fossil fuels

Craig Rucker, CFACT: Wind turbine installations impact vast amounts of habitat and crop land. Offshore wind turbines impact vast stretches of lake or ocean and like ships will not the worst ocean storms. Arizona’s Palo Verde nuclear plant generates 3,750 megawatts of electricity from a 4,000-acre site. The 600-MW John Turk ultra-supercritical coal-fired power plant in Arkansas covers 2,900 acres; gas-fired units like Calpine’s 560-MW Fox Energy Center require several hundred acres. All generate reliable power 90-95% of the year.

John Shanahan, Civil Engineer, Editor of allaboutenergy.net: A lot of the public in North America and Europe have been led to believe that wind and solar energy are better than fossil fuels and nuclear. Other countries are determined to stay strong with fossil fuels and nuclear. It is so sad to see the downfall of Western Civilization coming from extreme environmentalists claiming catastrophic man-made global warming and sea-level rise. The nations with stronger energy programs will control the world.

Paul Driessen, senior policy analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow: The IPCC says it’s still possible to limit planetary warming to an additional 0.5 degrees C (0.9 F) “above pre-industrial levels” – but only if global CO2 emissions are halved by 2030 and zeroed out by 2050. So climate alarmists intend to carbon-tax, legislate and regulate our energy, factories, livelihoods, living standards, liberties and lives to the max. We went to war with King George over far less serious abuses and usurpations.

First, batteries do not make electricity – Batteries simply store electricity produced elsewhere. The electricity stored in them is primarily generated by coal, nuclear, natural gas, diesel-fueled generators, or hydro.

Since forty percent of the electricity generated in the U.S. is from coal-fired plants, 40% of the EVs on the road are coal-powered.

Einstein's formula, E=MC2, tells us it takes the same amount of energy to move a two-thousand-pound gasoline-driven car a mile as it does an electric one. So, the only critical environmental question is what fuel produces the power? To reiterate, energy does not come from the battery; the battery is only the device to store it. A battery is like the gas tank in your car.

Over the course of the 20th century, the Jakobshavn Glacier in Iceland retreated about 10 to 15 kilometers. Over just the next eight years, it retreated about the same amount, For anyone who has entertained doubts about the warming of the planet, a trip to Greenland serves as a bracing corrective.

Greenland is about the size of Alaska and California combined and, except at its coasts, is covered by ice that in places is nearly two miles thick. Even that’s only a fraction of the ice in Antarctica, which is more than six times as large. But the Arctic is warming at nearly four times the global average, meaning Greenland’s ice also poses a nearer-term risk because it is melting faster. But just how fast is Greenland’s ice melting right now? Is this an emergency for our time, or is it a problem for the future?...... Global warming is real and getting worse, Pielke said, yet still it’s possible that humanity will be able to adapt to, and compensate for, its effects. [Is mankind the cause of this warming? Can mankind control climate change? The answers to these two questions is NO! Climate change is caused by the sun and other physics of the solar system. Atmospheric carbon dioxide is the molecule of life.]

David Wojick, Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow, CFACT, Washington, D.C., Ph.D. Philosophy of Science and Mathematical Logic, B.Sc. Civil Engineering: I recently described the all too often case where extreme computer modeling results feed the media into then feeding a public panic. A cascade of mindless fear. USA Today has provided a perfect example of promoting model based panic. Here is their panicky title: "Unsuitable for ‘human life to flourish’: Up to 3B will live in extreme heat by 2070, study warns" Three billion people will live where humans cannot survive? Seriously? Will they become billions of climate refugees? That is the absurd idea, right? This newspaper is a trusted source for many people, but here they publish pure nonsensical alarmist speculation as accepted fact.

Paul Driessen, Senior Policy Analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow, CFACT, JD, B.A. Geology and Field Ecology, David Wojick, Heartland Institute, Ph.D. Philosophy of Science and Mathematical Logic, B.Sc. Civil Engineering: Not every poor African, Asian or Latin American farmer wants to give up his backbreaking, dawn to dusk traditional agricultural practices, guiding his ox and plow, laying down meager supplies of manure to fertilize crops, surviving droughts, repeatedly hand spraying pesticides to battle ravenous insects – to reap harvests that often barely feed his family, much less leave produce to sell locally. But many do.

William M Briggs, initiator of Declaration to the Vatican on man-made climate change: The Magisterium of the Catholic Church makes no mention of earth’s optimal climate, or the best rate of change of the climate, nor should it. Neither optimum is known to anybody. Extreme caution, even skepticism, is warranted in any statement about the climate given the decades of failed and overreaching forecasts and hyperbole from official and interested sources. PEOPLE EVERYWHERE ARE ENCOURAGED TO SIGN THIS DECLARATION.

We are faced with the great challenge of limiting global warming to below 2°C.

The large-scale production of fossil fuel energy which was initiated by the Industrial Revolution and accelerated in the 20th century has led to great human development – for a minority. For the very few, it has even generated extreme wealth. On the other side of this development stand the poor and the poorest of the poor. The structural violence of this development predetermines their lives. Sources of fossil fuel energy are private goods, owned by corporations or controlled by governments.

Paul Driessen, senior policy analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow, Pope Francis: We must “enter into dialogue with all people about our common home,” Pope Francis recently told the US Congress, frequently quoting from his Laudato Si encyclical. “We need a conversation which includes everyone, since the environmental challenge … and its human roots concern and affect us all.” I couldn’t agree more. Unfortunately, the pontiff seems more interested in a lecture than a conversation on climate change. The pope’s advisors believe humans are destroying our planet and dangerously changing its climate. This website shows over a thousand photos of how beautiful the world is today with snow falling from the Equator to the Poles. How much more snow do climate alarmists need in order that they will permit the world to continue using fossil fuels?

Pope Francis: Deterioration has increased in recent decades: constant pollution, continued use of fossil fuels, intensive agricultural exploitation and deforestation are causing global temperatures to rise above safe levels. The increase in the intensity and frequency of extreme weather phenomena and the desertification of the soil are causing immense hardship for the most vulnerable among us. Melting of glaciers, scarcity of water, neglect of water basins and the considerable presence of plastic and microplastics in the oceans are equally troubling, and testify to the urgent need for interventions that can no longer be postponed. We have caused a climate emergency that gravely threatens nature and life itself, including our own. Now is the time to repent and return to our roots.

Pope Francis: In his message, the Argentine pope denounced that efforts to combat climate change are often frustrated by those who deny the science behind it or are indifferent to it, those who are resigned to it or think it can be solved by technical solutions, which he termed "inadequate." "We must avoid falling into these four perverse attitudes, which certainly don't help honest research and sincere, productive dialogue," he said. The Vatican's has erred significantly in backing correct science. "In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual" Galileo Galilei.

Pope Francis: The encyclical ‘Laudato Si’ issued in 2015 motivated many people to take action on global warming, but governments, the pope said, have lagged far behind. In June 2020," he issued guidance for carrying out his climate encyclical that included calling on Catholics to divest themselves of investments in fossil fuel companies. It's not just social justice issues, and not just environmental issues, It's the cry of the Earth and the cry of the poor, all coming together. The encyclical names this 'integral ecology'."

Christopher Monckton: There are references in Pope Francis' climate encyclical that there is a sever warming of the climate. Yet satellites show no warming of the lower troposphere for 18 years 5 months. Just 41 papers, or 0.3% of 11,944 climate papers published in the 21 years 1991-2011, stated that recent warming was mostly manmade. There is, therefore, no scientific consensus, and in recent decades - little warming.

John Holdren, Science Advior to President Barack Obama, Pope Francis, Vatican: Encyclical: "A very solid consensus indicates that we are presently witnessing a disturbing warming of the climatic sysem." "In recent decades this warming has been accompanied by a constant rise in sea level and, .. .. by an increase in extreme weather events. Downpours increasing everywhere. Stormiest winter on record fo Ireland and UK. Warming creates a vicious cycle affecting the availability of essential resources like drinking water, energy, and agricultural production .. .. and extinction of part of the planet's biodiversity."

Rubert Darwall, strategy consultant and policy analyst. He read economics and history at Cambridge University, Judith Curry, former Professor and Chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology: How dependable is climate science? Global warming mitigation policies depend on the credibility and integrity of climate science. In turn, that depends on a deterministic model of the climate system in which it is possible to quantify the role of carbon dioxide (CO2) with a high degree of confidence. This essay explores the contrast between scientists’ expressions of public confidence and private admissions of uncertainty on critical aspects of the science that undergirds the consensus.

Patrick Moore, Ph.D. Ecology, Co-Founder of Greenpeace: This is a collection of videos about man-made global warming and related topics (there is no serious man-made global warming problem), fossil fuels, agriculture and urgent needs of humanity that Patrick Moore has been working on for decades.

The Cornwall Alliance has produced four short videos on the topics of: a) CO2: Pollutaant or Plant Food?, b) History and Myth: The CO2 Record, c) Is CO2 as Dangerous as Commonly Thought?, d) Are Religion and Science in Conflict? Many will find these easy to understand, obvious and helpful. Contributors: Thomas Sheahen, Anthony Watts, Leighton Steward, Harold Doiron, Patrick Michaels, Fred Singer, Robert Carter, Robert Cunningham, Tom Wysmuller, Roy Spencer, David Lerates, Jay Richards.

TRCS, The Right Climate Stuff: Retired NASA Apollo Moon Program scientists, engineers and select others. Will increased levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide emitted from human activity reach a level that endangers human welfare and the health of the biosphere? The answer to this question has been the focus of The Right Climate Stuff research team. Our conclusion? Not likely. The rationale for this conclusion is the subject of this paper where we find that it is highly unlikely that added carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases will add more than 1.8 OC of warmth by the middle of the next century. This bounding of potential warming means that we do not have a rapidly developing climate problem requiring swift corrective action and transformation of economies.

William Ripple and Christopher Wolf are affiliate with the Dept. of Forest Ecosystems and Society at Oregon State University, Thomas M. Newsome is affiliated with the School of Life and Environmental Sciences at The University of Sydney,. Phoebe Barnard is affiliated with the Conservation Biology Institute, in Corvallis, Oregon, William R. Moomaw is affiliated with The Fletcher School and the Global Development and Environment Institute, at Tufts University: The world must quickly implement massive energy conservation practices and must replace fossil fuels with low-carbon renewables. We should leave remaining stocks of fossil fuels in the ground. Still increasing by roughly 80 million people per year, the world population must be stabilized—and, ideally, gradually reduced. There are proven and effective policies that lower fertility rates and lessen the impacts of population growth on GHG emissions.