The content on this site is provided without any warranty, express or implied. All opinions expressed on this site are those of the author and may contain errors or omissions.
NO MATERIAL HERE CONSTITUTES "INVESTMENT ADVICE" NOR IS IT A RECOMMENDATION TO BUY OR SELL ANY FINANCIAL INSTRUMENT, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO STOCKS, OPTIONS, BONDS OR FUTURES.
The author may have a position in any company or security mentioned herein. Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility.
Market charts, when present, used with permission of TD Ameritrade/ThinkOrSwim Inc. Neither TD Ameritrade or ThinkOrSwim have reviewed, approved or disapproved any content herein.
The Market Ticker content may be sent unmodified to lawmakers via print or electronic means or excerpted online for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to. Please contact Karl Denninger for reprint permission in other media, to republish full articles, or for any commercial use (which includes any site where advertising is displayed.)
Submissions or tips on matters of economic or political interest may be sent "over the transom" to The Editor at any time. To be considered for publication your submission must include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.
Considering sending spam? Read this first.
But Global Warming is real and even CHINA has agreed to be carbon-neutral in the next 40 years!
Including decommissions, China’s coal-fired fleet capacity rose by a net 29.8 GW in 2020, even as the rest of the world made cuts of 17.2 GW, according to research released on Wednesday by Global Energy Monitor (GEM), a U.S. think tank, and the Helsinki-based Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA).
They have roughly 250GW of additional capacity under construction and last year added more than 35GW of new approvals.
The rest of the world has, on balance, decreased coal-fired energy output.
Unfortunately with the exception of hydroelectric, which is a renewable source, so-called "green energy" is not reliable. Base load generation must be reliable and peak load generation must be dispatchable when needed in each and every case. If it's cost-effective to use renewable sources for "fill" while the others remain available that's fine, but it almost-never is.
Why do we keep putting up with the lies coming from both China and our own government?
This isn't about "Global Warming" it is about destroying the United States and other Western nations.
Behind every unit of GDP is a unit of energy.
Like it or not, that's physics and there's nothing you can do about it.
So tell me once again why you haven't used every single global warming screamer as a boat anchor given that their real intent is to destroy all western nations in favor of the Communist Chinese.
LAUSANNE, Switzerland (Reuters) - World leaders must prove that they have listened to young climate activists after a year of protests has not led to any progress in the reduction of greenhouse emissions, leading activist Greta Thunberg said on Monday.
I WANNA DAMN CANDY BAR NOW!
With all due respect to Greta, and she's not entitled to much, that she managed to get the world's attention because she's both young and cute means exactly nothing when it comes to authority -- or a demand that people "must prove they listened."
That you're an activist doesn't mean anything either.
You're 16. You lack the scientific foundation or knowledge to speak with any degree of authority on any such matter. That others claim there is an emergency and claim that it's backed by "science" means nothing either. Repeating someone else's screed without critical evaluation just makes you a loud-mouthed teenager.
Virtually all teens are loud about something. Big deal.
It's my opinion, as a 56 year old who actually does have a fair amount of understanding of the science involved, including gas laws, physics, chemistry and thermodynamics -- along with putting a lot of independent time and study into the underlying data, that this entire "emergency" nonsense is a scam.
However, I freely admit (unlike you), having taken many more trips around the Sun and understanding that my analysis, just as with others although they do not admit to it, contains enough uncertainty that I could be wrong.
Note that the so-called "scientists" who make these claims (1) do not put uncertainties on all their data, (2) don't expose their data in the raw, along with all of their analysis tools, to public scrutiny and in many cases have intentionally destroyed source data, and (3) do not admit that the claimed changes are subject to said uncertainty. This, by the way, is proof that they're not scientists as the first thing you learn when studying actual science, any science, is that all measurements have an uncertainty and all calculations and thus results of same must carry all uncertainties through from one end to the other, without exception.
But in the end, even though I am convinced that all the climate screaming is a scam it doesn't matter if I'm wrong. It doesn't matter because the United States, and the rest of the industrialized world isn't the fastest-growing source of CO2 emissions nor do we have the majority of the population of the planet between us. In fact it's not even close! Between Europe and the United States we have approximately 1.1 billion of the 7.5 billion humans on this rock at the present time. Add in the rest of the "modern world" and you get a few hundred million more (e.g. Russia, Japan, Australia, etc.)
Most humans ex-Europe and the US live with gross energy consumption on a per-person basis that is a tiny fraction of those in said industrialized world.
Just as a start since you and the rest of the screamers will not face or acknowledge the math: India alone has over three hundred million people, roughly the population of America, without electrical power! Over 1.3 billion people planet-wide have no electricity in their homes.
India produces roughly 80% of their power from fossil fuels. Are you going to try to tell them to turn that off? Really? What about the 300 million people in that nation who have no electrical power at all? Shall they never receive power in their residence? How about China? Roughly 2/3rds of their electrical generation is from coal. In Sub-Saharan Africa only 43% of people have access to electricity with several nations in the region under 25%! South Africa as one nation accounts for nearly half of the entire region's generation capacity. Coal generates approximately 90% of the region's electrical power, incidentally.
Unless you intend to murder all these people or tell them they can never obtain an industrialized standard of living their energy consumption and carbon emissions will dramatically rise no matter how much you or anyone else would like it to be otherwise. Even if the entire industrial world cut its CO2 emissions to zero, which would instantly destroy all transportation and agriculture in the Western World and kill a couple of billion humans through starvation as a result CO2 emissions on a global basis would still continue, after a short pause, to increase.
In other words you, Greta, are a screaming petulant child demanding the impossible short of mass-murder on a scale never before contemplated in the history of this planet -- and there have been many genocidal maniacs over the millennia. Attempting to prevent the majority of humans on this planet from achieving that which you have enjoyed during your entire childhood and adolescence is the height of arrogance, pig-headed hubris and outrageous aggrandizement of your prissy, entitled youth.
That is the message you should receive from "world leaders", since the majority of them, by far, preside over parts of this rock that do not have any of the things you and your family have taken for granted literally since your first suckle from your mother's breast.
You may be cute and you may have a loud voice, but you lack even a cursory ability to examine the facts based on this arithmetic and set of facts. Even if you were to spend years studying the underlying science after having gone to college and learned about chemistry through organic (including buffering reactions, which play a major part in this dance of climate on the rock we call "Earth"), gas laws, absorption spectra of various gases, thermodynamics, physics and more -- and having done so you arrived at the same conclusion you have now IT DOES NOT MATTER because not only could you not get anywhere in an airplane to deliver your screed without fossil fuels (which you'd understand the moment you studied the above subjects) and thus said 100% cutoff will not happen but in addition none of the nations and their peoples who currently are not enjoying a western-style standard of living are going to consent to living for all eternity in straw huts, hunting and gathering at subsistence levels while ****ting in the woods.
The debate's over folks.
Back when the "climate researcher" folks had their lab hacked into and their data set and source code stolen I wrote an article on what was in there -- including obvious adjustments in the FORTRAN code that were one way.
Post that incident there was a "convenient" loss of original data -- which made re-examination on an objective basis of much of the so-called "work" impossible.
Unfortunately for the screamers, they didn't get all of the data sets. There were plenty of them left, and eventually some folks took to actual mathematical analysis of them.
You can read their conclusions here -- but let me just quote a bit of it.
The conclusive findings of this research are that the three GAST data sets are not a valid representation of reality. In fact, the magnitude of their historical data adjustments, that removed their cyclical temperature patterns, are totally inconsistent with published and credible U.S. and other temperature data. Thus, it is impossible to conclude from the three published GAST data sets that recent years have been the warmest ever –despite current claims of record setting warming.
Finally, since GAST data set validity is a necessary condition for EPA’s GHG/CO2 Endangerment Finding, it too is invalidated by these research findings.
In other words, and to expand:
1. No, it has not been the "warmest ever."
2. There were more severe "heat wave" incidents in the 1930s, in point of fact, there was a cold period in the 1960s and 70s (which some of us who are old enough remember!) and today's anomalies are approximately equal to that of the early 1990s.
3. These facts including both the hot and cool periods earlier in the 19xx years, fit not only across the United States but globally in the Northern Hemisphere.
It is therefore quite-clear that the data has been intentionally tampered with.
Since this has formed the basis for plans to steal literal trillions of dollars and has already resulted in the forced extraction of hundreds of billions in aggregate for motorists and industry this quite-clearly constitutes the largest economic fraud ever perpetrated in the world.
I call for the indictment and prosecution of every person and organization involved, asset-stripping all of them to their literal underwear.