Coal Use To Explode By 43% Worldwide! …German Energy Expert: “Foundation Of The Paris Accord Has Collapsed”

Yesterday German energy expert and scientist Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt commented at his monthly column at Die kalte Sonne site here on solar activity, CO2 and coal power in Germany.

Photo: Fritz Vahrenholt, source: Die kalte Sonne

Sun factor grossly underestimated

Lately the sun’s activity has been very quiet as the star at the center of our solar system transitions over to a new solar cycle. April sunspot activity was very low in May. Vahrenholt then cites a recent study by Lewis and Curry showing that climate sensitivity to CO2 is in fact “up to 45% less than what the IPCC and the mainstream of climate science would like to have us believe.” Vahrenholt comments:

What was interesting however was the reaction of the mainstream: the methods used by Curry and Lewis in the study were not doubted. However, it could mean – according to the mainstream – that the earth will react very differently to CO2 in the future, i.e. get warmer. That’s what we can call speculative science, namely trust in the models which in the past have failed and have not been able to depict ocean circulation and clouds.”

So with CO2 not being at the factor it was made out to be, and because the Paris Accord is based on the spectacle of a rapidly warming planet, Vahrenholt writes that the “foundation of the Paris Accord has collapsed.”

Only Europe and Canada exiting coal

Another reason the Paris Accord is collapsing is because it’s not going to do anything we were promised it would.

When it comes to coal, Vahrenholt notes, so far only Europe and Canada have expressed some sort of a commitment to exit coal, and then he reminds us China, India and all developing countries will still be permitted to continue “massively” expanding their use of coal. He writes:

In China 280,000 MW and in India 174,000 MW are going to be added. By comparison: the entire brown coal fleet in Germany has a capacity of 22,700 MW. 1600 coal-fired power plants will be built in 62 countries across the world, most of them, by the way, will be built by Chinese power plant builders with the help of credits from China. Approximately 15,300 MW in Pakistan, 16,000 in Bangladesh, and even Myanmar with 5100 MW. (Source: South China Morning Post).

In other words, Angela Merkel and her green punch drinkers think the climate is going to be saved if Germany shuts down 1/20 of what China and India are going to add. No wonder Trump dumped the idiotic Accord.

Coal to expand 43% worldwide

And to illustrate what a farce the Paris Accord has become, the German energy expert adds: “In total, coal power plant capacity will expand by 43% worldwide.

Germany to lay out the blueprint for its own demise

Currently Germany is gradually growing obsessed with the idea of a coal exit, and is setting up a Coal Commission to launch the endeavor. The Commission “however will not be made up of energy, power grid and technology experts, but rather with Greenpeace, BUND and local citizens initiatives who are against brown coal,” writes Vahrenholt.

“The idea of including critics of alternative energy, which has become the largest destroyer of nature since WWII, never dawned on any politician.”

Green state fundamentalism

The Coal Commission of course should include Prof. Hans-Joachim Schellnhuber, fiormer director of the ultra-alarmist Potsdam Institute and architect of the Great Transformation masterplan, which calls for an immediate end to the economic model that is based on “fossil industrial metabolism”, making climate protection the “fundamental target of the state by which the legislative, executive and judicial branches are to align themselves.”

Paris absurdity

According to Vahrenholt, the phase-out of coal will mean the decarbonization of Germany, which in turn will mean its deindustrialization. This, according to Vahrenholt, all coming to the great delight of the Chinese

A dismayed Vahrenholt sums up:

“Trump was clever enough, to exit the Paris absurdity early enough.”

82 responses to “Coal Use To Explode By 4382 Worldwide! …German Energy Expert: “Foundation Of The Paris Accord Has Collapsed””

  1. AndyG55

    Looks like the once small industrial country of Australia is also heading down the gurgler due to wind and solar subsidies and feed-in mandates making maintenance of once cheap coal fired power stations a thing of the past.

    As they are forced to operate partially as a stop-gap for intermittent wind and solar, the economics of keeping them running becomes too expensive.

    Industry CANNOT function under these conditions, and if the main industrial processors are forced to shut down, our material have to come from , guess where..

    .. CHINA , of course.

    Some of the best coal in the world, and government idiocy from both main as they struggle for the leftist anti-CO2 vote, thereby ignoring rational thinking, is destroying the whole electricity supply system.

  2. bonbon

    The CO2 absurdity China never took seriously, as Trump plainly said. China takes no delight in seeing deindustrialization – on the contrary its Belt and Road Initiative is the greatest infrastructure project in history. It repeatedly offers Germany to join up – so far refused by Berlin, not by the Mittelstand. With Trump just about to join up where will Germany look for new allies? The now G6 is shaken, heading for a G2. An entire epoch is going down – with all its accoutrements like WBGU. Its architect Dr. Schellnhumber CBE becoming more shrill by the day as the titanic tips over.

    1. SebastianH

      Are you a Trump fan? He is isolating his country and everyone is laughing about him … Idiocrazy in the making.

      1. bonbon

        Isolation? G6 to G4 and less is isolation. Trudeau thought he was EU – he’s not laughing now. Trump gave the G7 what it deserved. The SCO as Putin said is more important. London is going berserk that Trump is now free of Russiagate-turned-Spygate and pursuing his agenda. Brussels can harrumph all it wants.

      2. Jacob Frank

        And being laughed at by mentally challenged eco religious nut jobs is a bad thing?

      3. AndyG55

        Trump is isolating his country from the economic STUPIDITY of the AGW agenda.

        This is a totally sensible and rational thing to do.

        But seb does not understand “sensible and rational”

        Its the likes of True-doh and macaroon and Mercel that are the loonie ones, destroying their countries for a bit of anti-science feel-good.

      4. JL

        “Isolating his country..”? How so? Don’t worry, they’ll all still trade with us. They have to.

      5. Bitter&twisted

        Yes I am a Trump fan.
        And proud of it.

      6. Sam Pyeatte

        Sebastian, if “you” want to see Idiocracy, look in a mirror. Trump is doing just fine.

      7. Gary Pearse

        Sebastian, what is it going to take to open your eyes and your mind? You should review all the predictions made by the AGW (political) scientists and what has happened to every one of them. You are in for a big surprise in the abundance of oil and gas resources.Places you would never think of have large resources.Romania, for example is underlain entirely by oil shales.Argentina,Canada, China, Australia,UK -Gatwick Airport area has c9nventional oil. Remember 1974 was supposed to mark peak oil? Sheesh, Seb, dont be 5he last man standing. You should have got it when Trump cancelled the Paris accord.

        1. SebastianH

          Open my eyes and mind to what? To Trump? To oil exploration?

          1. John Coghlan

            to the truth ….. open your mind to the truth.

            All this greenie bullshit is just that…BS

          2. AndyG55

            Poor seb has a massive dose of TDS.

            So funny that he is so incredibly BRAIN-WASHED and unskeptical about the propaganda of the leftist media.

            He just “BELEIVES” whatever carp they tell him to believe.

            No rational thought required.

            No rational though possible.

    2. bonbon

      It should be obvious by now, even to skeptical scientists, that AGW is entirely geopolitical – to prevent at all costs (sanity included) a 4-Power initiative by China, U.S.,Russia, India to break once and for all the global empire. Germany is in a very difficult situation – part of the Eurasian “world island” of Mackinder, highly industrialised, and then a natural partner in this inititiative. Austria is actually giving a little lesson to Berlin right now, and Italy too and especially Trump. Geopolitics has always ruined the continent. Never again!

  3. SebastianH

    1600 coal-fired power plants will be built in 62 countries across the world

    If he is falling for this, who knows what else he has got wrong 😉 Just like AndyG55, stubbornly repeating what sounds good or hurts the opponent in one way or the other …

    And to illustrate what a farce the Paris Accord has become, the German energy expert adds: “In total, coal power plant capacity will expand by 43% worldwide.”

    What an expert. Wasn’t there a study a few months ago that told us coal has likely already peaked, oil will soon peak and gas will be the only fossil fuel that continues to grow beyond 2030?

    alternative energy, which has become the largest destroyer of nature since WWII

    Oh boy …

    According to Vahrenholt […]

    I wouldn’t give anything into the opinion of a lobbyist who obviously has an agenda of his own. Decarbonization doesn’t mean deindustrialization. And China? Maybe Vahrenholt thinks – like his praised Trump does – that China is behind the “climate change hoax”? They invented it to criple western industry, right? 😉

    1. bonbon

      That China-did-it theory came from Bannon’s faction. Where is he now? the AGW cult comes actually from the bowels of Windsor Castle and Dr. John Schellnhuber CBE knows that well.

    2. bonbon

      Actually Dr. John Schellnhuber, CBE said decarbonization means population reduction – he tolerates less than 2 billion. China and India are not amused at this Commander of the Order of the British Empire, CBE – they both had that before.

    3. AndyG55

      Poor zero facts seb.. the PANIC in his post is palpable and HILARIOUS 🙂

      Even if the number is slightly reduced, that are one heck of a lot of new coal fired power stations going up, producing a heck of a lot of global plant food and in existence for 50 + years. 🙂

      “alternative energy, which has become the largest destroyer of nature since WWII”

      Seb cannot, DARE NOT, FACE THE TRUTH. !!

      It would destroy his fragile baselessly egotistical mind.

      Your credence is well in negative territory, seb.

      If you say something, it is most likely to be somewhere OPPOSITE the TRUTH.

      You are NOTHING but a brain-hosed AGW apologist, totally unable to face facts, or produce any evidence to back up even the most basic fallacy of the AGW cult religion.

    4. AndyG55

      Poor seb,

      You should at least read the forward to links you post, save yourself yet another HILARIOUS FACEPLANT.

      These scenarios are not predictions of what is likely to happen or what BP would like to happen. Rather, they explore the possible implications of different judgements and assumptions by considering a series of “what if” experiments.

      Please stop providing us with your juvenile slap-stick comedy routines. I am laughing too much at your deliberate, self-inflicted misfortune.

  4. Vahrenholt: Global Coal Use To Increase By 43%

    […] Full post […]

  5. Hans Schreuder

    The true nature of all climate alarm has been addressed in this essay: where the facts speak for themselves. Any warming off atmospheric carbon dioxide is utterly impossible. No matter how often energy is recycled, it can never make the source of that energy warmer than it was before. Does the coffee in a thermos get warmer the longer you keep it in there? Get the facts, make the right decisions.

    1. tom0mason

      Interesting Hans Schreuder,

      I enjoy seeing that dumb cartoon the IPCC propaganda machine concocted.
      It is so obviously flawed it’s joke.

      Thanks for the reminder of the low standard science we have to deal with.

    2. SebastianH

      Does the coffee in a thermos get warmer the longer you keep it in there? Get the facts, make the right decisions.

      The question should be, does the coffee with an internal source of heat get warmer in a thermos than it gets in a normal cup?

      Misunderstanding the “problem” at this level doesn’t increase confidence in your opinion about it.

      1. AndyG55

        Seb , there you go with your mythical SCIENTIFICALLY UNSUPPORTABLE nonsense, yet again

        Your grasp on physics is basically non-existent.

        FYI, a thermos does not have an internal source of heat..

        .. neither does the atmosphere.

        Get back to planet Earth, seb, not whatever place your fragile make-believe mind has taken you to this time.

        1. SebastianH

          Sometimes I wonder if you really are this slow or if it is just an act trying to drive me crazy.

          1. AndyG55

            “does the coffee with an internal source of heat… ”

            No, seb

            Coffee DOES NOT have an internal heat source.

            It requires heating by an external source, most often derived from fossil fuels.

            “”Misunderstanding the “problem””

            Your problem is ALWAYS your twisted, warped understanding … of everything.!

            So you just make it up.

            Even your so-called “problem”, is a total fantasy.

      2. AndyG55

        And please, not the phoney zero-science blanket analogy again.

        The atmosphere COOLS the planet’s surface when it gets warmer than the thermal gradient will allow for.

        That is a pretty weird “insulator” or “blanket”..

        sort of a “magic” blanket.. one on which seb and his ilk can drift mindlessly though their arrogant brain-hosed existence.

      3. AndyG55

        ZERO science seb, cannot counter anything said.

        Your sludge-mind is basically non-operable, little trollette

        Take some more “fantasy” pills and come up with another mindless analogy.

        That’ll show me. !!

        Sorry , I misread you comment

        “does the coffee with an internal source of heat “ direct quote from seb…

        You think coffee has an internal heat source.

        So funny…

        … as seb takes a flying leap and FACEPLANTS yet again into his own BS.

    3. Yonason (from a friend's comp)

      Hi, Hans.

      Another analysis of the warmist’s flawed energy conservationless fyziks.

      ASIDE – a bit of fun with applied radiation physics that you might enjoy.

  6. tom0mason

    Coal is still king and will be for a very long time.

    All that is changing is where it’s being used — Western nations not, just about everywhere else with desires to progress, yes — those large populous nations like China and India using this cheap, plentiful fuel will become the commercially powerful nations of tomorrow. And other nations (like parts of Africa) will note that this is the cheap way to build a reliable electricity infrastructure to join them in expanding their manufacturing.

    Grid ruinable electricity (aka wind and solar) will not replace it as long as they can never reliably dispatch electricity as and when required.

    1. SebastianH

      wind and solar will not replace it as long as they can never reliably dispatch electricity as and when required.

      What about wind, solar, hydro, biomass and natural gas complementing each other?

      It works in many countries already …

      1. K. Pool

        Sebastian, I’m sure it can work in just about any country, which is not really the issue. The issue is is: why crank in an unholy number of windmills and solar panels?
        Wind and solar will never be able to supply 100% of the electricity in the absence of industrial scale storage, which is nowhere in sight. The best that can be hoped for is about a 60% penetration (your number).

        This means a perpetual dual power supply system – all these backup gas plants will have to be purchased, staffed and maintained. It also introduces a frequency stability problems when at high wind/sun the gas generators are turned off and rotating inertia is no longer present. Leaving a certain number of gas plants idling, as is done in Ireland, is inefficient and beats the purpose.

        In the end, when straightforward engineering prevails again, the only thing that makes sense is nuclear energy if human generated carbon dioxide really turns out to be a problem.

        1. AndyG55

          seb refuses to understand that building two system, one totally intermittent and irregular and one forced to operate totally uneconomically to compliment that erratic first system… is really economic idiocy and accomplishes ABSOUTELY NOTHING.

          He also REFUSES to put forward ANY EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE that enhanced atmospheric CO2 causes anything but enhanced plant growth.

          His mind lives in a weird and spiteful alternate anti-science, anti-CO2, ANTI-LIFE fantasy land.

          His life is that of a very lonely, attention-seeking paid troll.

    2. tom0mason

      seb, is just preaching more expensive pie in the sky nonsense when writing about wind and solar.

  7. Mark M

    Isn’t the goal to prevent climate change?

    There is no evidence of a solar panel or a windmill preventing any climate change.

    Extreme drought, flood, or not. Anywhere.

    It is a distraction, which is what greenies want, to compare renewables to fossil fuels in any capacity when neither can prevent or create climate change.

    1. tom0mason


    2. SebastianH

      So are admitting that climate change is real. Good. Some people here think it is a fake/hoax 😉

      At a few percent of the primary energy consumption wind and solar do not have much of an influence today. Once renewables are widespread enough to actually cause the CO2 emissions to decline, it will still be too early to see an effect. The emissions have to decline below what nature can absorb, e.g. the CO2 concentration has to begin to fall in order to able to say that climate change is being prevented by renewables. At this point the world is just trying to lessen our effect so the climate change won’t be as big as it would be with continued high CO2 emissions.

      1. AndyG55

        NATURAL climate change is REAL

        Always has been , always will be

        There is ZERO EVIDENCE of any anthropogenic climate change

        Again you are purposely twisting what was said.

        What a PUERILE, twisted, small mind you have. !!

        CO2 has ZERO PROVABLE effect on climate

        and you KNOW THAT. !!

      2. SebastianH

        Mark said nothing about “natural” climate change. That’s you twisting what has been written.

        There is ZERO EVIDENCE of any anthropogenic climate change

        Really? In what fantasy land is that the case?

        1. AndyG55

          “There is ZERO EVIDENCE of any anthropogenic climate change

          Really? In what fantasy land is that the case?”

          THEN PRODUCE IT !

          Local affect only.

          No evidence CO2 causes anything.

          You have been asked time and time and time again to PRODUCE THE EVIDENCE.

          JUST DO IT. !! Surly it can’t be that hard !!!

      3. Peerke

        If politics is about creating a scare and then offering a solution to the scare, much like religion, then CO2 and climate change are a brilliant invention.

        Both the effects of the scare and the effects of the solution are beyond anyone’s lifetime.

      4. tom0mason

        seb, is just preaching more expensive pie in the sky nonsense when writing about wind and solar.

        1. SebastianH

          Pie in the sky as in “beware of the coming ice age”? Or this another I don’t understand the definition of the second moment? 😉

          1. AndyG55

            “Or this another I don’t understand “

            Almost CERTAINLY

          2. SebastianH

            Thank you for agreeing AndyG55 even if you almost certainly misunderstood this reference/sentence 😉

          3. AndyG55

            You don’t even understand your own comments, seb.

            The list of things where you have shown yourself to have what could only be described as “anti-knowledge” would take up a LOT of space.

            Keep up the fantasy, seb

            Its all you have.

  8. Mikky

    The Energiewende is somewhat similar to the policy of flooding Germany with migrants, both replace sensible status quos with who-knows-what. Both policies will continue until the inevitable problems arise, and even then there will be concerted efforts by the media and politicians to divert attention from the real cause of the problem.

    Stopping unrestricted migration requires a political movement that can exclude skin-heads and similar, but even then it will be smeared as “far-right”.

    Likewise stopping the Energiewende requires a political movement that can exclude business vested interests, but even then it will be smeared as “fossil-funded”.

    1. tom0mason


      But it is great political virtue signaling.

    2. SebastianH

      All that is required is someone to show you that the world is not going to end because of whatever you are currently opposed to. Stop being so negative and perceiving everything that changes the non-existing status quo as a threat.

      1. Mikky

        … and the world is not going to end because of continuing economic growth with its associated CO2 emissions.

        1. SebastianH

          Why would economic growth necessarily be associated with CO2 emissions? Plenty of CO2 free energy available in the form of wind, solar, hydro, nuclear fission and supposedly (in the far future) fusion.

          1. AndyG55

            Ecomomic growth requires industry seb

            The energy from wind and solar is too erratic and unreliable to run industrial processes.

            Two more things to add it to the growing list of things seb is UNAWARE of.

            Germany doesn’t have much nuclear energy left, does it seb.. why would that be.

            And without it you are getting the most expensive electricity in the world.

            Anyway, as you well know, the only thing all that added atmospheric CO2 does is to enhance plant growth.

            A big PLUS for the planet and all life on it.

        2. Yonason

          Yes, and… While the world wouldn’t end if we implemented all the greenie nonsense, it would become an awful place for the majority of us to live in.

          1. AndyG55

            Seb doesn’t realise that he will ALWAYS be at the bottom of the heap.

            So reducing the heap to a dung-pile, would leave him exactly where he feels most at home.

          2. Yonason



            Useful Idiot
            “…a person perceived as a propagandist for a cause whose goals they are not fully aware of, and who is used cynically by the leaders of the cause.“

            So dedicated
            So expendable
            So sad

      2. tom0mason

        seb, is just preaching more expensive pie in the sky nonsense when writing about wind and solar.

    3. bonbon

      Neither of these Scheinprobleme (Max Planck’s fake problems) can be solved within the fishbowl – EU,G6 whatever. Only looking outside the fishbowl about to be flushed, as no fish can do, we join up with the Belt and Road Initiative, a completely different approach with massive development. Win-Win instead of the British zero-sum geopolitics is the way to go, Trump is keenly aware of this.
      That is is what is missing, mostly, in Berlin, in no small way because of Dr. John schellnhuber CBE, Merkel’s “science” adisor. It simply became too embarrasing in 2014 when John’s wish to abolish 5 billion people. He was fired, turned up in the Vatican, Brussels, tune unchanged. Trouble is, his policies were not dumped, and Win-Win still waits for a signal.

      1. SebastianH

        Trump is not about Win-Win. If he notices that the other is not losing, he thinks he is on the losing side and jumps out of the agreement. He is incapable of perceiving a Win-Win situation as a good thing.

        1. AndyG55

          Poor seb,

          You haven’t got a clue what Trump is about.

          You are CLUELESS about politics, just like you are CLUELESS about everything else.

          All rational thought in that brain-hosed little mind of yours, is clouded out by deep-seated TDS.. which is just another part of AGWDS.

          You will ALWAYS be in a lose-lose situation, seb.

          Its who you are.

  9. tom0mason

    IMO —
    Some really dumb non-technical people ‘believe’ that wind and solar can ‘compliment’ each other. This is the fantasists dream world, for as long as wind and solar are unreliably intermittent they’ll add nothing to the overall electricity grid in the way of dependability, or regulation of supply, or lower overall cost.
    In fact they materially impede all of them. As shown here by a IEEE member ( – issues.pdf ) there are many problems. These issues cause the grids in all Western countries that have a large installed base of conventional generators, to install some very expensive addition in addition to the grid (so called ‘smart grid’ technology) in an attempt to stabilize the grid with unreliables installed. Also in all counties with large proportions of unreliable generation the overall minimum standards of line frequency and voltage regulation have been lowered. These measures however do not mean that the grid has been improved, it has not, it just means that the grid system can now ‘adjust’ to allow these unreliable generators systems to supply some power. What it has ensured for customers is bills have gone up, and/or the amount of taxes to subsidize the unreliables ensures either taxes rise or cut-backs in other government programs or both.
    All this while the quality of service to the customer has reduce if not (in some countries) got very much worse with a rapid rise in brownout and blackouts.

    So what ‘benefits’ does unreliable generator on the grid bring?
    Lowering of CO2 emissions — no. (convention power is still required 24/7/365)
    Improvements for the grid operators — no. (It now cost more, and is harder to regulate)
    Better service and lower bills (or taxes) to the customers — no.
    Industrialization of the countryside — yes. (I know. But some people believe windfarms look nice, I don’t)
    Vast profits from subsidies to the owners and suppliers of wind and solar — yes.
    (And the ordinary people are supplying this profit through their taxes and electricity bills!)

    So to the question ‘Can wind and solar ‘compliment’ conventional power generation?’ The answer is NO!

    IMO it is just a glorious vanity project in virtue signaling for most countries, one that the ordinary Jane and Joe tax are paying for through increased taxes and bills. It is one of those few examples of where the economies of scale actively cause a corruption of performance because this technology does not fit this purpose.

    1. SebastianH

      I’ll just focus on one of your point and then continue laughing out loud …

      Lowering of CO2 emissions — no. (convention power is still required 24/7/365)

      That is a blatant lie and could not be farther from reality. Of course do solar and wind reduce CO2 emissions. But then, what can be expected from someone who does think the definition of a second or the speed of light is a circular one 😉

      Have a nice day strange man.

      1. AndyG55

        Germany HAS NOT lowered CO2 emissions

        Conventional power IS still required 24/7, stop your DENIAL and your out and out LYING..

        Germany could not exist without it.

        They DO NOT reduce emissions, because they require 95% working back up from REAL power supply. They also require copious amounts of CO2 in their construction

        IGNORANCE runs deep with you seb.

        Your grasp and understanding of basic physics is not just LIMITED, but actually in NEGATIVE territory…

        … you are just TOO DUMB to realise it, and too baselessly arrogant to admit it, even if you weren’t so self-blinded.

        Sweet dreams of weird twisted fantasy lands, little trollette.

        1. SebastianH

          Germany HAS NOT lowered CO2 emissions

          So you think that if Germany had not build wind and solar (together providing 25+ % of the electricity) but increased the usuage of coal or gas power plants instead, the CO2 emissions would have been exactly the same? Are you serious?

          Germany could not exist without it [conventional power].

          Nobody is denying that.

          Your grasp and understanding of basic physics is not just LIMITED, but actually in NEGATIVE territory…

          … you are just TOO DUMB to realise it, and too baselessly arrogant to admit it, even if you weren’t so self-blinded.

          Keep up the clown act and insult away all you want. It only makes you look more desparate …

          1. AndyG55

            Still NOTHING except empty bluster.

            So funny !!

            So seb.

            Germany HAS NOT lowered CO2 emissions.

            Germany could not exist without it [conventional power].

            Your grasp and understanding of basic physics is not just LIMITED, but actually in NEGATIVE territory.

            Simple statements of fact, none of which you are able to refute.

      2. John Westman

        Keep up the good work, Seb,

        Stupidity has a high value as entertainment. I get plenty of laughs without having to pay for some comedian, who is trying to be funny.
        Keep up the entertainment Seb, so I can have a “fun” day.

        Have you ever thought about charging for your services as a funny man?

        1. SebastianH

          Glad that you find it entertaining when skeptics show the level of their competence in replies to my comments. I’ll never be charging for this service as I find it too entertaining myself and well … they basically provide their replies for free too (at least I hope so, if they get paid for this, I want to get paid as well).

          1. John Westman

            Read and then understand my comments, Seb.

            You clearly missed the sarcasm in my note. What is the level of your education-as you have a clear and ongoing problem with comprehension?

      3. tom0mason

        seb, is just preaching more expensive pie in the sky nonsense when writing about wind and solar.

  10. Yonason

    Oh you’re such a pessimist, tom0mason. Don’t you know that you must BELIEVE that somewhere somehow the wind always shines and the sun always blows?!

    1. tom0mason


  11. Vahrenholt: Global Coal Use To Increase By 43% | The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)

    […] Full post […]

  12. Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #319 | Watts Up With That?
  13. Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #319
  14. Michael K

    So… What you all say if i told you i have developed a renewable Process that is base load capable? It is modular and can be built and run economically at market rates $/MW at 10 MW and up (at lower MW it will need green statutory rates to be viable). I’ll be going on a capital roadshow this fall.

    1. SebastianH

      I’d be delighted if that works, if it doesn’t I’d call you a charlatan. Skeptics will find something that they can find bad though even if it works flawlessly as advertised (see Wind & Solar where they constantly try to notify the rest of the world about the downsides as if they have not been known since the beginning … nothing about them working exactly as expected) 😉

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. More information at our Data Privacy Policy