WINDFARM TO BE DISMANTLED AFTER 15 YEARS

This looks like a poor life expectancy, and hence a high cost.

 Germany’s First Offshore Wind Farm To Be Dismantled After Just 15 Years Of Operation

via climate science

https://ift.tt/aDSXrno

March 19, 2025 at 02:41AM

‘Climate Finance’ Degree: Only at Columbia University

“Lisa Sachs repeated refusal to address intellectual diversity and the need for balanced debate on open climate questions speak for themselves. It is climate propaganda at Columbia U.”

Yesterday’s post focused on Lisa Sachs, Director of Columbia Climate School’s Masters in Climate Finance. What is the course, and what is missing from a scholarly viewpoint? First, the parent’s Mission Statement:

The Columbia Climate School’s mission is to further knowledge and educate leaders to achieve equitable and just solutions to the changing climate and related sustainability challenges.

Education: The Columbia Climate School educates future climate leaders to address the urgent challenges facing our planet with graduate degree programs and offers other powerful learning opportunities for students, educators, and professionals.

Research: The Columbia Climate School nurtures and supports innovative research in the science, consequences, and human dimensions of climate change, including the methods of achieving a more sustainable and just world.

Impact: The Columbia Climate School translates its academic work into evidence-based analysis and advice to inform decision- and policy-makers in communities, governments, industries, and nonprofits in the US and globally.

Professor Sachs’ course is described on the Columbia Climate School’s website:

The Master of Science (MS) in Climate Finance is a one-year, 39-credit professional degree program offered by the Columbia Climate School in close collaboration with the Columbia Business School. This interdisciplinary degree integrates climate science with fundamental financial management practices that equip students with the financial decision-making skills to respond to climate change.

Equipped with a robust understanding of climate science, and the costs, risks and opportunities associated with climate change, graduates will be uniquely suited for senior positions in public, private, and intergovernmental institutions, navigating their organizations to success while supporting a more rigorous and coherent approach to climate finance more generally.

Comment

This all sounds reasonable, but where is the “first, check your premises” caveat? Greater speed to the wrong destination is not a virtue, as the founder of the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), the late Fred Smith, stated. Path dependency and ‘the tyranny of the status quo” in climate research and understanding can ruin a student’s time and subsequent career path.

Lisa Sachs repeated refusal to address intellectual diversity and the need for balanced debate on open climate questions speak for themselves. It is climate propaganda at Columbia U.

Appendix: Climate Realism Resources

There is no substitute for a climate degree program to not have a critic of the narrative of alarm and forced energy transition. One or more such professors can both teach courses and be a resource for students who are taking activist/alarmist courses. The “power of opposites” is very effective learning.

A second recommendation is to have debates for students between CO2/climate optimists and pessimists. In person or on Zoom. This is not nearly as good as having opposing professors, but it is necessary to reduce the present bias.

Third, key books should be texts for climate courses, as well as ‘skeptic’ articles and websites (Climate Etc., WUWT, MasterResource ….). The websites of Alex Epstein, Robert Bryce, and Bjorn Lomborg are useful, as is Roger Pielke Jr.‘s Substack. The Modernizing the EPA project of the Competitive Enterprise Institute is research-worthy, as is the global warming work of CEI over the years and decades. Finally, many energy issues regarding the ‘transition’ are covered by the Institute for Energy Research.

Here are several books of note:

Judith Curry, Climate Uncertainty and Risk: Rethinking Our Response (Anthem Environment and Sustainability (2023)

Alex Epstein, Fossil Future: Why Global Human Flourishing Requires More Oil, Coal, and Natural Gas–Not Less (2022)

Steven Koonin, Unsettled: What Climate Science Tells Us, What It Doesn’t, and Why It Matters (2021)

Pierre Desrochers and Joanna Szurkmak, Population Bombed!: Exploding the Link Between Overpopulation and Climate Change (2018)

The post ‘Climate Finance’ Degree: Only at Columbia University appeared first on Master Resource.

via Master Resource

https://ift.tt/SrpsEiZ

March 19, 2025 at 01:09AM

Tories Abandon Net Zero

The Conservative Party has abandoned the “impossible” Net Zero 2050 target in a major U-turn, overturning a decades long cross-party consensus on tackling the ‘climate emergency’. Tory leader Kemi Badenoch gave a major speech this morning setting out her reasons for jettisoning the policy and refusing to set a new target. Here are the highlights.

We are living off the inheritance of previous generations. For three centuries every era in our country’s history left a better legacy for our country’s children.

The greatness of the UK is forged by the sacrifices of our ancestors. They built, they innovated and they took tough decisions. They never assumed that prosperity was guaranteed, they made sure it was.

But that has bred an assumption that Britain will always be wealthy. We are a wealthy country but we are becoming weaker through complacency. We are losing our resilience, we can’t make things like we used to, we don’t build as quickly. We are spending too much on debt, too much on welfare and too little on defence.

We are not growing like we should. … We are not creating a legacy for the next generation. Worse than that, we are mortgaging our children’s future by not recognising that the world has changed. We’re making things harder and harder for them across the board. …

We suffered the worst defeat in the party’s history. We replaced the principles-based government that brought us success with the managerialism of Labour and gave our power to quangos and courts.

We assumed that we would always be wealthy so we focused on the status quo rather than the future and now Labour is back. They are already making everything worse.

Jobs are disappearing, taxes are rising, and growth is shrinking. They are vandalising education and they are completely clueless of the need for real reform on regulation.

The public made it very clear that the Conservative Party needed some time away from government. Our job now is to use that time wisely – just as Margaret Thatcher and David Cameron did in the generations past.

And just like the 1970s and 2000s, our party cannot shortcut our way back into office with easy answers or rushed announcements.

We must develop credible plans that reflect the shared conservative values of personal responsibility, citizenship, sound money, family, freedom and so much more.

And we start today. By talking about one of the biggest problems that our country, and our world, will face in the decades ahead and show that Conservatives are in the business again of dealing with reality and the problems we face. …

Cheap abundant energy is the foundation of civilisation as we know it today. We mess with it at our peril but that’s exactly what’s been happening for 20 years and it’s now starting to cause real pain for everyday people and business.

The cost of electricity [is] far too high, much higher than nearby and comparative countries. …. A big chunk of our existing bills are not direct energy costs. People are struggling to pay them, businesses, especially manufacturing businesses, are closing down and there is no real plan for bringing costs down.

That surely cannot hold. It’s fantasy politics built on nothing, promising the Earth and costing it too. …

There has never, ever been a detailed plan. Ed Miliband’s Climate Change Act 2008, no plan. Legislating for Net Zero in 2019, no plan. A multi-trillion, 30-year project touching every single aspect of all our lives was decided in 90 minutes without a single vote.

Of the 22 MPs spoke that day, only two sounded notes of caution. I was one of them. I asked for the plan, I asked for it that day, I asked a few days later. And I waited and waited and waited. 845 days later, one came. And it wasn’t enough. …

We need a serious approach, we’ve got to stop pretending it’s simple and we have got to stop government by press release, announcements without a policy plan.

Anyone who has done any serious analysis knows Net Zero cannot be achieved without a significant drop in our living standards, or worse, by bankrupting us.

Without the rest of the world doing the same we are making our country less safe, less secure and less resilient. Let me give you three truths at the heart of Net Zero. First, the published plans are a completely muddle. It is true that the UK has made the greatest progress on carbon emissions in the developed world but we are only responsible for 1% of global emissions. Even if we hit absolute zero we will not have Net Zero around the world if other countries are following us, and they are not. …

Our success at reducing emissions has also come at a cost, the highest energy bills in the developed world. …

The real reason no one in the Labour Government is talking about a proper overall plan is they know it would reveal just how catastrophic the actual costs would be for families, for businesses and for our economy. …

Second, even where there is a plan, we are behind. Let’s look at one easy example. By 2040 the Committee on Climate Change says more than half of UK homes need to rip out boilers and replace them with a heat pump. There is no way we can do that quickly enough on that timescale. …

Heat pumps run on a lot of expensive electricity and it turns out many people just don’t like them. …

Most of them were installed with some form of government subsidy, or as I prefer to call it, taxpayers’ money. …

The good news is that costs have dropped in the last decade. Here’s the less good news. Ten years ago we were heavily dependent on China for all of the key components. Today we’re even more dependent. Look at the top dozen makers of solar panels, they are nearly all Chinese. …

Those three truths are why I call myself a Net Zero sceptic: muddled plans, unrealistic targets and deadlines, over-reliance on China. We have got to start acknowledging what is in plain sight. Net Zero makes us dangerously dependent on countries that don’t share our values and it is risking our own security. …

It is time to stop pretending that everything will be fine. And I am not debating whether climate change exists, it does. I badly want to leave a much better environmental inheritance for my children and for yours. But it doesn’t look like we are going to get remotely close to Net Zero by 2050. … This is what happens when politics turns into fantasy. Maybe some of it will change, but it doesn’t look promising.

I often say that when you want to help someone, you tell them the truth. When you want to help yourself, you tell them what they need to hear. We have to tell the truth.

The plans for Net Zero by 2050 are impossible. We have to do better than this. That’s why as part of our policy renewal we are going to do something that Labour failed to do in 14 years of opposition. We are going to deal with reality, confront the real problems, answer the real questions and be ready with a plan.

via Watts Up With That?

https://ift.tt/HgFRTw6

March 19, 2025 at 12:09AM

EV Mandates

Democrats are forcing people to purchase electric vehicles in order to reduce CO2 emissions.  At the same time they are burning up electric vehicles and generating CO2 emissions and toxins. Apparently free speech is now more of an existential threat … Continue reading →

via Real Climate Science

https://ift.tt/DxlECAf

March 18, 2025 at 10:44PM