Greens are killing the planet

[Manonthestreet]

Acording to their own propo, to wit

End Of Renewables Craze Is Near

Renewables have stalled out in California and Germany :: UK announces it will frack for natural gas :: South Korea cuts renewables to fund nuclear

michaelshellenberger.substack.com

But other data complicate that picture. The global economy’s dependence on fossil fuels declined from just 86% to 84% over the last 20 years. Solar and wind supply just 5% of global energy. And there are so few EVs that they reduce petroleum consumption by just a half percent of global demand.

Meanwhile, places with heavy renewables penetration are reaching their limits. The amount of zero-carbon electricity California generated declined by 10% over the last decade, because of less hydroelectricity from drought, and the 2011 closure of San Onofre nuclear plant, which was 9% of the state’s total electricity generation. In Germany, the total amount of electricity from renewables declined in 2021, even as overall electricity consumption rose.

 

[skye]

.....and who controls the Greens worldwide?

The Globlalists of course.

Sad but true.

 

[Esdraelon]

I recall the Arab oil embargo from '73 after Nixon backed Israel in the Yom Kippur war. There were long lines everywhere and people could only purchase gas every other day based on tag numbers at that time.
That was the first time I heard much about wind or solar. It was going to "revolutionize" and clean up the planet. Funny how that didn't work out.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Acording to their own propo, to wit

End Of Renewables Craze Is Near

Renewables have stalled out in California and Germany :: UK announces it will frack for natural gas :: South Korea cuts renewables to fund nuclear

michaelshellenberger.substack.com

But other data complicate that picture. The global economy’s dependence on fossil fuels declined from just 86% to 84% over the last 20 years. Solar and wind supply just 5% of global energy. And there are so few EVs that they reduce petroleum consumption by just a half percent of global demand.

Meanwhile, places with heavy renewables penetration are reaching their limits. The amount of zero-carbon electricity California generated declined by 10% over the last decade, because of less hydroelectricity from drought, and the 2011 closure of San Onofre nuclear plant, which was 9% of the state’s total electricity generation. In Germany, the total amount of electricity from renewables declined in 2021, even as overall electricity consumption rose.

Well, the problem we have is there are two narratives.

The first is there's no man made problem.
The second is there is a man made problem.

However the issues we should be looking at don't really have anything to do with this.

We have overpopulation issues.
Within this there are water issue, there are agricultural issues and not being able to produce enough food. There are other resource issues which will lead to war as people scramble to get the resources. I'd say the Ukraine War might be the first war in what could be turbulent times if we don't reduce a population that might hit 8 billion by the end of the year, only 11 years after hitting 7 billion.

10 billion will happen within 20 years.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Well, the problem we have is there are two narratives.

The first is there's no man made problem.
The second is there is a man made problem.

However the issues we should be looking at don't really have anything to do with this.

We have overpopulation issues.
Within this there are water issue, there are agricultural issues and not being able to produce enough food. There are other resource issues which will lead to war as people scramble to get the resources. I'd say the Ukraine War might be the first war in what could be turbulent times if we don't reduce a population that might hit 8 billion by the end of the year, only 11 years after hitting 7 billion.

10 billion will happen within 20 years.

No it wont. China and Japan are imploding...EU is shrinking even we are not at replacement level.

 

[Baron Von Murderpaws]

And like the DementocRats, they are willing to kill, maim, destroy, and anniahlate to get their way.

 

[MisterBeale]

No it wont. China and Japan are imploding...EU is shrinking even we are not at replacement level.

Folks like frigidweirdo think that the kings and queens and billionaires that gather at DAVOS, own all these foundations, and control everything he reads and sees, have his best interests at heart. They wouldn't lie to him about anything.

Gee, I wonder why they want to make it so small farmers can't even grow food, and only billionaire owned food corporations can?

 

[MarathonMike]

Well, the problem we have is there are two narratives.

The first is there's no man made problem.
The second is there is a man made problem.

However the issues we should be looking at don't really have anything to do with this.

We have overpopulation issues.
Within this there are water issue, there are agricultural issues and not being able to produce enough food. There are other resource issues which will lead to war as people scramble to get the resources. I'd say the Ukraine War might be the first war in what could be turbulent times if we don't reduce a population that might hit 8 billion by the end of the year, only 11 years after hitting 7 billion.

10 billion will happen within 20 years.

I agree with you that we need to address overpopulation. But let's be specific when talking about overpopulation. I believe the problem is concentrated in already highly populated 3rd world countries where the families can ill afford to have large families. But they often do, and it is tragic for the kids who live with pain and starvation every day of their lives.

 

[MisterBeale]

 

[frigidweirdo]

No it wont. China and Japan are imploding...EU is shrinking even we are not at replacement level.

Look, China had the one child policy from 1980 to 2015, and in that time China's population grew from 981 million to 1.4 billion. Yes, there are issues now with a lack of young kids and people living older that will potentially see China's population drop.

Japan's population has been dropping since 2005.

The EU shrunk because the UK left. 2021 its population dropped.

But if we take 2005 as a benchmark, just because of Japan, we're seen a 1.5 million drop in Japan, out of 127 million population. A 1.18% drop in 17 years.

Right now Japan has 126 million, China 1.4 billion and the EU 446 million. About 2 billion, or a quarter of the world.

Africa had 927 million in 2005, now it has 1.39 billion, an increase of 466 million, or about a 50% rise. This doesn't include all the emigration Africa has been having. This is with malaria, AIDS etc etc. They've just made a breakthrough with malaria, could save loads of lives.

South America has a population growth of about 1% a year. Brazil, the largest country, went from 188 million in 2005 to 213 million in 2020. An increase if 31 million.
There are plenty of countries to take up the slack.

List of countries by population growth rate - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

41 countries over 2% growth. The world is at 1.17, with 83 countries at that or above. 99 countries are at 1% or above

187 countries have positive growth.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I agree with you that we need to address overpopulation. But let's be specific when talking about overpopulation. I believe the problem is concentrated in already highly populated 3rd world countries where the families can ill afford to have large families. But they often do, and it is tragic for the kids who live with pain and starvation every day of their lives.

Yes, these people have lots of kids because it's their pension, it's the future of their country.

And they have a tendency of emigrating, because other countries need workers, and they need jobs.
This doesn't change things. We're going around telling African countries man made global warming is the problem, poor countries say "well, that's not us then, is it?" and they keep having kids. We keep creating ways for people to stay alive...
Then we turn around and say abortion is bad, we encourage people to have more kids etc etc.

 

[Muhammed]

We have overpopulation issues.

Then why don't you kill yourself, hypocrite?

 

[ReinyDays]

I agree with you that we need to address overpopulation. But let's be specific when talking about overpopulation. I believe the problem is concentrated in already highly populated 3rd world countries where the families can ill afford to have large families. But they often do, and it is tragic for the kids who live with pain and starvation every day of their lives.

Exactly ... overpopulation is occurring in places without internet or even electric power ... with the exception of China, places with fossil fuel dependent affluence are all showing birth rates below replacement ...

Another correlation is stable governments and effective pension plans ... I live in the USA and my children will not have to support me when I'm old ... that's not true in these third world shit holes; parents have to have 12 to 18 children, first because half to three quarters will DIE in childhood, the second is to spread the invalid care out among the survivors ...

Now that fuckheads like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation bring first world medicine into these regions and all 18 to 24 children per family survive childhood ... well, we don't need a degree in population dynamics to see where this is going ... start the marriages at 15-years-old and crank up The Ukraine's wheat production and presto ...

PEOPLE POLLUTION ...

 

[Crick]

Acording to their own propo, to wit

End Of Renewables Craze Is Near

Renewables have stalled out in California and Germany :: UK announces it will frack for natural gas :: South Korea cuts renewables to fund nuclear

michaelshellenberger.substack.com

But other data complicate that picture. The global economy’s dependence on fossil fuels declined from just 86% to 84% over the last 20 years. Solar and wind supply just 5% of global energy. And there are so few EVs that they reduce petroleum consumption by just a half percent of global demand.

Meanwhile, places with heavy renewables penetration are reaching their limits. The amount of zero-carbon electricity California generated declined by 10% over the last decade, because of less hydroelectricity from drought, and the 2011 closure of San Onofre nuclear plant, which was 9% of the state’s total electricity generation. In Germany, the total amount of electricity from renewables declined in 2021, even as overall electricity consumption rose.

Your math doesn't work. If solar and wind now provide 5% of global energy, how could dependence on fossil fuels have only declined by 2%? And you act as if 5% of global demand were trivial. And then your list of setbacks is nothing but self delusion. The loss of hydro from drought and the closure of San Onofre had nothing to do with the qualities of renewable energy technology.

 

[Crick]

Exactly ... overpopulation is occurring in places without internet or even electric power ... with the exception of China, places with fossil fuel dependent affluence are all showing birth rates below replacement ...

Another correlation is stable governments and effective pension plans ... I live in the USA and my children will not have to support me when I'm old ... that's not true in these third world shit holes; parents have to have 12 to 18 children, first because half to three quarters will DIE in childhood, the second is to spread the invalid care out among the survivors ...

Now that fuckheads like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation bring first world medicine into these regions and all 18 to 24 children per family survive childhood ... well, we don't need a degree in population dynamics to see where this is going ... start the marriages at 15-years-old and crank up The Ukraine's wheat production and presto ...

PEOPLE POLLUTION ...

Wow. Bill and Melinda Gates are "fuckheads" for bringing modern medicine to third world countries? You OPPOSE children surviving childhood? I'm going to keep a copy of this one.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Your math doesn't work. If solar and wind now provide 5% of global energy, how could dependence on fossil fuels have only declined by 2%? And you act as if 5% of global demand were trivial. And then your list of setbacks is nothing but self delusion. The loss of hydro from drought and the closure of San Onofre had nothing to do with the qualities of renewable energy technology.

It is

 

[ReinyDays]

Wow. Bill and Melinda Gates are "fuckheads" for bringing modern medicine to third world countries? You OPPOSE children surviving childhood? I'm going to keep a copy of this one.

Put it right next to my "Kill Whitie" religion ... the best part of killing off 90% of the men-folk is that wimin will be in charge ...

They didn't bring modern medicine, STUPID, they brought first world medicine ... read my words, pimple-face ... and fuck your strawman ...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Your math doesn't work. If solar and wind now provide 5% of global energy, how could dependence on fossil fuels have only declined by 2%? And you act as if 5% of global demand were trivial. And then your list of setbacks is nothing but self delusion. The loss of hydro from drought and the closure of San Onofre had nothing to do with the qualities of renewable energy technology.

Your math doesn't work. If solar and wind now provide 5% of global energy, how could dependence on fossil fuels have only declined by 2%?

Because there are other sources besides solar, wind and fossil fuels?
Because solar and wind didn't produce 0% twenty years ago?

And you act as if 5% of global demand were trivial.

Compared to 84%, it seems trivial.

 

[toobfreak]

Your math doesn't work. If solar and wind now provide 5% of global energy, how could dependence on fossil fuels have only declined by 2%?

Easy, you are measuring two different things. OTOH, you are measuring fossil fuels as a subset of ALL energy in total-- a larger group, while OTOH you are looking only at interest in and consumption of fossil fuels by themselves, a smaller group.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Easy, you are measuring two different things. OTOH, you are measuring fossil fuels as a subset of ALL energy in total-- a larger group, while OTOH you are looking only at interest in and consumption of fossil fuels by themselves, a smaller group.

Crick will figure it out sooner or later.

He isn't the dimmest green here.