Month: September 2024

Daily News

DYCE WMO 03091 – Exhaustive Research

57.205026 -2.205317 Met Office assessed CIMO Class 4 Installed 1/1/1942

Before anyone asks, that is NOT a “photo-shopped” image. It is the latest “satellite” view from “Google Maps” Those with “google earth pro” can run through historic aerial images to see continually changing propeller and jet aircraft in that position, some with their engine exhausts much closer than even that shown above. Dyce regularly appears in the Met Office’s Daily Extremes as a regional hot spot.

Obviously an aviation site, probably better known as “Aberdeen Airport” (by regional airport standards a particularly busy one) the Stevenson Screen is barely 60 metres from jet aircraft engines. Exactly how the aircraft arrive at and move away from this apparent parking location is not entirely evident – I would welcome anyone’s knowledge on that matter. What is very obvious though, is that it is not a location to take readings from if the intention is for them to reflect the natural environment. Runways, taxiways, car parking, and especially large lumps of reflective metal (aircraft) parking are clearly unrepresentative. Should engines ever be running (even at low power) it is inconceivable that they would not affect the temperature readings.

Here lies a thorny problem for the Met Office – aviation sites comprise the bulk of their weather station sites. There are literally hundreds of airfields in the UK and all have some form of weather recording for operational purposes. Can, or should, many of these sites be used for long term temperature recording data or not? So what does the Met Office say?

“Temperatures should not be recorded at airfields as they can be contaminated by aircraft activity.”

Our response: The Met Office operates some observing sites at airfields (many of which form historical records). It is important that airfields and airports receive, and have access to, accurate and timely meteorological data. Observing stations at airfields are located to be as representative of the wider environment as possible. This includes being placed sufficiently far from runways to avoid contamination from aircraft activity and sites that exhibit significant deviations in behaviour are investigated.”

https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/weather/learn-about/how-forecasts-are-made/observations/obs-critical-for-weather–climate

Analysis…..”The Met Office operates some observing sites at airfields”

How many are “some”? Answer….There are over 130 Aviation sites in the total Synoptic and Climate reporting stations list – that is not “some” that is a very large proportion.

“It is important that airfields and airports…….” nobody disputes that straw man which is not relevant to using site data for the long term temperature record..

” representative of the wider environment” is just simply not accurate.

“being placed sufficiently far from runways to avoid contamination from aircraft activity”

So the above imagery (and I have lots more to come from very many sites) displays attention to detail?

Should we not believe our own “lying eyes”?

via Tallbloke’s Talkshop

https://ift.tt/UeEXIoL

September 1, 2024 at 08:44AM

Daily News

Shock New Claim: ‘Green’ Hydrogen Produces 37 Times More Global Warming than Carbon Dioxide

From THE DAILY SCEPTIC

by Chris Morrison

Dangerous stuff all this ‘green’ hydrogen. Apart from a tendency to explode unless handled with extreme care, its higher combustion temperature can produce more harmful nitrogen dioxide than natural gas. Nitrogen dioxide is a nasty pollutant and has been linked to childhood asthma and other major ailments. Furthermore, hydrogen is the lightest of gases and escapes easily into the atmosphere – where a newly-published science paper suggests, pound for pound, it produces 37 times the warming of carbon dioxide over a 20-year period. This is because hydrogen is oxidised by the hydroxyl radical leading to the formation of tropospheric ozone and stratospheric water vapour. Both these gases are so-called ‘greenhouse’ gases and alarmist scientists are keen to exaggerate their effect. If you are worried about atmospheric pollution and greenhouse gases, despite all past observational evidence that suggests the ‘greenhouse’ impact of the gases ‘saturates’ at certain levels, then promoting hydrogen is a very bad look indeed.

If green hydrogen was a poor person’s car, London Mayor Khan would have no hesitation in slapping a hefty Ulez charge on it. Obliging Imperial College might be relied on to provide a ‘statistical construct’ pointing out that hundreds of thousands of people will die.

But as is becoming increasingly clear, hydrogen is the only game still standing in town to back up unreliable wind and solar. Batteries are useless given their horrendous expense, limited lifespan and requirement to dig up vast quantities of the Earth’s crust. Not forgetting their tendency to explode and burn uncontrollably if not handled with care. Carbon capture appears to be an excellent opportunity for fools to be parted from their money chasing a ridiculous dream. One must fervently hope an efficient scheme to pull CO2 out of the atmosphere is never invented since removing 60% of the trace gas will lead to all plant and human life dying on Earth.

An interesting paper has just been published in the peer-reviewed journal Energy Science & Engineering which reviews the “challenges” with using the existing natural gas system to deliver hydrogen. It concludes that in considering hydrogen’s physical and chemical properties, “it is not an effective decarbonisation tool for use in homes and buildings”. Hydrogen is said to leak from pipes at a rate up to three or four times more than natural gas and, as suggested, the claimed effect on the atmosphere will not be easy for activists to excuse.

The paper is of interest since it seems to be the work of the Environmental Defence Fund, a highly influential Green Blob-funded activist and campaigning think tank. In short, it is another example of the penny dropping in even fanatical Net Zero circles about the lack of back-up energy for wind and solar. Not before time, it might be noted, since in countries like the U.K. there is still Miliband madness in the air with plans to ‘decarbonise’ the electricity grid by 2030.

Using hydrogen in existing gas systems has “major consequences for safety, energy supply, climate and costs”, argue the authors. Blending hydrogen with natural gas offers only small reductions in CO2 emissions, while a transition to full hydrogen is not possible without significant retrofits and replacements. The authors steer clear of putting a price on this but note that even if technical and “economic barriers” – the polite term for unimaginably large sums of money – are overcome, “serious safety and environmental risks remain”.

Concern is also expressed about the manufacturing process to produce hydrogen. There are noted to be more than 1,000 proposed projects aimed at scaling up zero and low-carbon hydrogen, but there are said to be “challenges” associated with each “clean” production method. “No method is universally beneficial to the climate,” they note.

Last year, an influential report from the U.K. Royal Society kicked batteries into touch as a viable electricity storage solution for unreliable wind and solar. But lacking any alternative back-up, the Royal Society turned to hydrogen as a possible solution. The report envisaged dissolving huge salt caverns capable of decadal storing of ‘green’ hydrogen. Salt caverns, which anyway would leak hydrogen through permeable loss, are only available in a few places in the U.K., so a huge network of specialist pipelines would be needed to move the gas to turbines on constant standby. Specialist pipelines that would cost billions of pounds and would invariably leak and present a danger to anyone in the vicinity. At the time, Francis Menton of the Manhattan Contrarian noted that the authors’ “quasi-religious commitment” to a fossil-free future led them to minimise and divert attention away from critical cost and feasibility issues.

Bottom line – there is no cost effective, feasible, reliable and scalable replacement for hydrocarbons available, or likely to be available, in the near future. Blackouts and severe rationing will be inevitable if uncompromising ideologues like Ed Miliband at the U.K. Department of Energy continue to be allowed to wreak havoc with the energy requirements of a modern industrial society.

Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.

via Watts Up With That?

https://ift.tt/oCW0fY1

September 1, 2024 at 08:07AM

Daily News

Rising Global Temperatures Saving Millions Of Lives, Study Finds. Cold Kills 30 Times More!

By Dr. Peter F. Mayer – https://tkp.at

Hat-tip: Linke Zeitung here. 

Over the past 11,000 years of the current interglacial period, phases of prosperity and cultural flourishing are clearly linked to warmer temperatures. A reduction in deaths with rising temperatures can also be observed for the last two decades.

Fact: Cold kills nearly 30 times more people than extreme heat, 4.6 million vs. 0.155 million. Rising temperatures drive up the number of heat deaths, but not in extreme heat, but in moderate heat, as TKP recently reported and broke down. However, rising temperatures also reduce the number of deaths from cold.

Bjorn Lomborg used this data to illustrate the ratios graphically:

Chart: Björn Lomborg

Overall, this has meant saving 166,000 lives per year over the last two decades. This is according to the Lancet study by Qi Zhao (2021), which TKP has already reported on.

“Globally, 5,083,173 deaths per year were associated with sub-optimal temperatures, accounting for 9.43% of all deaths. 8.52% were cold-related and 0.91% were heat-related. There were 74 temperature-related excess deaths per 100,000 population. The mortality burden varied geographically.”

Eastern Europe had the highest heat-related excess mortality rate and sub-Saharan Africa had the highest cold-related excess mortality rate.

So we see that global warming saves lives, exactly the opposite of what politicians like Health Minister Karl Lauterbach or EU-Leyen claim and of course the mainstream media.

Full article here: https://tkp.at/2024/08/11/steigende-temperaturen-retten-leben

(Translated/summarized in the English by P. Gosselin)

Donate – choose an amount

via NoTricksZone

https://ift.tt/j8qK57k

September 1, 2024 at 05:49AM

Daily News

Miliband’s flagship wind farm paid nearly £2.5m to keep turbines switched off

By Paul Homewood

 

 

h/t Philip Bratby

 

Only Miliband could say we need more developments like this!

 

 image

Ed Miliband’s flagship wind farm has already been paid close to £2.5 million to keep its turbines switched off, The Telegraph can reveal.

Mr Miliband, the Energy Secretary, praised the Viking wind farm in the Shetlands, which officially opened on Thursday, saying “hundreds of thousands of homes” across the country would benefit from “cheap, home-grown energy”.

He said the development, the UK’s largest onshore wind farm, “shows why we need more developments like this to make Britain a clean energy superpower”.

SSE, which operates Viking, promised that it would be Britain’s “most productive” onshore wind farm. But figures from the Renewable Energy Foundation (REF) show 62 per cent of its output has had to be discarded in its first month.

Dr John Constable, the director of the REF, said: “The paradoxical outcome is that wind farm developers actually make more money when they are paid to reduce output rather than when they are selling normally on the market. The British consumer is being ripped off, and developers are laughing all the way to the bank.

“All you hear from Ed Miliband is that more renewable energy will make energy cheap – but unless he deals with the constraint payment programme, that is simply an illusion.”

Dr Constable said it would “certainly not save people money on their electricity bill” if wind farms continued to be paid huge sums of money to keep turbines off.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/08/31/miliband-flagship-wind-farm-paid-keep-turbines-switched-off/

via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

https://ift.tt/aLg8BeV

September 1, 2024 at 05:23AM