Month: May 2024

Transatlantic air fares to jump under net zero fuel rules

From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

h/t Philip Bratby

Yet one more cost for Net Zero:

The cost of a return trip to New York is on track to rise by £40 as a result of incoming net zero regulations, according to figures from Virgin Atlantic.

The extra burden on travellers is expected if the cost of sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) is passed on directly. Calculations by Virgin Atlantic, a pioneer in using the greener jet fuel, show that ticket prices would have to rise 6pc.

For a return flight to New York that would amount to a £40 increase at current prices, based on two one-way fares costing about £350 each.

SAF is a refined blend of waste oils, animal fats and ethanol from corn. The fuel is viewed as the most practical route towards reducing aviation’s net CO2 emission before completely new technologies, such as hydrogen propulsion, become available next decade or beyond.

Airlines operating from the UK will be required to use at least 10pc SAF to power their flights from 2030, but with the fuel currently costing six times as much as traditional jet fuel, passengers face a potential jump in fares.

Figures published by Flint Global suggest that by 2040, when the UK mandate will require a 22pc SAF blend, fares will be a third higher if costs aren’t addressed.

The UK rules are more stringent than the EU’s requirement for a 6pc SAF mix by the end of the decade, with the difference potentially giving continental carriers such as Lufthansa and Air France a competitive advantage over the likes of Virgin Atlantic and British Airways.

British Airways currently sources 90pc of its SAF overseas.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/05/18/net-zero-jet-fuel-rules-to-add-6pc-to-transatlantic-fares

UK aviation CO2 emissions account for 0.1% of world emissions.

And as with everything else, as the world as a whole gets richer, more people will be flying. Any attempt by the UK to save a few tonnes of carbon will be swamped.

via Watts Up With That?

https://ift.tt/d2wYeTp

May 20, 2024 at 12:03AM

Climate Engineering

Another story about the press, academia and government working together to engineer a complete fake climate story.

About Tony Heller

Just having fun

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

via Real Climate Science

https://ift.tt/okYju6R

May 19, 2024 at 10:09PM

Why The UK Is Banning Disposable Vapes

Disposable vapes have become quite the hot button topic over the last few years. When they were first created they were met with quite a positive reception. The idea behind them was more that they would be a useful tool for those looking to quit smoking. Whereas today they have become an addiction powered industry worth as much as £1.2 billion pounds. A staggering amount.

Disposable vapes have moved away from the idea of helping people combat addiction. There are hundreds of different brands touting thousands of different flavors. Nearly every supermarket and corner shop in the United Kingdom stocks disposable vapes. Shops are making a small fortune by selling them. So why is the UK banning them?

Addiction And Young People

The biggest and most blatant issue with disposable vapes is the danger they pose to the younger generations. The United Kingdom already has very strict rules regarding tobacco. Licensing is strict and the taxes on tobacco is so high that a lot of smaller shops don’t bother stocking too much of it anymore. And the major chains are far better at ensuring younger people can’t buy any.

Whereas disposable vapes are far easier for young people to acquire. Most corner shops stock hundreds of variants and are often far more lax with their ID’ing processes. And it is also extremely easy for young people to order disposable vapes through apps like Deliveroo and JustEat. And this has been devastating for the health of the younger generations in the UK.

Nicotine addiction in young people has been on the rise since 2022. It did decrease a bit during the COVID era. The increase in the last few years has been linked to the increase in sales of disposable vapes. They have become quite trendy, being very popular on social media apps like TikTok. In the same vein of how smoking cigarettes was considered very stylish in the 50’s and 60’s. All of this is a huge factor in the government’s decision to ban disposable vapes.

Health Of The Nation

Addiction in young people isn’t the only issue the government is concerned with. The general consensus is that disposable vapes are a healthier alternative to smoking. But the truth is there isn’t any actual confirmation of this. The long term side effects simply can’t be proven yet. And what’s worse is that disposable vapes are actually the most dangerous type of vaporizer out there.

Refillable vapes are considerably less dangerous than disposable ones. The e-liquid that is used within them is often far safer than that found within disposable vapes. And it is easier for the country to regulate and inspect the batches of vape liquid as opposed to the disposable vapes. But the healthiest vape unit is the dry herb vape.

Dry herb vapes have become extremely popular in the United Kingdom, particularly amongst those with a medical cannabis card in the UK. Dry herb vapes don’t use any e-liquid. Rather than directly cook a herb, creating vapor. With the banning of disposable vapes, the government of the UK is hoping to turn more people towards healthier vaping alternatives such as refillable units or dry herb vapes.

The Recycling Problem

The United Kingdom has never been known as a particularly green nation. The nation’s recycling initiatives aren’t as functional as they could be. And the nation is undoubtedly one of extreme waste. Particularly technological waste. And disposable vapes are a huge part of this problem.

The fact of the matter is most disposable vapes cannot be recycled yet. Some brands, such as Elf Bar, can be recycled by the manufacturers. But the vast majority of people aren’t aware of this and, as such, most disposable vapes simply end up in landfills. The latest surveys suggest that over 30 million disposable vapes are bought in the UK each month. And it is extremely likely that at least 90% of these won’t ever be recycled.

This isn’t only an issue of waste pollution either. Nearly every disposable vape makes use of a lithium battery. Lithium batteries are an extremely useful power source. And each year the UK is wasting millions upon millions of these batteries. While there isn’t a lithium shortage on the planet at the moment, it has been speculated that it could be due to supply issues and ongoing political issues around the globe. Banning disposable vapes in the UK, one of the most populated and powerful countries on the planet will definitely go a long way to reducing the amount of lithium batteries being wasted each year.

via A Journey through Nature and Climate

https://ift.tt/8RNGcuI

May 19, 2024 at 09:45PM

The Inconvenient Truth About Copper: Implications for U.S. Electrification Goals

In the relentless pursuit of a greener future, copper stands as a critical element, central to the envisioned transition to renewable energy and electrification. However, recent insights bring to light a formidable obstacle: the rate of copper extraction is insufficient to meet the ambitious targets set by current U.S. policies. This blog post highlights this dilemma, as explained by the International Energy Forum’s (IEF) report, and examines the broader implications for energy policy and economic stability.

The Copper Conundrum

Copper is indispensable in the manufacture of electric vehicles (EVs) and the development of renewable energy infrastructure. The IEF report starkly presents the challenge:

“Electric vehicles (EVs) require substantially more copper and other metals than conventional internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles. For example, manufacture of an ICE automobile requires 24 kg of copper whereas manufacture of an EV requires 60 kg”​​.

https://www.ief.org/focus/ief-reports/copper-mining-and-vehicle-electrification#:~:text=To%20electrify%20the%20global%20vehicle,require%20negligible%20extra%20copper%20mining.

This statement alone encapsulates the monumental demand for copper driven by the push towards electrification. With policies mandating that 100% of cars manufactured be electric by 2035, the strain on copper supply becomes even more evident. The report quantifies this demand further:

“To meet business-as-usual trends, 115% more copper must be mined in the next 30 years than has been mined historically until now. To electrify the global vehicle fleet requires bringing into production 55% more new mines than would otherwise be needed”​​.

https://www.ief.org/focus/ief-reports/copper-mining-and-vehicle-electrification#:~:text=To%20electrify%20the%20global%20vehicle,require%20negligible%20extra%20copper%20mining.

Such figures underscore the vast amounts of copper necessary to achieve these electrification goals. The current mining capacity, however, does not align with this escalating demand.

Mining Realities and Economic Implications

The extraction and processing of copper are time-consuming and capital-intensive activities. Current production rates and available mining technology suggest that ramping up copper output to the required levels within the stipulated timelines is not feasible. The study’s findings suggest a significant shortfall in meeting the raw material needs for the electrification agenda:

“Under today’s policy settings for copper mining, it is highly unlikely that there will be sufficient additional new mines to achieve 100% EV by 2035. Policymakers might consider changing the vehicle electrification goal from 100% EV to 100% hybrid manufacture by 2035″​​.

https://www.ief.org/focus/ief-reports/copper-mining-and-vehicle-electrification#:~:text=To%20electrify%20the%20global%20vehicle,require%20negligible%20extra%20copper%20mining.

This revelation invites critical scrutiny of the underlying assumptions in policy frameworks that advocate for rapid and large-scale transitions to renewable energy. It also raises pertinent questions about the economic feasibility and long-term sustainability of such policies.

The Questionable Premise of a Green Future

The push for a green future is often presented as an inevitable and necessary path. However, this ideology-driven agenda lacks a solid foundation. The transition to renewable energy, while portrayed as essential, is fraught with practical challenges and economic burdens that are frequently overlooked or underestimated.

“Many have expressed concern that the lack of critical mineral resources may not allow full electrification of the global vehicle transportation fleet, and the vehicle electrification resource demand is just a small part of that needed for the transition”​​.

https://www.ief.org/focus/ief-reports/copper-mining-and-vehicle-electrification#:~:text=To%20electrify%20the%20global%20vehicle,require%20negligible%20extra%20copper%20mining.

The pursuit of sustainability has become a catchphrase devoid of critical examination. The supposed benefits of a green future are speculative at best, hinging on the unproven assumption that these efforts will significantly impact climate change. In contrast, the immediate and tangible costs—economic, social, and environmental—are substantial and often ignored.

Broader Policy and Strategic Considerations

Given the intrinsic link between copper supply and the any successful implementation of electrification policies, a reassessment of strategy is warranted. Policymakers need to consider several factors if they are going to go down this road:

  1. Diversification of Material Sources: Investing in research to find alternative materials that can either replace copper or reduce its use in key applications.
  2. Enhanced Recycling Programs: Implementing robust recycling systems to reclaim copper from obsolete electronics and other products, thereby easing the demand on primary copper mining.
  3. International Cooperation: Engaging in strategic partnerships with countries rich in copper resources to ensure a stable supply chain.
  4. Technological Innovation: Encouraging innovations in mining and processing technologies to increase the efficiency and output of copper extraction.

Environmental and Social Impact

The race to mine more copper also carries significant environmental and social costs. Increased mining activities can lead to environmental degradation, including deforestation, soil erosion, and contamination of water resources. Additionally, the social implications for communities in mining regions—often marked by displacement and health issues—must not be overlooked. Thus, a balance must be struck between meeting material needs and maintaining environmental and social standards.

Conclusion

The reality presented by the IEF report serves as a sobering reminder of the complexities inherent in transitioning to a greener economy. This situation highlights an ironic unforced error of poor planning and idealistic policy, driven by an optimistic yet impractical vision without fully considering the supply constraints of critical materials like copper. Moreover, the very premise of striving for a green future and sustainable development is itself an unfounded ideological pursuit, lacking in practical justification and burdened with significant costs.

As we navigate these challenges, it is imperative to maintain a balanced perspective, recognizing the need for realistic timelines and diversified approaches. The discourse around the frenetic, ill-conceived, and ideological fantasy of “climate policy” must evolve to incorporate these hard truths, ensuring that the path to so-called sustainability is both feasible and responsible—or reconsidered entirely in light of its dubious foundations.

The full report can be downloaded here

HT/Clyde Spencer

via Watts Up With That?

https://ift.tt/9MsTipY

May 19, 2024 at 08:01PM