Month: April 2018

Climate change is one quarter of the EU’s reason for being (a wild 25% of total spending?)

Climate change is one quarter of the EU’s reason for being (a wild 25% of total spending?)

There are 741 million people in the EU.  For years, their supranational government has been spending one fifth of their entire budget (!) on attempts to change the weather. Since that didn’t work, they are going to spend more.

It says a lot about how irrelevant the EU is that they have nothing more important to do than wave sticks at future storms and promise to hold back the tide with low powered hairdryers.

No other big pressing issues?

EU Logo


The European Union’s executive is poised to propose spending 25 percent of funds available in next EU multiannual budget on activities related to climate protection, making sure new economic and political challenges don’t weaken the bloc’s resolve to fight pollution.

While Europe’s political priorities are changing, the EU wants to continue leading global efforts to reduce greenhouse gases, which scientists blame for heating up the planet, and seeks to cut dependence on fossil fuels, shifting to cleaner renewable energy sources. The bloc aims to lower carbon emissions by at least 40 percent by 2030 compared with 1990 levels and to boost the share of renewables to at least 27 percent of energy consumption.

– Bloomberg

In the past, this kind of ludicrous total has appeared to be mere accounting hocus – where money that was going to be spent on something just gets rebadged as “climate action”. But back in 2013 this still equated to €180 billion on climate stuff between then and 2020. Even if most of it is “rebadged”, the mere breadcrumb trail it leaves would feed ten thousand activists.

A billion here, a billion there — pretty soon we’ll be talking about money for jam for the Green Blob.

The only real surprise is that the EU thinks this is something worth bragging about. Historians will have a field day with this.

Meanwhile the EU is starting to Brexit-up and the witchdoctors are concerned that without the UK, Poland and other coal using countries will have a more skeptical influence. Go Poland. :-)


VN:F [1.9.22_1171]

Rating: 10.0/10 (1 vote cast)

Climate change is one quarter of the EU’s reason for being (a wild 25% of total spending?), 10.0 out of 10 based on 1 rating

Tiny Url for this post:

via JoNova

April 30, 2018 at 01:32PM

Late April Freeze Warning

Freeze warnings for eastern KY and for parts of eastern Ohio and WV.

…Late April Freeze Expected Tonight in Sheltered Locations…

Including the cities of Flatwoods, Greenup, Grayson, Olive Hill,
Ashland, Louisa, New Lexington, Crooksville, Somerset,
McConnelsville, Stockport, Athens, Marietta, Belpre, Jackson,
Wellston, Oak Hill, McArthur, Hamden, Pomeroy, Gallipolis,
Ironton, South Point, Clintwood, Grundy, Vansant, Kenova, Ceredo,
Wayne, Huntington, Point Pleasant, New Haven, Ravenswood, Ripley,
Parkersburg, Vienna, St. Marys, Belmont, Paden City,
Sistersville, Middlebourne, Harts, Alum Creek, Hamlin,
Teays Valley, Hurricane, Charleston, South Charleston,
Saint Albans, Spencer, Elizabeth, Grantsville, Harrisville,
Pennsboro, West Union, Williamson, Logan, Chapmanville, Man,
Madison, Clay, Sutton, Gassaway, Burnsville, Glenville, Weston,
Clarksburg, Bridgeport, Welch, Gary, War, Mullens, Oceana,
and Pineville


* TEMPERATURES…In the upper 20s and lower 30s in sheltered
valley locations away from rivers. In the low to mid 30s along
rivers and in metro areas…which could still lead to frost

* TIMING…Monday morning.

* IMPACTS…Frost and freeze conditions may damage sensitive
vegetation. Take steps now to protect tender plants from the

Thanks to Kenneth Lund for this link

The post Late April Freeze Warning appeared first on Ice Age Now.

via Ice Age Now

April 30, 2018 at 01:10PM

More snow expected in Wyoming

30 Apr 2018 – WINTER storm warning – Significant snowfall expected this morning and into tonight…

.Snowfall will increase this morning across the northern and western mountains, continuing through the day and before tapering off late tonight. This will be heavy, wet snow that will occur through much of this period.

Bighorn Mountains West-Bighorn Mountains Southeast
Apr 30 2018


* WHAT…Heavy snow. Total snow accumulations of 8 to 14 inches expected.

* WHERE…Bighorn Mountains West and Bighorn Mountains Southeast.

* WHEN…From 6 AM Monday to 6 AM MDT Tuesday.

* ADDITIONAL DETAILS…Plan on difficult travel conditions, including during the morning commute on Tuesday. Expect significant reductions in visibility at times.

Thanks to Kenneth Lund for this link

The post More snow expected in Wyoming appeared first on Ice Age Now.

via Ice Age Now

April 30, 2018 at 12:40PM

Paul Krugman’s All-Renewable Delusion

The all-renewable future envisioned by greens would require paving the equivalent of California with nothing but wind turbines.

In 2008, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman was awarded a Nobel Prize for “his analysis of trade patterns and location of economic activity.”

Unfortunately, when writing about energy issues in the Times, Krugman doesn’t bother to do any analysis at all. Instead, as he proves yet again with his April 16 column, “Earth, Wind and Liars,” Krugman likes to make glib pronouncements about renewables and how they can save us from climate change while making us richer and sexier. In this latest edition, Krugman completely ignores wind energy’s massive footprint and the growing backlash against the wind industry. Further, like his many fellow travelers on the left, Krugman refuses to acknowledge that if we are going to be serious about slashing carbon dioxide emissions, nuclear energy must play a major role. (I’ve written three articles in these pages about Krugman’s energy silliness. See herehere, and here.)

Krugman launches his column with an attack on Peter Thiel, the billionaire technology investor and Trump supporter. Sounding rather Trumpish himself, Krugman calls Thiel “a terrible person.” After insulting Thiel, Krugman pivots to the renewable-energy sector, which he says is making “progress that can both change the world and save it.” And then — bogeyman alert — Krugman claims that renewable-energy deployment is being stymied by “many politicians and some businesspeople” who believe in the “primacy of fossil fuels.” Those people, says Krugman are “our modern Luddites” who, he claims, “can still do a lot of damage.”

While Krugman loathes Thiel and hydrocarbons, the point of his column is to profess his love for Big Wind. The bigger, the better. He writes that making wind turbines “really efficient requires making them very big and tall — tall enough to exploit the faster, steadier winds that blow at higher altitude.” He goes on to say that in a few years we will be seeing “850-foot turbines that totally outcompete fossil fuels on cost.”

Given that forests of turbines taller than Trump Tower (which stands 664 feet high) could soon be blighting our landscapes and seascapes, Krugman claims there is “no longer any reason to believe that it would be hard to drastically ‘decarbonize’ the economy,” nor, he claims is “there reason to believe that doing so would impose any significant economic cost.”

That in a nutshell, is the all-renewable delusion. For years, groups such as the Sierra Club,, and Greenpeace have relentlessly claimed that we don’t need hydrocarbons or nuclear energy and that switching to renewables not only will be fun, it will be cheap, too. To bolster their claims, they have endorsed the work of Stanford engineering professor Mark Jacobson, who has repeatedly claimed that wind, solar, and a few splashes of hydropower are all that will be needed to drive the U.S. economy.

But last year, Jacobson’s claims were thoroughly debunked by an all-star team of scientists in a paper published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. They determined Jacobson’s work had “invalid modeling tools, contained modeling errors, and made implausible and inadequately supported assumptions.” They also found that the wind turbines needed for Jacobson’s all-renewable scheme would cover “nearly 500,000 square kilometers, which is roughly 6 percent of the continental United States.” (In November, I reported on Jacobson’s $10 million defamation lawsuit against the lead author of the PNAS paper, Chris Clack. In February, apparently aware that his pitiful case would be dismissed and that he could be countersued, Jacobson suddenly withdrew the lawsuit.)

Even if we ignore the deleterious health effects that low-frequency noise produced by wind turbines can have on humans and the murderous effect that turbines have on birds and bats, the idea of covering a land area larger than California with nothing but wind turbines is ludicrous on its face. It’s doubly absurd given that over the past few years, rural communities from Maine to California and Ontario to Scotland have been rejecting the encroachment of Big Wind. Among the latest examples of the rural backlash: On April 10, in South Dakota, the Davidson County Commission unanimously rejected a permit for a proposed nine-turbine wind project….

By my count, since 2015, more than 200 government entities have moved to reject or restrict Big Wind. Given the rural resistance to today’s wind turbines, which stand 500 to 600 feet high, it’s easy to imagine how that resistance will flourish when Krugman gets his hoped-for turbines, with their red-blinking lights, and spinning blades, 85 stories high.

Full post

via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)

April 30, 2018 at 11:40AM