La Villa Spa

Only Three Months Left For Planet Earth( and other false doomsday predictions)

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,982
2,898
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
California like Germany and Ontario during Kathleen Wynn's green energy act suffering from high electricity prices due to expensive green energie polices



To the detriment of those that can least afford expensive energy, California climate policies have driven up the cost of electricity and fuels to be among the highest in the country.

The cost burdens of those policies may be fueling (no pun intended) the basis of a rebellion as the state’s climate policies discriminate against minority and low-income consumers.



Franklin Roosevelt brought affordable electricity to rural America and oversaw the construction of massive dams that provided cheap electricity to every corner of America.

It was FDR, who in 1932 proclaimed that “electricity is no longer a luxury; it is a definite necessity.”

In California, stringent and deceptive climate policies, and intermittent electricity from low power density renewables, are expensive to consumers.

The report from the Energy Information Agency (EIA) shows that both have contributed to household users paying 50% more, and industrial users paying more than 100% more than the national average for electricity.

It gets bleaker in the coming years for the minority and low-income consumers, as the state will be phasing out its last nuclear reactor and Los Angeles Mayor Garcetti recently announced that Los Angeles will shut down three gas-powered electricity-generating power plants.

The Mayor, Governor, and every other elected and appointed official are deliberately ignoring the fact that Natural Gas generating plants currently provide about 47 percent of the state’s electricity.

Those four power plants that have been generating zero or low emission electricity for decades.

Shockingly, the state has NO plans to replace the upcoming closure of four power plants with intermittent renewables!

Last year alone the Energy Information Agency (EIA) reported that California was unable to generate enough electricity in-state and imported up to 29 percent of its electricity to meet its demands. The good news is that we have had no brownouts.

The bad news is that imported electricity comes at higher costs and are being borne by residents and businesses alike.

Without the huge land requirements for industrial wind and industrial solar renewable electricity, the need to import more will escalate every year, as well as the cost of that electricity.

California’s climate policies guarantee that housing, electricity prices, and transportation will continue to rise, while ‘gateway’ jobs to the middle class for those without college degrees, such as manufacturing and logistics, will continue to locate in other states.

It is unconscionable that time after time, California continually imposes new costs and restrictions on home-building which make housing even more expensive. This, which harms working families and minority communities the most.

Following the “live lynching” of George Floyd, one would think the same folks that are demonstrating their rebellion about racial injustices within the police department (protesting both nationally and worldwide) would be the same folks being racially biased with more costs for energy they cannot afford.

By culminating that pain into protests of “enough is enough” and seek changes to lower the costs of energy for the poor.

Automobiles are the survival mechanism for low-income people. If you try to increase the cost of automobiles and the costs of fuel, you hurt low-income people.

Of whom are already forced to pay almost $1.00 more per gallon of fuel than the rest of the country.

Some of the taxes and climate policy costs hidden in the all-in posted price of fuel at the pump are federal tax, excise tax, state tax, local sales tax, cap and trade program compliance costs, low-carbon fuel standard program compliance costs, renewable fuels standard program compliance costs, and the refinery winter and summer reformatting costs.

Many of the state’s poor and people of color tend to live in the state’s inland areas that need more heating and cooling than the temperate coast and drive farthest to jobs due to the acute housing crisis.

Misguided Sacramento policies have forced California to be the only state in contiguous America that imports most of its crude oil energy from foreign countries.

That dependence has increased imported crude oil from foreign countries from 5 percent in 1992 to 58 percent today of total consumption.

The imported crude oil costs California more than $60 million dollars a day, yes, every day, being paid to oil-rich foreign countries, depriving Californians of jobs, careers, and business opportunities.

We’ve yet to receive any thank you cards from foreign suppliers for the states’ policies that are making wealthy countries, wealthier!

The Governor perpetuates the continuous cost increases with his mission to markedly reduce in-state oil production even more.

He is seeking to permanently ban oil-shale fracking technology’s use which would INCREASE costly foreign crude oil imports to California.

All to fill the gap of ever-declining California and Alaska production, further crippling the State, forcing the continuation of California as a remarkable national security risk for the USA.

The recent spate of rioting to improve racial biasing reflects how little the urban renaissance has done for its poorer citizens.

In fact, the number of high-poverty urban areas has grown steadily over the past few decades and doubled in population between 1980 and 2018.

The biggest drops in hiring have been concentrated in recreation and travel, largely “personal contact” jobs that employ many low-wage workers.

To be sure, COVID-19, like earlier pandemics throughout history, further devastated these poorer communities.

People who live in crowded housing, are forced to ride transit, and work in the most exposed “essential” jobs (most of them low-paying) are bound to be disproportionately affected by a public health crisis.

These inner-city residents deserve something more than cheap expressions of sympathy and solidarity from the affluent while they impose unbearable costs for the energy to survive.

Only by reducing rather than increasing the cost of energy, can we restore broad upward mobility potential for the underclass and hope to maintain a healthy democratic society.

Racial biasing from police may be seeing major reforms in the future. This resulting from the public protests occurring on city streets about the deep tradition of racial prejudice and violence against African Americans by law enforcement.

Yet the financial racial biasing of climate policies against the poorest residents, particularly Latinos and African Americans will continue into perpetuity under the current leadership.

Read more at CFACT
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,630
22,184
113
California like Germany and Ontario during Kathleen Wynn's green energy act suffering from high electricity prices due to expensive green energie polices
Fossil fuel prices go up, solar goes down.
Not only is it the best choice for humanity and the planet, but its cheaper and cleaner as well.

 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,982
2,898
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
climate change cultists endangering public health

The Hospital for Special Surgery in New York is apparently cutting back on use of general anaesthesia for hip and knee replacement surgery, to minimise the impact of surgical procedures on global warming.



Surgical anesthetic gases coming under fire for global warming potential – Only one problem: they haven't been observed in the atmosphere

 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,630
22,184
113
climate change cultists endangering public health

The Hospital for Special Surgery in New York is apparently cutting back on use of general anaesthesia for hip and knee replacement surgery, to minimise the impact of surgical procedures on global warming.



Surgical anesthetic gases coming under fire for global warming potential – Only one problem: they haven't been observed in the atmosphere

You didn't read the first article, did you?
 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,982
2,898
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
Virginia’s Latest Pricey Boondoggle: Offshore Wind Power


As reported in an earlier article, Virginia’s green electric power plan calls for 5,000 MW of offshore wind generating capacity to be built in the next decade or so.

This is a huge amount given that the worldwide total is just around 15,000 MW. We are talking about something like 800 giant windmills, embedded in the ocean floor and sticking hundreds of feet into the air above the water.



They will be on the order of one and a half times taller than the Washington Monument, which is really tall.

Two features make this offshore wind plan a folly — too little wind and too much wind. Let’s look at too little wind first.

The proposed site is around 30 miles offshore of the giant Norfolk naval complex. Sites are usually much closer in than this, but maybe the Navy told them to keep their distance.

Or perhaps they are out beyond the very busy shipping lanes. Every ship from Central and South America, or the southeast U.S., headed for ports from Baltimore north to Canada, passes through this area.

This in itself is a concern but not one we are looking at now.

The problem is that this area frequently gets periods of a week or more when the wind is too low to generate any power. These are winds of 10 mph or less.

Normal wind turbines require sustained wind of 33 mph or more to generate full power. Some new models with giant blades can do full power at just 23 mph.

But neither generates much of anything at 10 mph. It is not a matter of no wind; low wind is enough.

Weather records for Norfolk show just such an event last year, with the low wind period being August 17-23. The wind never measured over 10 mph for the entire 7 days.

To make matters worse, when these low wind periods occur in summer they often include very high temperatures. In the event cited above the high temperatures were in the upper 80s and low 90s.

Away from the ocean, temperatures were even higher. Both Richmond and Washington DC saw high temperatures in the mid to upper 90’s for most of this week-long period.

These high temperatures create the greatest need for electricity, called peak demand. Combining peak demand with no wind power means this huge, expensive wind facility does nothing when electricity is most needed.

Some other forms of power generation will have to be standing by to do what the 5,000 MW of useless offshore wind power cannot do.

There is no provision for this duplication of generating capacity in the Virginia plan. If it is not there when needed, then a prolonged blackout is the only option.

Week-long periods of no generation low wind occur fairly often in the Norfolk area, perhaps once every few years.

During a hot summer, they may occur more than once. But there are also many shorter periods of low wind, with a high need for electricity, that occur more frequently.

Then too there are no doubt longer periods of low wind that occur less frequently. At the one in fifty-year frequency, we might get a month or more of low wind. I see no evidence that these possibilities have been addressed in the Virginia plan.

On the high wind side, we have hurricanes.

This area could be called hurricane alley because many storms turn north in the Caribbean and run up the American coast. Southern Virginia and northern North Carolina actually stick out into this flow. That is where these tall towers will be.

Category five hurricanes have sustained winds over 156 mph with gusts that can exceed 200 mph. To date, no offshore wind towers have been designed to withstand these sorts of winds.

Most have been built in Europe where hurricanes do not occur. The force of the wind is a function of the square of the wind speed, so a 160 mph wind is four times as destructive as an 80 mph wind.

In fact, the US Energy Department recently announced a new research program to look into whether a hurricane-proof design is even possible. Here’s how DOE puts it:

“Although hurricanes and the damage they can cause remain difficult to predict, with current R&D, the Energy Department is taking steps to alleviate potential risks to offshore wind systems that will eventually be deployed in the southeastern and mid-Atlantic regions.”
DOE puts a positive spin on it but it seems clear that we are in no position to build massive hurricane-proof offshore wind facilities today. DOE says “eventually” and even that may be wishful thinking.

One thing certain is that if Virginia goes ahead, in effect playing chicken with cat 5 storms, these hundreds of towers will have to be far stronger than standard European designs. Stronger means more expensive.

The standard cost is around $1.5 million per MW, which would be $7.5 billion in Virginia’s case. If hurricane proofing doubles the cost that puts a monstrous $15 billion at risk of destruction.

Conclusion: The Virginia plan is calling for a massive and incredibly expensive offshore wind generating facility, at high risk of failure, that will produce no power whatever when it is needed most.

Surely this is folly.

Read more at CFACT
 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,982
2,898
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
In order to obtain their multi-million dollar research grants, scientists demand that everyone else be poor.


Abstract
For over half a century, worldwide growth in affluence has continuously increased resource use and pollutant emissions far more rapidly than these have been reduced through better technology. The affluent citizens of the world are responsible for most environmental impacts and are central to any future prospect of retreating to safer environmental conditions. We summarise the evidence and present possible solution approaches. Any transition towards sustainability can only be effective if far-reaching lifestyle changes complement technological advancements. However, existing societies, economies and cultures incite consumption expansion and the structural imperative for growth in competitive market economies inhibits necessary societal change.

 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,630
22,184
113
In order to obtain their multi-million dollar research grants, scientists demand that everyone else be poor.
You really think scientists are rich?
If you wanted to make cash would you really go into climatology or would you take a job in the oil industry?




 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,630
22,184
113
youtubetm_0-xSv-v
The argument that every single scientist who went into climatology did so in order to get rich through fraud is crazier than pizzagate/
Your videos are produced by Rockefeller/oil industry money yet you are too blind to see it.
 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,982
2,898
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
The argument that every single scientist who went into climatology did so in order to get rich through fraud is crazier than pizzagate/
Your videos are produced by Rockefeller/oil industry money yet you are too blind to see it.

all of your climate change websites you read like inside climate news are funded by the Rockefeller family and their foundations. stop projecting last year you blindly defend the family


Inside Climate News caught with their hand in the Rockefeller cookie jar #ExxonKnew


InsideClimate News (ICN) has insisted over and over that the Rockefeller Brothers Fund (RBF) and the Rockefeller Family Fund (RFF), which have been bankrolling the entire #ExxonKnew campaign, have absolutely no editorial authority over the stories they publish, including the series they released last year proclaiming that Exxon “knew” about climate change in the 1970s before climate scientists even understood the data. This is something the media has largely swallowed without scrutiny.


frankfooter likes to read climatealarmist websites bankrolled by the rockefeller traitor family now he is projecting

 
Last edited:

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,630
22,184
113

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,630
22,184
113
Ah larue, what is it you like to say?
Any scientific theory that can not stand up to questioning, opposing views or debate and instead relies on silencing of its critics is not worth a bucket of piss
1 - you don't have a theory, you have a propaganda cartoon
2 - you can't debate the science
3 - you run attacks on scientists like Michael Mann
4 - clearly your value is less than a bucket of piss

Again, your only explanation for the warming we are experiencing is 'natural variation', as if its normal for the warming shown below.
The IPCC has a theory, uses peer assessment to answer opposing views and has 20 years of projections vs real observations to show the merit of their theory.

 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,982
2,898
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
You don't know the history, do you?
Rockefeller Foundation Announces $70 Million Commitment to Climate Change Resilience



The Rockefeller Foundation has announced a five-year, $70 million commitment to build the resilience of communities most likely to be affected by climate change.

The foundation's Climate Change Resilience initiative aims to develop the ability of communities to manage and plan for the effects of climate change and to make sure that planning includes the most vulnerable citizens. Since building resilience requires actions on multiple levels and scales, the foundation expects to partner with governments, other foundations and donors, nongovernmental organizations, and groups from the private sector.


 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,630
22,184
113
Rockefeller Foundation Announces $70 Million Commitment to Climate Change Resilience
The foundation is a good example of how you can turn bad sources into something that can do good.
The family, unlike you, is able to learn about the damages of their fore fathers and to do something about it.

You're still quoting materials that came from this part of the family.
 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,982
2,898
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
Weather vs climate fail.



D.J. Easterbrook, in Evidence-Based Climate Science (Second Edition), 2016
2.3.3 Medieval Warm Period (900–1300 AD)

The Medieval Warm Period (MWP) is the most contentious of the late Holocene climatic oscillations because of claims by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and CO2 alarmists that it didn't really happen, ie, the basis for the infamous “hockey stick” assertion of no climate changes until CO2 increase after 1950.

Oxygen isotope data from the GISP2 Greenland ice core clearly show a prominent MWP (Fig. 21.8) between 900 and 1300 AD. It was followed by global cooling and the beginning of the Little Ice Age.




 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,630
22,184
113
D.J. Easterbrook, in Evidence-Based Climate Science (Second Edition), 2016
2.3.3 Medieval Warm Period (900–1300 AD)

The Medieval Warm Period (MWP) is the most contentious of the late Holocene climatic oscillations because of claims by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and CO2 alarmists that it didn't really happen, ie, the basis for the infamous “hockey stick” assertion of no climate changes until CO2 increase after 1950.

Oxygen isotope data from the GISP2 Greenland ice core clearly show a prominent MWP (Fig. 21.8) between 900 and 1300 AD. It was followed by global cooling and the beginning of the Little Ice Age.




Gotta love a 'scientific' chart that has no vertical scale, marked with a few random historic 'weather' reports.

The wiki page on temp record of the last 1000 years is a good contrast.




NOAA's chart also is good for contrast.
All this does is show that deniers really can't tell the difference between legit and bullshit.

 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,982
2,898
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
Gotta love a 'scientific' chart that has no vertical scale, marked with a few random historic 'weather' reports.

The wiki page on temp record of the last 1000 years is a good contrast.




NOAA's chart also is good for contrast.
All this does is show that deniers really can't tell the difference between legit and bullshit.



Dude your charts have been proven to be manipulated and false John Larue and other members here already debunked you misleading flawed graphs. constantly repeating yourself does not make you right. and i like the fact that you ignore Vikings settling in Greenland, Iceland and Canada during the mideval warm period oneof many archelaogical evidence that cimate cult memners like yourself ignore in the name of your alarmist cult




L'Anse aux Meadows (/ˈlænsi ˈmɛdoʊz/) is an archaeological site on the northernmost tip of the Great Northern Peninsula on the island of Newfoundland in the Canadian province of Newfoundland and Labrador. Archaeological evidence of a Norse presence was discovered at L'Anse aux Meadows in the 1960s. It is the only confirmed Norse site in or near North America outside of the settlements found in Greenland.[1][2]

Dating to c. 1000, L'Anse aux Meadows is widely accepted as evidence of pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact. It is notable for its possible connection with Leif Erikson, and with the Norse exploration of North America. It was named a World Heritage Site by UNESCO in 1978.[3]






all of this viking history was possible becuase the medieval warm period that climate change cult members like to ignore
 
Toronto Escorts