European Climate Institute EIKE: European Winters Show Clear Cooling Trend Since Hansen’s 1988 Testimony

Right on schedule, winter will be making its real debut at the end of this week as a colder air mass pushes westward into Central Europe, so writes German weather portal here.

This does not come as any surprise to those who ignore the warming hysteria in the media and follow the observed data. Today, according to the European Institute for Climate and Energy (EIKE) here, data from the DWD German national weather service shows that winters in Germany have been cooling significantly and in parallel with those in Austria for close to three decades – despite rising CO2 emissions. If Co2 has a warming effect, it hasn’t been seen in Central Europe since James Hansen testified before Congress in 1988!

Temperature Germany 27 years _Kowatsch

Germany’s mean winter temperature has been falling since NASA scientist James Hansen warned in 1988 of a rapidly warming planet. Chart: Josef Kowatsch, EIKE.

EIKE also presents a mean winter temperature chart for Germany since 1882. Here we see the long-term trend is modestly upward.

Teamperature Germany winter since 1882

Germany mean winter temperature, based on DWD data.

But EIKE adds that there is a good explanation for this modest warming:

The reason for this heat is mainly the consequence of the urban heat island effect. During the above period, Germany has changed profoundly. Compared to the much smaller and far less frequent heat islands back then, today’s heat islands are far more expansive and involve heat zones. And the surface measurement stations in 2014 are sited differently than they were 130 years ago. Forest chalets at the edge of wilderness and unheated monasteries no longer exist. The surface measurement stations, often under the same name, have been moved to inside heat islands where people live and heat mightily in the wintertime. And also the weather stations next to the landing strips of our airports in conjunction with the hot exhaust of jet engines did not exist 130 years ago. All homes are heated entirely today, and not just 2 or 3 rooms like 50 years ago. This applies to both Germany and Austria. Today’s thermometers are simply measuring man’s additional heat along with that of nature.”


Daily ‘Die Welt’ Reports German Greens Facing Political Extinction…”Apocalyptic Narrative Approaching An End”

Germany’s once formidable Green Party just held its annual convention in Hamburg.

Over the past few years Germans in general have grown fatigued of the planet-rescuing Greens and their dire warnings that man’s technology was destroying the planet. So faced with the prospect of slipping into irrelevance, the Greens are now scrambling to find an issue that will re-energize public enthusiasm.

German flagship daily Die Welt here has just published an online analysis of the Green Party’s convention. The piece is dubbed: “Farewell Apocalypse – the Greens are running out of issues“.

Once a party of devout Luddites, Die Welt writes:

The Party Convention shows that the Greens, now in their fourth decade of existence, are hardly needed anymore. The technology that they used to vilify has since solved more problems than it has created.”

One major problem the German Greens face is that the party is divided between the Fundis (fundamentalist greens) and the so-called Realos (hip progressives in business suits) who have taken over the party and adopted issues that other mainstream parties have long had in their platforms. Die Welt calls the German Greens “the children of Lenin and the Club of Rome“, a party whose leaders were “Maoists, Trotskyites and hardcore communists“; with the primary enemy: capitalism and the evils of a technological society, which they viewed would lead to global, ecological demise.

Though popular in the 1980s, Die Welt writes that narrative no longer finds much public appeal today. It’s totally out.

Today’s Green Party is now seeing its old anti-capitalist leaders going into retirement and its new leaders struggling to chart a meaningful course for the party’s future. The old Green zeitgeist is gone. The issues and philosophies that once resonated and brought the Greens huge success in the 1980s and 90s are today worn out, outdated. The appeal is gone, Die Welt writes.

In their fourth decade of existence, the apocalyptic narrative is approaching an end. Failure from fatigue looms. The mantra-like repeated invocation of the apocalypse hardly has any remaining energizing potential.”

Ironically, the Greens are facing a political extinction due to the very technology they once preached would lead to the global apocalypse. Die Welt:

Fusion could be delivering energy in just 10 years. Architects are designing skyscrapers that produce more energy then they consume. 900-hp sports car will be driven by engines that get 50 miles a gallon. The transition away from CO2 in oil and petrol is just a step away from the assembly line.

Contemporary capitalism has met the innovation challenges posed by ecology. […]

This weekend’s party convention showed that after the end of nuclear energy and mainstream ecology, the Greens have run out of issues.”

The Greens are now calling for an agricultural revolution. But as Die Welt points out: “capitalism has already long since recognized this. Thus there’s hardly any use left for the Greens“.

After 40 years of hearing apocalypse, the zeitgeist no longer desires doom and gloom. Engineers and scientists are basking in a sea of hopes and real breakthroughs. Who still needs the Greens when air, water and food are clean?”


President Bill Clinton No Longer Believes The “Consensus Science”. Why? Because It Almost Killed Him!

For decades the science told us that humans needed to cut back on fatty foods like red meat, eggs, chicken, cheese, butter and that we should switch to high carb diets, with lots of exercises. High carb, low fat was The Consensus. Backed by all the US medical associations and 99% of all doctors. Dissenters were dismissed, marginalized and labeled as kooks.

Decades later, America (and much of western society) now finds itself on the brink of a public health catastrophe with tens of millions having suffered heart attacks and tens of millions becoming obese and diabetic. Even the most optimistic of statistics show an even gloomier future.

What’s even worse, these nutrition-related diseases, once known to almost only afflict adults, are now spreading rapidly to children. The scientific consensus on nutrition has turned out to be disastrously wrong and it will go down as the greatest scientific folly in the history of mankind.

Bill Clinton, it turns out, a person who has had his share of heart trouble, has had enough of the “scientific consensus” on nutrition: Ex-Vegans Anne Hathaway And Bill Clinton Praise Paleo-Style Low-Carb Diets For Energy And Weight Loss

Also Anne Hathaway has woken up to the junk science (religion) of “climate-saving” veganism.

Anne noted that the difference between eating a vegan diet and consuming animal protein was notable overnight.

‘I just didn’t feel good or healthy,’ Hathaway recalled of her vegan days.”

Read more here.

Alarmists’ Accusations Aimed At Discrediting IPCC-Critical Spiegel Journalist Found To Be Absent Of Merit

About three weeks ago Spiegel science journalist Axel Bojanowski wrote a highly critical piece of the IPCC’s recently released 5th Synthesis Report, claiming that the report IPCC misled the public and needlessly sounded the alarms, background here.

Also at Twitter Bojanowski pointed to “gross problems” that “need to be discussed”. The Spiegel journalist in the article wrote that the IPCC final report suppressed central scientific findings”.

Bojenowski’s harsh criticism immediately drew heavy fire from some of Germany’s leading political climate alarmists, such as the climate alarmist website Klimaretter and leading green politicians such as Hermann Ott at Twitter, and the IPCC itself.

So who is right? At the German Science Skeptical site, Dr. Peter Heller closely examined the claims made by Bojanowski point-by-point and the counter claims launched by the climate activists surrounding Klimaretter and the IPCC itself.

Heller lists the accusations that the Klimaretter activists fired at Bojanowski in attempt to discredit him and to exert pressure on Spiegel editors:

  • Careful selection of formulations by the IPCC were imprecisely translated.
  • By shortening the IPCC quotes, he leaves out such details that could damage the central thrust of his article.
  • He uses passages from the technical chapters that the Synthesis Report does not at all contradict – when examined closely. The passages in the technical chapters that do support the Synthesis report do not get quoted.
  • Sources to the (supposed) evidence are not given, so that all the accusations cannot be verified, or done so only with great difficulty.

Peter Heller investigated to see if the climate activists surrounding Klimaretter had any merit. Here’s what he found.

  • Bojanowski does not “translate” at all. He concisely summarized passages from the Reports for the regular online speed-readers. The problem here are by far more the requirements by his chief editors with respect to article length and the complexity of the formulations, to which he must yield.
  • The main thrust of his article is not that there is not risk of a climate-change dependent species die-off. The main thrust is that the IPCC fails to mention the known uncertainties in its summary of the long reports. And he provides proof of this with passages from the reports. It#s not about contradictions, but it gets down to incompletenesses.
  • In the meantime the sources have been provided. But also without the page numbers one quickly finds the corresponding passages when one looks closely enough. A look at the table of contents suffices. As I have shown above, everything can be verified.

In summary, the accusations by the Klimaretter activists fired at Bojanowski have no merit. Heller also adds, at the very end of his article (for those who are too lazy to search a little):

One may object that the criticism of the IPCC is excessive because a summary is precisely just that, and thus it cannot give the full content of the main reports. However: people should at least be aware of this. And their position on climate policy should not be derived from summaries, but rather from the complete, comprehensive literature. Bojanowski’s text here fulfills an important function in that he exposes for the first time, to many people, the one-sided selection of content the summaries have. When people at Klimaretter, when the signatories of the petition against Bojanowski, and when someone like Herrmann Ott recognize reprehensible “climate skepticism ”, then as activists they expose themselves as something more than fanatics. For fundamentalists not only is the message sacrosanct, but so is also its proclaimer.”

What can we take home from all this?

Any journalist who actually investigates and researches, instead of blindly believing everything told by the one being investigated, risks getting smeared and discredited. Luckily we have diligent and open-minded people like Peter Heller to make sure this does not go unchallenged.


Global Warming Consensus? 58 Experts Who Aren’t Afraid To Show Up For a Public Debate

The Heartland Institute here has available a poster with 58 experts who don’t believe there is a man-made climate crisis, and who aren’t afraid to show up for a little debate in public.

58 Experts

Of course there are many other experts who could be added.

Next time you run into an alarmist who insists there’s a consensus, send him or her a copy of this poster. Better yet, send a poster to your local, state or national political representatives.


Economist At Swiss Weekly Weltwoche: “Cardiac Arrest With Flickering [Green] Power”!

This week’s print edition of the Swiss news weekly Weltwoche has a commentary by economist Silvio Borner titled “Cardiac Arrest with Flickering Power“. His commentary focusses on the completely misleading and false claims often made by tax-payer funded proponents of renewable energies, mainly solar and wind power.

Neue Energie für die Schweiz

Hat-tip: “Kurt in Switzerland”

According to Borner, the Swiss canton of Basel City has been levying a tax on every kilowatt of power consumed since 1999. The resulting revenue, according to Borner, flows into a “power-savings fund”.

Energy “Grubering”

Borner discovered that some of the generated revenue gets used for spreading green energy propaganda, for example the Fall 2014 publication dubbed: Neue Energie für die Schweiz (New Energy for Switzerland). Borner has found a number of dubious, misleading and even false claims in the publication, which one could easily describe as a classic example of energy policy “Grubering”.

Wind and solar constrained by “physical and economic laws”

First the Swiss publication confuses rated capacity and actual output. Neue Energie claims that 33,000 blocked small-scale green energy power systems could replace “without a problem” 3 nuclear power plants. Borner calls that claim false because even if a means for storing the intermittent wind and solar energy did exist, many times more the number of systems would be needed because they operate only at a small fraction of their rated capacity. Moreover they would produce much more CO2 than the zero-emission nuclear power plants, which run continuously near to full capacity.

This is a well known fact that still even today has yet to sink through the dense skulls of the naive green energy believers.

And because wind and solar energy are so intermittent when it comes to their supply, Borner dubs them “Flatterstrom“, which in English can be translated to: “flickering-power“. Thus they will never be able to serve as the stable base supply a power grid requires. Borner writes:

A complete replacement of the nuclear power plants by wind and solar cannot be achieved “without a problem’ due to physical and economic laws.”

Green energies “destroy x-times more jobs than they create

The Neue Energie propaganda publication also claims green energies are a jobs engine for Switzerland. But Borner writes that this not by any means the truth.

The higher costs for power thus destroy x-times more jobs subject to international competition than they artificially create, and do so only temporarily.”

Green energies increase dependency on foreign power

Borner also calls the assertion of energy independence thanks to wind and solar, and their “low prices”, a myth:

The more flickering power we feed into the grid (independent of demand and thus value), the more unstable the domestic supply becomes and thus the greater the dependency on foreign countries becomes.”

At the end, using an excellent analogy, Borner demolishes the claim made by the Swiss green energy propaganda publication where “20 to 30 square meters of rooftop supplies the energy demand of an average household, without CO2 emissions“. Borner writes:

Fact: The crux of the argument is the misleading magnitude ‘annual consumption’. What does our household do over the long and dark winter months? What use does the average number of annual heartbeats have if your heart stops for a few hours every night? The electric power circuit is like blood circulation. Both need a permananet flow. Anyne who puts faith in the annual value for supplying his own power, should please get off the grid and not expect others to bear the extra costs.”

Indeed. What good would be the average heart, which beats on average some 38 million times per year, if it stopped every year for even just an hour?

Also read:


Exorbitantly Expensive Green Energies Prevent Plunging Market Prices From Reaching German Consumers

Despite plunging energy prices on world markets, electricity prices in Germany refuse to drop anywhere near in proportion.

The reason for this is in large part due to the fixed, guaranteed high prices that renewable energy producers get for the wildly fluctuating power they feed in  – no matter what the market does. The result: Power companies must continue paying an exorbitant price and are thereforE unable to pass much of price decrease to the consumers.

On the other hand at the gas and diesel pumps, for example, the price decrease has been considerable – much to the delight of German motorists. Unfortunately the same cannot be said about German electricity, where power companies will decrease the price (for the first time in over a decade after years of steep increases) by only 2.4% on average!

The English language The Local here writes (emphasis added):

Power price drop isn’t all good news

A total of 205 companies – almost a quarter of the 850 power suppliers – have announced an average 2.4 percent drop in prices for 2015 so far according to price comparison websites Verivox and Check 24.

With current prices just over €0.29 per kilowatt-hour (kWh), that could mean between €30 and €35 savings over a year for a four-person average household.

“We’ve never seen such a large number of price cuts,” a Check 24 spokeswoman said.

‘But they’re too late and too small – the suppliers’ savings aren’t being passed on to the consumer.'”

Continue reading…

German Weather Service Says New York Record Snow Due To “Powerful Cold Wave”…Lake Effect Is Natural

The German media are reporting on the massive snowfall hitting Buffalo and parts of New York state, describing the “lake effect” and an “early start of winter”.

Also meteorologist Christian Herold of Germany’s DWD Weather Service writes here how the story begins with the “remains of super-typhoon” Nuri, which developed into a low over Alaska’s Aleutian Islands a week ago and pumped massive amounts of tropical air into the Arctic. This led to an “unusual” air current pattern, with a large high parked over the west coast also pumping warm air into the Arctic. At the same time a powerful low developed over the central and eastern USA and pumped a huge blast of Arctic air deep into the United States.

“Never so cold, so early”

The result, Herold writes, was “a powerful cold wave over a large part of the United States which was as much as 9°C below normal for this time of the year. In some regions it was never so cold so early.”

Natural phenomenon, even occurs in Germany

Herold then describes the Buffalo “lake effect”, how the Arctic cold air mass swept across a relatively warm Lake Erie and picked up huge quantities of moisture and dumping it as snow over New York.  To his their credit, Herold resists the urge to connect it to climate change.

The DWD meteorologist explains that the “lake effect” is a natural phenomenon that is also possible in Germany, but a smaller scale, especially near lake Constance, recalling an episode there in February 2013. It also happens near the Baltic Sea.

Moreover, the DWD warns that thanks to this year’s warmer temperatures over Germany and the relatively warm lakes:

…this winter, thanks to the generally warm water temperatures, we will surely hear about this effect once or more. Something we can look forward to with some excitement.”


IPCC Scientist Mojib Latif On Claim Warm Arctic Causing Severe Cold Winters: “Old Story”…”I’m Really Skeptical”

From Sebastian Lüning and Fritz Vahrenholt at Die kalte Sonne here:

The climate catastrophe is hitting without mercy. Bild reported on 28 October 2014:

New climate study causes fear and trembling: How bitter-cold will winter be?
The polar ice is melting. And so the jet stream is changing. Result: Lots of bitter cold winters – also in Germany. Excuse me? This US climate study has just been published by the magazine ‘Nature Geoscience’ and it is causing fear and trembling. But what is really behind this? BILD asked climate pope Prof. Dr. Mojib Latif: ‘That’s indeed just an old story. It could be so. But not necessarily. The jet stream can change because of natural reasons. I’m really skeptical.'”

Crazy world: Climate warming is cooling the climate in Germany. And [warmist] Mojib Latif is suddenly a skeptic. So what’s next? Is climate change going to make it dark in the daytime and light at night? Will [the island] of Norderney soon be reachable by foot because of sea level rise? Will the glaciers in the Alps cover Munich because the ice is melting faster and faster? So many questions.


USA Temps “Have Dropped Off A Cliff”…”Coldest November Morning” In 38 Years! Record Lows Down To Texas!

Not very often does one see such an image…

Frozen North America 18 Nov 2014

Image snipped here, 8 a.m. EST, 18 November, 2014.

And it’s only mid-November…autumn!

Weatherbell Models here has an assessment of the situation so far. It writes:

America ‘as a whole’ awoke to the coldest it has been in November since 1976 — 38 years ago. The Lower-48 or CONUS spatially average temperature plummeted overnight to only 20°F typical of mid-winter not November 18th!

An astounding 226-million Americans will experience at or below freezing temperatures (32°F) on Tuesday as well — if you venture outdoors.

More than 78% of the surface area of the Lower-48 reached or fell below freezing Tuesday morning

Record lows from Idaho to Nebraska and Iowa south to Texas and east through the Great Lakes, the eastern 2/3 of the US will shatter decades-long and in some cases, century-long records. Temperatures east of the Rockies will be 20-40°F below climate normals.

Compared to normal, temperatures over the past several days have dropped off a cliff — to 10°C below climate normal –“

Keep reading here.


Germany’s CO2 Reductions “Fetish” Causing National Policy Turmoil: Economics And Environment Ministries Collide

Daniel Wetzel of the German online flagship daily Die Welt here tells readers the real reason why Chancellor Angela Merkel is sticking to the “senseless” and now impossible to reach CO2 emissions reduction target of 40% for Germany by 2020:

She can sit back and enjoy watching her coalition partner SPD ministers rip themselves apart trying to implement it.”

Already we are seeing a nasty collision developing between Merkel’s Economics Minister, Vice Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel, who calls the shutting down of coal power plnats an illusion, and Environment Minister Barbara Hendricks, who insists that the coal power plants need to be shut down rapidly. Both ministers are SPD socialists.

Wetzel writes: “The traditional confrontation between the Ministry of Environment and the Ministry of Economics is taking on absurd traits.”

Now that both of these ministries are run by members of the coalition partner SPD, it is hardly possible for the SPD party to achieve any sense of unity – strife is inevitable. Merkel is skillfully implementing a “divide and conquer” strategy.

Wetzel writes there is virtually no chance Germany will reach the 40% reduction target, citing McKinsey:

Experts of McKinsey Consulting and other institutes have made calculations for the German government showing that the chances reaching these extremely ambitious reduction targets are close to zero.”

Die Welt says it has obtained a government list of 28 power plants that would need to be shut down in order to achieve the 40% target.

The problem is that closing these plants would mean the gutting out of some power companies, such as North Rhine Westphalia power giant RWE. North Rhine Westphalia is Germany’s most polpulated state and is currently governed by a coalition led by the SPD, who are in no hurry to anger the powerful trade unions. Read here.

Also a government move ordering the early closure of power plants would lead to lawsuits by power companies, who would demand billions in compensatory damages. Economics Minister Gabriel not only sees little technical and environmental sense in shutting down the power plants, but also thinks the political risks are too high. Die Welt writes:

Such an approach would also endanger the power supply and increase the prices of power for industry.

Thus in any case it remains open as to how the German government wants to reach its 40 percent CO2 reduction target. […] The 40% target as mere ‘political symbolism” or ‘a fetish’ is increasingly the word among ministry circles.”

Die Welt adds that the 40% reduction target was established in 2007, a time of ambitious aims. But since then the European Emissions Trading scheme has adopted new rules that apply to Europe, and not to individual countries. Also Germany abruptly mothballed a number of older nuclear power plants in the wake of the Fukushima accident, thus radically altering the overall power and policy landscape.

Die Welt quotes Jürgen Hacker, Chairman of the German Association for Emissions Trading and Climate Protection (BVEK):

The national German policy no longer has any direct influence on the emissions of German plants, as they are subject to emissions trading. It is thus pure nonsense to want to include them in a national German climate protection target.”


Germany’s Sole Electric Car Battery Plant To Be Closed…Yet “Another Setback” For Germany’s CO2 Reduction Target

Spiegel reports here that Germany’s sole plant for producing electric car batteries, owned by Daimler, is shutting down thus casting doubt Germany will reach its ambitious target of putting 1 million electric cars on the road by 2020.

According to Wikipedia, as of September 2014 a total of 21,256 plug-in electric vehicles were registered in Germany. Most of the plug-in stock in Germany has been registered by corporate customers.

Spiegel reports:

The only German plant that produces battery cells for electric cars will be closed. The company Li-Tec in the German state of Saxony will produce batteries only for one more year. Daimler Manager Harald Kroger told Spiegel that the current production numbers make it far too expensive to produce the batteries.”

Daimler was banking on higher production numbers, which are necessary for producing economically. But the quantities never materialized. Kroger told Spiegel that the company realized that “an automaker does not have to produce the batteries itself.”

Another setback

Spiegel calls the move by Daimler “another setback for electro-mobility in Germany“, and represents the latest obstacle in preventing Germany from reaching its target of cutting CO2 emissions 40% by 2020 compared to 1990 levels.

One reason Germany is not rushing into electro-mobility, behind the scenes, is because the country’s power grid is woefully unprepared to handle the extra burden posed by 1 million electric cars because it is crippled by the unsteady feed-in of wind and solar power. Already there are profound fears that Germany’s power grid will be overloaded and collapse should a harsh winter materialize.

A look at the last 5 days of electric power production in Germany shows that wind and sun cannot deliver, especially three days ago on November 13.


Excuses Abound As Sea Shepard Negligently Dumps Up To Half A Tonne Of Diesel Fuel Into Trinity Inlet

Here’s a another example of how environmental activists like to beg, plead and claim real excuses when severe environmental accidents happen, yet when an accident is caused by anyone else they demand heads on a plate.

The Cairns Post here has an article: Sea Shepherd guilty of diesel spill that dropped up to 500 litres of diesel into the Trinity Inlet.

Hat-tip: reader Jim

The article is from earlier this year, but it neither got media attention nor the attention it deserves.

What really strikes me is that the environmental organization comes in with its lawyers and fights tooth and nail in claiming that they really acted responsibly and that the accident was not entirely their fault. The excuses they presented are truly sad and pathetic and show an amazing ignorance when it comes to industrial safety regulation and management.

For example, the Cairns Post writes:

A FAULTY switch and instruction manuals written entirely in Japanese have been blamed in court for why a ship owned by conservation group Sea Shepherd dropped up to 500 litres of diesel into the Trinity Inlet.”

Sorry, but using a piece of equipment that you do not understand is gross negligence. Sea Shepard’s motto here obviously was: Let’s just get this thing running (and safety be damned!)

It’s not for nothing that the fundamental industry standard for any piece of such equipment is: Be sure you have read the manual and have UNDERSTOOD it! The crew obviously could not read Japanese, let alone understand it. Here they should have requested a manual in English from the manufacturer, or at least shelled out the money for a translation, before recklessly attempting to put it into operation at sea. They should especially have at least understood the critical technical points dealing with fuel.

The Cairns Times reports that “a crew member named Gabor Nosty failed to manually flick the “low level” switch during a fuel transfer, despite being aware the switch was faulty.”

If that isn’t gross negligence, then I don’t what is. It is management’s responsibility to be sure that its personnel are qualified and trained to carry out the work they have been assigned to do. Most industrial norms and regulations aren’t there to harass companies, but to prevent accidents involving human life and health, property and the environment. The Sea Shepard crew ignored this entirely.

And not only could they not read the vessel’s operating manual, according to the Cairns Times the Sea Shepherd Australia had bought the ship from Japan a week earlier and “had yet to translate signage and manuals or repair the switch“. Again putting a piece of equipment into operation when its crucial safety signs cannot be read is extremely reckless. The crew can count themselves fortunate nothing much worse happened. We are not talking about a TV here, rather a large piece of industrial equipment with lots of power – with people on board – and all around you.

The article also writes that because the chief engineer did not have a manual they could understand, the crew “had to work out the ship’s systems ‘by his own devices’“. This means they were guessing its operational function. This is something you never should do. You wait for a manual you can read, then you read it, and make sure you’ve understood it. Then you can start to use it.

The article also writes that the crew included some Germans. My wife’s company does a lot of translations of German industrial manuals and handbooks. The Germans are gurus when it comes to industrial safety regulation, policy and management. If any one should understand industrial regulation and the importance of adhering to safety standards, it is the Germans. Obviously the Germans on the Sea Shepard crew did not complete a German apprenticeship, or they slept through it.

All the crew members came from an advanced technological country. It’s amazing how activists are always calling for more stringent safety regulations and environmental protection laws, yet they themselves can’t even adhere to the most rudimentary and obvious safety rules. It’s the Japanese manufacturer’s fault!

Despite all the Sea Shepard’s gross negligence, recklessness and disregard for human, property and environmental safety, it appears the crew will get off real easy.


Hypocrisy Exposed…Spiegel Publishes Undisclosed German Survey Results: Green Voters Like Flying The Most!

Online Spiegel has a piece titled: Preaching travel by rail, but flying Business Class.

It would be natural to expect environmentalist greens and climate activists to take commercial flights very rarely, opting for rail, bus, or bicycle instead. However, it turns out they do not practice what they love to preach.

Spiegel news magazine writes of an unpublished survey commissioned by the Bundesverband der Deutschen Luftverkehrswirtschaft (Federal Association of German Aviation Industry) to find out which voters in Germany fly the most often. Some of us will not be surprised to learn that hypocrisy is alive and well in Germany.

Spiegel writes.

Hardly anyone criticizes air travel as vehemently as the Greens do. An unpublished study now shows: It is precisely the voters of the ecology party who most prefer hop onto commercial airliners.


Green love most flying the carbonated skies. Public domain photo.

 Spiegel writes that the survey was conducted by a “renowned polling organization”.

The results of the survey show that the Green Party voters fly the most: 49% have flown at least once in the past 12 months. They were followed by the communist Die Linke (42%), the conservatives CDU (36%) and lastly by the socialists SPD (32%).

When asked who had never ever flown in a jet, 17% of the communists said they had never flown, 16% of the conservatives, 13% of the socialists and 0% of the greens. All Green party voters surveyed said they had flown at least once in their lifetime.  Flying for me, but not for you.

When asked if they agree that it is good that so people today can afford to fly today, the percentage answering “yes” was 77% for the conservatives, 77% for the socialists, 69% for the communists and only 48% for the jet-setting greens.

Spiegel reports that green voters tend to be younger and hold high-income jobs, and so fit the profile of frequent fliers. What’s strange is that 60% of the flights in Germany are domestic, trips that could easily be done by rail. Apparently railcars are not good enough for environmentalists.

According to Spiegel the survey was conducted in September with 1032 persons interviewed. 77 of those interviewed identified themselves as Green voters.

Solar Bike-Path To Nowhere: $3.7 Million…Enough Electricity To Power A Whole Three Households

Greens have been all excited about the recent, high publicity solar bike path put in operation in Holland this week. It’s a whole 100 meters or so long…a distance that allows the average cyclist to cycle over and to feel good about saving the planet for about 15 seconds.


Photo (text added by author): Solaroad

NPR writes:

A Dutch project that integrates solar panels into a bike commuter path will officially open this week, on a special roadway outside Amsterdam. Power generated by the SolaRoad’s panels will be funneled into the national energy grid.”

Imagine that, the bike path will be feeding green power “into the national grid“.

That reminds me of the old Peanuts series where Linus once asked Charlie Brown how much allowance he got for feeding Snoopy. “10 cents a week,” Charlie Brown replied. Linus commented: “That helps boost the GNP”. At least for Snoopy it was something worthwhile.

The Guardian proudly trumpeted:

Solar panels embedded in the cycle path near Amsterdam could generate enough electricity to power three houses, with potential to extend scheme to roads.” here writes the bill for the road will be $3.7 MILLION dollars. For the price you’d think it would at least power an entire neighborhood or a small village. Vox writes:

But is this even practical? The bike path will cost roughly $3.7 million and, when it’s fully built out to 330 feet in 2016, will generate enough electricity to power… three households. Not very cost-effective. (That’s more than 1,000 times costlier than the price of rooftop solar electricity in the United States.)”

Of course much of the sum reflects a one time development cost. Even if the price gets driven down 95%, the problem of cost is still relevant and the sun barely ever shines in Amsterdam for much of the year. The horrendous cost of paving all of Holland’s extensive bike paths in the end would not eliminate a single coal power plant for the simple fact that the panels work only for a tiny fraction of the time and conventional power plants need to be on standby.

Then there are still the unanswered questions of how well the panels will hold up. One only needs to consider rain, snow, freeze-thaw cycles, vandalism, cleaning requirements etc.

Many of us have already thought that the idea of mounting them on the roofs of homes was already quite kooky and impractical enough, but the idea of putting them down on road surfaces really takes the economy cake.