June 15 was Global Wind Day. Its European industry sponsors hope to promote the “power and possibilities” of wind turbines. But beware the Ides of June.

Wind turbines have been sold to us as a means of reducing emissions, global warming and climate change. Although there are a lot of wind turbines installed around the world with many more seemingly to come, they have not reduced emissions, warming or climate change. And they offer no chance to do so, even if those things were desirable.

Coming eight days short of the 35th anniversary of James Hansen’s Senate testimony that sent the world into global warming panic, it’s clear to anyone who cares to look that emissions have nothing to do with recent warming.

Warming since 1980, has been driven by a series of El Nino events that have nothing to do with emissions. Since the last El Nino struck in 2015, the average global temperature has actually cooled slightly despite about 500 billion tons of emissions, which represent a 17 percent increase in industrial era atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2).

While wind turbines offer no chance of improving the weather or climate, they require taxpayer subsidies and, even though subsidized, have raised electricity prices wherever they have been erected. Wind power has made Germans, for example, think of electricity as a luxury good. And you can trace the ongoing global energy crisis, inflation and even the Ukraine war to the rise of wind power.

But wind turbines are more than just an economic and geopolitical disaster. They are a menace to the environment.

Onshore wind turbines are well know wind turbines kill almost 900,000 bats per year. How green is that?

ICECAP NOTE: An estimated 140,000 to 500,000 birds die each year due to turbine collisions. Bird deaths could soar to 1.4 million per year if the U.S. Department of Energy achieves its goal of expanding wind energy to 20 percent of the country’s electricity demand by 2030.)

The Biden administration is now in the process of permitting the fast-track erection of offshore wind turbines. Although the erection of these 900-foot tall monsters (like a 90-story skyscraper) has not yet occurred, the mere process of site surveying is already wreaking havoc on whales, dolphins, porpoises and seals.

Since December 2022, more than two dozen dead whales have washed up on the New Jersey coast. These deaths have coincided with the commencement of surveying work for offshore wind turbines by foreign and U.S. developers.

While there is no video of the surveying work killing the whales and the Biden administration denies that it is happening, the inconvenient truth is that the government has permitted (in writing) wind developers to kill hundreds of whales, and thousands of dolphins, porpoises and seals.

Although there are only few hundred endangered North Atlantic Right Whales thought to exist, the Biden administration has permitted the wind developers to kill all of them - twice over. In a particularly cynical move, the Biden administration is currently trying to shut down the Maine lobster industry on the basis of a single North Atlantic Right Whale getting tangled in lobster gear 19 years ago.

None of the major green groups like Greenpeace have done anything but defend the wind industry and Biden administration regarding these marine-life deaths. In 1973, Greenpeace coined the phrase, “Save the Whales.” In 2023, it’s apparently been changed to “Kill the whales.” Orwell would love the irony.

Back on land, wind turbines are a permanently scarring feature. Past just being eyesores, each turbine requires an immense foundation of concrete and iron rebar that will be practically impossible to remove if anyone ever wishes to reclaim the land for more sensible use.

Germany’s 30,000 wind turbines are reportedly drying out the soil and contributing to drought, according to a new study.

In Germany and Britain where wind developers have been particularly aggressive, local populations are fighting back with zoning restrictions. So wind developers are looking to change zoning laws to force them down the throats of communities.

In the U.S., so-called “ESG” investors like JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon have called for the government to seize land through eminent domain for wind turbines.

Iron Eyes Cody posed as the “Crying Indian” in the 1970s Keep American Beautiful campaign against litter. It’s time for another such campaign against the environmentally destructive wind industry. Just don’t count on the greens to support it. They are as phony as the Italian-born Cody was.

Steve Milloy is a senior legal fellow with the Energy and Environment Legal Institute.

Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. Scientists should openly address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of their policy measures

Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming

The geological archive reveals that Earth’s climate has varied as long as the planet has existed, with natural cold and warm phases. The Little Ice Age ended as recently as 1850. Therefore, it is no surprise that we now are experiencing a period of warming.

Warming is far slower than predicted

The world has warmed significantly less than predicted by IPCC on the basis of modeled anthropogenic forcing. The gap between the real world and the modeled world tells us that we are far from understanding climate change.

Climate policy relies on inadequate models

Climate models have many shortcomings and are not remotely plausible as policy tools. They do not only exaggerate the effect of greenhouse gases, they also ignore the fact that enriching the atmosphere with CO2 is beneficial.

CO2 is plant food, the basis of all life on Earth

CO2 is not a pollutant. It is essential to all life on Earth. More CO2 is favorable for nature, greening our planet. Additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also profitable for agriculture, increasing the yields of crops worldwide.

Global warming has not increased natural disasters

There is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts and suchlike natural disasters, or making them more frequent.

However, there is ample evidence that CO2-mitigation measures are as damaging as they are costly.

Climate policy must respect scientific and economic realities

There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm. We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050. Go for adaptation instead of mitigation; adaptation works whatever the causes are.

OUR ADVICE TO THE EUROPEAN LEADERS IS THAT SCIENCE SHOULD STRIVE FOR A SIGNIFICANTLY BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF THE CLIMATE SYSTEM, WHILE POLITICS SHOULD FOCUS ON MINIMIZING POTENTIAL CLIMATE DAMAGE BY PRIORITIZING ADAPTATION STRATEGIES BASED ON PROVEN AND AFFORDABLE TECHNOLOGIES.

1551 global scientists (and rising) have signed this agreement. See them here.

On May 4, India’s capital of New Delhi recorded the third coldest May morning since 1901. At 16 degree Celsius (60 Fahrenheit), the region’s 32 million residents woke up to a relatively cold morning in what is usually the hottest month of the year.

So why is there a record low temperature when the dominant mainstream narrative tells us that climate change has made our environs warmer than before? Is this just an aberration?

While Western media obsessed with the warm weather in Spain, India’s capital recorded a very cold summer morning. In fact, most of the cold-weather records in Delhi have gone unreported in Western media, which are mainly interested in showcasing the city’s extreme summer temperatures.

Neatly concealed from the public’s eye are the record low winter temperatures that Delhi has been witnessing since 2017. In December 2018, Delhi recorded an average minimum temperature of 7C (44F), the third lowest in the last 50 years. On December 30, 2019, the maximum temperature settled at 9C (49F), making it the coldest December day in 122 years.

As is the case globally, winter cold in Delhi is a bigger killer than summer heat. According to studies, short-term exposure to extreme temperature accounts for 6.5 percent of all deaths in India, with 88 percent of that amount caused by cold weather and only 12 percent by hot weather.

This is an example of media bias towards advancing a narrative of apocalyptic warming when reporting weather events. Also, part of this slanted reporting is the media’s failure to acknowledge the real reason behind the recording of all-time high summer temperatures: the urban heat island (UHI).

Urban Heat Island, Not Climate, Sets Records

During my stint as a climate consultant in New Delhi, I lived close to the Safdarjung temperature-measurement station. As per the Indian Meteorological Department, the highest maximum temperature ever recorded at Safdarjung was 47C (117F) on May 29, 1944.

This high temperature recorded nearly 80 years ago for this station has yet to be toppled by the 21st century warming that supposedly threatens us with doom, and the reason is probably the station’s location.

Unlike the other temperature monitoring stations in Delhi, the Safdarjung station is in a relatively greener section of the city. Thus, it is less susceptible to the Urban Heat Island effect, and, therefore, has not been registering the insanely high temperatures of 49C (120F) witnessed in and around Delhi.

Mahesh Palawat, vice-president of Skymet Weather Services, says, “Safdarjung weather station is located in a fairly green area, as compared to the rest of Delhi, which has a lot of heavily concretised spaces without much green cover. Temperatures in these parts of the city will therefore, understandably, be higher.”

So, the reason thermometers record new all-time highs in Delhi is because of urbanization’s concrete structures and pavements and other landscape changes. Weather officials also note that some of the newer automatic weather instruments used in highly urbanized areas may be prone to error.

“Most observatories in Delhi have automatic systems, which have a scope for error because they use bimetals, which can contract and expand during different weather conditions,” says an official of the India Meteorological Department in the Hindustan Times. He added that abnormal temperature spikes of the error-prone stations should be compared to the readings of older stations like Safdarjung to obtain “a more precise idea of the temperature.”

It takes just a bit of common sense to understand the artificial urban heat island impact on thermometers in cities and airports. However, preconceived notions of catastrophic warming pose serious hurdles to grasping this reality.

Delhi’s case illustrates that warming is not a continuous and unprecedented phenomenon as some claim it to be. Instead, we see at play a chaotic climate system at work with unpredictable weather patterns. Additionally, we must be mindful of the urban heat island impact when reading news bulletins about record-high summer temperatures.

Vijay Jayaraj is a Research Associate at the CO2 Coalition, Arlington, Virginia. He holds a master’s degree in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia, UK and resides in India.

"CCS has been slow to take off due to the cost of capture and the limited salability of carbon dioxide as a product. Thirty-nine CCS facilities capture CO2 around the world today, totaling 45 million tons per year, or about one-tenth of one percent (0.1%) of industrial emissions produced globally.”

The Environmental Protection Agency is working on a new rule that would set stringent limits on carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from US power plants. Utilities would be required to retrofit existing plants with carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology or to switch to hydrogen fuel. Others call for the use of CCS to decarbonize heavy industry. But the cost of capture and the amount of CO2 that proponents say needs to be captured crush any ideas about feasibility.

Carbon capture and storage is the process of capturing carbon dioxide from an industrial plant before it enters the atmosphere, transporting it, and storing it for centuries to millennia. Capture may be accomplished by filtering it from combustion exhaust streams. Pipelines are proposed to transport the captured CO2. Underground reservoirs could be used for storage. For the last two decades, advocates have proposed CCS to reduce emissions from coal plants and steel, chemical, and other hard-to-decarbonize industries in order to fight human-caused climate change.

CCS has been slow to take off due to the cost of capture and the limited salability of carbon dioxide as a product. Thirty-nine CCS facilities capture CO2 around the world today, totaling 45 million tons per year, or about one-tenth of one percent (0.1%) of industrial emissions produced globally. Of these, 20 reside in the US or Canada, six in Europe, and five in China. Twenty-four of these facilities use captured CO2 for enhanced oil recovery. Captured CO2 is injected into oil wells to boost oil output,

The news from these facilities is mixed. Many are not meeting their carbon-capture goals or are incurring costs well over budget. Nevertheless, Australia, Canada, China, Japan, the US, and nations of Europe now offer billions in direct subsidies or tax breaks to firms for capture of CO2 emissions and to build pipelines and storage. Over 300 large and small capture projects are in planning around the world which, after completion, may be able to boost capture to 0.5 percent of man-made emissions.

Illinois, Iowa, and other states are struggling with issues involving plans for CO2 pipelines. Ethanol plants and other facilities propose to capture CO2 and need a new network of pipelines to transport the gas to underground storage sites. These pipelines face strong opposition from local communities over farmland use and safety concerns in the case of a pipeline rupture.

Carbon capture and storage is very expensive. An example concerns plans for CCS in Wyoming, the leading US coal state. Wyoming mined 41 percent of US coal in 2020 and coal-fired plants produced about 85 percent of the state’s electricity. With abundant coal resources and good opportunities to store CO2 underground, Wyoming appeared to be an excellent candidate to use CCS. The state passed House Bill 200 in March 2020, directing utilities to produce 20 percent of electricity from coal plants fitted with CCS by 2030.

In response to the statute, Rocky Mountain Power and Black Hills Energy, Wyoming’s two major power companies, analyzed alternatives for their operations and provided comments to the Wyoming Public Service Commission in March 2022. But the comments were not favorable for CCS. Black Hills Energy determined that adding CCS to two existing coal plants would cost an estimated $980 million, or three times the capital cost expended to build the plants. Rocky Mountain Power stated that adding CCS to its existing plants was “not economically feasible at this time.”

Beyond cost, the amount of carbon dioxide that advocates say must be captured is vast. The amount of CO2 produced by industry is small in global terms, only about five percent of what nature releases into and absorbs from the atmosphere every day. But the amount of industrial CO2 produced is still huge in human terms.

For example, an empty Boeing 747 jumbo jet weighs 412,300 pounds (187,000 kg). Its maximum fuel weight is 433,195 pounds (196,494 kg), more than the empty weight of the aircraft. During fuel combustion, two oxygen atoms are taken from the atmosphere and combined with each carbon atom. For each kilogram of jet fuel burned, 3.16 kilograms of carbon dioxide are created.

Consider the Drax Power Station in North Yorkshire, England, the third-largest power plant in Europe, which has been converted to using two-thirds biomass fuel. The plant is experimenting with CCS to reduce emissions. Each day, the plant uses about 20,000 tons of wood pellets delivered by 475 railroad cars. Picture the volume that these railroad cars would carry and then more than double it to get an idea of the amount of CO2 to be captured and stored each day.

The world’s heavy industries use vast amounts of coal, natural gas, and petroleum. Ammonia, cement, plastics, steel, and other industries produce billions of tons of materials each year for agriculture, construction, health care, industry, and transportation. Capturing, transporting, and storing CO2 from these processes would involve trillions of dollars and many decades of investment.

The International Energy Agency calls for 9 percent of the world’s CO2 emissions to be captured and stored by 2050. Today we have a mix of 39 major and minor capture facilities in operation. The IEA estimates that 70 to 100 major capture facilities will need to come online each year until 2050 to achieve this goal. It’s unlikely that even 20 percent of the goal will be achieved, despite hundreds of billions of dollars in spending.

--------

Steve Goreham, a popular speaker on energy, environmental, and public policy issues, is author of three books on energy, sustainable development, and climate change. His previous post at MasterResource was “Green Energy: Greatest Wealth Transfer to the Rich in History,”

To those who have been misled to believe that a warming planet is dangerous, prepare to have a myth shattered: Data from hundreds of scientific journals across major publishing platforms and policy reports from major governments say cold is responsible for more deaths than hot weather worldwide.

Nonetheless, many people find it hard to believe this fact because of the decades-long propaganda and hysteria surrounding global warming. Here is why we should be thankful that our world is warming.

Human Body is Made for Warm Weather

Humans evolved in warm environments. The body is better equipped to handle heat than cold as it can regulate temperature through sweating and other mechanisms. However, in cold weather, our bodies must work harder to maintain a normal temperature, which can lead to a variety of health problems.

Anecdotes of heart attacks induced by shoveling snow are common in northern climes. When exposed to cold temperatures, the body’s blood vessels constrict to conserve heat, which can increase blood pressure and strain the heart.

The relative dryness of cold air is irritating to airways, causing inflammation and making breathing more difficult, particularly for those with preexisting respiratory conditions like asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

So, it is no wonder that civilizations flourished when temperatures were higher, especially when home heating was primitive or nonexistent.

Lessons from Norse Farming in Greenland

Some of the earliest civilizations - such as those in Mesopotamia, Egypt, and the Indus Valley - developed in warm, arid regions with fertile soils and abundant water resources. They were able to support large populations that developed sophisticated technologies, such as irrigation systems that made agriculture possible in dry lands.

Warmer temperatures are associated with higher crop yields, particularly for plants like wheat, rice and maize. Greater warmth increases the length of the growing season and improves the rate of photosynthesis.

In contrast, colder regions like northern Europe and Asia were historically less hospitable to human populations. In these regions, food production was more difficult and the risk of famine and disease higher. The only time life in colder regions was favorable is when there were centuries-long warming phases.

An example of this is the Vikings who developed a thriving civilization in Scandinavia and grew food in Greenland during the Medieval Warm Period. Charred grains and waste from threshing grain proved that barley was cultivated in Greenland by medieval Norse farmers.

As summer and winter temperatures decreased with the waning of medieval warmth, Vikings abandoned farming and turned to seafood. “Greenland’s climate worsened during the Norse colonization,” says Eli Kintisch in “Science” magazine. “In response, the Norse turned from their struggling farms to the sea for food before finally abandoning their settlements.”

Kintisch continues, “It was a sustainable lifestyle for hundreds of years. But in the 13th century, economics and climate began to conspire against the Norse. After 1250, a cooling climate posed multiple threats to a marine-oriented society.”

Even in moderate parts of Europe, the 16th century Little Ice Age was horrific. “All things which grew above the ground died and starved,” reported the National Post.

“The cold was so extreme and the freeze so great and bitter, that nothing seemed like it in the memory of man,” recalls Pierre de l’Estoile, the diarist.

Then, a warming that began in the 17th century and continues to the present day restored more bountiful harvests and a measure of food security that allowed time and energy for innovation and the onset of the Industrial Revolution. Since then, the human population has increased 10-fold.

So, the notion that warming is killing the planet is false. In fact, it is dangerous to direct public policy toward reducing the global temperature.

This commentary was first published at BizPac Review, April 6, 2023..

Vijay Jayaraj is a Research Associate at the CO2 Coalition, Arlington, Virginia. He holds a master’s degree in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia, UK and resides in India.

​