By Sanjeev Sabhlok  Senior leader and overseas coordinator of India’s Swarna Bharat Party

The Modi government has been shovelling scarce taxpayer resources into solar energy, with a further $6.5 billion promised till 2022. This is over and above indirect subsidies that people pay through higher electricity bills because of renewable energy certificates. And while Donald Trump did the right thing by walking out of the Paris Agreement, Mr Modi unthinkingly remains committed to it and Niti Ayog has been touting subsidised electric vehicles.

Our party disagrees with this approach. First, because we oppose subsidies for any industry. But second, because we believe there is a strong case to impose Pigovian taxes on solar energy given the economic and environmental harm it causes.

Solar energy can do a few useful things. It can power a radio in an off-grid location. But it can’t support our day-to-day life.

Read the full article:

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/blogs/seeing-the-invisible/solar-energy-badly-harms-the-environment-it-must-be-taxed-not-subsidised/

A letter from Pierre Bouteille

Dear friends from the English-speaking world,

Just to keep you abreast of what is going on in France…

You may have heard of the Yellow Vests, who triggered our president Macron into embarking on a “Grand Debate”, mainly on the internet. It is mostly a closed questionnaire with circular arguments on the most surreptitious ways to shoehorn the energy transition, without offering to question its legitimacy in the first place. However, looking closely at the fine print, contributors like associations can still express an open opinion.

On our side Rémy Prud’homme is an emeritus professor of economics, former consultant to the OECD, occasionally to the World Bank, and visiting professor at the MIT. As such he is our chief economist within the steering committee of the French Climato-Réalistes. He came up with the attached “ENERGY TRANSITION IN FRANCE: USELESS, COSTLY, UNFAIR”, initially in French of course. See: https://saltbushclub.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/energy-transition-in-france.pdf [PDF, 346 KB]

We thought you may like to know that we Froggies are enduring the same attacks as everywhere in the western world and that we like to voice our concern.

Sympathetically yours,

Pierre Bouteille, on behalf of the French Climato-Réalistes

Late on Tuesday, Nov. 12, high tides from the surrounding lagoon surged onto the more than 100 islands that make up Venice, flooding 85% of the city and damaging artwork and many historic sites. The mayor blamed climate change for the flood. Jim Steele wrote an excellent article about the event and climate change. The Great Flood of 1966 was the worst on record. Since then, Venice has been working on the long-delayed MOSE project which was supposed to prevent flooding. High inflows to the Venice Lagoon from the Adriatic Sea are driven by the strength of the Sirocco and Bora winds that cause local sea level to surge. There has been no trend in the winds. Steele wrote “Dwarfing the 1.4 millimeters per year of estimated sea level rise, from 1930 to 1970 Venice sank at the rate of 2.3 millimeters per year, largely due to ground water extraction. After addressing that problem, the rate of sinking slowed, but Venice continues to sink at a rate of 1 millimeter per year.” The 1996 flood happened during a low tide and the 2019 flood during a high tide.

Read More:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/11/18/venice-and-unenlightened-climate-fear-mongering/

by Roger Dewhurst

• There was the First Atlantic Warm Period about 7750 BC
• Second Atlantic Warm Period about 7000 BC
• First Saharan Warm period about 5800 BC
• Second Saharan Warm Period about 5000 BC
• Egyptian Warm period about 3200 BC
• Sumerian Warm Period about 2200 BC
• Minoan Warm Period about 1200 BC
• Roman Warm Period about 0 BC
• Mediaeval Warm Period about 1000 AD
• Modern Warm Period about 2000 AD

All the warm periods prior to the current one have been warmer (in most cases substantially warmer) than the modern warming that we are having hysterics about.

There have been five significant Little Ice Ages scattered between these warm periods.

If you can explain how man-made carbon dioxide was the temperature driver for these events please go ahead and tell me.

Until you do there are, for me, better explanations, principally the magnetic field of the sun.

Roger Dewhurst

Roger is a retired geologist who spent much of his life studying climate history written in sedimentary rocks.

Source: https://carbon-sense.com/2013/11/30/nothing-new-about-climate-change/

By Dr. John Happs

It would appear that climate alarmists and associated vested interest groups might have decided that an increasing number of politicians and members of the public no longer see the trivial amounts of atmospheric carbon dioxide as having much of a role to play in our ever-changing climate and the weather extremes the planet has always experienced. (more…)

We live in the coldest period of the last 10,000 years”, says
glaciologist, Jørgen Peder Steffensen, who takes us back in time to the Greenland ice cores and reveals the secrets from the past.

Watch this short interesting video:
https://vimeo.com/14366077

By David Archibald

2 February 2022

Reports from the current Northern Hemisphere winter include plenty of low temperature records broken, frozen seas off Greece, etc., suggesting that the world is cooling. A correspondent in Missouri writes:

Nearly 800 chill hours here so far … cold forecast for the next 2 weeks. Will hit 1000 easily. The average when we moved here not quite 20 years ago was 5-600 … for the entire winter. (Chill hours refer to the total amount of time a fruit tree needs to be exposed to cold winter temperatures to allow them break dormancy so they will flower and set fruit normally.)

So that is good news for Missouri — they will now be able to grow things like peaches with a high chill hour requirement for fruiting. Confirmation of colder Northern Hemisphere winters is provided by the snow mass trend by the Finnish Meteorological Institute: (more…)

By Dr John Happs

I’m often asked:
“Why do so many people still believe that we are facing a climate crisis?”

And:

“Why is so much money being spent on reducing carbon dioxide emissions when many other factors control climate change?”

My answers to these questions rest with the following facts:

1. The general public has little understanding of science and do not appreciate the complexity of climate science. Few understand that climate alarmism is essentially driven by politics and financial opportunism.
2. Media reporters (there are few investigative journalists) are always looking for alarmist headlines. Unfortunately, the public largely obtains its (dis)information about climate change through newspapers, radio and television.
3. Politicians are always “sniffing the breeze” to see which way public sentiment about climate change is going. If the public is alarmed, they can reassure us that they can save us from climate Armageddon. This usually entails the wasting of vast amounts of taxpayer’s money.

Since its inception in 1988 the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has followed the directive it was given by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). This stated explicitly that the IPCC’s brief is to:

“Assess the scientific, technical and socioeconomic information relevant for the understanding of the risk of human-induced climate change.” (My emphasis) (UNFCCC, 2020)

Should the IPCC find no evidence for human-induced climate change there would be no reason for the IPCC to continue, so we can understand the efforts that have been made over the years for those on the IPCC gravy-train to secure a link between human carbon dioxide emissions and climate change.

Not surprisingly, the IPCC could find no evidence for human-induced climate change because there is none so. . . .

Read More:
https://papundits.wordpress.com/2021/08/23/the-suns-influence-on-climate-and-why-the-evidence-is-ignored-by-the-ipcc/

The Bushfire Front Inc has produced a submission to the Federal government in relation to their inquiry into the impact of fire regimes on biodiversity in Australia.

The paper the government attached to the call for submissions was terrible. If this represents the level of impartial scholarship and understanding of bushfire science in the Commonwealth public service, then the country is in a worse position than I thought.

Please feel free to circulate this submission as you see fit. We regard it as a public document.

Roger Underwood
Chair, The Bushfire Front Inc

Submission document: https://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/bushfire-front-submission.pdf [PDF, 170 kB]

By David Brennan

I attended the IPA’s book launch of Climate Change The Facts 2020 at Sunshine Beach last week.

Jennifer Marohasy, the editor, came up with the following quotation which was new to me:

Better a question that cannot be answered than an answer that cannot be questioned.

Attributed to Richard Feynman, American theoretical physicist (1918-88), but may not be an entirely original thought by him.

It does rather sum up the state of contemporary climate science, does it not?

If you would like to buy a copy of Climate Change The Facts 2020 go here:
https://climatechangethefacts.org.au/

David Brennan