Weaknesses Of Wind And Solar: When Science And Reality Clash – Part 2

PA Pundits - International

By Dr. Jay Lehr and Terigi Ciccone~

In Part One we established a Rule of Thumb for electrical engineering which states: All Solar and Wind Power on an Electric Grid Must Be Backed Up With an Equal or Greater Amount of Fossil Fuel Power Running on Standby 100% OF The Time.

There are those who claim that one day these intermittent sources will be backed up by batteries, which is the claim of the solar plant to be built in the Mohave Desert 30 miles NE of Las Vegas. In a future article we will explain with simple arithmetic why this can never happen at any affordable costs based on the laws of physics. For now we want to address the claims that have lead to the distorted interest in solar and wind power.

Daily academia, the press/media, the CO2 industry, and politicians sound the alarms with headlines screeching:

View original post 1,531 more words

Pick Your A-Team: Arrhenius or Ångström

Science Matters

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”–George Santayana 1905

Interesting that Svante Arrhenius was elevated as the founder of AGW belief system. He was ignored for many decades after Knut Ångström and his assistant Herr Koch showed that reducing CO2 concentrations did not affect the amount of IR absorbed by the air. That’s almost as interesting as discovering that shutting down the global economy over fear of Covid19 has little effect on atmospheric CO2 concentrations.

As a fellow Scandinavian, Ångström agreed with Arrhenius that his projected warming would be a good thing, even in the lower estimates Svante made later on. Still, Angstrom had two objections to Arrhenius’ conjecture about global warming from increasing CO2. In 1900, Herr J. Koch, laboratory assistant to Knut Ångström, did not observe any appreciable change in the absorption of infrared radiation by decreasing the concentration of CO2 up to a…

View original post 3,210 more words

Following Arrhenius on global warming

Tallbloke's Talkshop


The eternal question – was the Arrhenius climate theory erroneous? Still looking for convincing evidence of it, the author concludes.
– – –
But he did change his mind …

This 1912 newspaper article (here) shows that a century ago the worthy citizens of Warkworth were followers of Svante Arrhenius’s new theory that global warming would be caused by mankind’s emissions of greenhouse gases, says Richard Treadgold @ Climate Conversation (NZ).

Forty years earlier Tyndall had identified CO2 as a greenhouse gas.

Arrhenius followed up with newly available data in 1896 and calculated that doubling CO2 would increase temperatures by 5°C or 6°C. In 1906 he reduced it to 4.0°C.

View original post 62 more words

The Push for Climate Death Certificates

Science Matters

So now we have the climatists calling for attributing many more deaths to warmer temperatures in order to blame CO2 emissions. No doubt they noticed how powerful were the Covid19 death statistics in getting the public to comply with lockdown regulations. Their logic is clear: When people die with multiple diseases, pick the one that’s politically useful. (“Never let a crisis go to waste.”) Never mind that 90+% of Covid deaths were people with cancers, chronic lung disease, obesity, diabetes, and so on.

Ideological Perversion of Science

This push for climate death certificates demonstrates a recurring pattern: reducing life’s multitude of factors and values down to a single dimension as the be all and end all. Environmentalism puts nature first, ignoring that humans are a part of nature, and have a managerial role to play. Many naturalists have reduced further into climatists, who extrapolated the 1978 to 1998 warming into…

View original post 300 more words

Wind And Solar Weaknesses – Part I

PA Pundits - International

By Dr. Jay Lehr and Terigi Ciccone~

So-called “Green energy” threatens our culture, our freedoms and our pocketbooks, yet provides no net electricity to our electrical networks. Zero-Zip-Nada. They remain a Green delusion.

A bold statement, yes? Bolder still is the fact that wind and solar power plants are more efficient when they are not running and are the most efficient and eco-friendly when:

  • They are never bought, never installed, and never operated because they produce little or no net electrical power for a community’s electrical network, called the grid.
  • They make no significant reduction in CO2 emissions or pollution, and little reduction of fossil fuel burning.
  • For the “green-plants” already bought and installed—the best option for an electrical utility and the community is to tear them down, recycle the materials, restore the wastelands, and give your wallet and the Earth a big green smile.

Those are the tips…

View original post 901 more words

ClimateFeedback review of PragerU video challenges good news on polar bears

polarbearscience

Facebook has labelled a recent short PragerU polar bear video as “false information” based on a ClimateFeedback review featuring statements by Andrew Derocher and Ian Stirling published 18 May 2020.

The video, posted on Facebook 5 May 2020, is also available here and here.

I was approached yesterday by Nick Coltrain, a reporter for the Des Moines Register and USA Today, asking for a statement about the accuracy of the PragerU video, which cites me as a source for two of their three ‘inconvenient facts.’

My comments are below but I reminded Nick that what is going on is a classic conflict that happens all the time in science: it presents no proof that I’m wrong or that the PragerU video is ‘false information’. Climate Feedback is not ‘factchecking’: it is presenting its preferred side of a disputed science issue.

View original post 2,212 more words

SSTs Stay Cool April 2020

Science Matters

The best context for understanding decadal temperature changes comes from the world’s sea surface temperatures (SST), for several reasons:

  • The ocean covers 71% of the globe and drives average temperatures;
  • SSTs have a constant water content, (unlike air temperatures), so give a better reading of heat content variations;
  • A major El Nino was the dominant climate feature in recent years.

HadSST is generally regarded as the best of the global SST data sets, and so the temperature story here comes from that source, the latest version being HadSST3.  More on what distinguishes HadSST3 from other SST products at the end.

The Current Context

The chart below shows SST monthly anomalies as reported in HadSST3 starting in 2015 through April 2020.
A global cooling pattern is seen clearly in the Tropics since its peak in 2016, joined by NH and SH cycling downward since 2016.  In 2019 all regions had been…

View original post 1,214 more words