Green Money Tree

13 Apr 2016

At http://phys.org/print379302444.html ... we learn the World Bank intends to increase funding for renewable energy projects - in developing countries. Should people over there start getting worried?

At http://notrickszone.com/2016/04/07/spiegel-puts-spotlight-on-germanys-gr... ... the German blog refers to an article in Der Spiegel news magazine. Green activists are at last seeing through the charade of Renewables. Ernst zu Guttenberg, a leading environmentalist, has joined in the anti wind farm protest movement that seems to have exploded on the other side of the North Sea. Environmentalists in Germany are divided as many local politicians and planning boards are steamrollering through wind farm sites against the public will. Of course, the 'born again' environmentalists see it as capiltalist injusted of 'energie winde' but the bottom line is that the little guy is filling the pockets fo some large property owners.

Meanwhile, at https://judithcurry.com/2016/04/10/twilight-of-the-climate-change-movement/ ... Judith refers to an essay in 'The American Interest' magazine by Mario Loyola, on the Paris Agreement (or deal) and Hansen (and his alarmist view on it). Mario went on to say that in the US unadulterated socialism usually doesn't sell well. The alarmists have put a distinct capitalist face on they policy prescriptions - led by prominent billionaires keen to graner huge clearn energy subsidies.

Judith Curry considers that part of the late 20th century warming is attributable to co2 from humans burning fossil fuels. However, one commenter takes here to issue saying it is the extra heat as a result of rising population numbers, consuming energy and electricity from any source - coal to wind, gas to solar panels. There were one billion people in the world in 1850 and in 2010 there were seven billion - lots of extra people consuming lots of extra heat and energy (and where does it go). Into the air where it is measured by thermometers - rising temperatures.

At http://notrickszone.com/2016/04/08/why-climate-sciences-condition-is-ter... ... and here we have a reference to an article in The Guardian, bastion of the alarmist (see www.theguardian.com/society/2016/apr/07/the-sugar-conspiracy-robert-lust... ... and www.nytimes.com/2002/07/07/magazine/what-if-it-s-all-been-a-big-fat-lie....). We've been here before and we now know that nobody in authority is about to admit it might have all been a load of codswallop. The example provided is the low c=fat diet so beloved of the medical profession over the last 50 years. Not so long ago you were well heeled if you could afford gold top milk on your breakfast cereals. Nowadays it is all green top - virtually water and not a lot else. All the fat has virtually been skimmed off and used in subsidiary products. You get lean bacon nowadays - with the fat trimmed off. Supermarket shelves were full of margarines. Butter was discouraged - but has made a comback in recent years. Cholesterol was the big bogie man - but experiments have proven this was wrong. Sugar is what causes obesity - or that is what is now being said. 

The point of the Guardian storyline is that the authorities know that fat is not the cause of heart attacks but the dietary clinicians will not admit this - and still preach to those people prepared to listen to them that it is imperative to cut back on fats. Hence, the analogy made by Pierre Gosselin is that climate scientists must now know that co2 is not responsible for warming. Something else is the culprit but they will never publicly and openly admit this. Is it believable ? Well, if it is true don't expect an end to the folly. This time it is the steel industry going bottoms up. Next it will be the motor vehicle industry. What will it take to make them wake up?

See also www.westonaprice.org/know-your-fats/the-oiling-of-america/ ... and www.yahoo.com/beauty/12-bad-foods-now-good-125500154.html