Germany Tries To Reassure Homeowners On Heating Overhaul
Almost a third of the energy consumed in Germany goes toward heating and warm water, prompting the government to draft a bill that would require all new heating systems installed from next year to use at least 65% renewable energy. From 2045, all fossil fuel heatings would be banned as part of Germany's target to become “climate neutral” by then.
If approved by lawmakers, the bill would provide significant subsidies for those switching to greener heating systems — such as electric heat pumps — and the savings for homeowners who don't have to buy oil or gas anymore will allow them to more than recoup their investments over time, she said.
I pick Kooo-Kooo, Jean!
This post applies even more to Germany!
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/94557/
The only legit reason to push for more electric would be to save the cheap, reliable and dense fossil fuels (that serve as their own battery) for our children and grandchildren and poor countries.
But the diabolical scheme is designed to do the exact opposite and has a 0% chance of working. CO2 is well mixed in the global atmosphere. What will the US mandating electric cars and banning fossil fuels over the next decade do to help the planet? Exactly NOTHING. in fact, this scheme is wrecking the Planet!!
We can all agree that the EIA, (Energy Information Administration) is the world's most credible and comprehensive source for energy information and forecasts.
Look at their global energy graph below and tell me where this 0 emissions of CO2 by killing fossil fuels scam from the United States/Western countries comes into play?
Again, it's crony capitalism, political agenda and corrupted science!
There Is No Energy Transition, Just Energy Addition
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/03/12/there-is-no-energy-transition-just-energy-addition/
While wind and solar power are taking a larger piece out of a growing world primary energy pie, fossil fuels are expected to have more absolute growth through 2050.
As Liberty Energy CEO Chris Wright explained in his viral video a few weeks ago, dishonest terminology surrounds the climate debate. One of these terms is “Energy Transition”. The term’s use gives the impression that there exists a quick, easy and scalable alternative to eliminate fossil fuel use without serious impact on people.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/88331/#88831
“Severe and long-lasting recession”
The wave of insolvencies has just begun, and is “picking up speed”, writes Blackout News. “What we are seeing now is just the tip of an iceberg. Increased energy prices are affecting all industries, whether directly, as in the case of steel mills and bakeries, or indirectly, as in the case of shoe retailer Görtz. If politicians do not take countermeasures here, Germany will fall into a severe and long-lasting recession, with mass unemployment and a massive loss of prosperity.”
Mike Maguire
September 12, 2022 12:56 pm
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/88331/#88344
GOOD ANSWER, MIKE
BEING TOTALLY HONEST HERE ~ WHEN I READ THAT HEADLENE, I THOUGHT: "GEE. MAYBE GERMANY DID BLOW UP THAT PIPELINE!". SAVE IT FOR THE KIDS, YA KNOW?
I watch the ABC Nightly news on most nights.
They are KOOO-KOOO about the fake climate crisis.
Tonight, they were in Sudan. I think its wonderful for them to show us how awful conditions are in other parts of the world.
It was a great human interest story to make people aware of this. They spent half the show on it.
However, they spent 100% of their time in a flooded area. They spent almost 15 minutes of their show on this. They mentioned "climate change" at least 15 times (my guess), over once a minute and insisted to viewers that this was entirely from climate change.
Not telling us what we can do to help or what can be done. Just telling us it's hopeless and all because of climate change.. Over and over. The only solution is to stop burning fossil fuels causing climate change.
That, sadly appears to be their objective. Finally, at the end, they flashed a link for 5 seconds for people that want to make donations.
This was a blatant abuse of using these people for their fake climate crisis agenda.
To debunk them, let's use some authentic climate/weather facts.
U.S. Department of the Interior
U.S. Geological Survey
Fact Sheet 2011–3072
June 2011Printed on recycled paper
Famine Early Warning Systems Network—Informing Climate Change Adaptation Series
A Climate Trend Analysis of Sudan
https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2011/3072/pdf/FS2011-3072.pdf
Conclusions
• Summer rains in western and southern Sudan
have declined by 10–20 percent since the mid-
1970s.
• Observed warming of more than 1 degree
Celsius is equivalent to another 10–20 percent
reduction in rainfall for crops.
• The warming and drying have impacted south-
ern Darfur and areas around Juba.
• Rainfall declines west of Juba threaten south-
ern Sudan’s future food production prospects.
• In many cases, areas with changing climate
are coincident with zones of substantial con-
flict, suggesting some degree of association;
however, the contribution of climate change
to these conflicts is not currently understood.
• Rapid population growth and the expansion
of farming and pastoralism under a more
variable climate regime could dramatically
increase the number of at-risk people in Sudan
over the next 20 year
++++++++++++++++++
Clearly, the risk to Sudan from climate change, according to what we've been told is less rain and temps increasing.
The entire ABC story was situated in an area that has had too much rain since 2019.
This was also a time frame that saw global warming paused(tiny decrease in global temps) from a natural La Nina, which caused the droughts in the US West and Plains.
Other places on the planet likely saw different types of weather from the La Nina, possibly this part of Sudan getting too much rain from this natural phenomena.
One can make the case that heavy rains have 7% higher amounts from a 1 deg. C increase in temps and air that can hold 7% more moisture.
However, it's ludicrous to take a place that's mostly desert to semi desert and been too dry for decades(like all deserts are) and supposedly at risk for more droughts because of climate change......then take a WEATHER pattern that started after 2019(that wasn't there for decades), during a La Nina and insist its all from climate change........15 times in 15 minutes.
And people watching don't know any better.
How could they?
Which is why they do it.
They would never mention that the increase in CO2 is boosting plant growth and crop yields by 25%…..much more food for poor people like this!!!
And that plants grown with higher CO2 don't need to open their stomata as wide to get CO2 and are more drought tolerant/water efficient.
They are also more heat tolerant.
But thats authentic agronomy and science. They are selling junk science.
https://theconversation.com/rising-carbon-dioxide-is-making-the-worlds-plants-more-water-wise-79427
Plants growing in today’s higher-CO₂ conditions can take up more carbon – the so-called CO₂ fertilisation effect. This is the main reason why the terrestrial biosphere has taken up 17% more carbon over the past 30 years.
The enhanced carbon uptake is consistent with the global greening trend observed by satellites, and the growing global land carbon sink which removes about one-third of all CO₂ emissions generated by human activities.
Increasing carbon uptake typically comes at a cost. To let CO₂ in, plants have to open up pores called stomata in their leaves, which in turn allows water to sneak out. Plants thus need to strike a balance between taking up carbon to build new leaves, stems and roots, while minimising water loss in the process. This has led to sophisticated adaptations that has allowed many plant species to conquer a range of arid environments.
One such adaptation is to close the stomata slightly to allow CO₂ to enter with less water getting out. Under increasing atmospheric CO₂, the overall result is that CO₂ uptake increases while water consumption does not. This is exactly what we have found on a global scale in our new study. In fact, we found that rising CO₂ levels are causing the world’s plants to become more water-wise, almost everywhere, whether in dry places or wet ones.
++++++++++
So if you're ABC news and most other MSM entities, increasing CO2 is causing a climate crisis that includes every kind of weather.......too hot, too cold, too dry, too wet. Less snow, too much snow. Natural, extreme weather variations from the past no longer impact the weather today. All extreme weather is from human caused climate change, whether directly or indirectly.
And climate change NEVER causes anything good to happen. ..........except for bad creatures.
All the bad life, like ticks, fleas, mosquitoes, weeds, virus's, bacteria and such thrive on climate change.
All the good life, gets killed by the exact same conditions of climate change(which no authentic science report shows). Polar bears, tree frogs, crops, penguins, ocean creatures, human beings.
Truth is that almost ALL LIFE loves the increase in beneficial CO2,(building block for all of life) which is still just 50% of the optimal level during this current climate optimum featuring the best weather/climate in the last 1,000 years.
ABC news,
25,000 people on this planet starve every day. Climate change with its beneficial increase in CO2 is helping to reduce that number because of the huge increase in food production.
your phony baloney about the fake climate crisis and using starving people to misinform viewers is very offensive!
I'VE REACHED THE POINT OF SHUTTING ANY PROGRAMMING OFF, THE 1ST TIME I HEAR: "CLIMATE CHANGE". ~ UNLESS IT'S A CLIMATE CHANGE DENIER! LOL
LAST NIGHT, I SAW A YOU TUBE VIDEO TITLE " HOW MUCH CO2 IS IN THE AIR?" I'D PLANNED ON WATCHIN' IT, BUT... GOT SIDETRACKED. I'LL DO A SEARCH FOR IT & FIND OUT IF IT'S SUMPIN' I AGREE WIF! LOL I'LL KNOW WITHIN THE 1ST 60 SECONDS, I IMAGINE. HAHAHHAAAA
The Renewable Energy Fail SO FAR, I'M LIKIN' THIS'N!!
the Moral Case for Fossil Fuels, Renewable Energy, and Green Deceptions
The Nuclear Option OOOOOOOOOOPS
Imagine, for a minute the 100+ billion dollars sent to Ukraine to make sure the war goes on......killing hundreds of thousands and 1 trillion in damage to Ukraine but is accomplishing the objective......killing a hundred thousand Russian and weakening Putin/Ukraine.
Imagine what good that money could have done to help the people in the world that are starving to death.
Not just hungry but literally dying a horrible, slow death from their bodies shutting down from lack of calories and nutrients.
Many of them are children.
The worse death imaginable. The ones that do barely survive have horrible lives that are impossible for any of us to imagine.
And we let the military industrial complex and our hate for Russia flush that money down the toilet in order to take lives and create enemies/loss of respect in the world instead of saving lives.
At a time when our country is going bankrupt.
Here's another of the charlatans bamboozling tricks using words.
When we hear the term increased carbon uptake by plants, especially crops, know that food is made out of that carbon.
Increased carbon uptake actually means huge increases in food production but they hide that incredible benefit from the only true green energy……the one greening up the planet…..fossil fuels and instead call the massive boosts to yields and crop size……increased carbon uptake!
yes, plants are gobbling up the greatly beneficial CO2, the building block for all of life…….and animals, like humans are in turn gobbling it up Which is helping to reduce food costs and feed the worlds poor.
Newspeak Comes From 1984
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/newspeak
propagandist language marked by euphemism, circumlocution, and the inversion of customary meanings
The term newspeak was coined by George Orwell in his 1949 anti-utopian novel 1984. In Orwell's fictional totalitarian state, Newspeak was a language favored by the minions of Big Brother and, in Orwell's words, "designed to diminish the range of thought." Newspeak was characterized by the elimination or alteration of certain words, the substitution of one word for another, the interchangeability of parts of speech, and the creation of words for political purposes. The word has caught on in general use to refer to confusing or deceptive bureaucratic jargon.
+++++++++++++++++++
In 2023, we live in a world of manufactured realities. Governments and media make up things that we want to hear in order to convince us to believe in them as they push their self serving agenda on us using convincing propaganda, DISinformation and False narratives.
Mostly to support crony capitalism, political agenda and corrupted science/scientists.
This is NOT the exception but the rule in many realms.
All of politics.
All of climate science.
Many other science fields(can you say COVID).
Much of human rights(can you say riots of 2020 justified)
Much of US border issues. (can you say REAL crisis)
Much of gun control and crime.
One side is able to get thought control on issues by creating false narratives and with the colluding media repeating them hundreds of times until they are.............just accepted as realities, especially targeting one political side most vulnerable because they want to believe in the DISinformation/propaganda.
Both sides do it.
Fox is the quintessential example of the far right using it to hypnotize the minds of that group. Trump is the worlds biggest individual master. Elon Musk knows how to use it.
Make no mistake. The gatekeepers dang well know this defines the road for their success in this age and they exploit us to the max using this diabolical tactic.
Both sides battle, using this dishonest strategy to control our minds...... with you and me being the biggest losers because nobody can tell the difference between the truth and lies unless they are either experts in the field or do extensive fact checking.............which is almost never.
So the gatekeepers of messages are able to control our minds with impunity!
IN THE END ~ MOM NATURE WILL WIN THE CONTEST, NO MATTER WHO DECLARES WHAT, AS FACT. LOL SHE ALWAYS COMES OUT ON TOP.
Jean.
How ironic that the biggest benefit from climate change and higher CO2 levels is a massive increase in food/crop yields.
But they want to twist that into a false narrative(like in 1984), in your example which uses food as a tool to trick people into thinking its the complete opposite.
If they were telling the truth , they would list how much MORE of each food item there is on the MENU because of the increase in the beneficial gas, CO2 that has warmed the planet by 1 deg. C the last century, otherwise known as climate change.
If they were telling the truth they would be calling it a climate optimum, instead of a climate crisis.
Death by Greening:
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/69258/
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/92155/
Figure 2. Average annual climate-related (blue line) and non-climate-related (red line) deaths in natural disasters. Data from OFDA/CRED International Disaster Database
https://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2015/05/20/cold-weather-deaths/27657269/
The Holocene climate OPTIMUM based on authentic science that featured temperatures 2 deg. C WARMER THAN THIS in the higher latitudes and LESS ARCTIC SEA ICE, just 9,000-5,000 years ago:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_climatic_optimum
Of 140 sites across the western Arctic, there is clear evidence for conditions that were warmer than now at 120 sites. At 16 sites for which quantitative estimates have been obtained, local temperatures were on average 1.6±0.8 °C higher during the optimum than now. Northwestern North America reached peak warmth first, from 11,000 to 9,000 years ago, but the Laurentide Ice Sheet still chilled eastern Canada. Northeastern North America experienced peak warming 4,000 years later. Along the Arctic Coastal Plain in Alaska, there are indications of summer temperatures 2–3 °C warmer than now.[9] Research indicates that the Arctic had less sea ice than now.[10]
+++++++++++++
UN warns of food shortage
11 responses |
Started by metmike - Aug. 24, 2022, 10:34 a.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/88287/
Release date: 08/07/2022
FAO’s forecast for global cereal production in 2022 has been raised by 7 million tonnes in July from the previous month and is now pegged at 2 792 million tonnes, however, still 0.6 percent short of the world output in 2021.
The month-on-month increase predominantly rests on a 6.4-million-tonne upward revision made to the coarse grain production forecast, with the world output seen reaching 1 501 million tonnes in 2022, only 0.5 percent below the 2021 outturn. Prospects were bolstered this month by reports indicating large maize plantings in China (mainland) and India.
This is what the science being covered up by the gatekeepers of the fake climate crisis information actually shows:
Here are most of the studies(hundreds on the map below), that by a wide margin, show that the Medieval Warm Period was this warm or warmer than this. Most of them done before climate science was hijacked.
Over 100 studies from the Medieval Warm Period, most of which show the planet was this warm or warmer 1,000 years ago. It was also this warm 2,000 years ago during the Roman Warm Period and also just over 3,000 years ago, during the Minoan Warm period.
Medieval Warm Period Project:
http://www.co2science.org/data/mwp/mwpp.php
| MWP-CWP Qualitative Temperature Differentials - CO2 Science Figure Description: The distribution of Level 2 Studies that allow one to determine whether peak Medieval Warm Period temperatures were warmer than (red), equivalent ... |
Where did the data from the bar graphs above come from so that we know that this is the authentic science vs the one that the MSM and dems describe with the fake climate crisis(where they can't show the data to prove)?
List of Scientists Whose Work We Cite:
http://www.co2science.org/data/mwp/scientists.php
List of Research Institutions Associated With the Work We Cite
http://www.co2science.org/data/mwp/institutions.php
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
For the Medieval Warm Period compared to today below:
Red balloons showed it was warmer.
Blue was colder than today(in that study)
Green was wetter/more precip
Yellow was drier
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/01/03/documenting-the-global-extent-of-the-medieval-warm-period/
If you go to the link below, you can hit those individual balloons and get each individual study:
This guy is a gifted communicator with elite understanding/knowledge on the topic!
Should the world stop using fossil fuels—oil, coal, and natural gas? Or should we embrace them as an essential part of modern life? Alex Epstein explores these questions.
The world needs more fossil fuels—more oil, coal, and natural gas. Not less.
Does that sound crazy?
It’s actually not—not if you employ one common-sense principle.
It’s the same principle you use when you decide whether to take a prescription drug.
Carefully weigh the benefits and the negative side effects.
If the benefits of using fossil fuels outweigh the negative side effects, then we should keep using fossil fuels. If the negative side effects outweigh the benefits, then we should stop using fossil fuels as soon as possible.
Which is it?
It turns out that the benefits of fossil fuels far outweigh the negative side effects.
The reason that most so-called experts, including many climate scientists, are against fossil fuels is that they violate this principle. They ignore the benefits of fossil fuels while overstating their negative side effects.
To know the truth about the benefits and side effects of fossil fuels, you need to understand eight essential facts.
Fact One: Cost-effective energy is essential to human flourishing.
This is almost never discussed, but no one can dispute it.
Low-cost, reliable, versatile energy makes modern life possible. There’s a simple reason for this. Energy powers the machines that allow us to be productive and prosperous—from the combine harvesters that allow one farm worker to do the work of 1,000 to the incubators that save the lives of millions of premature babies. Everything depends on energy.
Thanks to the unprecedented availability of cost-effective energy—overwhelmingly fossil fuel energy—the world has never been a better place for human life. Life expectancy has risen sharply. And extreme poverty (those that earn less than $2 per day) has plummeted from 42% in 1980 to less than 10% today.
Fact Two: Billions of people are suffering and dying for lack of energy.
Most of us take cost-effective energy for granted. But much of the world doesn’t have that luxury.
For the full script, visit: https://l.prageru.com/3mATLad