Month: March 2024

COUNCILS BEING WATCHED AND CHALLENGED ON CLIMATE POLICIES

 It was in December that I first reported on the fact that in some districts the public were starting to attend council meetings to give a sceptic point of view on climate policies. I have just checked again to find that this trend seems to be continuing as more disliked policies are being introduced like 20 mph zones and the closing of certain roads to reduce car use,

Here is a link to a new you tube channel which holds a number of recent videos:

WELCOME to Colchester Council Watch (youtube.com)

I expect this trend to increase as we see "net zero" policies being pushed by some of the more extreme councils.

via climate science

https://ift.tt/0hb6rX5

March 21, 2024 at 02:44AM

Mega-Battery Owners Rolling in Cash Whenever Wind & Solar Output Collapse

Sunset and calm weather provides the perfect opportunity for rent-seekers profiting from the market chaos that follows.

The owners of fast-start diesel and gas-generators make out like bandits, as the spot price for power goes from less than $100 per MWh to tens of thousands of dollars per MWh.

Couple a sudden collapse of wind and solar output with a surge in demand (think a breathless 40°C day with the sun setting and air conditioners running at full throttle).

In Australia, this means the spot price often runs all the way up to the regulated price cap – when spot prices can (and often do) hit the $15,500 per MWh cap. Some might call deliberately engineered opportunities for market manipulation theft; others an investment prospect with no downside.

The owners of fast-start peaking generators are not alone in seeking every opportunity to gouge unwitting and defence-less power consumers.

As Paul Homewood outlines below, Britain’s large-capacity battery owners are just as eager to cash in on the volatility that comes with purporting to rely on weather and sunshine-dependent power generation.

Battery Energy Storage Systems
Not a Lot of People Know That
Paul Homewood
19 February 2024

There has been discussion of solar farm projects which include battery storage. (Battery Energy Storage Systems, or BESS).

The claims of the developers and renewable lobby is that storage will help to make intermittent renewables work.

By coincidence Timera have just published this update, which reveals it is nothing more than a money making ploy:

Impact of new balancing platform on GB BESS
Batteries create value from harvesting price volatility. The real time Balancing Mechanism (BM) has the most volatile prices in the GB market, yet battery (BESS) assets have captured limited BM value to date.

BESS BM value capture has historically been impacted by:

    1. Manual dispatch of flexible assets by the System Operator (ESO), disadvantaging smaller asset dispatch
    2. The 15 min rule where BESS bid offer acceptances are effectively limited to 15 mins of duration (given issues with the ESO’s visibility as to state of charge)
    3. Skip rates where the ESO has consistently chosen higher priced assets over BESS in the BM (reflecting issues 1. & 2. above, but also real constraints that the ESO faces in managing the system e.g. locational requirements to use thermal assets).

There has been significant progress in 2024 in addressing these factors with the introduction of the ESO’s new Open Balancing Platform and a relaxation of the 15 min rule.

In today’s article we look at the impact of these changes on BESS asset dispatch in the BM.

Timera Energy

The rest is technical, but the key is this opening sentence:

Batteries create value from harvesting price volatility

As Timera note, the Balancing Mechanism (BM) has the most volatile prices in the GB market. This is because of the inherent unreliability of wind and solar power. When supplies are short, the Grid is forced to step in and buy up short term power supplies wherever it can get it.

Prices can obviously go sky high, and it is trading at these times where the battery storage operators can make a handsome return. These costs of course end up being added to consumer bills.

In short, solar/battery farms can make large profits from the very intermittency which they create.

None of these battery storage systems will solve the problem of how to store solar power in summer for use in winter, when generation falls to about 3% of capacity. Instead they are designed to store power during the day, to use at night.

The giant Project Fortress solar/BESS farm in Kent, mentioned by Ray Sanders, is rated at 373 MW, with 700 MWh of battery storage. That’s less than two hours’ worth.
Not a Lot of People Know That

via STOP THESE THINGS

https://ift.tt/R5JckMd

March 21, 2024 at 01:31AM

Climate Policy vs. Social Justice (‘Bloomberg Green’ decries rollbacks)

“Apologies are in order from Bloomberg Green. In terms of social justice, why hurt the average person as consumer, ratepayer, and taxpayer?”

Trump’s Green-Bashing and Europe’s Right Put Climate Goals at Risk,” write Laura Millan, Zahra Hirji, Olivia Rudgard, and Jonathan Gilbert (maybe it takes four writers to tip-toe around the climate vs. social justice issue).

The Bloomberg Green authors call it “the campaign against climate.” Realists would call it a long overdue populist campaign for energy justice and against alarmism and energy rationing. And expect a lot more such protest in the future as Net Zero fails–and an “energy transition” back to the real thing (dense, stock, affordable, plentiful, reliable energies) occurs.

Here is the Bloomberg Green Daily story:

Politicians are vowing to roll back green policies and downplaying climate change ahead of key elections on both sides of the Atlantic, casting doubt on whether countries can maintain momentum in the transition away from fossil fuels.

In the US, former President Donald Trump, who has a long record of climate denial, is the frontrunner to challenge President Joe Biden in November. On the campaign trail, Trump has minimized the effects of climate change, attacked electric vehicles and pledged to repeal Biden’s signature climate law.

Meanwhile, in Europe, polls show right-wing parties that oppose strong climate action are likely to increase their representation after the European Union’s parliamentary elections in June, while the climate-minded Greens are expected to lose seats.

That raises the prospect of the US and the EU, two of the world’s top three climate polluters, retreating on environmental ambition following the world’s hottest year on record.

The shift is a mix of backpedaling — goals being pushed back or watered down — and backlash. The growing hostility in some cases veers into outright climate denial and is part of a drift into authoritarian rhetoric that relies on attacks and emotional appeals more than traditional policy debate.

Here comes the hyperbole, the religious-like premise of climate alarmists and forced energy transformationists:

Scientists warn that what’s at stake is a livable planet. Earth has already warmed 1.2C compared to the preindustrial era, and that’s on track to go up to about 2.5C by the end of the century if the world doesn’t speed up the shift to clean energy. Any slow-walking comes at the risk of additional warming that’s already driving disasters and costing billions of dollars every year.

That’s the regular green hype. Then comes the politics, where the authors get realistic. I offer my comments (in green).

Climate isn’t a core issue for most voters the way the economy and security are. But the populist right has made climate policy another culture-wars flash point — an example in their eyes of costly, intrusive overreach that compromises personal choice and national sovereignty.

Correct–and more. Frankly, the general public knows about exaggerated climate “science” and the behind-the-scenes shenanigans from a politicized profession (Climategate turns 15 years old this year).

Much of the right believes that the bigger threat “is not climate change; it’s the actions taken by governments to decarbonize economies,” says Mahir Yazar, a researcher at the Centre for Climate and Energy Transformation at the University of Bergen in Norway.

Correct! Just add “policy” to climate change to understand the real threat to what Alex Epstein calls human betterment.

Part of the reason the political winds are shifting is that climate regulations, as they ramp up in stringency, are starting to impinge more on people’s daily lives — at a time when many feel squeezed by inflation and the cost of living. “Do you choose a heat pump in your house? What car are you going to drive? These are emotional things to people,” said Bas Eickhout, a Dutch member of the European parliament with the European Green Party.

Yes, “green” policies increase energy prices and swell government budgets (and deficits in many places, led by the U.S. And yes, personal freedom to choose the best energy appliances and energies is a human preference against the Climate Industrial Complex.

Far-right politicians have prospered by tapping into that sentiment. Dutch Freedom Party leader Geert Wilders won over voters last year by promising to scrap the Netherlands’ climate law and exit the Paris Agreement. Libertarian Javier Milei, who has called global warming “a socialist lie,” became Argentina’s new president in December. Germany’s far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) party, which rejects the decades-old scientific consensus on human-caused climate change, has promised to tear down Germany’s wind farms and has recently broadened its public support.

Fantastic! Removing ill-performing industrial wind turbines to allow more green space is surely environmental…. Climate policy is all pain, no gain, whatever one’s views on the cause and pace of physical climate change.

Closer to the political center, leaders are scrambling to show they’re not prioritizing net zero at the expense of household budgets or consumer choice. In the UK — by some measures a world leader in efforts to cut carbon emissions — Prime Minister Rishi Sunak hit the brakes on decarbonizing as one of his ministers vowed the Conservative government wouldn’t “save the planet by bankrupting Britons.” The rival Labour Party dropped its own pledge to invest £28 billion in green projects should it win the country’s next general election.

So climate policy does increase energy prices. So much for the magical thinking” that Net Zero was a free lunch or one you are paid to eat….

But abandoning pledges is one thing; undoing settled policy is another. 

But failed policy needs to be rescinded. Apologies are in order from Bloomberg Green. In terms of social justice, why hurt the average person as consumer, ratepayer, and taxpayer?

The post Climate Policy vs. Social Justice (‘Bloomberg Green’ decries rollbacks) appeared first on Master Resource.

via Master Resource

https://ift.tt/YOZkubh

March 21, 2024 at 01:09AM

Update:  Yes, We Have No Anthropocene!

News Alert by Kip Hansen — 20 March 2024

Earlier this month we heard that the International Union of Geological Sciences commission on the Anthropocene voted not to declare that the Earth  had entered a new epoch of geological time: neither now or in 1950.

The reporting at that time included that the chair and the vice-chair of the commission both objected to the vote. “Even so, it was unclear Tuesday morning [March 5th] whether the results stood as a conclusive rejection or whether they might still be challenged or appealed. In an email to The Times, the committee’s chair, Jan A. Zalasiewicz, said there were “some procedural issues to consider” but declined to discuss them further. Dr. Zalasiewicz, a geologist at the University of Leicester, has expressed support for canonizing the Anthropocene.”

The NY Times has an update on the issue:

March 20, 2024Updated 11:22 a.m. ET

The highest governing body in geology has upheld a contested vote by scientists against adding the Anthropocene, or human age, to the official timeline of Earth’s history.

The vote, which a committee of around two dozen scholars held in February, brought an end to nearly 15 years of debate about whether to declare that our species had transformed the natural world so thoroughly since the 1950s as to have sent the planet into a new epoch of geologic time.”

Despite the continued objections of Dr. Zalasiewicz and his vice-chair, Martin J. Head:

 “…the committee’s parent body, the International Union of Geological Sciences, has decided the results will stand, the union’s executive committee said in a statement on Wednesday.

That means it’s official. Our planet, at least for the time being, is still in the Holocene epoch, which began 11,700 years ago with the most recent melting of the ice sheets.”

# # # # #

Author’s Comment:

And, hopefully, that is the end of that!  At least “officially”. 

Activists and Advocates-of-all-stripes will continue to use the term to forward their anti-human stances and to blame all “bad things” on humans and human influences. 

Kudos to the geologists!

# # # # #

via Watts Up With That?

https://ift.tt/ivjNpCr

March 21, 2024 at 12:03AM