My mom and dad passed away from Covid within a half hour of each other holding hands in a hospital in Rhode Island on January 19, 2022.
The post A personal Covid Story appeared first on CFACT.
via CFACT
January 17, 2023 at 12:51PM
Month: January 2023
Davis Strait pack ice is now descending on the Labrador coast. Only slightly later than usual but it looks like there’s plenty of it.
This is the ice that brings polar bears to Newfoundland and southern Labrador (photo above from April 2022). Be careful what you ask for…
As I said in my most-popular post of last year (12 August 2022): ‘Alone’ and ‘Alone Frozen’ survivor reality show participants were never at risk of a polar bear attack
…polar bears only come to southern Labrador when the pack ice from Baffin Bay barrels south. The pack ice is generated in the northern reaches of Baffin Bay in autumn and throughout the winter, and is pushed south by winds and currents. Polar bears ride the ice south. Shore-fast ice that develops in place isn’t relevant in this context: only pack ice counts.
In the chart below, the pack ice from the north is green, the rest is newly-formed shorefast ice:
Further south, there isn’t much ice on the north coast of Newfoundland yet:
Compared to 2017 on the same date: that’s the year there was heavy ice well into May and many polar bear sightings in southern Labrador and Newfoundland in March/April.
In 2018, there was a bit less ice along the Labrador coast but much more in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. Northern pack ice never reaches that far south except for a bit that might leak through the Strait of Belle Isle at the northern tip of Newfoundland late in the season: virtually all Gulf of St. Lawrence ice develops in place.
via polarbearscience
January 17, 2023 at 12:32PM
“Britishvolt: UK battery start-up collapses into administration” Britishvolt: UK battery start-up collapses into administration – BBC News
via Real Climate Science
January 17, 2023 at 12:03PM
By Paul Homewood
It is pretty clear that support for net zero drops away rather rapidly as soon as people understand its implications
Just why is Chris Skidmore’s review into the government’s target to achieve net zero carbon emissions by 2050 called an ‘independent’ review? It somewhat stretches the definition of the word ‘independent’.
Skidmore was the very minister – the Energy and Clean Growth Minister – who pushed the net zero commitment through the House of Commons in the first place in 2019. He remains a Conservative MP. Putting him in charge of an ‘independent’ review on net zero is analogous to Rishi Sunak putting Boris Johnson in charge of a ‘independent’ review into Brexit. That, of course, would be laughed out of the House of Commons. But things seem to work very differently in the world of net zero.
The legally-binding target to reduce emissions to net zero by 2050 has the most far-reaching consequences of any piece of legislation in recent times. It is far more significant than Brexit, for example, as it requires Britain to adopt multiple new, extremely expensive and unproven technologies. And yet it was passed through the Commons without even a vote. The commitment to net zero didn’t even feature in either the Conservative or Labour manifestos in 2017, the last election before the measure was passed.
But any dissent doesn’t matter, according to Skidmore, because he has held 50 ‘round tables’. He claims, ‘We heard a clear message for businesses, organisations, individuals, and local government across the country: net zero is creating a new era of opportunity, but government, industry, and individuals need to act to make the most of the opportunities, reduce costs, and ensure we deliver successfully.’ Was it really that unanimous, Chris? And if so, who did you invite to your round tables? I guess my invitation got lost in the post.
Skidmore claims there is strong public support for net zero. This might well be the case when people are asked simply about net zero without any context, i.e. what the implications will be for them personally. Polls suggest around 60 per cent of people are generally in favour. But it is a very different matter when people are asked directly about measures which form part of the government’s net zero strategy.
Planting trees (92 per cent approval in a YouGov poll in 2021) and banning single use plastics (81 per cent) are wildly popular. So, too, it seems is ‘only using renewable energy’ (66 per cent). That is perhaps because the cost implications were not explained in the question. A majority, too, backed a frequent flyer levy (60 per cent). Banning petrol and diesel cars, however, was met with approval of 48 per cent, taxing air fares 37 per cent, increasing fuel duty 27 per cent and restricting consumption of meat and dairy 26 per cent.
It is pretty clear that support drops away rather rapidly as soon as people are allowed to understand the implications of net zero. Most support it only as an abstract idea which does not impinge on them personally.
What we really need is a genuinely independent review of this policy which explains very clearly what some of the known costs are and also looks at the many unknown costs of decarbonising food production, industries, backing up intermittent wind and solar, and so on. As Lord Frost suggested in a tweet today, what we could do with is a Red Team review of the review, which asks the difficult questions – the ones MPs failed to ask when they nodded net zero through the Commons. And it needs to be led by someone who really is independent of government.
via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
January 17, 2023 at 12:00PM
