The fast growing Climate Intelligence Foundation (CLINTEL) is planning a major debate on climate change. The event will coincide with the COP 26 UN climate summit in Glasgow this November. Unlike previous attempts at decisive debates, this one has an excellent chance of really happening.
By Viv Forbes
Dr Finkel (Australia’s Chief Scientist) is wrong – hydrogen will never be a “hero fuel source”.
Australia has no gas wells producing hydrogen – every bit of hydrogen we use must be generated by electrolysis of water or manufactured from natural gas or coal. These processes consume energy some of which could be recovered by using the hydrogen as a fuel to power cars or generate electricity. We could use solar or wind energy to generate hydrogen, but then they cannot generate electricity for consumers, industry and the millions of electric cars our political scientist also supports. Continue reading “Hydrogen Hype”
By Dr. John Happs
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.”
Dennis Prager responded to Goodman’s vitriol: Continue reading “Petitions from Climate Realists”
By Duggan Flanakin
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?”
The Institute of Public Affairs launch of Ian Plimer’s book from Connor Court Publishing, ‘Not For Greens’, in Melbourne on Tuesday 22 July 2014.
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.”
Watch the video from Sky News:
See also Naomi’s presentation to The Heartland Institute in Madrid, Spain, the site of the UN’s COP25.
By David Wojick. First published by https://www.heartland.org/.
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.
Generating all of America’s electric power through wind and solar industrial facilities is an expensive pipedream. Continue reading “Providing 100 Percent Energy from Renewable Sources Is Impossible”
‘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”.
By Viv Forbes, Executive Director, The Saltbush Club.
Considerable publicity is being given to an article by Byron Lamont and Tianhua He titled “Why prescribed burns don’t stop wildfires” (published in New Matilda, and also WAToday 22 January 2020).
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”.
The article should be filed among works of fiction. Continue reading “Prescribed Burning Myths – the Academics vs the Bushies”