Tesla car battery production releases as much CO2 as 8 years of gasoline driving

Watts Up With That?

Ooops, looks like those “saving the planet” Tesla snobs just got their eco-ride de-pimped

Image from Tesla’s website

From NyTeknik: h/t to Don Shaw (translated)

Huge hopes have been tied to electric cars as the solution to automotive CO2 climate problem. But it turns out the the electric car batteries are eco-villains in the production process of creating them. Several tons of carbon dioxide has been emitted, even before the batteries leave the factory.

IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute was commissioned by the Swedish Transport Administration and the Swedish Energy Agency to investigate litium-ion batteries climate impact from a life cycle perspective. There are batteries designed for electric vehicles included in the study. The two authors Lisbeth Dahllöf and Mia Romare has done a meta-study that is reviewed and compiled existing studies.

The report shows that the battery manufacturing leads to high emissions. For every kilowatt hour of storage…

View original post 271 more words

NYT coins ridiculous meme: ‘Earth-scorching CO2’

Watts Up With That?

Guest Commentary by Kip Hansen

NYT_earth_scorching

The New York Times has set a new standard of scientific misrepresentation in this front page title to the latest climate change consensus salvo from Justin Gillis.   On the front page of the online edition of the NY Times for 26 June 2017, the title is given:  “Sharp Rise in Levels of Earth-Scorching Carbon Dioxide”

The actual title of the article, once one clicks through to it,  is “Carbon in Atmosphere Is Rising, Even as Emissions Stabilize”.

Who knows who at the NY Times thinks that characterizing CO2 as “Earth-scorching” is a valid scientific description of one of the absolutely necessary-for-life trace gases in the Earth’s atmosphere.  It certainly is not a proper journalistic description.

My objection is that it is a serious violation of Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics  specifically:

Provide context. Take special care not to misrepresent or…

View original post 629 more words

A Rebuttal to Environmentalists’ Claims That “Arctic Drilling Revenue Predictions Are ‘Way Off’”

Watts Up With That?

Guest post by David Middleton

Why would anyone care what “environmentalists” have to say about potential Arctic oil revenue?  I only care because their “reasoning” is both fun and easy to ridicule.

Environmentalists Say Arctic Drilling Revenue Predictions ‘Way Off’

IULIA GHEORGHIU | JUNE 19, 2017

Conservation advocates believe opening up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, America’s largest swath of wilderness, isn’t likely to be the boon to federal coffers that President Donald Trump expects.

Opening up the wilderness region is a perennial issue; bipartisan bills are introduced each Congress to definitively label the area as “wilderness” while industry groups seek to gain access to a section of land that had been designated for oil and gas exploration. Plans have existed since 1980 to use less than 3 percent of the more than 19 million acres of wilderness refuge for oil and gas exploration — but conservation groups argue even that amount is too…

View original post 1,533 more words

Turkish power ship proposed for Adelaide 

Tallbloke's Talkshop


The dash for renewables in South Australia has gone so badly wrong that crisis measures are now called for, as PEI reports.

A large-scale temporary power solution is being considered, as South Australia struggles to ensure its energy security.

A 250 MW ship-based power station is under consideration as a solution to the crisis for the Australian state, which has seen a lot of investment in renewable power over recent years, while old fossil stations were retired.

The Turkish ship could be operational by the end of the year for less than the $360m budgeted for a new state-owned gas-fired power plant of the same capacity.

View original post 147 more words

EPA’s suspect science

Watts Up With That?

Its practices have defiled scientific integrity, but proposed corrections bring shock and defiance.

Guest essay by John Rafuse

President Trump’s budget guidance sought to cut $1.6 billion from the Environmental Protection Agency’s $8.1 billion expectation. Shrieks of looming Armageddon prompted Congress to fund EPA in full until September 2017, when the battle will be joined again.

Then EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt said he would prioritize Superfund cleanups based on toxicity, health-impact and other factors. The ensuing caterwauling suggested that EPA had no priorities since Bill Ruckelshaus (EPA’s first administrator, 1970-1975). But consider some standard EPA practices:

1. EPA advocates claim the US is unhealthy and dirty. They won’t admit that US water quality has improved dramatically since 1970. They deny that factories, cars and power plants are far more efficient and clean. They ignore that, while most nations continue to cut down forest habitats for fuel, the Lower 48…

View original post 1,132 more words

National Climate Assessment and the Trump administration

Climate Etc.

The National Climate Assessment must be redirected or terminated

by Patrick J. Michaels

Periodic National Assessments of the effects of climate change on the U.S. are mandated by the 1990 Global Change Research Act. The next Assessment Report is scheduled to be published in late 2018.

View original post 1,004 more words