Article

In China, the true cost of Britain's clean, green wind power experiment: Pollution on a disastrous scale

Submitted by climaterealists on Mon, 30/05/2011 - 20:36
Mail Online by Simon Parry and Ed Douglas
 
 
 

On the outskirts of one of China’s most polluted cities, an old farmer stares despairingly out across an immense lake of bubbling toxic waste covered in black dust. He remembers it as fields of wheat and corn.

Yan Man Jia Hong is a dedicated Communist. At 74, he still believes in his revolutionary heroes, but he despises the young local officials and entrepreneurs who have let this happen.

‘Chairman Mao was a hero and saved us,’ he says. ‘But these people only care about money. They have destroyed our lives.’

Vast fortunes are being amassed here in Inner Mongolia; the region has more than 90 per cent of the world’s legal reserves of rare earth metals, and specifically neodymium, the element needed to make the magnets in the most striking of green energy producers, wind turbines.

Live has uncovered the distinctly dirty truth about the process used to extract neodymium: it has an appalling environmental impact that raises serious questions over the credibility of so-called green technology.

The reality is that, as Britain flaunts its environmental credentials by speckling its coastlines and unspoiled moors and mountains with thousands of wind turbines, it is contributing to a vast man-made lake of poison in northern China. This is the deadly and sinister side of the massively profitable rare-earths industry that the ‘green’ companies profiting from the demand for wind turbines would prefer you knew nothing about.

Flannery finally boobs

Submitted by climaterealists on Mon, 23/05/2011 - 21:34

Andrew Bolt  - Herald Sun- 25 March 2011

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/mtr_today_march_25/ 

On our MTR 1377 show today:

Global Warming R.I.P.

Submitted by climaterealists on Sat, 14/05/2011 - 20:58
by Alan Caruba  14 March 2011
 
Have you noticed that you rarely hear “global warming” mentioned on radio or television and the term rarely occurs any more in the print media?
One reason is that it has been replaced with “climate change” and the other reason is that the only people talking about climate change seem to be leaders of governments like the United States or Australia.
To borrow a line from Shakespeare, I come to bury global warming, not to praise it.
 
An early and unrelenting skeptic from the days it first debuted in the late 1980s, I rather instinctively knew that the only warming occurring was the same natural warming that always follows a cooling cycle; in this case the warming that began in 1850 after the Little Ice Age that began around 1300.
It never made sense to me that “industry” should be blamed for pumping massive amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere when the amount of CO2 was a minuscule 0.038 percent with far greater amounts of hydrogen and oxygen that protect the Earth from becoming the galactic equivalent of a toasted marshmallow.

Fear of Climate Change Falling Precipitously

Submitted by climaterealists on Sat, 14/05/2011 - 20:53

http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech-mainmenu-30/environment/7301-fear-of-climate-change-falling-precipitously 

The results of a recent survey conducted by the Gallup organization reveal that Americans and Europeans have much more to worry about (statism? crushing national debt?) than climate change.

 
The survey was conducted in 2010 among 1,000 adult citizens of 111 countries. Although the study finds that Americans and Europeans aren’t preoccupied by the threat of climate change, respondents in Latin America and sub-Saharan Africa reported fearing real and personal risks from the effects of global warming.
 
The discrepancy was attributed to the differences in worldview between those living in the so-called developed area of the world and those living in the poorer, “developing” areas.
 
The 42% of adults worldwide who see global warming as a threat to themselves and their families in 2010 hasn't budged in the last few years, but increases and declines evident in some regions reflect the divisions on climate change between the developed and developing world.
 
Majorities in developed countries that are key participants in the global climate debate continue to view global warming as a serious threat, but their concern is more subdued than it was in 2007-2008. In the U.S., a slim majority (53%) currently see it as a serious personal threat, down from 63% in previous years.
 
Not only do Westerners express a statistical disregard for the dangers of climate change, but the number of those who believe there is something to fear from the weather is declining. In France, for example, the poll numbers indicate that the percentage of respondents who consider global warming “a serious threat” has declined from 75 percent to 59 percent since 2007.

Earth is cooling, sea levels not rising, scientists say

Submitted by climaterealists on Sat, 14/05/2011 - 20:51

http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/tech-mainmenu-30/environment/3583-earth-is-cooling-sea-levels-not-rising-scientists-say 

As the U.S. Senate prepares to consider enormously expensive cap-and-trade legislation, supposedly aimed at curbing alleged global warming caused by man-made emissions, scientists and policy makers at a conference in Chicago heard from experts in various scientific fields challenging the crumbling assumptions that have provided the foundation for global-warming alarmism.

Dr. Don Easterbrook, emeritus professor of geology at Western Washington University, was among those addressing the three-day conference. According to Professor Easterbrook, author of more than 150 peer-reviewed papers, the Earth is now in the beginning period of a trend of global cooling. 

A Golden Opportunity for Farmers.

Submitted by climaterealists on Sat, 14/05/2011 - 20:47

by Robin Grieve  of Pastural Farming Climate Research

Two remits put forward by Neil Henderson for the Beef and Lamb annual meeting give farmers an excellent opportunity to send a clear signal to Beef and Lamb that it must stop giving farmer’s money to the global warming industry.

Beef and Lamb is a partner in Pastoral Greenhouse Gas Research Consortium which was set up to fund research into ways to reduce livestock greenhouse gas emissions. Beef and Lamb contribute a significant amount of farmer’s money to this consortium, as do Dairy NZ and Fonterra. One of the remits calls for Beef and Lamb to withdraw from the consortium and cease its financial contribution.

Farmers should vote for this remit because this consortium is a complete waste of time and money, the world would be a better place without it.

The UN 'disappears' 50 million Climate Refugees, then botches the cover-up

Submitted by climaterealists on Tue, 26/04/2011 - 17:50

http://dailycaller.com/2011/04/16/the-un-disappears-50-million-climate-refugees-then-botches-the-cover-up/#ixzz1KbamCj00

   Oh boy, government idiocy at its finest. Not only is the original claim bogus, the attempts to disappear it are hilariously inept. Apparently, they’ve never heard of Google Cache at the UN. Rather than simply saying “we were wrong,” they’ve now brought even more distrust onto the UN.

Back on April 11th, Gavin Atkins of Asian Correspondent asked this simple question: What happened to the climate refugees?

It is a valid question, and he backs it up with census numbers. Here’s the first part of his story.

New study affirms climate change is natural

Submitted by climaterealists on Mon, 18/04/2011 - 21:51

http://www.cfact.org/a/1875/New-study-affirms-natural-climate-change?utm_source=CFACT+Updates&utm_campaign=331f46161b-Can%27t_sell_warming_Call_it_clean_energy3_7_2011&utm_medium=email 

It's nice when people validate your work. Fred Singer and I-co-authors of Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1500 Years-are currently basking in the glow of a new paper that affirms the earth's long, moderate, natural climate cycle. The study is by Dr. U.R. Rao, former chair of India's Space Research Organization. He says solar variations and cosmic rays account for 40 percent of the world's recent global warming.

Dr. Rao says the data between 1960 and 2005 show lots fewer cosmic rays hitting the earth, due to a periodic expansion of the sun's magnetic field. The bigger solar magnetic field blocked many of the cosmic rays that would otherwise have hit earth. Fewer cosmic rays hitting the earth meant fewer water droplets shattering in our atmosphere, and thus fewer of the low, wet clouds that deflect solar heat back into space. So the earth warmed.

Fred and I tried to tell the world in 2007 that the moderate 1500-year Dansgaard-Oeschger cycle was the cause of the warming since 1850, based on historic and paleoclimatic evidence. The cosmic ray linkage was put forth in 2008 by Henrik Svensmark of Denmark. The UN's panel on climate change dismissed that whole approach, claiming the variations in the sun's irradiance were far too small to account for the rapid warming from 1976-98.

Can't sell global warming? Call it clean energy

Submitted by climaterealists on Mon, 18/04/2011 - 21:49

http://www.cfact.org/a/1890/Who-could-oppose-clean-energy?utm_source=CFACT+Updates&utm_campaign=331f46161b-Can%27t_sell_warming_Call_it_clean_energy3_7_2011&utm_medium=email 

By Dennis Avery


President Obama didn't mention carbon constraints in his State of the Union message. Such carbon constraints would force the nation to give up most of the energy that currently keeps us warm and productive. Instead, the President proposed a new "clean energy" program-which would force the nation to give up most of the energy that currently keeps us warm and productive. A study by the Beacon Hill Institute in Boston estimates the President's "clean energy" proposal might well cost the economy $4 trillion over 20 years, and force huge numbers of U.S. jobs overseas.

Mr. Obama's "new" proposal is obviously being offered as Plan B, since his cap-and-trade proposal failed in the Congress. He obviously hopes to lure some befuddled House Republican votes to pass it. The President is not "moving to the middle." Instead he is playing bait-and-switch. Either cap-and-trade or "clean energy" would cause chaos in the American economy. Remember his desperate efforts to pass Obama-care, complete with the payoffs to key Senators?  He is rigidly persistent!

New Jungles Prompt a Debate on Rain Forests

Submitted by climaterealists on Mon, 18/04/2011 - 21:46

 

Tito Herrera for The New York Times

NEW GROWTH Marta Ortega de Wing once raised pigs in Chilibre, Panama, on land now reverting to nature, a trend dimming the view of primeval forests as sacred.

Syndicate content