CNN Touts the Climate Benefits of Chinese Coronavirus

By Eric Worrall – Re-Blogged From WUWT

The climate alarmist community is repeatedly praising the alleged “benefits” of the deadly Covid-19 outbreak.

There’s an unlikely beneficiary of coronavirus: The planet

By Rebecca Wright, CNN
Updated 1005 GMT (1805 HKT) March 17, 2020

Hong Kong (CNN)Factories were shuttered and streets were cleared across China’s Hubei province as authorities ordered residents to stay home to stop the spread of the coronavirus.

It seems the lockdown had an unintended benefit — blue skies.

Continue reading

Social Changes With COVID-19 are a Prelude to Life With Less Fossil Fuels

By Ronald Stein – Re-Blogged From WUWT

While the world is feverously trying to reduce emissions from fossil fuel usage, we get hit with the horrific contagious Coronavirus COVID-19. We’ve seen extensive self-imposed social adjustments to transportation that are very similar to what will be required to live with less fossil fuels in the future.

We’ve seen a serious reduction in the usage of the transportation infrastructures of airlines and cruise ships, as well as automobiles and trucks, and their impact on the leisure and entertainment industries, all to avoid crowds.

Before fossil fuels and the thousands of products made from petroleum derivatives, and electricity that followed, the world was a zero-sum snake pit that was a war against one another scrounging for food, water, and shelter. In the 1800’s most people never traveled 100-200 miles from where they were born. Life expectancy throughout Europe hovered between 20 and 30 years of age.

Continue reading

Energy Used vs Wealth

  By Bob Shapiro – Image from WUWT

As per capita use of energy goes up, so does wealth. Making energy cheaper means more energy can be used, which translates into a higher standard of living. To make people poorer – lowering their standard of living – you raise the cost of energy, reducing the per capita use of energy.

By forcing greater use of more costly solar, wind, and other uneconomical renewables, the US and other western governments (and the NGOs supporting the Global Warming nonsense) are spreading poverty throughout their countries.

CONTINUE READING –>

Studies Show Fracking Ban Would Wreak Havoc on U.S. Economy

By Tim Benson – Re-Blogged From WUWT

A new study from the American Petroleum Institute (API), with modeling data provided by the consulting firm OnLocation, details how a nationwide ban on hydraulic fracturing (colloquially known as “fracking”) could trigger a recession, would seriously damage U.S. economic and industrial output, considerably increase household energy costs, and make life much harder and costlier for American farmers.

In America’s Progress at Risk: An Economic Analysis of a Ban on Fracking and Federal Leasing for Natural Gas and Oil Development, API argues that a fracking ban would lead to a cumulative loss in gross domestic product (GDP) of $7.1 trillion by 2030, including $1.2 trillion in 2022 alone. Per capita GDP would also decline by $3,500 in 2022, with an annual average decline of $1,950 through 2030. Annual household income would also decline by $5,040.

Continue reading

This Team Wants to Capture Unlimited Energy From Inside the Earth

Digging In

In central Italy, a team of scientists dug a well two miles deep in search of a functionally-unlimited supply of clean energy.

If the group of Italian and Swiss geologists manages to get a little bit deeper and reach the K horizon — the depth at which they expect to find reservoirs of highly-pressurized fluids — they would be able to tap into what Wired describes as “one of the most energy-dense forms of renewable power in the world.”

The trick, however, is digging that deep without triggering a massive earthquake along the way.

Greenpeace Fanatics Shut Down Oil-Rich Houston Shipping Lanes

Why the Democrats Will Lose on Climate Change

By David Middleton- Re-Blogged From WUWT

4 inconvenient truths about climate change

Noah Millman

September 7, 2019

At this week’s climate symposium on CNN, Elizabeth Warren answered a question about whether the government should be regulating lightbulbs in an interesting way. She said, basically, that we’re focusing on the wrong thing. There’s nothing wrong with more efficient lightbulbs, but it’s small beer. That’s what the fossil fuel companies want us to be arguing about, because most of the carbon is thrown up by three industries — construction, electric power, and oil — and arguing about lightbulbs takes attention away from those sectors.

The obvious inconvenient truth that Warren is pointing out here is that we aren’t going to be able to fight climate change with a series of small-change consumer choices. It’s going to require massive changes in large industries, which is a heavier political lift. Below the radar, there’s another inconvenient truth being implied: that people are really irritated by losing even small conveniences, and so focusing energy on these small-beer fights has a real cost in terms of being able to fight the bigger fights.

Continue reading