All Scientists are Sceptics ~Professor Bob Carter

Whenever someone asserts that a scientific question is “settled,” they tell me immediately that they don’t understand the first thing about science. Science is never settled. Dr David Deming

Perhaps the most frustrating aspect of the science of climate change is the lack of any real substance in attempts to justify the hypothesis ~Professor Stewart Franks

A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf

Wednesday, 21 May 2014

Jeffery Sachs: Misanthrope.

Anthony Cox

Professor Sachs is the director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University and a special advisor to the UN secretary general on the Millennium Development Goals. Sachs is AGW royalty.

Sachs has received the usual Royal treatment from the usual unctuous media such as Fairfax and the ABC. His position is plain; if he has his way the 3rd world will become cave dwellers and the West will become the new 3rd world.

Sachs repeats the usual mantra about temperature:
We are in trouble. We're on a trajectory for global temperature to increase by four to six degrees centigrade above the pre-industrial level.

This is unmitigated BS. The temperature increase during the 20thC has been about 0.7ºC. During this time the alleged agent of AGW, CO2, increased from 290PPM to 390PPM, an increase of 100PPM or 35%. According to the IPCC climate sensitivity estimates/guesses/fabrications the temperature response to a doubling of CO2 ranges from 3.26 – 3.8ºC not between 4-6ºC as this scaremonger Sachs says. But even the IPCC amounts are ridiculous.

On the basis of the IPCC formula a 35% increase should have caused an increase in temperature of between 1.14ºC and 1.33ºC. The actual increase has been far less than these predicted amounts.

In addition temperature has been flat for a climatically significant period of 17 years:


At current rates of increase of CO2 there should be a doubling by 2050 according to the alarmist press. So by 2050 the temperature increase should be between 3.26 – 3.8C above 1900 levels. Because we have already seen an increase of ~ 0.7C that leaves between 2.56C and 3.1C to go [3.26 – 3.8 – 0.7C].

CO2 levels are currently at about 400PPM. To reach 580PPM another 180PPM of CO2 is needed which is about 45% of the current 400PPM. 45% of the IPCC range of 3.26 – 3.8C is 1.47 – 1.71C which is much less than the 2.56 – 3.1C range of extra temperature required by the IPCC’s own formula to reach its predicted range of 3.26 – 3.8C.

In any event there is NO correlation between CO2 and temperature during the 20thC:



So Sach’s scaremongering is based on plainly false ‘science’.

This makes Sach’s recommendations about what should happen in the 3rd world all the more egregious. 

Sachs says:
Actually poorer countries have wonderful options because the price of photo-voltaics is falling so sharply, places like Mali. Actually the low-cost solution is off-grid photo-voltaic power. The fact that we can now put solar panels for pumps for irrigation, for refrigeration, for cold chains, for vaccines, for running schools, for allowing remote schools to be online.
This is dreadful. It is condemning 3rd world nations to continued poverty while offering a false solution with renewables. Renewables do NOT work. They are unreliable and cannot supply the continuous power required for any civilized lifestyle. Miskelly and Quirk show this about wind power which also applies to solar power. Miskelly and Quirk show the Reliability Point of wind is 10%. The Reliability Point is defined as:
The 90 per cent reliability figure represents the amount of energy that can be relied on for 90 per cent of the time.

This means that 90% of the time you are only going to have 10% of the Installed or maximum energy from the renewable available. Many times you will have NO power, especially at night. How can you have a civilized lifestyle under such circumstances?


Sachs is also a supporter of the pipedream of CO2 capture or clean coal. The defects of this process are 2 fold; firstly the energy required to capture the CO2 from the burning of the coal is about the same as is produced from the burning of the coal; so there is no net energy benefit! Secondly the area required to store the captured CO2 is many times greater than the hole created from the mining of the coal.


But why would you even consider CO2 capture unless you believed in the lie of AGW?


Sachs concludes:

But if this technology is not feasible then the coal is going to have to be left in the ground. We are not going to ruin this planet in the interests of one particular sector.



This is just Green propaganda: starve and freeze in the dark. Thanks for coming, Professor Sachs and joining the conga line of home grown malcontents spitting their venom at our elected government.

1 comment:

  1. I read a book about Sachs Millenium Villages Project. It was a disaster. All it did was use a lot of western taxpayers money to lure a bunch of Africans into some patch of desert where they existed on handouts until the funding dried up. After they they had the choice of dispersing or dying of thirst when the diesel for borehole pump ran out.

    ReplyDelete





All serious comments published after moderation.
Comments should be polite, and respect all views.
No bad language. Spam never makes it!