Originally posted by Dilip Panjwani
View Post
-
Hi Bob,Originally posted by Bob Gillanders View Post
Besides what Sid has posted above, let us look at it in your favorite 'mathematical' way.
For July 2023 to be the hottest July in records kept over 120 years, there is a 10% chance that it would happen just randomly, without any upward trends in heating. As you know, p=0.1 is not considered statistically significant. So, nothing to get anxious about...Last edited by Dilip Panjwani; Thursday, 10th August, 2023, 07:34 PM.Leave a comment:
-
"The average global ocean surface temperature hit 20.96 degrees Celsius (69.7 Fahrenheit) at the end of July, according to modern data from the European Union’s Copernicus Climate Change Service, beating the previous record of 20.95 degrees Celsius in 2016". https://cnn.it/3DK1Gao "Originally posted by Bob Gillanders View Post
.Increase .01 degrees (!) It took seven years to establish a new "RECORD" up by a whopping .01degrees. At that rate, the temp will be up all of .14285 degrees in
100 years. That is within the range of the UK data that shows on average .5 degrees per century for several hundred years.
You should welcome that news BobG, one less thing to worry about.Leave a comment:
-
July 2023 - Globally, hottest month on record.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRxI...hannel=CBCNews
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vO_H..._channel=MSNBCLast edited by Bob Gillanders; Thursday, 10th August, 2023, 07:45 AM.Leave a comment:
-
Negative Climate Change (NCC)
8 Generally-Accepted Statements
(Accepted by a group of Canadian Tournament Chess players
on the Canadian national chess discussion board,
ChessTalk (Non-Chess Topics Forum):
https://forum.chesstalk.com/forum/ch...ss-discussion- board/217060-anthropogenic-negative-climate-change-ancc)
Here are the 8 STATEMENTS so far (To 23/8/9) [2 are currently under “Challenge” - so noted]
Statement # 1
Solar Activity is the main driver of climate change. It is heat from the sun that is the "source" of the rising air/atmospheric temperature of Earth.
Statement # 2
Earth's mean temperature is now rising, has been for some time, and will likely continue to rise for some time in the future.
Statement # 3
“The term “Record-Breaking” is sometimes loosely/wrongly used in the Main Stream Media re Earth's currently rising temperature. Cities across the globe may have unique geographic and meteorological characteristics that determine current temperature variations. Fact checking may be necessary.”
Statement # 4:
Currently rising air/atmospheric temperature of Earth is a problem for humanity.
Statement # 5
Since the year 1650 (200 years before the Industrial Revolution [Started: 1850], which is the earliest global temperature recording), the Earth's mean temperature has been rising naturally (Earth has been in a natural warming cycle; it has gone through various cooling and warming cycles before this current warming one). There is surface temperature data for the period 1650 to 1850, and beyond, from the records of the UK Meteorological Observatory. Some propose that they are sufficient to use to analyze our increasing temperature problem.
Statement # 6
For 650,000 years, CO2 in Earth's atmosphere never rose beyond 300 parts per million (to 1949). In 1950, 100 years after the start of the Industrial Revolution [1850], the percentage of the air/atmosphere that is CO2 had spiked dramatically to 380 parts per million. Since 1950, we have now had another 75 years of the Industrial Revolution. We are seeking a source for the 2023 count for CO2 parts per million.
[Note: The significance of CO2, and the Industrial Revolution, as factors in negative climate change is hotly debated. But it is necessary to include a factual finding on these two items, to have some common factual statement concerning them, for future Statements & debate.]
Currently under Challenge; no Defence yet entered.
Statement # 7
It is essential to have alternate sources of energy; it is good that this transition is now underway; our options include renewables (solar panels, tidal, water turbines, windmills) and nuclear. Traditionally used fossil fuels, including coal, are finite, though more plentiful than commonly thought.
Statement # 8 (Proposed)
If farming has an effect on global negative climate change (Whether it does will be dealt with in another Statement, if possible), then any negative effect will be mitigated to some extent by the farming industry becoming “sustainable”. Sustainable agriculture is the efficient production of safe, high-quality agricultural product, in a way that protects and improves the natural environment, the social and economic conditions of the farmers, their employees and local communities, and safeguards the health and welfare of all farmed species.(Definition by Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food & Rural Affairs: https://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/busdev/facts/15-023.htm").
Currently Under Challenge; has been Defended; now in processing period.
Bob Armstrong (Group Secretary)
Leave a comment:
-
Sid - Post # 1609 - 23/8/7
"You [Bob A] called the UK meteorological data "horsecrap" but have offered nothing to disprove that the average temp within this data set rose on average .5 degrees every 100 years with or without industrial carbon emissions."
1. I am unaware of using the word "horsecrap" ever........you have it in quotes as an verbatim quote - please provide my post # where I used this term. I believe this to be "false news".
2. Bob A's Post # 1519 - 23/7/23
"Statement # 4
From 1650 (200 years before the Industrial Revolution [Started: 1850]; 1650 is earliest global temperature recording), the Earth's mean temperature has been rising naturally (Earth has been in a natural warming cycle; it has gone through various cooling and warming cycles before this current warming one). There is surface temperature data for the period 1650 to 1850, and beyond, from the records of the UK Meteorological Observatory. Some propose that they are sufficient to use to analyze our increasing temperature problem.
Support - Sid Belzberg - Post # 1296 (23/4/29)
"Bob, concerning statement [4 – formerly 3]. Given that heart of the early Industrial Revolution started in the UK, where manmade CO2 emissions were significant, it is an excellent platform to analyze the data.”
[Note: Bob's Comment: Sid's statement seems a support for the statement # 4 saying that the UK MO recordings are good to use. Unless there are objections, this post of Sid's has been changed to a “Support” from a "Challenge", which was a mistake of the Secretary of the Group.]"
Far from calling the UK meteorological data "horsecrap", I accepted, for the time being, Sid's assertion that the UK data were good to use re a longitudinal record of temperature, that claims a .5 C rise every 100 yrs., from 1650. I even brought about an editorial change re Statement # 4, to change Sid's comment from a "Challenge" to a "Support".
Bob ALeave a comment:
-
How 2020 of you, when you can’t attack the messageOriginally posted by Bob Gillanders View Post
attack the messenger.Last edited by Sid Belzberg; Wednesday, 9th August, 2023, 01:46 PM.Leave a comment:
-
I am not so sure Lord Monckton is somebody you want to be quoting.Originally posted by Sid Belzberg View Post
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbW-...nel=potholer54
Leave a comment:
-
Climate Consensus and ‘Misinformation’: A Rejoinder to Agnotology, Scientific Consensus, and the Teaching and Learning of Climate Change
Science & Education volume 24, pages299–318 (2015)Cite this article- 6764 Accesses
- 13 Citations
- 418 Altmetric
- Metricsdetails
Agnotology is the study of how ignorance arises via circulation of misinformation calculated to mislead. Legates et al. (Sci Educ 22:2007–2017, 2013) had questioned the applicability of agnotology to politically-charged debates. In their reply, Bedford and Cook (Sci Educ 22:2019–2030, 2013), seeking to apply agnotology to climate science, asserted that fossil-fuel interests had promoted doubt about a climate consensus. Their definition of climate ‘misinformation’ was contingent upon the post-modernist assumptions that scientific truth is discernible by measuring a consensus among experts, and that a near unanimous consensus exists. However, inspection of a claim by Cook et al. (Environ Res Lett 8:024024, 2013) of 97.1 % consensus, heavily relied upon by Bedford and Cook, shows just 0.3 % endorsement of the standard definition of consensus: that most warming since 1950 is anthropogenic. Agnotology, then, is a two-edged sword since either side in a debate may claim that general ignorance arises from misinformation allegedly circulated by the other. Significant questions about anthropogenic influences on climate remain. Therefore, Legates et al. appropriately asserted that partisan presentations of controversies stifle debate and have no place in education.
https://link.springer.com/article/10...191-013-9647-9
Leave a comment:
-
Bob, this is a very nice essay but it is based on the assumption that you have yet to demonstrate that there is a climate emergency that would justify dictating to others what they eat or what they farm. In particular, I have provided evidence that it is a physical impossibility for methane and nitrous oxide emissions to have any influence on climate and yet here you are pumping out propaganda. All of this despite the utter humanitarian disaster of Sri Lanka that clearly showed that they were victims of the CCP/WEF agenda to depopulate the planet.Originally posted by Bob Armstrong View PostFarming
Part II of 2; Part I above
B. “Non-Carnivore-Directed” Farming & Climate Change
1. Organic Farming - Anti-Negative Climate Change
How do farmers help climate change?
Organic farming prohibits most synthetic inputs, which means reduced GHG emissions, as well as cleaner soil, water, and food. Furthermore, organic and sustainable techniques bring additional benefits for farmers, such as increased soil health and fertility, which leads to additional climate-friendly benefits.
https://foodwise.org/articles/10-way...limate-change/
2. Non-Carnivore Directed Farming
Global elimination of meat production could save the planet
https://news.berkeley.edu/2022/02/01...ave-the-planet
3. Agriculture & CO2
I. Greenhouse gas emissions and agriculture
10% of Canada's greenhouse gas emissions are from crop and livestock production, excluding emissions from the use of fossil fuels or from fertilizer production.
The main gases emitted by agricultural activities are:
Conversely, agriculture helps slow climate change by storing carbon on agricultural lands. Storing, or sequestering, carbon in soil as organic matter, perennial vegetation, and in trees reduces carbon dioxide amounts in the atmosphere.
https://agriculture.canada.ca/en/env...eenhouse-gases
II. The Carbon Cycle
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNLUzqW8IuA
III. Generally Accepted:
Carbon is the primary component of all fossil fuels (coal, oil and gas) that we burn to create power. Our growing use of energy has increased the volume of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere through burning fossil fuels. [ There is controversy over whether the amount of CO2 generated by man has a "significant" effect on Climate Change and rising temperature. The Anthropogenicists claim that man is increasing the air CO2 at a rate that is accelerating any "natural" warming of the Earth, due to a current warming cycle we are in.]
4. Farming & Methane
13 nations – many of them major cattle and food-producing states led by the United States, Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Spain – have signed onto a commitment to place farmers under new restrictions intended to reduce emissions of methane gas.
(Above link)
5. Farming & Food Security
Non-Carnivore Directed Farming can produce enough food to feed many more than are currently populating the Earth.
But to maximize productivity, and to maintain fairness, carnivore-directed farming must be stopped from gobbling up tremendously more production resources than non-carnivore-directed farming. Have you heard of any problem in the Amazon and the rain forests, due to the headlong rush for profit of the Brazilian cattle ranching industry? No? Google "Deforestation - South America"! But this transition is not happening.........why?.........Carnivore-directed farmers, as a force in the world, are quite influential, and backed by whole industries based on the products of carnivore-directed farming. This lobby works hard at justification to the public of this unfairness, and its gambling with food security, which is best maintained by non-carnivore-directed farming......there are many articles on the great disparity between the two types of farming.
Again, it is going to be up to the elector to elect parties that are not beholden to this lobby, and who will pass laws to achieve full food security.
6. Elimination of All Farming is Not On
In our researching, all emphasis is on greater productivity in farming, given climate change, and how farming can reduce its carbon footprint and other negative factors. There is almost nothing we have found supporting the total elimination of farming.
Many articles are very misleading on this point (https://www.eutimes.net/2023/06/13-n...ve-the-planet/). The headline reads "Abolishing Farming" - this is significant false reporting! "New restrictions" is not "abolishing". This is scare-mongering. The article deals with farming and the methane gas generation. It does not propose the elimination of either carnivore-directed farming nor any other kind of farming.
The REAL News (TRN – 23/8/8)
Copyright – TRN (23/8/6)
Ethical animal treatment and the ethics of animals as a food source is an entirely separate issue from whether or not this should be banned and is nothing but a distraction from the debunked notion that this is a source of climate change.
You are now unwittingly supporting the Greatest Crime Against Humanity Ever Perpetrated on Humanity, starting with mass poisoning via lethal slow-kill injections and now the same players (CCP)/WEF are pushing mass starvation.
Net Zero is a Marxist Agenda that Canada"s Minister of the Environment and Climate Change Guilbeault is trying to force onto the country without the consent of Canadians. Former UK Government Policy advisor Lord Monckton discusses the climate scam and how it relates to the Marxist roots of the Net Zero Agenda. It goes way back to WWII:
He has testified four times before the U.S. Congress and has spoken at United Nations climate conferences in Bali, Bonn, Copenhagen, Cancun, Durban, Rio, and Qatar. His lecture to undergraduates at the Cambridge Union Society on climate change was released as a feature-length film called Apocalypse. NO!
He has triumphed in a debate at St Andrews University, where undergraduates voted against climate alarm for the first time at any British university, and at the Oxford Union, where undergraduates voted against climate alarm for the first time at any English university. Lord Monckton has authored numerous papers on the climate issue both for the layman and scientific community. In a paper for the World Federation of Scientists, he established that CO2 has a social benefit, not a social cost. He was also a co-author of the paper that showed the claim of “97% scientific consensus” about climate change to be false https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11191-013-9647-9. His scholarly articles on climate issues have appeared in numerous books as well as such journals as Science Bulletin, Energy and Environment, Journal of
The Marine Navigation Industry, UK Quarterly Economic Bulletin, Physics and Society, Science & Education, and AIG News. For his work on the climate, Lord Monckton, who was Nerenberg Lecturer in Mathematics at the University of Western Ontario in 2013, has been presented with numerous honors, including the Meese-Noble Award for Freedom, the Valiant-for-Truth Award of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, the Santhigiri Ashram Award, and the Intelligence Medal of the Army of Colombia.
Start at 1:20 of this video, the last 15 minutes, although it is fascinating all through.
Last edited by Sid Belzberg; Wednesday, 9th August, 2023, 08:38 AM.Leave a comment:
-
Farming
Part II of 2; Part I above
B. “Non-Carnivore-Directed” Farming & Climate Change
1. Organic Farming - Anti-Negative Climate Change
How do farmers help climate change?
Organic farming prohibits most synthetic inputs, which means reduced GHG emissions, as well as cleaner soil, water, and food. Furthermore, organic and sustainable techniques bring additional benefits for farmers, such as increased soil health and fertility, which leads to additional climate-friendly benefits.
https://foodwise.org/articles/10-way...limate-change/
2. Non-Carnivore Directed Farming
Global elimination of meat production could save the planet
https://news.berkeley.edu/2022/02/01...ave-the-planet
3. Agriculture & CO2
I. Greenhouse gas emissions and agriculture
10% of Canada's greenhouse gas emissions are from crop and livestock production, excluding emissions from the use of fossil fuels or from fertilizer production.
The main gases emitted by agricultural activities are:
Conversely, agriculture helps slow climate change by storing carbon on agricultural lands. Storing, or sequestering, carbon in soil as organic matter, perennial vegetation, and in trees reduces carbon dioxide amounts in the atmosphere.
https://agriculture.canada.ca/en/env...eenhouse-gases
II. The Carbon Cycle
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNLUzqW8IuA
III. Generally Accepted:
Carbon is the primary component of all fossil fuels (coal, oil and gas) that we burn to create power. Our growing use of energy has increased the volume of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere through burning fossil fuels. [ There is controversy over whether the amount of CO2 generated by man has a "significant" effect on Climate Change and rising temperature. The Anthropogenicists claim that man is increasing the air CO2 at a rate that is accelerating any "natural" warming of the Earth, due to a current warming cycle we are in.]
4. Farming & Methane
13 nations – many of them major cattle and food-producing states led by the United States, Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Spain – have signed onto a commitment to place farmers under new restrictions intended to reduce emissions of methane gas.
(Above link)
5. Farming & Food Security
Non-Carnivore Directed Farming can produce enough food to feed many more than are currently populating the Earth.
But to maximize productivity, and to maintain fairness, carnivore-directed farming must be stopped from gobbling up tremendously more production resources than non-carnivore-directed farming. Have you heard of any problem in the Amazon and the rain forests, due to the headlong rush for profit of the Brazilian cattle ranching industry? No? Google "Deforestation - South America"! But this transition is not happening.........why?.........Carnivore-directed farmers, as a force in the world, are quite influential, and backed by whole industries based on the products of carnivore-directed farming. This lobby works hard at justification to the public of this unfairness, and its gambling with food security, which is best maintained by non-carnivore-directed farming......there are many articles on the great disparity between the two types of farming.
Again, it is going to be up to the elector to elect parties that are not beholden to this lobby, and who will pass laws to achieve full food security.
6. Elimination of All Farming is Not On
In our researching, all emphasis is on greater productivity in farming, given climate change, and how farming can reduce its carbon footprint and other negative factors. There is almost nothing we have found supporting the total elimination of farming.
Many articles are very misleading on this point (https://www.eutimes.net/2023/06/13-n...ve-the-planet/). The headline reads "Abolishing Farming" - this is significant false reporting! "New restrictions" is not "abolishing". This is scare-mongering. The article deals with farming and the methane gas generation. It does not propose the elimination of either carnivore-directed farming nor any other kind of farming.
The REAL News (TRN – 23/8/8)
Copyright – TRN (23/8/6)
Leave a comment:
-
Farming
Part I of 2
Farmers are undergoing severe pressure across the globe to change their methods. Criticisms abound: cruelty to farm animals; clear-cutting of forests; use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides, and the list goes on.
Let's delve a bit deeper into the topic.
A. “Organic” Farming
1. Viable
a. Small rice farming in India
file:///C:/Users/Bob/Downloads/sustainability-10-04424.pdf
b. Organic farming in Nepal: A viable option for food security and agricultural sustainability
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/335017097.pdf
2. Sustainable
a. Organic farming - widely considered to be the far more sustainable alternative when it comes to food production.
https://news.climate.columbia.edu/20...r-environment/
Definition of Sustainable Agriculture (Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food & Rural Affairs: https://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english...cts/15-023.htm"):
The efficient production of safe, high-quality agricultural product, in a way that protects and improves the natural environment, the social and economic conditions of the farmers, their employees and local communities, and safeguards the health and welfare of all farmed species.
There was a time when farmers recognized that the land had to be sustainably used. Thus crop fields, having had much of the nutrients removed from a number of years of use, rotated leaving one field "fallow" for one year's regeneration. Green fertilizers, such as clover, were sown during that year, and in the late summer/fall, were "mulch cut" in order to have organics deteriorate in the field and rejuvenate that one field. Done in rotation, the system was sustainable.
Chemical fertilizers do increase both yield and profit (But humans, in many areas, destroy what they have in the headlong rush after the "Sacred Dollar"; big profits come, and the problem of "sustainability" falls off the radar; the capitalist system demands that you maximize your profit, and we see all over the place that the negative consequences of such headlong rush to "wealth" are ignored, until the chickens (Farm animals!) come home to roost). Their effect on the environment and health of all is generally thought to be negative; however it has been argued that certain types of fertilizer, properly applied, are neutral re the environment and human health (And the health of our co-resident species)
Aside: Have you seen "chicken farming" that maximizes egg production and minimizes expenses, and is cruel and unusual treatment of one of our co-resident species on this planet ?
Consider:
"Few people think about the chicken as intelligent, however. In recent years, though, scientists have learned that this bird can be deceptive and cunning, that it possesses communication skills on par with those of some primates and that it uses sophisticated signals to convey its intentions.
The Startling Intelligence of the Common Chicken"
https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...mmon-chicken1/
The definition of “Sustainable Agriculture” is not only supportive of organic farming, but can as well apply to non-organic farming done properly.
b. There have been failures in transition – Sri Lanka
https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/03/05...arming-crisis/
3. More Profitable than non-organic farming
https://www.dal.ca/faculty/agricultu...itability.html
4. Challenges for Organic Farming can be Overcome
"...organic farming presents its own unique set of challenges, from pests and diseases that can damage crops to lack of access to water and other resources. Here we will explore some of the biggest challenges faced by organic farmers and offer some possible solutions."
https://ryansproduce.com/the-challen...overcome-them/
5. Some Negatives to Organic Farming
Organic food is more expensive because farmers do not get as much out of their land as conventional farmers do. Production costs are higher because farmers need more workers. Marketing and distribution is not efficient because organic food is produced in smaller amounts.
https://byjus.com/ias-questions/what...ganic-farming/
6. Organic Food Really Is Better for Human Health/the Environment
The gradual shift towards organic farming has been mainly because we as consumers have become increasingly concerned about the health impacts of accidentally consuming pesticides and chemical fertilizers. During the 1990s, the USDA first standardized the meaning of the term “organic” — basically, farmers do not use any form of synthetic fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, or fungicides to grow their produce.
https://news.climate.columbia.edu/20...r-environment/
7. Growing World Population & Food Security - Organic Farming is the Answer
Problem - producing enough food for a population that could reach 10 billion by 2050, without the extensive deforestation and harm to the wider environment.
Solution - Organic agriculture occupies only 1% of global agricultural land, making it a relatively untapped resource for [future food security], one of the greatest challenges facing humanity.
https://www.theguardian.com/sustaina...e-world-hunger
Part II below
The REAL News (TRN - 23/8/8)
Copyright – TRN (23/8/6)Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Wednesday, 9th August, 2023, 07:19 AM.Leave a comment:
-
Here is what happened to the Genocidal WEF leftist Government of Sri Lanka when Bob's dream of a Nitrogen Fertilizer ban was implemented.
With Country Facing Crisis, World Economic Forum Deletes Post on Making Sri Lanka 'Rich by 2025'
Rebecca Downs | July 13, 2022 11:30 AM
AP Photo/Eranga JayawardenaLast weekend, the Sri Lanka president and prime minister resigned in wake of protesters storming their residences, and the president has since fled the country. It was an instance of so-called "green" policies gone terribly wrong, as Bob Barr laid out in a column for Townhall, which involved a catastrophic fertilizer ban.
As an editorial from National Review on Tuesday that highlighted the "Collapse of Sri Lanka Is a Failure of Leftism," pointed out, what happened "are the real-world consequences of government central planning."
"Sri Lanka, under the leadership of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, decided in April 2021 to become the world’s first all-organic country," the editors wrote. "The government banned the use of chemical fertilizers and banned their importation. The move was pitched as creating a self-reliant economy on the island nation and hailed as a great experiment in green policy-making."
With such an embarrassing failure that Sri Lanka turned out to be, it looks like the World Economic Forum (WEF) is trying to cover its tracks. Tucker Carlson, who discussed the turmoil on his Monday night episode of "Tucker Carlson Tonight," shared that the WEF appears to have deleted an article dated August 29, 2018 from Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, "This is how I will make my country rich by 2025."
Recommended
Former Fox News Reporter Takes a Blow Torch to Dem's Pathetic Defense of Hunter BidenMatt Vespa
As of Wednesday morning, the link is still broken, but archives show the link was working as recently as Monday morning.
There is only the briefest of mentions about the policies that drove the Sri Lankan people to revolt, with added emphasis:We have also played a constructive role in promoting international and regional initiatives in many areas, ranging from the environment and climate change to maritime security and migration. It is our commitment to use the strategic potential of the country, including its vibrant maritime connectivity, for enhancing friendly cooperation with all partners while reaping the economic benefits for all our peoples.
Stunningly, on Monday, amidst the turmoil in Sri Lanka, WEF published a piece on how "Transitioning to green energy is key to both tackling climate change and creating sustainable economies. Here's why." Recommended reading includes a piece from June 20 about "Why the global energy transition must be just and equitable."
The World Bank has a page up on "Vision 2025: Sri Lanka’s Path to Prosperity," from October 17, 2017. There is no mention of buzz words such as "environment" or "climate change" or "green."
As lengthy and comprehensive as an explainer from Reuters may seem, there is still very little about the disastrous "green" policies, with more of an emphasis on "economic mismanagement" and how leaders stalled talks with the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
"Anti-government protesters angry over power blackouts, shortages of basic goods and rising prices have long demanded that [President Gotabaya] Rajapaksa steps down," the explainer reads at one point. It fails to delve into why such blackouts occurred though, which are already coming to the United States, especially in the case of deeply liberal California, which Gov. Gavin Newsom has sought to turn into a progressive oasis of sorts but has really become more of a wasteland.
As Spencer wrote in a column last month about these coming blackouts:Across America, millions of citizens facing forecasts of "above-average season temperatures" are at elevated risk of "forced outages for generation and some bulk power system equipment." That means, as the NERC assessment explains, "elevated or high risk of energy shortfalls this summer." Those grim findings on the crisis that looks set to plunge Americans into darkness during the hottest summer months have already been confirmed by power officials in Texas and California, another mismanaged jurisdiction where Golden State residents have been told they'll face "blackouts every summer for another four years."
Californians, plus millions more Americans who find themselves in the elevated risk zone — nearly everyone living west of the Mississippi River — face energy emergencies during what NERC calls "extreme conditions" such as droughts, heatwaves, and wildfires. Americans in the high risk zone — including Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, and portions of Michigan, Illinois, Arkansas, and Louisiana — face power disruptions during both extreme conditions as well as normal summer conditions. That is, pretty much any time that summer temperatures put a strain on the power grids on which millions of Americans rely.
...
But, as with other crises that developed on Biden's watch, many have seen and warned of the threat. Still, the Biden administration has done basically nothing to address the threat of blackouts across the country. Like California's failed Democratic leaders, the Biden administration continues to allow risks to go unmitigated and warnings remain unheeded.
Biden's apparent solution, as seen in his executive orders and dubious use of the Defense Production Act, is to continue down his leftist-inspired "transition" away from reliable fossil fuels to falsely named "green" energy. But NERC's report also contains warnings that such policies and energy sources have already jeopardized America's electrical grid and led to the foreboding predictions for this summer.
It's not just President Joe Biden's policies we have to worry about, as Spencer highlighted in his column. Tucker Carlson also warned that Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), pointing out that the turmoil "is what the Green New Deal looks like in Sri Lanka." He also shared he wished he had her cell phone number, so that he could text her footage of the unrest there. "I would text her those videos and say, 'The Green New Deal comes to Sri Lanka. Are you psyched?'"
Conclusion:
It is always better to learn from other people's mistakes, not your own!Last edited by Sid Belzberg; Tuesday, 8th August, 2023, 09:18 AM.Leave a comment:
-
So let's stop using nitrogen fertilizers altogether and repeat the results of Sri Lanka's 2022 humanitarian disaster on a global; scale? Are you nuts?Originally posted by Bob Armstrong View Post
All kinds of tactics can be deployed to ameliorate the problem of dealing with nutrient runoff and leaching without banning Nitrogen-based fertilizers. Here are several strategies and practices that can help mitigate the problem:- Precision Agriculture: Modern technology can assist farmers in applying the exact amount of fertilizer needed by the crops, at the right time, and in the right place. This reduces the chance of excess nitrogen being available for runoff or leaching.
- Buffer Strips and Riparian Zones: Vegetative buffer strips can be planted between agricultural fields and water bodies. These strips can capture and absorb any runoff, reducing the amount of nitrogen that enters rivers, lakes, or streams.
- Cover Crops: Planting cover crops after the main crop's harvest season can help absorb leftover nitrogen in the soil. This prevents the nitrogen from leaching into groundwater or being washed away into surface water bodies.
- No-Till or Reduced Tillage Farming: Tilling the soil can increase erosion and nutrient runoff. By reducing or eliminating tillage, the soil remains more intact, and its capacity to hold onto nutrients increases.
- Contour Farming and Terracing: These practices can reduce the speed of water runoff, allowing more time for the soil to absorb and hold onto its nutrients.
- Improved Irrigation: Over-irrigation can increase the risk of nutrient leaching. Efficient irrigation systems, like drip irrigation, apply water only where and when it's needed, reducing nutrient losses.
- Constructed Wetlands: Wetlands can be constructed or restored in strategic locations to act as filters for agricultural runoff. The plants in these wetlands can take up a significant amount of the nutrients before they reach larger water bodies.
- Manure Management: If animal manure is a primary source of nutrients, proper storage, treatment, and application techniques can reduce the risk of nutrient runoff.
- Education and Training: Ensuring that farmers and agricultural workers are educated about the risks of nutrient pollution and the techniques available to reduce it is crucial
Leave a comment:
-
Farming & Use of Fertilizers
One negative environmental effect - growth of algae
"An algal bloom affects the whole ecosystem.
Consequences range from the benign feeding of higher trophic levels to more harmful effects like blocking sunlight from reaching other organisms, causing a depletion of oxygen levels in the water, and, depending on the organism, secreting toxins into the water.
Algal blooms are the result of a nutrient, like nitrogen or phosphorus from various sources (for example fertilizer runoff or other forms of nutrient pollution), entering the aquatic system and causing excessive growth of algae."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algal_bloom...
Bob A (Anthropogenicist)
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: