Global Warming Propaganda

[ducati]

They're made of aluminium and copper.

I'll have em if nobody else gets there first.

And an 80 metre steel pole!

[fred]

And an 80 metre steel pole!

I'll take that as well.

[Tubthumper]

But a pretty big concrete plinth to rip out. Or not. Depending on the subsidies available at the time obviously.

[Tubthumper]

What is a plinth anyway??

[fred]

But a pretty big concrete plinth to rip out. Or not. Depending on the subsidies available at the time obviously.

I'm not greedy, someone else can have that.

[ducati]

What is a plinth anyway??

In 25 years? Hardcore

[Yoda the flump]

What is a plinth anyway??

Great big lump of concrete

[ywindythesecond]

I notice no-one posted the wind turbine outputs when it was blustery the other day.

If you can tell me when it was blustery, I can look up the outputs.

[bekisman]

Germans this time. More sceptics.. bit long but don't want to give the impression this is 'Cherry Picking' as suggested by an ex-orger

German scientists reject man-made global warming
Growing body of evidence shows anthropogenic CO2 plays no measurable role
Wednesday, August 05, 2009 By Marc Morano

More than 60 prominent German scientists have publicly declared their dissent from man-made global warming fears in an open letter to German Chancellor Angela Merkel. The more than 60 signers of the letter include several United Nations IPCC scientists.

The scientists declared that global warming has become a "pseudo religion" and they noted that rising CO2 has "had no measurable effect" on temperatures. The German scientists, also wrote that the "UN IPCC has lost its scientific credibility."

This latest development comes on the heels of a series of inconvenient developments for the promoters of man-made global warming fears, including new peer-reviewed studies, real world data, a growing chorus of scientists dissenting (including more UN IPCC scientists), open revolts in scientific societies and the Earth's failure to warm. In addition, public opinion continues to turn against climate fear promotion.

The July 26, 2009 German scientist letter urged Chancellor Merkel to "strongly reconsider" her position on global warming and requested a "convening of an impartial panel" that is "free of ideology" to counter the UN IPCC and review the latest climate science developments.

The scientists, from many disciplines, including physicists, meteorology, chemistry, and geology, explain that "humans have had no measurable effect on global warming through CO2 emissions. Instead the temperature fluctuations have been within normal ranges and are due to natural cycles."

"More importantly, there's a growing body of evidence showing anthropogenic CO2 plays no measurable role," the scientists wrote. "Indeed CO2's capability to absorb radiation is almost exhausted by today's atmospheric concentrations. If CO2 did indeed have an effect and all fossil fuels were burned, then additional warming over the long term would in fact remain limited to only a few tenths of a degree," they added.

"The IPCC had to have been aware of this fact, but completely ignored it during its studies of 160 years of temperature measurements and 150 years of determined CO2 levels. As a result the IPCC has lost its scientific credibility," the scientists wrote.

"Indeed the atmosphere has not warmed since 1998 – more than 10 years, and the global temperature has even dropped significantly since 2003. Not one of the many extremely expensive climate models predicted this. According to the IPCC, it was supposed to have gotten steadily warmer, but just the opposite has occurred," the scientists wrote.

"The belief of climate change, and that it is manmade, has become a pseudo-religion," the scientists wrote. "The German media has sadly taken a leading position in refusing to publicize views that are critical of anthropogenic global warming," they added.

"Do you not believe, Madam Chancellor, that science entails more than just confirming a hypothesis, but also involves testing to see if the opposite better explains reality? We strongly urge you to reconsider your position on this subject and to convene an impartial panel for the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, one that is free of ideology, and where controversial arguments can be openly debated. We the undersigned would very much like to offer support in this regard.

　　
　
http://www.speroforum.com/a/20054/Ge...global-warming

[Tubthumper]

So what is a Plinth anyway?

Great big lump of concrete

Plinth (noun): Male member of a Royal family: Oppothite of Plintheth

[Tubthumper]

If you can tell me when it was blustery, I can look up the outputs.

If you have a look back through the charts, (I reckon it was last weekend - Force 5 - 6 up here) it should be pretty obvious from the output. Assuming there was some output of course.
Alternatively, Tugmistress might be able to help.

[ducati]

So what is a Plinth anyway?

Plinth (noun): Male member of a Royal family: Oppothite of Plintheth

I wonder, is that were the expression a plinthsly thum, e.g. four guinees comes from?

[Tubthumper]

Like "The thubthidieth available for thticking thome thubthtanthial turbineth on one'th land add up to a plinthely thum?"

[ducati]

Like "The thubthidieth available for thticking thome thubthtanthial turbineth on one'th land add up to a plinthely thum?"

Yeth!

[ywindythesecond]

If you have a look back through the charts, (I reckon it was last weekend - Force 5 - 6 up here) it should be pretty obvious from the output. Assuming there was some output of course.
Alternatively, Tugmistress might be able to help.

The figures for Saturday 13th, Sunday 14th and Monday 15th are below. I don't have a complete record for Saturday so the average is over 20.5 hours. The period missing was in a fairly stable part of the day.

(I had no idea how difficult it is to post a table here!)

1588MW is metered by National Grid. BWEA calculate the number of homes served at 30% load factor. That is 475MW from metered wind power stations which BWEA calculates will serve 887,976 homes. Do the math and work out how many would have gone without power if we were reliant on wind. This is the chart for 15th February.



National Grid had to cope with this erratic generation, and will have done so by "constraining off" power from a coal plant to make room for the wind power. The constrained off plant was compensated for its loss of income while the wind was available, wind power was bought at three times the cost of coal, and the power station kept the fires burning to be ready to switch back on when the wind dropped.
In very round terms, when we use wind energy it costs us about four times as much as coal, and saves a very small percentage of fossil fuel. I find it an obscene waste of our valuable resources to burn coal and get nothing for it just because our politicians haven't the guts to admit they are wrong and come up with a real energy policy.

[Tubthumper]

Intrguing. I will keep an eye on the forecast vs out-turn situation during a more 'normal' period of weather, ie when there's some real wind about.
The price of wind-generated power during a period like this is astonishing, considering the fuel is effectively free. I can understand the idea of 'incentive' and compulsory purchasing to get the thing going (after all the same was done for Dounreay-generated power, I think) but what will happen when subsidies and 'sweeteners' are removed is slightly worrying.

[golach]

ywindythesecond, have you taken into consideration the hot air created on the Org by the Anti Wind farm lobby?

[bekisman]

“Again, the number of households increased by one per cent last year to 2.27 million, from 2.25 million in 2004." Lets hope the wind don't drop..

[bekisman]

ywindythesecond, have you taken into consideration the hot air created on the Org by the Anti Wind farm lobby?

Add the hot air from Holyrood too don't forget, there's more bluster as well..

[ywindythesecond]

Intrguing. I will keep an eye on the forecast vs out-turn situation during a more 'normal' period of weather, ie when there's some real wind about.
The price of wind-generated power during a period like this is astonishing, considering the fuel is effectively free. I can understand the idea of 'incentive' and compulsory purchasing to get the thing going (after all the same was done for Dounreay-generated power, I think) but what will happen when subsidies and 'sweeteners' are removed is slightly worrying.

Have a look at this then. The wind was up and down like the proverbials in January. It is worse when we get a lot of wind than it is when there is none.
http://img694.imageshack.us/img694/6...turnposter.jpg