The Truth About Green Subsidies

Up to 100 solar PV firms in Japan could face bankruptcy this year, with more than double the number of firms going bust in the first half of this year than the same period in 2016. According to corporate credit research company Teikoku Databank, which surveys companies across various industries and has produced its third report on solar PV company bankruptcies, 50 companies in Japan’s solar sector have already gone out of business in the first six months of 2017. Teikoku Databank acknowledged that there has been a slowdown in deployment in the past couple of years as the government successively made cuts of 10% or more on an annual basis to the premium prices paid for solar energy fed into the grid. —PV Tech, 18 July 2017

The loss of 340 jobs at a factory that makes blades for wind turbines could be harbinger of troubles ahead in Ontario’s green-energy industry, a leading analyst says. Siemens Canada announced Tuesday it’s closing its Tillsonburg plant, one of four Ontario green-energy factories set up under a controversial, multi-billion-dollar deal with Korean industrial giant Samsung. “I think it was always pretty obvious that whatever jobs were going to arise from the Green Energy Act were all temporary or almost all temporary,” Adams said. “Samsung had no history in renewable energy before they came to Ontario. They came only for the subsidies, and when the subsidies dry up, they’ll disappear as quick as they landed,” said Adams, an independent energy and environmental advisor and researcher. —Toronto Sun, 18 July 2017

Not a single Tesla was sold in the country in April. Following Hong Kong’s decision to reduce incentives for electric vehicles, sales of Tesla vehicles in the country plummeted. The local government slashed a tax break for electric vehicles on April 1, which resulted in no Model S or Model X deliveries during the whole month. Data from Hong Kong’s Transportation Department also reveals only five privately owned electric vehicles were sold in May. The collapse reveals once again how sensitive the automaker’s performance can be to government incentive programs. —Motor1 News, 11 July 2017

The California state Assembly passed a $3-billion subsidy program for electric vehicles, dwarfing the existing program. The bill is now in the state Senate. If passed, it will head to Governor Jerry Brown, who has not yet indicated if he’d sign what is ostensibly an effort to put EV sales into high gear, but below the surface appears to be a Tesla bailout. Tesla will soon hit the limit of the federal tax rebates, which are good for the first 200,000 EVs sold in the US per manufacturer beginning in December 2009. In the second quarter after the manufacturer hits the limit, the subsidy gets cut in half, from $7,500 to $3,750; two quarters later, it gets cut to $1,875. Two quarters later, it goes to zero. Losing a $7,500 subsidy on a $35,000 car is a huge deal. The Tesla Model 3 would be tough to sell without the federal $7,500. But this new bill would push Californian taxpayers into filling the void. It would be a godsend for Tesla. –Wolf Richter, Business Insider, 17 July 2017

Benny Peiser, director of the climate change-skeptical Global Warming Policy Forum in London, said Mr. Macron’s claim “has been both overhyped and misinterpreted by the news media. “In reality, it would appear that President Trump may have swayed Macron to change his position on the UN climate deal,” said Mr. Peiser in an email. “In short, my assessment is that President Macron may be preparing the ground for giving up the EU’s rejectionist position about the Paris agreement,” said Mr. Peiser. “After all, this, I believe, is the only likely option to bring back the U.S. administration to the negotiating table — and even this scenario looks more like a utopian dream at the present time.” –Valerie Richardson, The Washington Times, 18 July 2017

My Lords, energy and climate policy displays a great deal of groupthink and a reluctance to challenge long-held assumptions, even when the evidence changes. So it was refreshing to work on this report, which questions many of those assumptions. –Lord Turnbull, House of Lords, 17 July 2017

Why is a bishop — I say to the noble Lord, Lord Turnbull, that bishops are always curates at heart — interested in this area? I have a scientific background and have always been drawn to issues where science and public policy interact… Especially in my years as a bishop, I have become concerned about the rising cost of electricity and its differential impact upon those who, by a socioeconomic judgment, are among the poorest in our society. Levels of fuel poverty have been stubbornly high, underpinned by rises in the cost of electricity. —The Lord Bishop of Chester, House of Lords, 17 July 2017

A controversial article appearing in the New York magazine has drawn criticism from the scientific community. One activist has drawn criticism from the scientific community by claiming it will render the planet uninhabitable and bring about “rolling death smogs” of pollution. David Wallace-Wells wrote an article, titled The Uninhabitable Earth in New York magazine, and claimed the apocalypse could come about very quickly indeed. “At 11 or 12 degrees of warming, more than half the world’s population, as distributed today, would die of direct heat. Things almost certainly won’t get that hot this century, though models of unabated emissions do bring us that far eventually.” But the article has been called “irresponsible” and “nonsense” by commentators taking to social media. —The Mirror, 17 July 2017

Comments (28)

  • Avatar

    rakooi

    |

    13.8 TIMES MORE SUPPORT goes to Killer Coal and BIG Oil….those profitable industries have been sucking on the STATE & FEDERAL corporate welfare teat since 1918 !
    JUST OVER a TRILLION DOLLARS in 2016 alone.
    Lobbyist WRITTEN Industry Specific Tax Breaks !
    Lobbyist WRITTEN Industry Specific TAX DEFERRALS !
    Free land or Free land use.
    Free Infra structure and free infra structure maintenance.
    Free Routine Policing .
    Free Training Wage supports.
    Even foreign aid….designed as a DOLLAR-FOR-DOLLAR reimbursement for SUBSIDIES other nations provide our profitable industries.
    *
    *
    Everything changed in 2015 with the Paris climate agreement ! !
    We must decouple economic growth from environmental impacts and leave a better world,” said Goyal,
    to loud applause from the 1650 energy experts and government officials in Vienna. “Every moment counts.”

    “I’ve never heard such visionary and progressive remarks from a world-leading country,”
    the Prime Minister of Tuvalu, Enele Sopoaga, told me afterwards.
    The small Pacific island country is barely ten feet above sea level and rising water levels
    resulting from climate change have forced thousands to leave the country already.

    “India sees the urgency of climate action,” said Sopoaga.

    India is in a big hurry to green its energy system to create jobs, improve the quality of life for its citizens,
    clean the air and water and, yes, tackle climate change, its leaders say.
    Keep in mind this is a country with 1.3 billion people, nearly 300 million of whom do not have access to electricity
    and where the average income is $1,600 a year.

    Now mainly powered by coal,
    ** India is adding 50 percent more solar and wind than the U.S. currently has installed.
    It is replacing 770 million street and household lights with energy-saving and long-lasting
    LEDs and bringing electric access for the first time to tens of thousands of poor rural villages.

    And India is already doing all of this faster than anyone believed possible.

    http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/05/india-solar-wind-renewable-power-electric-cars-leds/?google_editors_picks=true

    On the GREEN & CLEAN side of the equation…

    • Avatar

      Sonnyhill

      |

      Rakooi your posts are leftovers recycled as barf.

    • Avatar

      G

      |

      Tedious
      Long-winded
      Unoriginal
      Bereft of humor

      • Avatar

        rakooi

        |

        BUT ACCURATE….and boring as a Goldwater Conservative could be.

        • Avatar

          Sonnyhill

          |

          You slipped out of character there Rakooi. Go back to your broken DP English.

        • Avatar

          G

          |

          I just watched a documentary on North Korea where all the NK people shown bow to Kim Jong-Un as a god, proclaiming robotically the most absurd attributes imaginable to their “Dear Leader”.

          I’ve read enough of your stuff to know that you would fit in there nicely.

  • Avatar

    Spurwing Plover

    |

    Solar Energy is a bust just like with wind energy We realy need to consiter using Hot Air that would make Gore,DiCaprio,Suzuki the EDF,NRDC,GREENPEACE very very useful indeed and if we harnessed all the Hypocricy then the above mentoined would also be useful at

    • Avatar

      rakooi

      |

      as always, SPURNING PLOVER insults and tells NO TRUTH.

      ASK the Governor of IOWA how solar and wind are failures
      ASK the Governor of Texas how solar and wind are failures.

      Stabilized and falling electric rates now that killer coal has competition.
      THOUSANDS of jobs, jobs, jobs!
      Increased Tax Revenues
      ..
      “Wind power in the United States – Wikipedia
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_the_United_States
      More than 35 percent of the electric power generated in Iowa now comes from wind power.
      **
      “For the first time, monthly electricity generation from wind and solar (including utility-scale plants and small-scale systems) exceeded 10% of total electricity generation in the United States, based on March data in EIA’s Electric Power Monthly. Electricity generation from both of these energy sources has grown with increases in wind and solar generating capacity

      • Avatar

        Sonnyhill

        |

        Coal is King in Iowa. Natural gas is second. Doesn’t matter how much wind and solar you build, backup is still needed and must be kept in hot standby.

  • Avatar

    MikeW

    |

    Unfortunately, with current technologies, wind turbines and solar panels consume more energy in their construction, maintenance, backup and decommissioning than they can ever produce in their lifetimes. That’s why they always lose money without subsidies or set-asides. In wide-boundary energy analyses (EROI) that include both direct and indirect energy costs (including land, labor and dependents), wind and solar industry energy costs are always higher than their energy revenues (especially in the U.S. where labor energy costs are especially high). In narrow-boundary energy analyses that consider only direct energy costs, wind and solar power actual delivered energy production-to-consumption EROI is always less than the minimum required to run a modern advanced economy, which ironically is the only economy that can support wind and solar power industries. (For comparison, fossil fuel energy sources have EROIs much higher than the minimum required for advanced economies.)
    In addition, wind and solar power are environmental disasters. They destroy acres of wildlife habitat, kill millions of birds and bats, cause health problems for anyone unfortunate enough to live nearby, pollute landfills, despoil the landscape, and poison vast amounts of ground water with their mining operations for lithium and rare earth metals. There is nothing economical nor environmental about wind and solar power. They can only be tolerated by societies that have other energy surpluses to spend on them, and by those that value “feel-good” talking points over actual economic and environmental liabilities.

    • Avatar

      Sonnyhill

      |

      Thank you, Mike. Rakooi obviously uses narrow boundary analysis for his propaganda.
      Third World countries favor fossil fuels because? They’re poor. They can’t afford the luxury of flaky green energy.

    • Avatar

      rakooi

      |

      I can’t find 1 point where you tell the truth.

      I am not surprised that you have no reference to substantiate your claims.

      I live next to hundreds of those wind turbines…nestled between farms that are Prosperous….I walk my dogs thru them…and in several years, have found a couple birds that could have been killed.

      YOU LIE ABOUT BIRD DEATHS and Pollution and health problems and
      limited life expectancy (40+ years)…unprofitable…(pay for themselves in months…after that it is profit) etc….YOU JUST NEVER STOP LYING.
      Man-made structure/technology
      Associated bird deaths per year (U.S.)
      Feral and domestic cats
      Hundreds of millions [source: AWEA]
      Power lines
      130 million — 174 million [source: AWEA]
      Windows (residential and commercial)
      100 million — 1 billion [source: TreeHugger]
      Pesticides
      70 million [source: AWEA]
      Automobiles
      60 million — 80 million [source: AWEA]
      Lighted communication towers
      40 million — 50 million [source: AWEA]
      Wind turbines
      10,000 — 40,000 [source: ABC]

      ALL NEW SOLAR and WIND ELECTRIC Generation plants are SPANKING KILLER COAL as to price of electric…..WITHOUT SUBSIDIES !

      ASK the Governor of TEXAS about the failure of WIND and SOLAR !
      Listen to him complain about the stabilized and falling electric rates
      now that KILLER COAL has some real competition…
      Listen to him complain about the thousands of JOBS, JOBS, JOBS…all well paying.
      Listen to him complain about ALL the additional investments that tangential industry makes in his state.
      Listen to him complain about ALL the additional tax Revenues.

      and there are 7 other states raving about ALL the BENEFITS OF SOLAR AND WIND Electric production.

      “….
      THE Low Costs of
      Solar Power
      and
      Wind Power
      and
      Natural GAS:
      Crush Killeer Coal Electric rates,
      Crush Nuclear Electric rates,
      even
      Spanks Natural Gas Electric rates.

      December 25th, 2016

      “We already published a great article from Nexus Media regarding Lazard’s new report showing the extremely low (and falling) costs of solar power and wind power.

      “However, I’ve been wanting to highlight these awesome new findings since Larmion shared the updated report with us earlier this month, and I want to break out the amazing news in 5 specific ways.

      These are 5 messages that I think anyone wanting a better US economy (or a better economy in practically any country), anyone wanting national energy freedom (aka energy independence), anyone wanting to advance the most cost-effective choices for electricity generation, and anyone wanting to make logical energy decisions should know and share with others.
      ….
      “1. Wind & Solar Are Cheaper (Without Subsidies) Than Dirty KILLER COAL Energy

      The first point is the very basic fact that new wind power and/or solar power plants are typically cheaper than new coal, natural gas, or nuclear power plants — even without any governmental support for solar or wind.

      Not only are they typically cheaper — they’re much cheaper in many cases.
      ….
      2. Wind & Solar Are Actually Even Much Cheaper Than Dirty KILLER COAL Energy (More So Than Lazard Shows)

      The estimates above are supposedly “unsubsidized,” but if you include social externalities as societal subsidies (I do), the estimated costs of fossil fuels and nuclear energy are hugely subsidized in those charts.
      ….
      3. Solar & Wind Became Much Cheaper In The Past 7 Years (85% and 66%, Respectively)

      No, wind and solar costs didn’t roll off a cliff because of Obama, but his staff did help to hasten the roll to some degree. Programs like SunShot have helped to bring down costs even faster than they were coming down anyway, as did greater deployment of renewables — with greater production and deployment, costs come down almost automatically.
      ….
      4. The Lowest Solar Costs Shown In The Lazard Report Are Considerably Higher Than Globally Recorded Low-Price Bids

      I won’t go into much detail right now, but I will update this article as more record-low prices for solar power and wind power are reported. For now, though, note that we’ve seen solar project bids for under 3¢/kWh in the UAE and well under 4¢/kWh in Mexico — prices that are well below the Lazard’s low-end estimates for the US.

      ….

      People Can Get Lower Prices But More Jobs With Solar & Wind

      Whether American, British, Canadian, Australian, Indian, German, Dutch, French, Spanish, or [fill in the blank], solar and wind power don’t just mean lower prices — they also typically mean more jobs. Much of the price of dirty energy power plants is in the fossil fuel — the physical resource. When we buy that fuel, much of the money goes to the billionaires and multimillionaires who “own” the fuel — the coal mines and the natural gas wells.

      Sunshine and wind, of course, are free, but distributed solar and wind power plants have to get built and installed — those are things humans do. When we pay for solar and wind power plants, we pay for human labor, and often help create or support local jobs.

      We don’t actually have to choose between low prices or jobs or protecting our air, water, and climate — we get all of those things with renewable energy options like solar and wind energy.”

      https://cleantechnica.com/2016/12/25/cost-of-solar-power-vs-cost-of-wind-power-coal-nuclear-natural-gas/
      *
      * http://www.climatechangenew

      https://www.carbonbrief.org

      http://www.utilitydive.com/

      Even without the massive benefits of reduction of CO2 emissions, we cannot afford to not switch to renewables. The decreases in energy prices and increases in employment are crucial for the economy.
      *
      “Wind turbine payback: Environmental lifecycle assessment of 2 …
      https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/06/140616093317.htm
      Jun 16, 2014 – They conclude that in terms of cumulative energy payback, or the time to produce the amount of energy required of production and installation, a wind turbine with a working life of 20-45 years will offer a net benefit within five to eight months of being brought online.”
      *

      • Avatar

        Sonnyhill

        |

        Do you scoop the doggie Rakooi?

  • Avatar

    G

    |

    I have a very liberal college professor as a rural neighbor. He had a series of very large photovoltaic panels installed on his property and I was curious. I asked him honestly, “When do you calculate they will pay for themselves?”. Without hesitating he said, “Oh, they’ll NEVER pay for themselves! I just got so much tax assistance and grant money that I couldn’t resist!”

  • Avatar

    Spurwing Plover

    |

    Coal Yes Windfarms no I realy do like to hear songs about coal miners like BIG BAD JOHN,16 TONS and COAL MINERS DUAGHTER over some mindless enviromental themed song like Big Yellow Taxi

    • Avatar

      rakooi

      |

      There is that Spurning Clover again….yap yap yap

      Mitt Romney Called those business failures “creative destruction”

      Your predictions that hundreds are gone IS BOGUS … FAKE … FRAUD

      There is absolutely
      NO REASON WHY
      Solar,
      Wind,
      Nuclear,
      Natural Gas,
      Hydro,
      Geo Thermal,
      Tidal Energy
      cannot fill the 40% Killer Coal’s monopoly niche,
      as we dispose of KILLER COAL.
      ….and
      by the way,
      TODAY!
      .
      “UNSUBSIDIZED” SOLAR, WIND generated electricity are substantially less expensive than cheapest KILLER COAL today !!
      *
      TALK ABOUT MASSIVE REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH… the TOP ECONOMIC TIER has had its total taxes paid cut in half and that is on TRIPLED INCOME!

      A huge chunk of the cost of transitioning away from the KILLER Coal & OIL monopoly, can be paid for by STOPPING
      the endless subsidies,
      industry specific Tax Breaks,
      industry specific Tax Deferrals (most never to be paid) ,
      free land,
      free land use,
      free infra structure, etc.
      .
      Paul Ryan, August of 2016, estimated that by the end of 2016 Coal & Oil will have received just over a TRILLION DOLLARS
      in subsidies, free land, free infrastructure, industry specific tax breaks and tax deferrals etc.
      .
      …including EVEN foreign aid used as a dollar-for-dollar reimbursement to foreign nations for their subsidies to Our Oil & Coal Companies.
      *
      *
      “…There are numerous damaging & TOXIC environmental impacts of coal electric Generation that occur through its mining, preparation, combustion, waste storage, and transport.
      This article provides an overview:
      .
      **Acid mine drainage (AMD) refers to the outflow of acidic water from coal mines or metal mines, often abandoned mines where ore- or coal mining activities have exposed rocks containing the sulphur-bearing mineral pyrite.
      Pyrite reacts with air and water to form sulphuric acid and dissolved iron, and as water washes through mines, this compound forms a dilute acid, which can wash into nearby rivers and streams.[1]
      .
      **Air pollution from coal-fired power plants includes sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter (PM), and heavy metals, leading to smog, acid rain, toxins in the environment, and numerous respiratory, cardiovascular, and cerebrovascular effects.[2]
      .
      **Air pollution from coal mines is mainly due to emissions of particulate matter and gases including methane (CH4), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and nitrogen oxides (NOx), as well as carbon monoxide (CO).[3]
      .
      **Climate impacts of coal plants – Coal-fired power plants are responsible for one-third of America’s carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, making coal a huge contributor to global warming.[4]
      **Black carbon resulting from incomplete combustion is an additional contributor to climate change.[5] CHINA reported an 18% loss of snow pack and glacial ice due to Black Carbon.
      .
      **Coal dust stirred up during the mining process, as well as released during coal transport, which can cause severe and potentially deadly respiratory problems.[6]
      .
      **Coal fires occur in both abandoned coal mines and coal waste piles. Internationally, thousands of underground coal fires are burning now.
      .
      **Global coal fire emissions are estimated to include 40 tons of mercury going into the atmosphere annually, and three percent of the world’s annual carbon dioxide emissions.[7][8]
      .
      **Coal combustion waste is the nation’s second largest waste stream after municipal solid waste.[9] It is disposed of in landfills or “surface impoundments,” which are lined with compacted clay soil, a plastic sheet, or both.
      .
      **As rain filters through the toxic ash pits year after year, the toxic metals are leached out into the local environment.[10][11]
      .
      **Coal sludge, also known as slurry, is the liquid coal waste generated by washing coal. It is typically disposed of at impoundments located near coal mines, but in some cases it is directly injected into abandoned underground mines.
      Since coal sludge contains toxins, leaks or spills can endanger underground and surface waters.[2]
      .
      **Floods such as the Buffalo Creek Flood caused by mountaintop removal mining and failures of coal mine impoundments.
      .
      **Forest destruction caused by mountaintop removal mining – According to a 2010 study, mountaintop removal mining has destroyed 6.8% of Appalachia’s forests.[12][13]
      .
      **Greenhouse gas emissions caused by surface mining – According to a 2010 study, mountaintop removal mining releases large amounts of carbon through clearcutting and burning of trees and through releases of carbon in soil brought to the surface by mining operations. These greenhouse gas emissions amount to at least 7% of conventional power plant emissions.[14][15]
      .
      **Loss or degradation of groundwater
      – Since coal seams are often serve as underground aquifers, removal of coal beds may result in drastic changes in hydrology after mining has been completed.
      .
      **Radical disturbance of 8.4 million acres of farmland, rangeland, and forests, most of which has not been reclaimed
      — See The footprint of coal
      .
      **Heavy metals and coal
      – Coal contains many heavy metals, as it is created through compressed organic matter containing virtually every element in the periodic table – mainly carbon, but also heavy metals.
      The heavy metal content of coal varies by coal seam and geographic region. Small amounts of heavy metals can be necessary for health, but too much may cause acute or chronic toxicity (poisoning).
      Many of the heavy metals released in the mining and burning of coal are environmentally and biologically toxic elements, such as lead, mercury, nickel, tin, cadmium, antimony, and arsenic, as well as radio isotopes of thorium and strontium.[16][17][18]
      .
      **Mercury and coal – Emissions from coal-fired power plants are the largest source of mercury in the United States, accounting for about 41 percent (48 tons in 1999) of industrial releases.[19]
      .
      **Methane released by coal mining accounts for about 10 percent of US releases of methane (CH4), a potent global warming gas.[20]
      .
      **Mountaintop removal mining and other forms of surface mining can lead to the drastic alteration of landscapes, destruction of habitat, damages to water supplies, and air pollution.
      Not all of these effects can be adequately addressed through coal mine reclamation.
      .
      **Particulates and coal – Particulate matter (PM) includes the tiny particles of fly ash and dust that are expelled from coal-burning power plants.[21]
      Studies have shown that exposure to particulate matter is related to an increase of respiratory and cardiac mortality.[22] [23]
      .
      **Radioactivity and coal – Coal contains minor amounts of the radioactive elements, uranium and thorium. When coal is burned, the fly ash contains uranium and thorium “at up to 10 times their original levels.”[24]
      **Subsidence
      – Land subsidence may occur after any type of underground mining, but it is particularly common in the case of longwall mining.[25]
      .
      **Sulfur dioxide and coal
      – Coal-fired power plants are the largest human-caused source of sulfur dioxide, a pollutant gas that contributes to the production of acid rain and causes significant health problems.
      Coal naturally contains sulfur, and when coal is burned, the sulfur combines with oxygen to form sulfur oxides.[26]
      .
      **Thermal pollution from coal plants is the degradation of water quality by power plants and industrial manufacturers
      – when water used as a coolant is returned to the natural environment at a higher temperature, the change in temperature impacts organisms by decreasing oxygen supply, and affecting ecosystem composition.[27]
      .
      **Toxins
      – According to a July 2011 NRDC report, “How Power Plants Contaminate Our Air and States” electricity generation in the U.S. releases 381,740,601 lbs. of toxic air pollution annually, or 49% of total national emissions, based on data from the EPA’s Toxic Release Inventory (2009 data, accessed June 2011). Power plants are the leading sources of toxic air pollution in all but four of the top 20 states by electric sector emissions.
      .
      **Transportation
      – Coal is often transported via trucks, railroads, and large cargo ships, which release air pollution such as soot and can lead to disasters that ruin the environment, such as the Shen Neng 1 coal carrier collision with the Great Barrier Reef, Australia that occurred in April 2010.
      .
      **Waste coal,
      also known as “culm,” “gob,” or “boney,” is made up of unused coal mixed with soil and rock from previous mining operations. Runoff from waste coal sites can pollute local water supplies.[28]
      .
      **Water consumption from coal plants
      – Power generation has been estimated to be second only to agriculture in being the largest domestic user of water.[29]
      **Water pollution from coal includes the negative health and environmental effects from the mining, processing, burning, and waste storage of coal.

      “The Trump administration has hit the pause button on an Obama-era regulation aimed at limiting the dumping of toxic metals such as arsenic and mercury by the nation’s power plants into public waterways.
      “I have decided that it is appropriate and in the public interest to reconsider the rule,” Scott Pruitt, head of the Environmental Protection Agency

  • Avatar

    Sonnyhill

    |

    “False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience, that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils except destruction….. ”
    You see, Rakooi, coal shall continue to be used because of its bounty and usefulness. CO2 is the same, without it life on Earth ceases. Maybe it has a trifling effect on atmospheric temperatures, but its value to life is its saving grace and should not be villainized. The CO2 from centuries civilization burning of coal is now in the natural carbon cycle. That CO2 is now trees and flesh.

  • Avatar

    rakooi

    |

    COAL KILLS
    1 million new cases of asthma is CAUSED by COAL..23 die per 100.000
    2000 Earth Storage Pits & Ponds with Earthen dams…storing TOXIC
    COAL ASH…..literally hundreds of billions of gallons of waste
    …leaching into our drinking water, leaking into our creeks & rivers
    …and periodic Spills of hundreds of billions of gallons onto farms, fields, rivers and School yard.
    +WHAT ???
    Carbon dioxide is also a deadly gas?
    THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS of miners laboring underground have forfeited their lives to “choke damp,” the term for the oxidizing of carbon trapped within coal.
    *
    “Accounts given by people who witnessed choke damp (CO2) in action described deaths that came
    so quickly the victims had no chance to escape.

    (CO2 is heavier than air and it settles into basements, sealed rooms and into protected glades.
    AS CO2 levels in the atmosphere increase…the accumulation of TOXIC levels of this gas is more likely.”
    .
    “One person, recounting the fate of eight men and one woman who walked into a Glen where the gas had accumulated, said they
    “fell down dead, as if they had been shot.”
    *
    The CO2 fertilization effect is limited, because plants require more than just CO2 to do their job:
    photosynthesis. Water is certainly a limiting factor, but many other nutrients are just as important, & required for plants to grow.
    In experiment after experiment, scientists find that the CO2 fertilization effect is short-lived without additional inputs of nutrients, particularly nitrogen.
    http://www.theenergycollect
    You might wish to check out Liebig’s Law of the Minimum.
    **
    ALL of the original multi story ‘Sky Scrapers’ built.
    ..realized very, very quickly,
    that
    CO2 accumulated in sub basements. (& sealed rooms)
    (being heavier than Oxygen)
    …disorienting, dizzying leading to falls, sickening and killing in
    those in the basements and isolated rooms.
    .
    …ALL THOSE BUILDINGS WERE FORCED TO RETRO-FIT
    Fresh Air circulation systems.
    …much the same as used today in ALL multi-floor buildings.
    With increased Concentrations of CO2 and other gases in our atmosphere…means upgrades in circulation systems are required.
    *
    The author estimated the early symptoms of CO2 poisoning would begin
    showing up in the general population at atmospheric levels of 420-450 ppm.

    That was the good news.
    Health effects of increase in concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere
    D. S. Robertson
    http://www.alfaintek.com/asset

    • Avatar

      Sonnyhill

      |

      PATHOLOGICAL

  • Avatar

    rakooi

    |

    Solar panels are the only reasonable way to electrify thousands upon thousands of rural villages.

    • Avatar

      Sonnyhill

      |

      LIAR

  • Avatar

    rakooi

    |

    Solar and Wind are Growing RAPIDLY … 10% nationally…and CHEAPER THAT COAL…
    back up is need for ALL energy sources.
    ..right now there is AMPLE backup on the grid.
    ..and with Affordable natural Gas.
    ..we can get rid of DEADLY KILLER COAL!
    and we can get rid of the 2000 TOXIC COAL ASH dumps….with hundreds and hundreds of billions of gallons of TOXINS…arsenic, heavy metals….
    leaching into our drinking water, leaking into our streams…and periodically spilling en masse into our farm fields, towns and school yards.
    *
    Although it has some very important and beneficial effects, CO2 meets the legal and
    encyclopedic definitions of a “pollutant”, and human CO2 emissions pose a threat to public health and welfare.
    .
    Climate Myth…
    CO2 is not a pollutant
    ‘To suddenly label CO2 as a “pollutant” is a disservice to a gas that has played an enormous role
    in the development and sustainability of all life on this wonderful Earth.
    Mother Earth has clearly ruled that CO2 is not a pollutant.’ (Robert Balling, as quoted by Popular Technology)
    **
    Is Increasing CO2 Dangerous or Harmless?
    .
    Humans are Increasing Atmospheric CO2 Concentrations
    .
    Humans have increased the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere by
    40% over the past 150 years, primarily through the combustion of fossil fuels.
    .
    Figure 1: CO2 levels (parts per million) over the past 10,000 years. Blue line from Taylor Dome ice cores (NOAA).
    Green line from Law Dome ice core (CDIAC). Red line from direct measurements at Mauna Loa, Hawaii (NOAA).
    We know that the increase in atmospheric CO2 is anthropogenic from a number of lines of evidence. 
    Atmospheric oxygen is decreasing at approximately the same rate as the atmospheric CO2 increase,
    which tells us that the source of the change is from a release of carbon combining with
    atmospheric oxygen rather than a natural release of CO2.  We also know that the 30 billion tonnes of CO2
    released by human activity must go somewhere, and in fact atmospheric CO2 is only
    increasing by about 16 billion tonnes per year (the rest is going into the oceans). 
    CO2 produced from burning fossil fuels or burning forests also has quite a different isotopic composition from CO2 in the atmosphere,
    because plants have a preference for the lighter isotopes (12C vs. 13C); thus they have lower 13C/12C ratios. 
    And indeed we’ve observed this ratio decline in the atmosphere.

    Figure 2: Atmospheric 13C ratio as measured at Mauna Loa (CDIAC)
    The Increasing CO2 is Causing Global Warming
    Thus we know that human emissions are increasing the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere,
    which as a greenhouse gas, in turn increases the greenhouse effect. 
    This increases the amount of energy (in the form of longwave infrared radiation) reaching the Earth’s surface. 
    We’ve observed this increase through spectroscopy, which measures changes in the electromagnetic spectrum. 
    Climate scientists have also quantified the amount of warming we expect to see from the energy imbalance
    caused by this increased downward radiation, and it matches well with observations. 
    Given the amount of CO2 humans have added to the atmosphere already, once the planet reaches a new equilibrium state,
    it will have warmed approximately 1.4°C from pre-industrial levels. 
    Additionally, we have observed numerous key ‘fingerprints’ of anthropogenic global warming which confirm that
    the warming we’ve experienced is due to an increased greenhouse effect.
    How Much Warming is Dangerous?
    There are some positive effects of global warming from increased CO2 emissions. 

    For example, improved agriculture at high latitudes and increased vegetation growth in some circumstances.
    However, the negatives will far outweigh the positives.  Coast-bound communities are threatened by rising sea levels.
    Melting glaciers threaten the water supplies of hundreds of millions. 
    Species are  already becoming extinct at a rate 100 to 1000 times higher than the “background” rate of long spans of geological time, 
    partially due to the effects of global warming and climate change. 
    Quantifying exactly at what point global warming will become dangerous is a difficult task. 
    However, based on the research and recommendations of climate scientists,
    more than 100 countries have adopted a global warming limit of 2°C or below
    (relative to pre-industrial levels) as a guiding principle for mitigation efforts to reduce climate change risks, impacts, and damages. 
    This 2°C warming level is considered the “danger limit”. During the last interglacial period when
    the average global temperature was approximately 2°C hotter than today, sea levels were 6.6 to 9.4 meters higher than current sea levels.
    Large parts of the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets melted, with the southern part of Greenland having little or no ice.
    As discussed above, the CO2 we’ve already emitted has committed us to about 1.4°C warming above pre-industrial levels. 
    Given a climate sensitivity to a doubling of atmospheric CO2 of 2-4.5°C and the fact that on our current path
    we’re headed for a CO2 doubling by mid-to-late 21st century, we’re fast-approaching the danger limit.
    How Soon Will we Reach Dangerous Warming?
    Meinshausen et al. (2009) found that if we limit cumulative CO2 emissions from 2000-2050 to 1,000 Gt
    (approximately an 80% cut in global emissions), there is a 25% probability of warming exceeding the 2°C limit,
    and 1,440 Gt CO2 over that period (an 80% cut in developed country emissions) yields a 50% chance of 2°C warming by the year 2100. 
    If we maintain current emissions levels, there is an approximately 67% chance that we will exceed 2°C warming by 2100.

    Figure 3: Probability of exceeding 2°C warming by 2100 in various emissions scenarios in gigatonnes of carbon (RealClimate)
    In short, to avoid the amount of global warming which is considered dangerous based on our understanding of
    the climate and empirical evidence, we need to achieve major reductions in global CO2 emissions in the next 40 years.  
    Thus it becomes quite clear that not only is CO2 a pollutant, but it also poses a risk to public health and welfare.
    .
    Ocean Acidification
    Another impact of increasing atmospheric CO2 emissions is ocean acidification. 
    When CO2 dissolves in seawater, it increases the hydrogen ion concentration though the chemical reaction CO2 + CO32- + H2O ? 2HCO3-,
    thus decreasing the pH of the oceans (NOAA 2008).  Among other impacts, this decreasing oceanic pH has a damaging effect on corals,
    which form the habitat of approximately 25% of marine species (Karleskint et al. 2009). 
    A seminal study co-authored by 17 marine scientists (Hoegh-Guldberg et al. 2007) found:
    “Many experimental studies have shown that a doubling of pre-industrial [CO2]atm to 560 ppm decreases coral calcification
    and growth by up to 40% through the inhibition of aragonite formation (the principal crystalline form of calcium carbonate
    deposited in coral skeletons) as carbonate-ion concentrations decrease”
    Thus not only does anthropogenic CO2 act as a dangerous pollutant due to its impacts on global warming and climate change,
    but it also has a major effect on marine ecosystems through ocean acidification.
    CO2 is a Pollutant
    When considering the legal definition of “air pollutants” and body of scientific evidence,
    it becomes clear that CO2 meets the definition and poses a significant threat to public health and welfare.

  • Avatar

    Sonnyhill

    |

    Carbon dioxide is our friend, why are you condemning it? We can handle 1,000 ppm all day long. Rakooi belongs to a fear – mongering cult. The lies he puts up here are evidence of brainwashing.

    • Avatar

      rakooi

      |

      HUMAN BEINGS and NEANDERTHALS have never lived at a time when Atmospheric Gases were this high.

      NEVER!

      So when you say we can handle it….that is based ON EXACTLY WHAT INFORMATION??
      Certainly not experience.

      • Avatar

        Sonnyhill

        |

        40 hour work week, accepted government standard. CO2 is not carbon monoxide. CO2 is not toxic in the concentrations we encounter? Where is your list of fatalities to support your LIE?

        • Avatar

          rakooi

          |

          BUT, dear boy, YOU are advocating the increase In CO2.
          .
          Go out and suck on your TAIL PIPE while the car is running…say for 10 minutes….then come back from the dead and TELL US WHAT A WONDERFUL FERTILIZER it is!
          *
          CO2 is heavier than Air…it pools and pockets in Protected Glades, basements and sealed rooms.
          .
          “…
          CO2 Pushes The Oxygen Layer “Higher Up The Hill”

          ” ….. as CO2 is heavier than oxygen, then only the peasantry, especially those in lowlands & valleys & river basins etc. will be breathing the higher CO2 at the expense of Oxygen levels, as the settling CO2 pushes the Oxygen layer “higher up the hill” & above their breathing zone, thus slowing them down & allowing the elite to sleep easy”

          temperature increases from greenhouse effect of excess Carbon Di-Oxide aside, no-one seems to mention the MAIN dangerous effect of the build-up of atmospheric CO2, of course if you live high on the hill, or in a penthouse (or in an ivory tower for that matter) you won’t be too bothered, in fact you’l get relatively MORE oxygen, ie, as CO2 is heavier than oxygen, then only the peasantry, especially those in lowlands & valleys & river basins etc. will be breathing the higher CO2 at the expense of Oxygen levels, as the settling CO2 pushes the Oxygen layer “higher up the hill” & above their breathing zone, thus slowing them down & allowing the elite to sleep easy, in the knowledge that any peasants climbing their hills will be bringing gold & such to trade for a bucket of Oxygenated air…ie, INSIDIOUS.”
          .
          “One person, recounting the fate of eight men and one woman who walked into an area where the gas had accumulated,
          said they “fell down dead, as if they had been shot.”

          “Another narrative of a different death said the stricken miner was “without access to cry but once ‘God’s mercy.'”

          “….Miners not only walked into deadly accumulations of (CO2) choke damp; they were also sometimes lowered into them by being let
          down into mine shafts on ropes.
          If they hit pockets of carbon dioxide during their descents, they would fall from those ropes dead.”
          .
          “….Persons not employed in the coal mining trade are unlikely to encounter deadly masses of carbon dioxide, yet such clouds have been known to form in the open air and at a cost dear in human life. Which was indeed the case on 21 August 1986 at Lake Nyos in Cameroon….A total of 1,746 people were smothered in the night, according to the official casualty toll.
          The deadly cloud covered an area of up to 12 miles around the lake, killing thousands of cattle as well.”
          .
          “A similar incident in 1984 at Lake Monoun, another crater lake in western Cameroon, killed 37 people.”
          ..
          “…The CO2 fertilization effect is limited, because plants require more than just CO2 to do their job:
          photosynthesis. Water is certainly a limiting factor, but many other nutrients are just as important, & required for plants to grow.
          In experiment after experiment, scientists find that the CO2 fertilization effect is short-lived without additional inputs of nutrients, particularly nitrogen.
          HIGHLY CO2 STIMULATED GRAINS produce LESS PROTEIN< LESS IRON< and LESS ZINC….30% of the population is ZINC deficient & all the maladies that implies….DISEASE RESISTANCE IS substantially reduced and deaths increased from those diseases.
          http://www.theenergycollect
          You might wish to check out Liebig’s Law of the Minimum.”

          “….CO2 effect on vertebrates Vic / November 21, 2016
          Ocean acidification’s other evil twin – Blood acidification.

          Going from 250 to 410 ppm CO2 we’ve increased the pH of our blood by 0.1 …(equivalent to an increase in acidity of 30%).
          http://www.smh.com.au/environm..”


          http://www.smh.com.au/environm..
          .
          “…ALL of the original multi story ‘Sky Scrapers’ built…realized very, very quickly, that CO2 accumulated in sub basements. (& sealed rooms)(being heavier than Oxygen)
          …disorienting, dizzying leading to falls, sickening and fatalities in
          those in the basements and isolated rooms.”
          .
          “…ALL THOSE BUILDINGS WERE FORCED TO RETRO-FIT Fresh Air circulation systems….much the same as used today in ALL multi-floor buildings.”
          ((( TODAY it is quite common to encounter concentrations in buildings in excess of 1000PPM….those readings are rising along with atmospheric concentrations.)))
          .
          “…Increasing
          Atmospheric concentrations of CO2 also increases significantly
          the concentrations which can accumulate in buildings, basements, protected lowlands, etc.
          THUS requiring Re-NEWED retro fitting of circulation systems to account for the increased threat of CO2 Concentrations in sealed enclosures & sub-basements.
          .
          “….“The health effects of low-level carbon dioxide poisoning are likely
          to be first observed in the results of athletic events, where
          maintenance of present performance records becomes difficult and
          the establishment of improved performance records never occur.”

          The author estimated the early symptoms of CO2 poisoning would begin
          showing up in the general population at atmospheric levels of 420-450 ppm.

          That was the good news.

          Health effects of increase in concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere
          D. S. Robertson
          http://www.alfaintek.com/asset…”
          **
          More information: Yield vs. Quality trade-offs for wheat in response to carbon dioxide and ozone,
          Global Change Biology, Vol 18 issue 2. onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2011.2489.x/abstract

          Provided by: University of Gothenburg

          http://www.columbia.edu/~mhs119/Temperature/globalT_1880-1920base.png

  • Avatar

    G

    |

    Drew (Rakooi) is an unapologetic socialist. Socialists are self-entitled to say ANYTHING that advances their propaganda cause. To socialists lying is in fact, a virtue.

    “A lie told often enough becomes the truth.” – Vladimir Lenin

  • Avatar

    rakooi

    |

    AUH20 for ever…..
    ran his local campaign in 64
    sorry you missed it.
    at least he told the truth…..I will never be a Trumpaneesta Liar like you

Comments are closed