It would be great if you could devote a column to how much CO2 reduction and how much fossil fuel consumption has been reduced by $3.5 trillion in spending on solar and wind over the past 20 years? Hoping for big numbers to make it all worthwhile.
With all the mining , processing and smelting of ores , mining and production of concrete and reinforcing steel for the 'windmills' , mining , refining and transport and installation of all the components of the 'photovoltaic-cells-arrays' and 'windmills' , mining and smelting of all the copper for the transmission lines to connect up the entire 'boondoggle' to the existing grid , which now has to be doubled in size and carrying capacity to allow the transmission of all that extra electricity , even if it is only intermittent !
And , to add insult to injury , those damned unsightly 'windmills' still require regular LUBRICATION with that much hated , but erroneously called 'fossil fuel' , OIL !!!
[ Fossils are ROCK......silicates or carbonates....THEY DON'T BURN under NT&P ]
And so on....and on.....and on......ad infinitum ! What a shambles ! What a hoax !
AT A GUESS I would say that OVERALL........there is NO REDUCTION at all........and that any
"saved" has been SWAMPED by all the CO2 produced by the manufacturing processes that I mentioned above ! What a pointless exercise in futility this whole UN-SCIENTIFIC venture is proving to be ! ...........................BUT , hasn't China done well financially from it all !!!
Here it is. I work connecting renewables to the grid every day. I understand grid operations and the need for back up power. I have an MS in electrical engineering from one of the top engineering schools in the country.
California has been stuck at 30% renewables since 2018, because they cannot afford the grid upgrades to connect more. Power rates are the highest in the country.
To completely supply a 100 MW data center with solar and battery would cover 8 square miles and cost $2 billion. A gas turbine would require an acre and cost $150 million.
If not for renewables we would not need more transmission. All the hundreds of billions in new transmission projects are not necessary
Simply put, we can’t afford it. nobody can. Even the bozos in the UK and Germany are starting to see it. Mann and Jacobsen have been sued into silence.
Dr. Richardson and other “experts” lack exposure to reality. Easy to make pretty numbers, hard to build the stuff and make it work. She might be right about climate change,but Im right that there is absolutely nothing we can do about it.
Hi Trevor. That is an interesting hypothesis, but where are your data and analysis? Plenty of numbers-based evidence accounts for the full life cycle of non-fossil and fossil fuel energy sources that conclude non-fossil to have much lower emissions. For example: https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy
I am very PRO-NUCLEAR. Very safe , very reliable , long lasting=economical.
Sadly , even Hannah has fallen for the "Fukushima Disaster" as a Nuclear incident .Possibly 1 death can be attributed to the nuclear part of that Tsunami Disaster ,
the rest drowned or were hit by flotsam ....or while being evacuated !!!!
"The Great East Japan Earthquake and subsequent tsunami in 2011 resulted in approximately 19,729 deaths and 2,559 people still missing. While the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident caused a significant disaster, there were no direct deaths from radiation exposure, but there were 2,313 disaster-related deaths among evacuees. "
Great question. I assume you mean prevented emissions, rather than an absolute reduction in emissions, which also has a component of how much new energy demand is met by different energy sources. Here's a number for 2022r from the International Energy Agency. In 2022 "growth of solar PV and wind generation helped prevent around 465 Mt CO2 in power sector emissions. Other clean energy technologies, including other renewables, electric vehicles, and heat pumps, helped prevent an additional roughly 85 Mt CO2. Without this increased growth in clean energy deployment, the annual increase in energy-related emissions would have been almost triple." https://www.iea.org/reports/co2-emissions-in-2022
This is a great data review! It's also helpful (but sad) to put context on the human experience we've had the past few years. To your point at the end of the article, it's hard to wrap our arms around the home loss / intra-country changes year-to-year. This year in the US, we obviously had devastating fires in LA, while last year, where I live in Chicago, we experienced a whole summer covered in smoke from the 2023 wildfire year in Canada. Good to remember that we're living through this data!
THAT is why some ' preventive burning' , when the prevailing weather is cooler and wetter and allows it , removes so much of the flammable material that a "wild-fire" is unlikely to be sustainable or become a disaster. It will self-extinguish when it runs out of fuel !
THIS POLICY CAUSES MOST OF THE PROBLEM : "But a long-standing US government policy of fire suppression has led to dangerous accumulations of fuel so that when the landscape catches fire, there is so much fuel that fires burn with greater intensity than they would have if we hadn’t had decades of active fire suppression."
SMOKE THE BEAR WAS WRONG !!! IS WRONG !!!! ALWAYS WAS WRONG !!!
Welcome to the fray ! What useful FACTS those all are !
"Forest fire burn acreage in the US has plummeted as atmospheric CO2 has increased. The exact opposite of fraudulent claims of the Biden administration. "
AND : "US forest fire burn acreage through June 16 is near historic lows, and less than half of the ten year average.#ClimateScam .".............. Many thanks Tony Heller .....and David.
Yep ! Warmth and higher atmospheric levels of CO2 are PLANT and ANIMAL FRIENDLY !
I tend to despair at the woeful lack of basic understanding that climate alarmists often exhibit. Often contradicting themselves and dismissing evidence that does not fit their belief system.
Climate alarmism is an act of faith and is often practised by people who refuse to consider basic science and keep just parroting received high status opinions.
I have a friend who won't even accept that Co² has been much higher in the past. Or that Co² helps to increase crop yield. The problem is he holds an influential position in local government and he is the lead on climate change!
All WESTERN COUNTRIES need a NEW SCHOOL EDUCATION CURRICULUM
to correct the deliberate misinformation which has been "pumped into" at least 3 generations of children . Everyone can see the RESULTS of the mental disruption caused by the clash between " OBSERVED REALITY" and "WHAT THEY ARE TAUGHT and SUPPOSED TO BELIEVE". The confusion is causing ructions and mental and physical damage at every level of the , so called , education system !
The kids are smarter than ever but , due to the weird un-scientific ideology gripping the 'educators' , the kids are now confused , frustrated and disorientated and have lost faith in their own culture BECAUSE the 'educators' have taught them that it is evil and worthless........DESPITE ALL THE EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY !
Perhaps when POTUS Trump CORRECTS THE AMERICAN SYSTEM [ by throwing it and it's promulgator's out !!! ] we can "ride on his coat-tails" and chuck our rotten lot out as well ! Something DRASTIC has to happen to vastly improve it soon !
To be fair, Trevor, it is encouraging to come across others who share a similar understanding, whose foundation is built on facts, science, and reality.
So, many people just uncritically swallow the high status narrative and repeat it without ever giving it a thought.
Like you, I think Trump is an opportunity to change things for the better but I don't actually think we will! So many people just refuse to extrapolate into the future. It is already too late to resolve without a great deal of unrest, but by the time they wake up it will be long past the time things can be saved.
Ah David ! Faint heart never won Fair Lady ! Don't despair !
Personally , I think that the "WOKE ERA" has reached it's "USE-BY-DATE"
and that society generally is NOW open to new and fresh ideas ! It's fed-up with the DOOM and GLOOM preaching by "St.Greta , Patron Saint of Truants" and "other such ignoramuses" , and is aware of the FACT that despite ALL THE PREDICTIONS of DEATH , DOOM and DISASTER that were GUARANTEED to happen by the year 2000 , 2003 , 2013 etc........NONE HAVE HAPPENED !
London , New York and Florida were all supposed to be under 3 metres of sea-water long ago !........and they are not ! Adaptation will handle it !
The Sun continues to shine , the birds to sing and people still enjoy their lives in our wonderful paradise........made possible by the energy provided by coal , gas and oil ! Now all we need is NUCLEAR REACTORS producing electricity for all the electric-powered-machinery and the OIL and GAS to power the transport required for many industries and private citizens cars !
CHOICE is STILL the hallmark of a FREE and DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY !
Hi Hannah ! Thanks for another comprehensive article !
I was pleased that you noted the following :
"It was a low year for area burned in the US; in fact, ... the lowest since the start of 2012 records."
To hear the screams and outrage issuing from California [ and Hollywood in particular ] you would have thought Armageddon was upon us ! The World was about to end !!!
Perhaps 'reality' will enlighten this conversation AND Californians will indulge in a bit of 'preventive burning' in future rather than the mere 'fire suppression' and 'water-bombers' they relied on !!
"But a long-standing US government policy of fire suppression has led to dangerous accumulations of fuel so that when the landscape catches fire, there is so much fuel that fires burn with greater intensity than they would have if we hadn’t had decades of active fire suppression." Agreed !
.
"A much higher percentage of Africa’s burned area is the result of deliberate savannah burning and clearance compared to other regions." Yes.....and Brazil also has a bit of 'slash and burn agriculture'
contributing to it's [ so called ] wildfires.......many of which are deliberately lit by 'farmers' .
Why are they called "wild-fires" when they are deliberately lit ? Does that carry a measure of culpability and a lack of responsibility ???
.
Australia also has more than it's fair share of Arsonists plying their skills at 'preventive burning' ,
just at the wrong time of the year though ! So many metropolitan fires occur on hot sunny days when there is no lightning occurring , and yet so very few arsonists are apprehended !
Australia would fare better if "forestry management" and logging were reinstated to their previous levels......fire protection , forest management and a lot more jobs and a [ bonus] timber industry !
That would cut the amount of imports considerably and employ people in the regions.
Thanks you, this information is interesting. As you say it is just one measure of wild fire impact. In Australia, and possibly some other large countries, there is a very wide diversity of forest types. The chart above on Oceania does not show the devastating fire season in 2019 in Australia. The open woodlands and grasslands of much of northern Australia burn very regularly and recover well. In southern parts of Australia very dense eucalypt forests and even sometimes dense rainforest burns and this was a particularly bad year for that in 2019. These fires are much more intense, have longer term impact on plant and animal populations and are also closer to the more populous areas. As you point out the single measure of forest area burned does not say much about the scale of impact for plants, animals and humans nor perhaps provide much indication of any effects of global warming.
Garth.......your sympathies are misplaced ! The plants and the animals evolved in the "bush" of whatever type , and floods , droughts , fires etc are just part and parcel of that process.
Some will escape and some will die.......but most will endure whatever "Mother Nature" throws at them ! Just as the human race did in the past and does now !
The hideous murderous malevolent environment that has succeeded in killing 99.99% of everything that has ever lived on the planet and which should be showered in opprobrium
is instead mentally transmuted into some cuddly benevolent entity euphemistically
called "Mother Nature" as though it was a nurturing thing ! .......It's not ! It's out to kill us ! Fortunately , mankind's technology and skills have managed to curb "her" worst homicidal tendencies and we now live in relative safety and security due to our inventiveness and science and technology ! If these are 'under-mined' and 'compromised' by "alternative 'religions" , like "Climate Catastrophe" at al , then "she" will simply resume her agenda .
Global Warming is REAL , but it is SLIGHT and it played very little role in the LA fires in California .....that was mainly due to man's ever-present propensity towards arrogance
Thank you for your insightful analysis. Regarding the final section: the total burned area doesn't tell us everything. Carbon emissions from wildfires in the 2023 to 2024 fire season were 16% above average due to the type of forest burned. https://essd.copernicus.org/articles/16/3601/2024/.
Although 2024 wasn't an exceptional year for the extent of wildfires, it looks like the types of wildfires contributed more to CO2 pollution than on average and hence to increasing temperatures - at least on a year-on-year comparison.
It would be great if you could devote a column to how much CO2 reduction and how much fossil fuel consumption has been reduced by $3.5 trillion in spending on solar and wind over the past 20 years? Hoping for big numbers to make it all worthwhile.
Hi Lee ! Yes......what a good question !
With all the mining , processing and smelting of ores , mining and production of concrete and reinforcing steel for the 'windmills' , mining , refining and transport and installation of all the components of the 'photovoltaic-cells-arrays' and 'windmills' , mining and smelting of all the copper for the transmission lines to connect up the entire 'boondoggle' to the existing grid , which now has to be doubled in size and carrying capacity to allow the transmission of all that extra electricity , even if it is only intermittent !
And , to add insult to injury , those damned unsightly 'windmills' still require regular LUBRICATION with that much hated , but erroneously called 'fossil fuel' , OIL !!!
[ Fossils are ROCK......silicates or carbonates....THEY DON'T BURN under NT&P ]
And so on....and on.....and on......ad infinitum ! What a shambles ! What a hoax !
AT A GUESS I would say that OVERALL........there is NO REDUCTION at all........and that any
"saved" has been SWAMPED by all the CO2 produced by the manufacturing processes that I mentioned above ! What a pointless exercise in futility this whole UN-SCIENTIFIC venture is proving to be ! ...........................BUT , hasn't China done well financially from it all !!!
AND Al Gore !!!
I don’t think a transition to solar wind and batteries is possible. We can surely make China rich but that’s about it.
Interesting comment. It'd be great if you could share your analysis like Dr Ritchie does.
Here it is. I work connecting renewables to the grid every day. I understand grid operations and the need for back up power. I have an MS in electrical engineering from one of the top engineering schools in the country.
California has been stuck at 30% renewables since 2018, because they cannot afford the grid upgrades to connect more. Power rates are the highest in the country.
To completely supply a 100 MW data center with solar and battery would cover 8 square miles and cost $2 billion. A gas turbine would require an acre and cost $150 million.
If not for renewables we would not need more transmission. All the hundreds of billions in new transmission projects are not necessary
Simply put, we can’t afford it. nobody can. Even the bozos in the UK and Germany are starting to see it. Mann and Jacobsen have been sued into silence.
Dr. Richardson and other “experts” lack exposure to reality. Easy to make pretty numbers, hard to build the stuff and make it work. She might be right about climate change,but Im right that there is absolutely nothing we can do about it.
Hi Trevor. That is an interesting hypothesis, but where are your data and analysis? Plenty of numbers-based evidence accounts for the full life cycle of non-fossil and fossil fuel energy sources that conclude non-fossil to have much lower emissions. For example: https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy
Hi Martin , several sources , but I can't locate them all.
Try this one for starters.....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBjX0O7gOmw
.
I am very PRO-NUCLEAR. Very safe , very reliable , long lasting=economical.
Sadly , even Hannah has fallen for the "Fukushima Disaster" as a Nuclear incident .Possibly 1 death can be attributed to the nuclear part of that Tsunami Disaster ,
the rest drowned or were hit by flotsam ....or while being evacuated !!!!
"The Great East Japan Earthquake and subsequent tsunami in 2011 resulted in approximately 19,729 deaths and 2,559 people still missing. While the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident caused a significant disaster, there were no direct deaths from radiation exposure, but there were 2,313 disaster-related deaths among evacuees. "
https://www.ted.com/talks/michael_shellenberger_why_renewables_can_t_save_the_planet/transcript
https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=JYQ6eZDXXRE&t=529s
https://www.prageru.com/video/the-real-climate-crisis
The mining & processessing and duplication of power-lines produces most of the CO2 associated with EV's and "replace-ables" .
And...the entire Earth has benefitted from the extra CO2 and is now 40% greener
food production is increased and humans are thriving What more do you want !
Great question. I assume you mean prevented emissions, rather than an absolute reduction in emissions, which also has a component of how much new energy demand is met by different energy sources. Here's a number for 2022r from the International Energy Agency. In 2022 "growth of solar PV and wind generation helped prevent around 465 Mt CO2 in power sector emissions. Other clean energy technologies, including other renewables, electric vehicles, and heat pumps, helped prevent an additional roughly 85 Mt CO2. Without this increased growth in clean energy deployment, the annual increase in energy-related emissions would have been almost triple." https://www.iea.org/reports/co2-emissions-in-2022
This is a great data review! It's also helpful (but sad) to put context on the human experience we've had the past few years. To your point at the end of the article, it's hard to wrap our arms around the home loss / intra-country changes year-to-year. This year in the US, we obviously had devastating fires in LA, while last year, where I live in Chicago, we experienced a whole summer covered in smoke from the 2023 wildfire year in Canada. Good to remember that we're living through this data!
Destruction limited, just ‘normal' this year… that’s good news..
Forests burnt aren’t available to burn again for decades. So what is the effect of previous losses on trends you discuss?
( Taking it to an extreme, if all forests have burnt then next years figures are going to look really good…)
Pete Drake : Your logic is irrefutable !
THAT is why some ' preventive burning' , when the prevailing weather is cooler and wetter and allows it , removes so much of the flammable material that a "wild-fire" is unlikely to be sustainable or become a disaster. It will self-extinguish when it runs out of fuel !
THIS POLICY CAUSES MOST OF THE PROBLEM : "But a long-standing US government policy of fire suppression has led to dangerous accumulations of fuel so that when the landscape catches fire, there is so much fuel that fires burn with greater intensity than they would have if we hadn’t had decades of active fire suppression."
SMOKE THE BEAR WAS WRONG !!! IS WRONG !!!! ALWAYS WAS WRONG !!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLDOfBtJwsU
Cheers Pete !
Tony Heller @TonyClimate appears to be able to obtain historic forest fire data for North America stretching right back to the early 1900s
https://web.archive.org/web/20210129125036/https://www.nifc.gov/fireInfo/fireInfo_stats_totalFires.html
https://x.com/TonyClimate/status/1620064747927527424
https://x.com/TonyClimate/status/1671927378636070912
Hi David !
Welcome to the fray ! What useful FACTS those all are !
"Forest fire burn acreage in the US has plummeted as atmospheric CO2 has increased. The exact opposite of fraudulent claims of the Biden administration. "
https://x.com/TonyClimate/status/1620064747927527424
AND : "US forest fire burn acreage through June 16 is near historic lows, and less than half of the ten year average.#ClimateScam .".............. Many thanks Tony Heller .....and David.
Yep ! Warmth and higher atmospheric levels of CO2 are PLANT and ANIMAL FRIENDLY !
I tend to despair at the woeful lack of basic understanding that climate alarmists often exhibit. Often contradicting themselves and dismissing evidence that does not fit their belief system.
Climate alarmism is an act of faith and is often practised by people who refuse to consider basic science and keep just parroting received high status opinions.
I have a friend who won't even accept that Co² has been much higher in the past. Or that Co² helps to increase crop yield. The problem is he holds an influential position in local government and he is the lead on climate change!
Hi David ! Yep ! Brainwashing works well !
All WESTERN COUNTRIES need a NEW SCHOOL EDUCATION CURRICULUM
to correct the deliberate misinformation which has been "pumped into" at least 3 generations of children . Everyone can see the RESULTS of the mental disruption caused by the clash between " OBSERVED REALITY" and "WHAT THEY ARE TAUGHT and SUPPOSED TO BELIEVE". The confusion is causing ructions and mental and physical damage at every level of the , so called , education system !
The kids are smarter than ever but , due to the weird un-scientific ideology gripping the 'educators' , the kids are now confused , frustrated and disorientated and have lost faith in their own culture BECAUSE the 'educators' have taught them that it is evil and worthless........DESPITE ALL THE EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY !
Perhaps when POTUS Trump CORRECTS THE AMERICAN SYSTEM [ by throwing it and it's promulgator's out !!! ] we can "ride on his coat-tails" and chuck our rotten lot out as well ! Something DRASTIC has to happen to vastly improve it soon !
To be fair, Trevor, it is encouraging to come across others who share a similar understanding, whose foundation is built on facts, science, and reality.
So, many people just uncritically swallow the high status narrative and repeat it without ever giving it a thought.
Like you, I think Trump is an opportunity to change things for the better but I don't actually think we will! So many people just refuse to extrapolate into the future. It is already too late to resolve without a great deal of unrest, but by the time they wake up it will be long past the time things can be saved.
Ah David ! Faint heart never won Fair Lady ! Don't despair !
Personally , I think that the "WOKE ERA" has reached it's "USE-BY-DATE"
and that society generally is NOW open to new and fresh ideas ! It's fed-up with the DOOM and GLOOM preaching by "St.Greta , Patron Saint of Truants" and "other such ignoramuses" , and is aware of the FACT that despite ALL THE PREDICTIONS of DEATH , DOOM and DISASTER that were GUARANTEED to happen by the year 2000 , 2003 , 2013 etc........NONE HAVE HAPPENED !
London , New York and Florida were all supposed to be under 3 metres of sea-water long ago !........and they are not ! Adaptation will handle it !
The Sun continues to shine , the birds to sing and people still enjoy their lives in our wonderful paradise........made possible by the energy provided by coal , gas and oil ! Now all we need is NUCLEAR REACTORS producing electricity for all the electric-powered-machinery and the OIL and GAS to power the transport required for many industries and private citizens cars !
CHOICE is STILL the hallmark of a FREE and DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY !
Hi Hannah ! Thanks for another comprehensive article !
I was pleased that you noted the following :
"It was a low year for area burned in the US; in fact, ... the lowest since the start of 2012 records."
To hear the screams and outrage issuing from California [ and Hollywood in particular ] you would have thought Armageddon was upon us ! The World was about to end !!!
Perhaps 'reality' will enlighten this conversation AND Californians will indulge in a bit of 'preventive burning' in future rather than the mere 'fire suppression' and 'water-bombers' they relied on !!
"But a long-standing US government policy of fire suppression has led to dangerous accumulations of fuel so that when the landscape catches fire, there is so much fuel that fires burn with greater intensity than they would have if we hadn’t had decades of active fire suppression." Agreed !
.
"A much higher percentage of Africa’s burned area is the result of deliberate savannah burning and clearance compared to other regions." Yes.....and Brazil also has a bit of 'slash and burn agriculture'
contributing to it's [ so called ] wildfires.......many of which are deliberately lit by 'farmers' .
Why are they called "wild-fires" when they are deliberately lit ? Does that carry a measure of culpability and a lack of responsibility ???
.
Australia also has more than it's fair share of Arsonists plying their skills at 'preventive burning' ,
just at the wrong time of the year though ! So many metropolitan fires occur on hot sunny days when there is no lightning occurring , and yet so very few arsonists are apprehended !
Australia would fare better if "forestry management" and logging were reinstated to their previous levels......fire protection , forest management and a lot more jobs and a [ bonus] timber industry !
That would cut the amount of imports considerably and employ people in the regions.
Thanks you, this information is interesting. As you say it is just one measure of wild fire impact. In Australia, and possibly some other large countries, there is a very wide diversity of forest types. The chart above on Oceania does not show the devastating fire season in 2019 in Australia. The open woodlands and grasslands of much of northern Australia burn very regularly and recover well. In southern parts of Australia very dense eucalypt forests and even sometimes dense rainforest burns and this was a particularly bad year for that in 2019. These fires are much more intense, have longer term impact on plant and animal populations and are also closer to the more populous areas. As you point out the single measure of forest area burned does not say much about the scale of impact for plants, animals and humans nor perhaps provide much indication of any effects of global warming.
Garth.......your sympathies are misplaced ! The plants and the animals evolved in the "bush" of whatever type , and floods , droughts , fires etc are just part and parcel of that process.
Some will escape and some will die.......but most will endure whatever "Mother Nature" throws at them ! Just as the human race did in the past and does now !
The hideous murderous malevolent environment that has succeeded in killing 99.99% of everything that has ever lived on the planet and which should be showered in opprobrium
is instead mentally transmuted into some cuddly benevolent entity euphemistically
called "Mother Nature" as though it was a nurturing thing ! .......It's not ! It's out to kill us ! Fortunately , mankind's technology and skills have managed to curb "her" worst homicidal tendencies and we now live in relative safety and security due to our inventiveness and science and technology ! If these are 'under-mined' and 'compromised' by "alternative 'religions" , like "Climate Catastrophe" at al , then "she" will simply resume her agenda .
Global Warming is REAL , but it is SLIGHT and it played very little role in the LA fires in California .....that was mainly due to man's ever-present propensity towards arrogance
hubris and ideological-stupidity !
Thank you for your insightful analysis. Regarding the final section: the total burned area doesn't tell us everything. Carbon emissions from wildfires in the 2023 to 2024 fire season were 16% above average due to the type of forest burned. https://essd.copernicus.org/articles/16/3601/2024/.
The Met Office suggests that wildfires contributed to the large rise in atmospheric CO2 concentration in 2024. https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/climate/seasonal-to-decadal/long-range/forecasts/co2-forecast-for-2025#:~:text=Verification%20of%20the%202024%20CO,ño%20influence%20in%20South%20America.
Although 2024 wasn't an exceptional year for the extent of wildfires, it looks like the types of wildfires contributed more to CO2 pollution than on average and hence to increasing temperatures - at least on a year-on-year comparison.
A timely piece especially while news out of Ofunato covers Japan’s largest wildfire in decades.