The term “climate denier” continues to be used by those promoting catastrophic global warming from the trivial emissions of anthropogenic carbon dioxide. It is a derogatory term, first coined by the journalist Ellen Goodman. In 2007 she wrote for the Boston Globe:
“I would like to say we’re at a point where global warming is impossible to deny. Let’s just say that global warming deniers are now on a par with Holocaust deniers, though one denies the past and the other denies the present and future.”
Should Americans follow China in a massive commitment to supposedly eco-friendly battery-electric buses (BEBs)? California has mandated a “carbon-free” bus system by 2040 and will buy only battery or fuel cell-powered buses after 2029. Other states and cities are following suit.
Vehicle decisions are typically based on cost and performance. Cost includes selling price plus maintenance, while performance now includes perceived environmental impacts – which for some is the only issue that matters. But that perception ignores some huge ecological (and human rights) issues. Continue reading “Do ‘Green’ Buses Pass the Performance Test?”
YouTuber and climate realist, Naomi Seibt says she became “passionate” about the topic of climate change after she “looked into the science of both sides of the spectrum” and realised “what climate skeptics say” made “a lot of sense scientifically.”
Lately, many politicians at the federal, state, and local levels have unthinkingly bought into the talking points of radical environmentalists, pushing policies to require 100 percent of the electricity used in the United States to come from politically favored renewable energy sources, primarily wind and solar power.
‘We saw this coming for years’: Farmers take legal action after fires.
Six farmers are preparing to take legal action against the NSW state government, arguing a massive bushfire in northern NSW could have been prevented if more hazard reduction had been allowed.
In what could be the first class action after this summer’s horror bushfire season, graziers hit by the August blaze in the Guy Fawkes National Park, west of Coffs Harbour, say it was “a disaster waiting to happen”.
Lamont and He are academics from Curtin University in WA, the former a botanist and the latter a molecular biologist. They argue against the use of fuel reduction burning in bushfire management because it does not “stop bushfires”.
Anyone who has studied elementary physics, or basic fire science, is familiar with the Fire Triangle. For a fire to occur three things must be present:
Oxygen, to enable oxidation or combustion (or, in everyday terms “burning”);
Fuel, which is the substance that burns; and
Heat, or a source of ignition, to ignite the fuel in the presence of the oxygen.
If any one of these elements is absent, a fire will not occur.
I first remember seeing this demonstrated in a laboratory when I was a high school student. Our physics teacher had a glass container from which all the air had been removed. When a lighted candle was inserted into the vacuum, it immediately went out. No air, which means no oxygen, meant no fire. A lesson never to be forgotten.
In fact, there are two Fire Triangles, and both must be understood if bushfires are to be effectively managed and bushfire damage is to be minimised. They are the Classic Fire Triangle, and the Bushfire Triangle. Continue reading “Fire Triangles”
A global network of more than 800 prominent scientists and experienced professionals has signed the World Climate Declaration. The statements of the Declaration contain a clear message: ‘There is NO Climate Emergency’. The Declaration also states that CO 2 is NOT a pollutant but a blessing for our planet and that current computer models of climate – on which international policy is founded – are unfit for their purpose. Therefore, it is unwise to advocate spending trillions of dollars on the basis of speculative results from such immature models. Current climate policies not only dangerously undermine the global economic system, but they also put lives at risk in countries where large-scale access to reliable and affordable electricity is made unfeasible. In part I of this essay the Declaration is shown. In part II the Science behind the Declaration is explained. The essay ends with a message to the young generation.