Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Global Greening

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Global Greening

    The Patriot Post
    Global Warming is Beneficial

    DOUGLAS ANDREWS / FEBRUARY 17, 2022

    First, the good news: Global warming is real. Now, the even-better news: It’s mild, and it’s mostly beneficial. So says Matt Ridley, an Oxford-educated journalist and libertarian who was also, until recently, one of the most independent and interesting members of British Parliament. “This startling fact,” he says, “is kept from the public by a determined effort on the part of alarmists and their media allies who are determined to use the language of crisis and emergency.”

    How’s that for a countervailing narrative?

    Ridley, who’s also the author of several science books, says that the biggest benefit of mankind’s increased carbon footprint is global greening, which is the year-over-year increase in the amount of vegetation we have on the planet. It’s simple, really: When carbon emissions and carbon dioxide increase, plants get more food, and we get more greenery — thicker forests, richer grasslands, and more plentiful scrub brush.

    As Ridley writes: “This has been measured using satellites and on-the-ground recording of plant-growth rates. It is happening in all habitats, from tundra to rainforest. In the four decades since 1982, as Bjorn Lomborg points out, NASA data show that global greening has added 618,000 square kilometres of extra green leaves each year, equivalent to three Great Britains. You read that right: every year there’s more greenery on the planet to the extent of three Britains.”

    Ridley suspects that Greta Thunberg didn’t share this news with any of us.

    If you’re trying to convert square kilometers to square miles, 618,000 of the former is equivalent to 238,000 of the latter — or a surface area just short of Texas. Incredible, huh? Planet Earth is growing another Lone Star State worth of green space every year. Or, as Lomborg calculates it, from 1982-2019, the world has added leafy green spaces equivalent to three times the continental United States. And the primary cause of this greener world is a much maligned one. As Ridley writes:

    All studies agree that by far the largest contributor to global greening — responsible for roughly half the effect — is the extra carbon dioxide in the air. In 40 years, the proportion of the atmosphere that is CO2 has gone from 0.034 per cent to 0.041 per cent. That may seem a small change but, with more ‘food’ in the air, plants don’t need to lose as much water through their pores (‘stomata’) to acquire a given amount of carbon. So dry areas, like the Sahel region of Africa, are seeing some of the biggest improvements in greenery. Since this is one of the poorest places on the planet, it is good news that there is more food for people, goats and wildlife.
    Of course, all this means that folks are better able to farm, too. And all this time, the lefties and the eco-theologians and the AOCs of the world were telling us that climate change is most hurtful to the poor among us. It’s no surprise, then, that this news about global greening is being mostly ignored by the mainstream media — both in Great Britain and the U.S. After all, it wrecks their narrative, and it thereby wrecks their ability to scare us into supporting financially ruinous boondoggles like the Green New Deal.

    The news, though, is better still. As Ridley continues: “Another bit of good news is on deaths. We’re against them, right? A recent study shows that rising temperatures have resulted in half a million fewer deaths in Britain over the past two decades. That is because cold weather kills about ‘20 times as many people as hot weather,’ according to the study.

    Remember that: Cold is the real killer; not heat. And, interestingly, "more warming is happening in cold places, in cold seasons and at cold times of day. So winter nighttime temperatures in the global north are rising much faster than summer daytime temperatures in the tropics.” So tropical temperatures, where most poor folks live, are changing more slowly than the average.

    Here, it’s also worth debunking another of the Left’s oft-repeated claims about climate change: that it’s causing one species after another to go extinct. That’s rubbish, as Ridley points out: “Invasive alien species are the main cause of species extinction worldwide … whereas climate change has yet to be shown to have caused a single species to die out altogether anywhere.”

    If all this weren’t good enough, the alarmists can’t even fall back on extreme weather events as a reason for alarm. As Ridley writes: “There’s no evidence to suggest weather volatility is increasing and no good theory to suggest it will. The decreasing temperature differential between the tropics and the Arctic may actually diminish the volatility of weather a little. … Globally, deaths from droughts, floods and storms are down by about 98% over the past 100 years — not because weather is less dangerous but because shelter, transport and communication (which are mostly the products of the fossil-fuel economy) have dramatically improved people’s ability to survive such natural disasters.”

    Finally, climate change does bring challenges — the biggest of which is the rise in sea levels. According to a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration report released Tuesday, after all, sea levels are rising at an increasing rate, and we could see an extra foot of water at our coastlines by 2050. NOAA Administrator Rick Spinrad says, “This will happen no matter what we do about emissions.”

    But Ridley offers a different perspective: “Whereas the sea level shot up between 10,000 and 8,000 years ago [by nearly 200 feet over 2,000 years] … today the change is nine times slower: three millimeters a year, or a foot per century, and with not much sign of acceleration.” And, he adds, “The land area of the planet is actually increasing, not shrinking, thanks to siltation and reclamation.”

    So: more greenery, more farmable land, fewer weather-related deaths, and, at least according to Ridley, historically slow sea-level increases. Global greening is indeed a real thing. And it’s a good thing. No wonder the Left doesn’t want to talk about it.

    #2
    Rogan has two good podcasts on this recently. One is a climate scientist from A&M, who believes global warming is man-made and terrible (Ironically sipping soda from a Styrofoam Whataburger cup during the interview). The other worked for BP, who came across as much more measured and pragmatic, and generally reliable.

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by WItoTX View Post
      Rogan has two good podcasts on this recently. One is a climate scientist from A&M, who believes global warming is man-made and terrible (Ironically sipping soda from a Styrofoam Whataburger cup during the interview). The other worked for BP, who came across as much more measured and pragmatic, and generally reliable.
      I was literally going to type the exact thing. Even though I work in industry and I see a shift toward renewables is inevitable, the BP fella made more sense. As much as I want to buy into the climate change thing and helping make our power grid more sustainable, the A&M guy seemed like he was all emotion and the other guy was more evidence. The part where A&M says he won’t debate the science because it’s settled, made me feel like we were in the middle of Covid. The elitist are too dang dogmatic on issues for me to take them 100% serious.

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by ram04 View Post
        I was literally going to type the exact thing. Even though I work in industry and I see a shift toward renewables is inevitable, the BP fella made more sense. As much as I want to buy into the climate change thing and helping make our power grid more sustainable, the A&M guy seemed like he was all emotion and the other guy was more evidence. The part where A&M says he won’t debate the science because it’s settled, made me feel like we were in the middle of Covid. The elitist are too dang dogmatic on issues for me to take them 100% serious.
        I agree. Anyone with half a brain knows that climate science isn't settled. I agree with both of you guys on how the 2 scientists came across. Only half way through the a&m guy. Haven't heard the part that he won't debate Koonin but that is pretty telling.

        Comment


          #5
          Thanks, Y'all just saved me from listening to the chicken little version.
          If I wanted to hear that side I'd turn on Net Geo or the weather channel.

          I like the version in my echo chamber better.
          I'll listen if they ever get China and India to give 2 licks about it.

          Comment


            #6
            just go and look for the "SKY IS FALLING" alarmist from the last 30-40 years, it's real comedy.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by LWC View Post
              I agree. Anyone with half a brain knows that climate science isn't settled. I agree with both of you guys on how the 2 scientists came across. Only half way through the a&m guy. Haven't heard the part that he won't debate Koonin but that is pretty telling.
              He said he won’t debate the science, he would debate policy only but not the science because the science is settled lol.

              Comment


                #8
                Was watching CNN today and they were talking about the sea levels rising…. Sky is falling sky is falling… If that were true why is beach front property in the Hamptons or Miami Beach so valuable. I don’t see the super rich buying property that will be underwater soon.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by blackfoot1 View Post
                  Was watching CNN today and they were talking about the sea levels rising…. Sky is falling sky is falling… If that were true why is beach front property in the Hamptons or Miami Beach so valuable. I don’t see the super rich buying property that will be underwater soon.
                  I think the former president Obama and big Mike are good examples, looks pretty close to the water to me-

                  Turns out, our hunch was more or less correct. President Barack Obama’s new estate in Hawaii will be built on the site of the mansion used as a primary location for the 1980s hour-long action TV show Magnum P.I. The property is located on the southeastern tip of Oahu. The Obamas’ friend Marty Nesbitt officially


                  Martha's Vineyard and Hawaii, Nice!

                  Comment


                    #10
                    I read something like this maybe 10 years ago. Scientists looked at data from different climates in the past, and the most productive period for flora and fauna was slightly warmer than we are currently.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by CEO View Post
                      I read something like this maybe 10 years ago. Scientists looked at data from different climates in the past, and the most productive period for flora and fauna was slightly warmer than we are currently.
                      Well yeah… Alaska was sub-tropical at one point, the permian basin was a sea, and white sands New Mexico was the “riviera maya” of the Paleozoic period. Where do we think all of these rich oil deposits came from? Fossil fuels is someone of a misnomer.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by ram04 View Post
                        I was literally going to type the exact thing. Even though I work in industry and I see a shift toward renewables is inevitable, the BP fella made more sense. As much as I want to buy into the climate change thing and helping make our power grid more sustainable, the A&M guy seemed like he was all emotion and the other guy was more evidence. The part where A&M says he won’t debate the science because it’s settled, made me feel like we were in the middle of Covid. The elitist are too dang dogmatic on issues for me to take them 100% serious.
                        One thing the A&M guy said that I just had to turn him off...something along the lines of we should use capitalism to judge if renewable energies are sustainable, and the free market is showing they are. That is why we don't see coal plants anymore, because renewables are now so cheap.

                        Coal plants are taxed to death, and solar is subsidized. This is a well known fact. He was either lying, or willfully ignorant.

                        Another thing he said, and I don't know if it's true, but supposedly a majority of Texas power comes from renewables. I knew there was some, but I thought it was only like 10%. Which makes 10x more sense why the grid failed so easily last year.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          I listened to both podcasts as well and I was ashamed as an Aggie alum. As was said above, Koonin came off much more measured in his speech and thus more believable. Dessler was very emotional and alarmist. I personally believe there are flaws in both and the truth is somewhere between them. As an energy consultant who makes my money securing commercial energy contracts in the deregulated areas of Texas, he said some things about our grid that were flat out false.

                          He told Joe that wind is half our power. Yes, at times (typically early in the morning), wind is a significant source of our electricity. As the wind lays and the state wakes up and goes to work, it no longer becomes the dominant source.

                          According to ERCOT, energy source by fuel type for 2021 was as follows:

                          NG - 42%
                          Wind - 24%
                          Coal - 19%
                          Nuclear - 10%
                          Solar - 4%

                          Remaining 1% is hydro, biomass, etc.

                          He also said that we know solar and wind is intermittent and we should pair that with dispatchable power and some short term storage batteries. So that would mean we would need enough battery storage and NG, nuclear, etc to cover the entire potential peak demand of the grid in the event wind and solar are down which we already proved last year we don’t have.

                          If everything was rolling at peak capacity ERCOT currently has about 105,000 MW of resources. Problem is nothing is ever at peak. Wind isn’t blowing somewhere, NG plant is offline for scheduled maintenance, it’s cloudy over a solar farm, whatever.

                          I’m for battery storage if/when it becomes economically feasible. It would help capture power from these renewables we already have here in Texas and give ERCOT the ability to dispatch it at more favorable times. (Flatten the demand curve so to speak and level out price spikes)

                          There is no incentive to build a combined cycle NG plant or a new nuclear plant. (The cleanest and most efficient means we have to produce power currently) They don’t make money if they don’t run in the current market structure. You either have to have market forces incentivize a company to invest (sustained high electricity prices) or Texas would need to flip to a capacity market where generators are paid for the available capacity they have to run even if they aren’t running. Not to mention all the federal red tape they have to go through just to get one built.

                          Another thing these environmentalists never bring up that chaps my hide is the environmental impact of manufacturing and assembling these renewables.

                          I like renewables. I think they have a place in the market, but they should not be the dominant source of our generation capacity. I particularly like behind the meter solar for some commercial consumers. Not because it’s green, but the ability to shave peak demand for a commercial facility can drastically reduce their TDU delivery costs.


                          Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                          Comment


                            #14
                            THEY have idiots like AOC and the little Danish girl running around screaming global warming. When I say THEY I mean the people pulling the strings making the big bucks off going green. Pay off scientist to misrepresent the data or change it. Happened with tobacco companies with doctors and the Corona virus and doctors. Always follow the money. I believe cancer could have been cured long ago if not for the money involved with it.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Global Greening

                              Originally posted by WItoTX View Post
                              One thing the A&M guy said that I just had to turn him off...something along the lines of we should use capitalism to judge if renewable energies are sustainable, and the free market is showing they are. That is why we don't see coal plants anymore, because renewables are now so cheap.

                              Coal plants are taxed to death, and solar is subsidized. This is a well known fact. He was either lying, or willfully ignorant.

                              Another thing he said, and I don't know if it's true, but supposedly a majority of Texas power comes from renewables. I knew there was some, but I thought it was only like 10%. Which makes 10x more sense why the grid failed so easily last year.

                              Here is from earlier this morning- (a snippet from one of the numerous screens on our control console at a power plant)

                              When the wind is blowing their contribution is more than low blow days.

                              Solar isn’t represented on this screen, but I could have sworn I’ve heard it being in the 7k mw range on sunny days.




                              Oops, didn’t see Centexhunters post before posting the pic.

                              Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
                              Last edited by DaveC; 02-18-2022, 10:14 AM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X