Royal Spa

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

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,992
2,903
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
Cost Of ‘Net Zero’ Will Be Astronomical, New Reports Warn

The cost of reaching the government’s “Net Zero” target will be astronomical for the UK economy. That’s according to analysis by two new reports published by the Global Warming Policy Foundation.

The reports find that decarbonising the electricity system and domestic housing in the next three decades will cost over £2.3 trillion pounds. The final bill will surpass £3 trillion, or £100,000 per household, once the cost of decarbonising major emitting sectors like manufacturing, transport and agriculture are included.
This is the equivalent of a £100 billion HS2 project every single year.

According to the Committee on Climate Change (CCC) the costs for Net Zero in 2050 are ‘manageable’: “…we estimate an increased annual resource cost to the UK economy from reaching a net-zero [greenhouse gas] target that will rise to around 1–2% of GDP by 2050.”

Yet, the CCC has resisted attempts to have its calculations disclosed under FOI legislation. Even more remarkably, it has admitted that it has not actually calculated a cost for the period 2020–2049. The decision by Parliament to undertake the complete decarbonisation of the UK economy is thus uncosted.

According to GWPF director Benny Peiser, the two new studies represent the first meaningful attempts to pin down the cost of net zero:

“Although the Committee on Climate Change claims that net zero can be achieved at modest cost, they have now quietly admitted that they have not actually prepared any detailed costing. Unfortunately, Parliament seems to have taken them at their word, and we are now embarked on a project that risks to bankrupt the country.”
Note for editors:

GWPF has today released a series of papers on the cost of Net Zero.

The Future of GB Electricity Supply: Security, Cost and Emissions in a Net-zero System, by former grid engineers Colin Gibson and Capell Aris, reports on a detailed costing exercise based around National Grid’s low-carbon scenarios, which deliver emissions close to net zero by 2050. The estimated cost of this project alone will be over £2 trillion.

Decarbonising Housing: The net zero fantasy, by Professor Michael Kelly FRS, looks at the problems of decarbonising domestic heat and concludes that retrofitting insulation to homes is a fool’s errand.

There is also a short introductory paper, £3 Trillion and Counting, which provides a brief summary of the two news GWPF papers and considers the implications for consumers.

A briefing entitled Reducing Emissions without Breaking the Bank covers new technologies that might deliver reduced greenhouse gas emissions at considerably lower cost.

https://www.thegwpf.com/cost-of-net-zero-will-be-astronomical-new-reports-warn/
 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,992
2,903
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
The purpose of the Green New Deal and climate alarmism in general, is to control and restrict the freedom of people. It has nothing to do with Polar Bears or the climate.


Heathrow third runway ruled illegal over climate change | Environment | The Guardian

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...hird-runway-ruled-illegal-over-climate-change

It has been that way since day one of this scam.


names that end with the letter e

26 Jan 1989 – Call for anti-greenhouse action – Trove

https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/120906718/12982929
 

Phil C. McNasty

Go Jays Go
Dec 27, 2010
26,846
4,955
113
How is everyone enjoying their global warming this morning??
 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,992
2,903
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
As much of the USA and Canada and Europe experienced an abundance of the white stuff, CNN picked this as a good time to make an “end of snow” prediction.

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/02/29/weather/climate-change-threatening-winter-sports-pow/index.html

Climate alarmism just can’t help themselves. Their models predict a hothouse world in their lifetimes, so they see every glitch or variation in conditions as evidence the great temperature acceleration has begun, and endlessly embarrass themselves with their wild “end of snow” predictions.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,866
22,260
113

K Douglas

Half Man Half Amazing
Jan 5, 2005
27,303
7,982
113
Room 112

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,866
22,260
113
[

Brilliant analysis here by Tony Heller aka Steve Goddard. Pretty sad times we live in when we can't trust our government agencies to be honest and transparent.
Pretty sad when you think NASA is dishonest about temperature records and instead think 'percentage of US weather stations hitting 100ºF' is more relevant than actual temperature records.
 

K Douglas

Half Man Half Amazing
Jan 5, 2005
27,303
7,982
113
Room 112
A UK paper has outed a number of angry climate change deniers who made threats to Greta Thunberg.

The abuse and threats made to Greta Thunberg by people from Bristol
By grown men, many who appear to have children of their own


Seems pretty reasonable to me.
If you're going to threaten violence on children you really should be brave enough to put your name and face behind it.
It seems to me that they used their personal social media accounts to post isn't that putting your name and face behind it?
 

Dutch Oven

Well-known member
Feb 12, 2019
6,992
2,477
113
No reasonable adult believes that Thunberg is the person behind anything she posts online or speaks about in public. I'm pretty sure whatever was said by posters was really directed to her handlers, who are undoubtedly adults.

Besides, the definition of "advocating violence" is a little loose. As an example, one of the "violent" acts directed towards her that was detailed in the article was a tweet that she be "burnt at the stake". Does anyone seriously think that the poster was trying to make this a reality, or rather that he was trying to insult her by calling her a witch? Reasonable people will go with the latter. The rest of the "threats" toward her are pretty much along the same lines. Crack reporting by the Bristol Post. The insults and comments were pretty mild by TERB standards.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,866
22,260
113
It seems to me that they used their personal social media accounts to post isn't that putting your name and face behind it?
'If'

Likely they didn't, or there wouldn't be a need for that article.

Polls say that climate change is actually the number one concern for voters in the US.
https://www.theatlantic.com/science...s-really-do-care-about-climate-change/606907/

And how much coverage do US networks give it?
Less than 1%.
https://grist.org/climate/major-new...n-four-hours-to-climate-change-in-2019-total/

 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,866
22,260
113
No reasonable adult believes that Thunberg is the person behind anything she posts online or speaks about in public. I'm pretty sure whatever was said by posters was really directed to her handlers, who are undoubtedly adults.

Besides, the definition of "advocating violence" is a little loose. As an example, one of the "violent" acts directed towards her that was detailed in the article was a tweet that she be "burnt at the stake". Does anyone seriously think that the poster was trying to make this a reality, or rather that he was trying to insult her by calling her a witch? Reasonable people will go with the latter. The rest of the "threats" toward her are pretty much along the same lines. Crack reporting by the Bristol Post. The insults and comments were pretty mild by TERB standards.
If you feel that way I would hope you would have no issue putting your name and face behind those comments.
Obviously if you think they aren't offensive, threatening or dangerous, you should stand behind them publicly.

Just as if you really thought neo Nazis aren't dangerous and would never say, drive into a crowd of protesters, you should have no fear putting your name and face behind those views.
 

Dutch Oven

Well-known member
Feb 12, 2019
6,992
2,477
113
If you feel that way I would hope you would have no issue putting your name and face behind those comments.
Obviously if you think they aren't offensive, threatening or dangerous, you should stand behind them publicly.

Just as if you really thought neo Nazis aren't dangerous and would never say, drive into a crowd of protesters, you should have no fear putting your name and face behind those views.
Frank, this might be hard for you to process, but there's a difference between offensive and threatening or dangerous. If you seriously believe that particular tweet was a real attempt to have Thunberg burned at the stake, then you should immediately stop reading anything further on the internet. The internet isn't a safe place for those who can't tell the difference between bluster and real criminal scheming. However, you might try applying for a job as a journalist.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,866
22,260
113
Frank, this might be hard for you to process, but there's a difference between offensive and threatening or dangerous. If you seriously believe that particular tweet was a real attempt to have Thunberg burned at the stake, then you should immediately stop reading anything further on the internet. The internet isn't a safe place for those who can't tell the difference between bluster and real criminal scheming. However, you might try applying for a job as a journalist.
If you think calling for a teenager to be burnt at the stake isn't offensive or dangerous I'll buy you a t-shirt with those words you can wear to work.
Otherwise you should avoid reality altogether and be content to be a basement troll.
 

Dutch Oven

Well-known member
Feb 12, 2019
6,992
2,477
113
If you think calling for a teenager to be burnt at the stake isn't offensive or dangerous I'll buy you a t-shirt with those words you can wear to work.
Otherwise you should avoid reality altogether and be content to be a basement troll.
Please Frank, start reading the posts that you respond to. Too many of your posts are completely disconnected from the points being made by others.

If you are actually reading and understanding them, and yet responding to them in the way you do, you're just trolling. Nobody likes a troll.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,866
22,260
113
Please Frank, start reading the posts that you respond to. Too many of your posts are completely disconnected from the points being made by others.

If you are actually reading and understanding them, and yet responding to them in the way you do, you're just trolling. Nobody likes a troll.
Do you think its offensive or dangerous to call for teenagers to be burnt at the state, or is just really fun times for you?
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts