Can Solar & Wind Fix Everything (e.g., Climate Change) with a battery break-through?
- Thread starter svetz
- Start date
Daddy Tanuki
Solar Wizard
thank god I was a boy scout... I was carrying my own TP in a zip lock bag in 1985Pork patty or beef patty needed hot water.No hot water. Ate it anyway. That cheese had to be kneaded or would dump out oil and dried shit was left. Filled with preservatives…nasty smell…can still smell it..
Daddy Tanuki
Solar Wizard
dude... these "conclusions" are your distorted dream level conclusions. the only thing that makes any sense on the above paragraph is nuclear power and not via some company thats a new startup... the rest are pipe dreams... as in too many tokes on the cheech and chong bong.
42OhmsPA
What's in a title?
Daddy Tanuki
Solar Wizard
this is the absolute truth.
svetz
Works in theory! Practice? That's something else
DENIAL, DISINFORMATION, AND DOUBLESPEAK:BIG OIL'S EVOLVING EFFORTS TO AVOID ACCOUNTABILITY FOR CLIMATE CHANGE
White Roof
I was watching Engineering with Rosie the other day and heard something interesting, that some communities in Australia don't allow white roofs (similar to how some communities think solar panels on roof are unattractive). Maybe it's a thing where you're at too?
I have a white roof. A lot of my neighbors do too. But it's for a good reason, it keeps the roof cooler, meaning lower AC cost. A black roof membrane can have a reflectance of 0.03. That energy is absorbed by the roof and heats the house, we all know sunshine is ~1000W/m², so that's a lot of energy! Great for winter I guess (if you don't have snow).
There are different types of white. I got my information from CoolRoofs.org and when I had my roof done, the best I could get to DIY was:
But it looks like there are some better products in their database now:
Better reflectance materials are coming, I particularly like the ones that can provide active cooling:
Opinion: Pretty scathing for a 65 page government report summary. But, don't worry deniers! See the next headline! It's already being billed as "democrat" attack as Trump is in the "it's a hoax" camp. Given all the direct quotes from their email it's pretty obvious they've been gaming the public. The document also points out the culpability of prestigious organizations like the American Petroleum Industries with some pretty scathing quotes from their documents about bamboozling Americans in order to delay change and maximize profits. Out and out lies on how much they say spending on new clean technologies vs. what they're actually spending. There's even evidence of "Obstruction of the Congressional Investigation". Tracking activists and people that speak out on social media and targeting them. Tsk Tsk. You think they would have shredded those emails. What's missing is the culpability of politicians and how much money switched hands. I bet any seized hard drives will never see the light of day again.
- Climate change virtually disappearing in Florida
- Florida Says No to Federal Funding Aimed at Greenhouse Gas Emissions
- Big oil privately acknowledged efforts to downplay climate crisis, joint committee investigation finds
White Roof
I was watching Engineering with Rosie the other day and heard something interesting, that some communities in Australia don't allow white roofs (similar to how some communities think solar panels on roof are unattractive). Maybe it's a thing where you're at too?
I have a white roof. A lot of my neighbors do too. But it's for a good reason, it keeps the roof cooler, meaning lower AC cost. A black roof membrane can have a reflectance of 0.03. That energy is absorbed by the roof and heats the house, we all know sunshine is ~1000W/m², so that's a lot of energy! Great for winter I guess (if you don't have snow).
There are different types of white. I got my information from CoolRoofs.org and when I had my roof done, the best I could get to DIY was:
But it looks like there are some better products in their database now:
Better reflectance materials are coming, I particularly like the ones that can provide active cooling:
Last edited:
Wash Post Editorial Board follows orders of megalomaniac billionaires: ‘Humans might need to re-engineer the climate’ – Tout injecting ‘100,000 tons of sulfur per year into lower stratosphere to block solar rays
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/04/27/climate-change-geoengineering
Washington Post Editorial Board: ‘Humans might need to re-engineer the climate’ –
“A conversation about the risks and potential benefits of re-engineering the climate is urgently needed.” … “Climate engineering scholars David Keith at the University of Chicago and Wake Smith at Yale think it would take no more than 15 souped-up Gulfstream jets to send up, say, 100,000 tons of sulfur per year into the lower stratosphere to block solar rays, at an annual cost of some $500 million. This could happen in as little as five years.”
Flashback 2023: Washington Post: A ‘climate solution’ that spies worry could trigger war –
Solar geoengineering holds promise for reducing global temperatures. Absent international agreements, it could also spark conflict. -It sounds like something out of science fiction: A country suffering from heat, flooding or crop failures decides on its own to send out a fleet of aircraft to spray a fine, sun-blocking mist into the earth’s atmosphere, reducing temperatures and providing relief to parched populations. Other countries view it as a threat to their own citizens and ready a military response.
But members of the U.S. intelligence community and other national security officials were worried enough last year to plot how to avert a war triggered by this kind of climate engineering. In a role-playing exercise, they practiced managing the tensions that would be unleashed, according to people familiar with the exercise, a sign that they see it as a credible threat in need of a strategy.
The practice, known as solar geoengineering, is theoretically possible. And as the world’s most vulnerable populations suffer more sharply from rising temperatures, global decision-makers will likely come under heavy pressure to deploy the technology, scientists and policymakers say. Compared to other methods to combat the effects of climate change, it’s likely to be cheaper and faster.
Because the technique could weaken the sun’s power across the globe — not just above whichever country decided to deploy it — security officials are concerned about the potential to spark conflict, since a single capital could make decisions that shape the entire world’s fate.
###
Biden: ‘The weather may be beyond our control — for now’ – Biden joins Bill Gates & China in seeking to control the weather – August 9, 2022
Bill Gates’ Savior Complex: Funds Sun-Dimming Plan To Save the Human Race
Watch: Morano on Fox and Friends rips efforts to block the sun with geoengineering to stop ‘global warming’ –
Marc Morano: This is Bill Gates funding this as well through Harvard University. This is retro 1970s. In the 1970s, they believed fossil fuels were creating aerosols blocking the sun, creating man-made global cooling. So they came up with the same kind of geo-engineering solutions back then. They wanted to put black soot on the Arctic to melt it. There was one proposal was to use nuclear energy to loosen the Arctic ice caps because they thought they were growing too much. John Holdren (Science Czar) in the Obama Administration supported geo-engineering, if you will, of the climate. This is radical, risky, unproven, with unknown effects but they are doing it as a sort of lever over us. The Biden Administration is saying ‘We know this is dangerous, we don’t know the effects, but darn it, people aren’t buying electric cars fast enough, or they aren’t embracing the Green New Deal policies, so we have to risk our entire planet with this research.’ It is basically weather modification. China has been doing it for years. Another form of what the government is been doing. ABC News meteorologists (Ginger Zee) talked about the cloud seeding to increase rain, snow or storms, They will — the government will control the weather, and you will be Happy. That seems to be the new motto.
Watch: World Economic Forum touts China’s efforts ‘to control the weather’ with ‘cloud seeding’ to create ’55 billion tons of artificial rain’ – ‘Weather Modification Department’
###
Flashback: CBS News segment on ‘Controlling the weather’ – ‘How to change the weather on purpose’ by ‘firing trillion watt lasers into the sky’
August 26, 2023
Michio Kaku, a physics professor at City College of New York: “Even in [the] sixties, the CIA used this to bring down monsoons during the Vietnam War to wash out the Vietcong.”
Kaku: “Instead of doing a rain dance, we physicists are firing trillion watt lasers into the sky to actually precipitate rain clouds and actually bring down lightning bolts. This is potentially a game-changer.”
“It is experimental, however in the laboratory, so far it works when you have water vapor and you have dust particles or ice crystals. You can precipitate rain. It condenses around the seeds. These seeds can also be created by laser beams by firing trillion watt lasers you rip apart the electrons creating what I call ions and these ions act like seeds like dust particles bringing down rain and even lightning.”
CBS News anchor Nora O’Donnell: “They were talking about climate change yesterday and now we’re learning that scientists and researchers are looking at how to change the weather on purpose. That’s right. Lasers now could one day manipulate rain and lightning.”
###
Flashback: CBS News segment on ‘Controlling the weather’ – ‘How to change the weather on purpose’ by ‘firing trillion watt lasers into the sky’
August 26, 2023
Michio Kaku, a physics professor at City College of New York: “Even in [the] sixties, the CIA used this to bring down monsoons during the Vietnam War to wash out the Vietcong.”
Kaku: “Instead of doing a rain dance, we physicists are firing trillion watt lasers into the sky to actually precipitate rain clouds and actually bring down lightning bolts. This is potentially a game-changer.”
“It is experimental, however in the laboratory, so far it works when you have water vapor and you have dust particles or ice crystals. You can precipitate rain. It condenses around the seeds. These seeds can also be created by laser beams by firing trillion watt lasers you rip apart the electrons creating what I call ions and these ions act like seeds like dust particles bringing down rain and even lightning.”
CBS News anchor Nora O’Donnell: “They were talking about climate change yesterday and now we’re learning that scientists and researchers are looking at how to change the weather on purpose. That’s right. Lasers now could one day manipulate rain and lightning.”
Background Info:
CNN in 2022: Scientists in the US are flying planes into clouds to make it snow more – CNN: “It’s called cloud seeding, and it’s nothing new. It’s been around since the 1940s and countries all over the world have been doing it for various reasons (most notably China), but it’s a growing practice in the US, especially in the drought-stricken West.”
Good Morning America meteorologist Ginger Zee on The View: Climate is now so ‘desperate’ that ‘cloud seeding is ramping up..it is huge & only getting bigger’ – ‘They send silver iodide into the clouds & it makes it snow more’ – Gives storms ‘a little boost’
Ginger Zee On Climate Change’s Impact On America’s Vulnerable River System | The View – Broadcast Apr 18, 2023 – Ginger Zee: “There are some solutions happening. Here’s where it’s always going to get controversial, perhaps. Cloud seeding is something that I studied in school for meteorology — weather modification. Back when I went to school, it was like pooh-poohed a little bit, too expensive; it’s not efficient enough. Well, guess what? When you get desperate, and then technology gets better. Twenty years later, here we are, cloud seeding is ramping up so big. You see me there, showing that flare on the plane. They send silver iodide into the clouds, and it then it makes it snow more. So they can’t make a cloud, right? But they’re taking storms already there and then giving it a little boost. That part is not new. What’s new is they have hundreds of these ground cloud seeders. so they are actually puffing the silver iodide with a flare into the air. That thing sits all over the Rocky Mountains, all over the American West. Ten states are doing this. My friend Russ (Schumacher) is the State Climatologist of Colorado, and he said, ‘You got to see with cloud seeding. It is huge, and it’s only getting better by next year.”
Bill Gates’ Savior Complex: Funds Sun-Dimming Plan To Save the Human Race
Watch: Morano on Fox and Friends rips efforts to block the sun with geoengineering to stop ‘global warming’
PLAYING GOD? Tens of millions spent on huge project to change the WEATHER – ‘Putting chemicals in the sky’
NYT: Dangerously Stupid Science: Solar Geoengineering: The National Academies said the United States must study technologies that would artificially cool the planet by reflecting away some sunlight, citing the lack of progress fighting global warming.
Dangerously Stupid Science: Solar Geoengineering
A Bill Gates Venture with Harvard University Aims To Spray Dust Into The Atmosphere To Block The Sun. What Could Go Wrong?
A sun reflector for Earth? Scientists explore the potential risks and benefits
Bill Gates Is Thinking About Dimming the Sun
Claim: Bill Gates Is Funding a Chemical Cloud That Could Put an End to Global Warming
Sweden canceled Bill Gates’ controversial climate geoengineering project (SCoPEx) aiming to block the sun to stop global warming
Scientific American: Eight States Are Seeding Clouds to Overcome Megadrought – 2021: This is not a page from a science fiction novel. “Cloud seeding” is a real practice—in fact, it’s been around for decades. It’s used today to boost precipitation in at least eight states across the western U.S. and dozens of countries around the world. … Open flames burst from the throats of metal chimneys, mounted on squat towers nestled among the peaks. With a low hiss, puffs of particles belch from their mouths into the air, where the wind catches them and whisks them away. These aren’t ordinary particles. They’re tiny bits of crushed-up silver iodide, a crystal-like photosensitive substance once used in photography. But it’s not used to take pictures out in the mountains. It’s meant to make snow. … The crystalline silver iodide particles have a structure similar to ice—and inside a cloud, like attracts like. Water droplets begin to cluster around the particles, freezing solid as they gather together. These frozen clusters eventually grow too heavy to stay in the air. They fall from the cloud and drift gently toward the Earth, dusting the mountaintops with fresh snow.
CNN in 2022: Scientists in the US are flying planes into clouds to make it snow more – CNN: “It’s called cloud seeding, and it’s nothing new. It’s been around since the 1940s and countries all over the world have been doing it for various reasons (most notably China), but it’s a growing practice in the US, especially in the drought-stricken West.”
Good Morning America meteorologist Ginger Zee on The View: Climate is now so ‘desperate’ that ‘cloud seeding is ramping up..it is huge & only getting bigger’ – ‘They send silver iodide into the clouds & it makes it snow more’ – Gives storms ‘a little boost’
Ginger Zee On Climate Change’s Impact On America’s Vulnerable River System | The View – Broadcast Apr 18, 2023 – Ginger Zee: “There are some solutions happening. Here’s where it’s always going to get controversial, perhaps. Cloud seeding is something that I studied in school for meteorology — weather modification. Back when I went to school, it was like pooh-poohed a little bit, too expensive; it’s not efficient enough. Well, guess what? When you get desperate, and then technology gets better. Twenty years later, here we are, cloud seeding is ramping up so big. You see me there, showing that flare on the plane. They send silver iodide into the clouds, and it then it makes it snow more. So they can’t make a cloud, right? But they’re taking storms already there and then giving it a little boost. That part is not new. What’s new is they have hundreds of these ground cloud seeders. so they are actually puffing the silver iodide with a flare into the air. That thing sits all over the Rocky Mountains, all over the American West. Ten states are doing this. My friend Russ (Schumacher) is the State Climatologist of Colorado, and he said, ‘You got to see with cloud seeding. It is huge, and it’s only getting better by next year.”
Bill Gates’ Savior Complex: Funds Sun-Dimming Plan To Save the Human Race
Watch: Morano on Fox and Friends rips efforts to block the sun with geoengineering to stop ‘global warming’
PLAYING GOD? Tens of millions spent on huge project to change the WEATHER – ‘Putting chemicals in the sky’
NYT: Dangerously Stupid Science: Solar Geoengineering: The National Academies said the United States must study technologies that would artificially cool the planet by reflecting away some sunlight, citing the lack of progress fighting global warming.
Dangerously Stupid Science: Solar Geoengineering
A Bill Gates Venture with Harvard University Aims To Spray Dust Into The Atmosphere To Block The Sun. What Could Go Wrong?
A sun reflector for Earth? Scientists explore the potential risks and benefits
Bill Gates Is Thinking About Dimming the Sun
Claim: Bill Gates Is Funding a Chemical Cloud That Could Put an End to Global Warming
Sweden canceled Bill Gates’ controversial climate geoengineering project (SCoPEx) aiming to block the sun to stop global warming
Scientific American: Eight States Are Seeding Clouds to Overcome Megadrought – 2021: This is not a page from a science fiction novel. “Cloud seeding” is a real practice—in fact, it’s been around for decades. It’s used today to boost precipitation in at least eight states across the western U.S. and dozens of countries around the world. … Open flames burst from the throats of metal chimneys, mounted on squat towers nestled among the peaks. With a low hiss, puffs of particles belch from their mouths into the air, where the wind catches them and whisks them away. These aren’t ordinary particles. They’re tiny bits of crushed-up silver iodide, a crystal-like photosensitive substance once used in photography. But it’s not used to take pictures out in the mountains. It’s meant to make snow. … The crystalline silver iodide particles have a structure similar to ice—and inside a cloud, like attracts like. Water droplets begin to cluster around the particles, freezing solid as they gather together. These frozen clusters eventually grow too heavy to stay in the air. They fall from the cloud and drift gently toward the Earth, dusting the mountaintops with fresh snow.
Book excerpt on geoengineering the climate from “Green Fraud: Why the Green New Deal Is Even Worse than You Think”
Green Fraud: Pages 113-114
Book excerpt:
End excerpt
teal95
Solar Enthusiast
Doesn't sulfur in the atmosphere cause acid rain? Or is that only when the sulfur comes from burning coal?
TommySr
Solar Enthusiast
aenyc, the mask is so yesterday, but there are a few more just soaking up the information svetz
has to offer on this topic.
I also enjoy and envy your writing skills, not buying your view, but enjoying it.
svetz
Works in theory! Practice? That's something else
Want a ‘green job?’ Paid Climate Corps training positions are now open
Exxon Deception
New York cities plagued by blackouts due to climate change, study finds
Opinion: Even if the storms were intensified by climate change it is still the power companies' responsibility to keep the powerlines safe from falling limbs. Sounds a lot more like trying to push the public's ire onto climate change than their poor management. Climate change makes your job harder, it's not a pass to ignore your job and leave people in the dark.
China Dominating The Climate Fight?
How the U.S.-China energy race imperils the climate fight
New NOAA climate action plan
Opinion: Not sure what I was expecting, possibly a clear and concise plan to save the world? It's definitely not a Master Plan 3.
Generative AI tools can enhance climate literacy but must be checked for biases and inaccuracies
Opinion: <Boo! Hiss! ; -)> That's the wrong way to look at it IMO. AI Tools using the internet as their source need to learn to be taught to figure this out on their own as it's pertains to everything, not just climate science. Using climate information is a great test bed as there is so much energy and creative thought put into various ways of disproving it. If AI tools can't get this right when there are so many cross-reference checks and balances then they won't be able to get it right on other topics humans aren't checking.
The IPCC’s reductive Common Era temperature history
Reducing man-made sulfur dioxide emissions increases global warming.
Quite the pickle!
Most see putting SO2 into the atmosphere as a stop-gap measure because we know exactly how it works. It's not as bad as it sounds as it's not quite apples to apples. Power plants burning coal spews it out from a stationary point causing dense concentrations that make acid rain dangerous downwind. Volcanoes are stationary too, but they're only making acid rain downwind when they're spewing SO2.
Injecting it higher in the atmosphere at lower concentrations/more-spread-out it can do more to reflect earlier, last longer, and not make the rain so acidic.
But yeah, a lot of people believe the real solution is to reduce the GHGs in the atmosphere rather than spray on more perfume to mask the problem. Then again, a lot of people don't believe in carbon capture as it has a cost and isn't helping to ween us off non-renewables.
Exxon Deception
New York cities plagued by blackouts due to climate change, study finds
Opinion: Even if the storms were intensified by climate change it is still the power companies' responsibility to keep the powerlines safe from falling limbs. Sounds a lot more like trying to push the public's ire onto climate change than their poor management. Climate change makes your job harder, it's not a pass to ignore your job and leave people in the dark.
China Dominating The Climate Fight?
How the U.S.-China energy race imperils the climate fight
Opinion: Don't be sipping coffee as you open the article, the graphic in the article might cause spontaneous laughter.
New NOAA climate action plan
Opinion: Not sure what I was expecting, possibly a clear and concise plan to save the world? It's definitely not a Master Plan 3.
Generative AI tools can enhance climate literacy but must be checked for biases and inaccuracies
Opinion: <Boo! Hiss! ; -)> That's the wrong way to look at it IMO. AI Tools using the internet as their source need to learn to be taught to figure this out on their own as it's pertains to everything, not just climate science. Using climate information is a great test bed as there is so much energy and creative thought put into various ways of disproving it. If AI tools can't get this right when there are so many cross-reference checks and balances then they won't be able to get it right on other topics humans aren't checking.
The decision maker’s lament: If I only had some science!Opinion: Naive. In Florida the politicians usually vote the way they are told to by the party. They probably do where you live too, the graphic to the right is from the Washington Post. The problem isn't the politicians... it's the parties The question is, why isn't the Republican party on board with accepted science on climate change? I think we all know the answer to that one. | 
|
The IPCC’s reductive Common Era temperature history
Sulfur dioxide does cause acid rain.
Reducing man-made sulfur dioxide emissions increases global warming.
Quite the pickle!
Most see putting SO2 into the atmosphere as a stop-gap measure because we know exactly how it works. It's not as bad as it sounds as it's not quite apples to apples. Power plants burning coal spews it out from a stationary point causing dense concentrations that make acid rain dangerous downwind. Volcanoes are stationary too, but they're only making acid rain downwind when they're spewing SO2.
Injecting it higher in the atmosphere at lower concentrations/more-spread-out it can do more to reflect earlier, last longer, and not make the rain so acidic.
But yeah, a lot of people believe the real solution is to reduce the GHGs in the atmosphere rather than spray on more perfume to mask the problem. Then again, a lot of people don't believe in carbon capture as it has a cost and isn't helping to ween us off non-renewables.
svetz
Works in theory! Practice? That's something else
Conrad Black: Washing away the Climate Lunatics
The recent piece by Conrad Black titled “Washing away the climate lunatics: Canada at risk of turning into Europe” offers a poignant commentary on the current state and potential pitfalls of climate change policies, especially those aimed at achieving net zero carbon emissions. It provides a stark warning to Canada, drawing on the troubles Europe has experienced with similar policies. Black’s article, which references Dr. Benny Peiser’s address to the Friends of Science Society in Calgary, delves deep into the socio-economic and political upheavals triggered by these policies, particularly in Europe, and forecasts the implications for Canada if it follows suit.
The Illusion of Net Zero and the Reality of Economic Backlash
One of the central themes in Black’s argument is the critique of Europe’s aggressive climate policies, which, although initially wrapped in the guise of environmental stewardship, have rapidly led to significant public dissent and economic disruption. This is vividly illustrated by the farmer protests across Europe, a reaction to policies perceived as economically damaging and impractical. Governments, faced with mounting opposition, have begun to retreat from their ambitious climate goals, highlighting a crucial disconnect between political agendas and public acceptance.
Black notes, shedding light on the initially obscured financial burdens that later became unbearable for the taxpayers.
Technological Transitions and Economic Consequences
The article also tackles the impact of forced technological shifts, such as the transition from internal combustion engines to electric vehicles (EVs) in Germany, France, and Italy. This move, although aimed at reducing carbon emissions, has led to unintended economic consequences, including diminished auto sales and increased competition from cheaper Chinese EVs. This situation underscores the potential risks of rapid policy-driven economic transformations without considering global market dynamics and consumer behavior.
Black elaborates, emphasizing the unintended outcomes of these policy-driven market disruptions.
Judicial Overreach and the Misinterpretation of Climate Science
A particularly alarming development cited by Black is the European Court of Human Rights’ ruling against the Swiss government, which was found to have violated human rights by not adequately addressing climate change. This judicial decision exemplifies the overreach of legal frameworks into democratic processes and scientific domains, where the nuances of climate science are still under debate.
Highlighting the problematic encroachment of judicial bodies on national sovereignty and democratic decision-making.
The Role of CO2: A Misunderstood Element
The narrative that CO2 is solely a harmful greenhouse gas ignores its critical role in photosynthesis and its beneficial effects on agricultural productivity, especially in arid regions. The argument that increased CO2 levels could actually bolster food production is a facet often overlooked in mainstream climate debates. Furthermore, the assertion that net zero policies could lead to an increase in global starvation by reducing nitrogen fertilizer availability is a stark reminder of the complex trade-offs involved in climate policy decisions.
Thus presenting a contrarian view that challenges the prevailing narrative on CO2 emissions.
Conclusion: A Call for Rational Climate Policy
Black’s article serves as a cautionary tale about the potential pitfalls of hasty and ideologically driven climate policies. It calls for a more nuanced, scientifically grounded approach to environmental stewardship. The backlash in Europe provides a clear indication of the need for democratic engagement and economic pragmatism in policy formulation. As Canada faces its own environmental policy decisions, it would do well to heed the lessons from across the Atlantic, ensuring that policies are both scientifically sound and economically viable, thereby avoiding the socio-political turmoil experienced by its European counterparts.
In sum, the debate around climate change and the measures proposed to combat it is far from settled. A balanced approach that considers both environmental goals and economic realities is crucial. Policies must be based on rigorous scientific analysis and broad-based consensus to ensure that they are sustainable in the long term and are embraced rather than imposed on the populace. As the discourse evolves, it remains imperative that policy decisions are guided by pragmatic and scientifically validated insights rather than alarmist and economically detrimental prescriptions.
Climate Alarm Has Become a Dangerous Ideology, Says Cambridge Academic
Mike Hulme, Professor of Human Geography at Cambridge University, has come out with a dark warning that the obsession with climate change as the cause of all our ills, and the only problem worth focusing any attention on, has turned ‘climatism’ into an ideology and left the science far behind. The Mail, which interviewed him, has the story:
Hulme warns that by promoting fatalism, the risk is that climatism will encourage people to give up on the grounds that it’s pointless. It also generates cynicism – because the world manifestly isn’t ending, and as one deadline after another passes without the promised catastrophe, people stop listening. Hulme emerges as a pragmatist, and while you may disagree with his view that “carbon-emitting energy sources” need to be phased out, his overall pragmatism is certainly refreshing, particularly from a Cambridge academic:
Worth reading in full.
Chris Packham’s BBC Series Warning of “Mass Extinction” by CO2 is Propaganda, Not Science
Last year, Chris Packham hosted a five-part series on the BBC called Earth, which compared a mass extinction event 252 million years ago to the small rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide seen in the last 150 years. He said he hoped the “terror factor” generated by his programme would “spur us to do something about the environment crisis”. But as we shall see, the only terror factor is having to sit through an hour-long film consisting of cherry-picked science data and unproven assertions in the hope of persuading us that the increase in global temperatures in the last 150 years or so is comparable to the rise in temperatures over a considerable swath of geological time. Great play was made of a 12°C rise in average global temperatures 252 million years ago as CO2 levels started to rise, although Packham fails to report that CO2 levels were already at least four times higher back then than in modern times. The ‘science’ that Packham cloaks himself with on every occasion is hardly served by terrorising the viewer with what is little more than a highly personal political message.
Think of all that suffering and wastage, he says about the fourth great mass extinction. I don’t think we want a comparable extinction to the one that happened 252 million years ago on our conscience, he adds. Of course, Packham is not the first person to politicise the end-Permian extinction when most plant and animal life disappeared to be replaced eventually with what became known as the age of the dinosaurs. As we can see from the graph below, even though that extinction event coincided with an uptick in CO2 levels, the general trend over a 600-million-year period was downwards ending in the near denudation currently experienced today. But scientists note that the rise started some time before the extinction event, with most of the Permian characterised by very low levels of CO2.
It is obvious why the three other great extinctions are of little interest to modern day climate alarmists. The Ordovician extinction 445 million years ago occurred when CO2 levels were 12 times higher than today, the Devonian wipe-out happen 372 millions ago when CO2 levels were falling, while the later Triassic/Jurassic event 201 million years ago occurred at a time of stable CO2. Hard to see a pattern there suggesting rising CO2 levels equals a mass extinction event. The disappearance of the dinosaurs 66 million years ago is generally attributed to the impact of a giant meteorite, while the current sixth mass extinction exists only inside the head of the Swedish doom goblin, and need not detain us at this point.
Since Packham was essentially making a BBC political film promoting Net Zero, he inevitably started with the fixed view that all our current environmental problems are the fault of CO2. An intense period of volcanic eruptions that led to huge coal deposits catching fire increased CO2 levels and almost instantly sent temperatures soaring at the end of the Permian period. About 20 million years of rain subsequently followed, he observed, taking some of the CO2 out of the atmosphere and order it seems was restored. Certainly, CO2 resumed a small descent but levels remained almost as high, or for some periods higher, as those at the end of the Permian period for another 120 million years. Packham does not provide an explanation of what happened to the average global temperature at this time.
The graph above shows why he avoided the subject. Temperatures did rise at the end of the Permian period after a long decline, but only as far as previous highs recorded 200 million years earlier. They then stayed at those levels for most of the next 200 million years, throughout the age of the dinosaurs. Helped by the increased levels of CO2, this is considered one of the most verdant periods in Earth’s history.
Is it likely that volcanic eruptions triggered the substantial rise in temperature around 252 million years ago, as Packham claims? In a paper published in 2022, a group of European scientists said their data showed seawater temperature began to rise at least 300,000 years before the main volcanic eruptions. “Gradual warming by approximately 12°C was probably responsible for initial environmental degradation that eventually culminated in the global and Permian extinction,” they wrote. The scientists reviewed much of the published evidence and concluded “a temporal link between volcanic activity, environmental changes and biological impacts remains controversial”.
Carbon dioxide, of course, is the main cause of global warming in Packham’s world. Promoting his film to like-minded activists at the Guardian, he said it was the “urgency that makes me despair”. As we can see, this “despair” is the result of comparing events hundreds of millions of years ago with a small temperature rise in the past 150 years or so of around 1°C – and this after a short-term period of global cooling. You can of course argue about all this, but it is a bit rich to claim the science of recent global warming is ‘settled’ and refuse to debate anyone who disagrees with you.
From such a shaky base, Packham claims we’re all becoming far too complacent about pumping CO2 into the atmosphere. “It’s an experiment we have been running for over 100 years,” he told the Guardian. “The more the CO2, the more the heat is locked in and the hotter our Earth becomes.” But if Packham really believes that, how does he explain those geological periods when temperatures fall as CO2 levels rise? And if a rise in temperatures and mass extinction is inevitable when CO2 rises, how does that work in the current period when CO2 levels are as low as they’ve ever been?
Could it be that the end-Permian extinction was actually caused by CO2 starvation? During the Permian, it was the first time in Earth’s history that CO2 concentrations fell below 1,000 parts per million, perhaps as dangerously low as 200 ppm at some points. This may well have started to stress plant life since 1,000 ppm is a concentration that supports maximum photosynthesis productivity. This is the view of Jim Steele, Director Emeritus of San Francisco State University’s Sierra Nevada Field Campus. In a recent paper, he noted that many researchers have pointed to competition between different plant species for declining CO2 during the Permian period. This was said to result in “severely reduced photosynthesis, the collapse of primary productivity and a significant malfunction of the global food webs”.
The truth is that the scientific jury is still out and the ‘science’, as with most climate science, is unsettled. Perhaps inadvertently, Packham has simply drawn attention to all the observational evidence that suggests CO2, the gas of life, ‘saturates’ at around 300-400 ppm, and its warming effect is greatly diminished beyond that concentration. But “fear is motivating” he claims, and in the BBC he seems to have a compliant megaphone for whatever green propaganda he cares to promote.
Similar threads
