all the aspects of a person’s behavior and attitudes that make up that person’s personality. Everyone has character traits, both good and bad.

            Some character traits reveal positive aspects of a person’s underlying values or beliefs.

            generosity, integrity, loyalty, devoted, loving, kindness, sincerity, self-control, peaceful, faithful, patience, determination, persistence, open-minded, fair, cooperative, tolerant, optimistic, spiritual

            Dark Side Characteristics. No one is perfect; everyone has a bit of a darker side. Some people may have character traits that are generally viewed with a negative connotation.

            dishonest, disloyal, unkind, mean, rude, disrespectful, impatient, greed, abrasive, pessimistic, cruel, unmerciful, narcissistic, obnoxious, malicious, pettiness, quarrelsome, caustic, selfish, unforgiving

            https://examples.yourdictionary.com/character-trait-examples.html

            1. “Maybe you can shed some light on why Trumpsters act against their own best interest(in the name of freedom).” ~ HB

              My first guess would be because their perceived best interests don’t align with their actual best interests; they lack class consciousness; and they lack awareness of class struggle.
              https://www.britannica.com/topic/class-consciousness

              “Environmentalism Without Class Struggle is Just Gardening.” ~ Chico Mendes‬

              False Consciousness
              “Why do some voters vote against their own interests?”
              https://www.psychologytoday.com/ca/blog/mood-swings/202010/false-consciousness

              Moral, Cognitive, and Social The Nature of Blame
              “Blame is a moral judgment that has a cognitive and a social nature. We first focus on the cognitive side and introduce a theoretical model of blame that integrates insights and evidence from extant research. Within this model, we demonstrate the critical role of such concepts as agent, intentionality, and obligation—all of which are grounded in people’s theory of mind.”

              https://marketing.wharton.upenn.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Malle-Guglielmo-Monroe-2012-Sydney-proofs.pdf

              Blame Game vs. Root Cause Analysis
              https://www.huffpost.com/entry/blame-game-versus-root-ca_b_109058

              Fundamental attribution error
              https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error

    3. Hey , another 200000 recalled in China today . What a fuckfest .

      2. Why do people say India is a shithole?

        Rahul Chaudhary- “The reason india is a shit hole is because it is full of selfish greedy egoistic arrogant and cowards who openly cheer loss of their fellow citizens and are more concerned about others well being rather than their own issues”

        Anya Shukla- “People say India is a shit hole because it is! being an Indian I should feel bad or embarrassed to say this but I don’t. Since its the truth no one can do anything about it other than the people and government of India which are all (obviously) stupid and selfish. Its not right to just blame the government for not doing anything the people here are on equal selfishness and useless level as the government.”

        Mogra Disu- “well because it’s full of shit… it’s not a hole actually… but yes, half the people caca outdoors… there are some nice places in India, but avoid the major cities… unless you want to step on human caca… I actually saw a human turd on the floor, inside the Calcutta Airport… but this was back in 1997. I’m guessing they have CCTV cameras to catch airport dumping now…

        https://www.quora.com/Why-do-people-say-India-is-a-shithole

        “What a fuckfest”

    4. 2004-’09 Toyota Prius Part of Recall of 2.8 Million Toyota Vehicles Worldwide, including 670,000 2004-’09 Toyota Prius vehicles in the U.S., because of steering and water pump problems

      https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/2004-09-toyota-prius-part-of-recall-of-28-million-toyota-vehicles-worldwide.html

      Safety recall is underway for about nearly 267,000 Toyota Prius hybrid vehicles. Car owners behind these models, 2013-2015 Model Year Prius and 2014 – 2017 Model Year Prius v, might discover power loss with their engine or find themselves in a dangerous stall while in motion.

      https://www.newsweek.com/toyota-recall-prius-cars-recalled-over-stalling-trouble-power-failure-1513628

      Toyota Recalls More Than 800,000 Prius Vehicles In U.S.

      https://www.npr.org/2018/10/05/654782186/toyota-says-it-s-recalling-more-than-800-000-prius-vehicles-in-u-s

      NHTSA safety recall results (25) Toyota Prius Recalls

      https://www.cars.com/research/toyota-prius/recalls/

      1. 670,000 2004-’09 Toyota Prius vehicles

        Drove a 2009 Prius from St Louis to San Francisco, and many other trips.
        Housemate had one.
        Never any issues.

  17. Nick,

    You asked: “Do you agree with them when they say that very strong advocacy of renewables and EVs is essential??”

    Respecting cars, so long as EVs remain a tiny percentage of the small vehicle fleet or they are being fueled by electricity generated by fossil fuels or people are using them to drive 30 miles to get a loaf of bread, in my opinion they are just a (new) component of the “car culture” (or BAU) and therefore not worth discussing. Anyway, I said before, I was going to stop commenting on this Blog so will henceforth do just that.

    1. Well, I understand. Oil has done a lot of good in the past. Heck, it provided good careers for you and your daughter.

      It’s very sad and scary to have to let go of something so familiar.

    2. Thanks for once again dropping by with a comment Doug. I appreciate your takes on constructing the problem definition. I like the references you bring to the comments feed; wouldn’t want this highly esteemed blog’s comments section turning into an Elon Musk circle jerk.

    3. drive 30 miles to get a loaf of bread

      It’s true that bonkers city planning in America has resulted in vast poverty and waste of resources. Maybe Covid will provide the “aha” moment that the energy crisis in 1973 provided Europe.

    1. Thanks Survivalist. An interesting and scary read. I fear the Dems are sleepwalking into a nightmare, believing US democracy will “hold”…

Comments are closed.