pmccarthy

If you accept "climate science" 100%, do you also accept that nothing Australia does in drawing its power from coal, oil, nuclear, solar or wind in the next century will make any measurable (ie greater than 1%) difference to global temperatures for the next few hundred years? Because that is what climate science tells us. So, we need to balance that reality with the impact our decisions right now have on our economy and our natural environment. And if, like me, you do not accept the "climate science", then our current destructive actions are simply abhorrent.

Octave the sources of funding are absolutely not relevant! Thank goodness someone is funding independent thought and studies. I suspect, but obviously cannot prove, that the destruction of established Western energy systems is an outcome of massive political/green propaganda directed over decades primarily by China and Russia. I will not live long enough to find out the truth. So much of what is stated on this forum derives from that propaganda. To take one example, the myth that China is going green. China is selling US the solar panels and wind turbines. Meanwhile what is it doing? The following is from an AI query: As of early 2026, China has 59 nuclear power plants in operation and 28 additional reactors under construction, totaling more than 32 GW of new nuclear capacity. Recent projects include the Lufeng Nuclear Power Plant in Guangdong province, where construction of Unit 1 has begun using the CAP1000 pressurized water reactor design, while Units 5 and 6 are already under construction with Hualong One technology. China’s nuclear expansion is part of a broader strategy to reduce reliance on coal, with the Lufeng plant alone expected to save 15.77 million tons of coal annually and cut 42.69 million tons of CO₂ emissions. The country also plans to deploy nuclear reactors at retiring coal sites under the “Coal to Nuclear” (C2N) program, leveraging existing infrastructure to accelerate construction and reduce costs. Despite nuclear growth, China is simultaneously experiencing a resurgence in coal-fired power construction. In 2024, construction began on 94.5 GW of new coal capacity, with an additional 3.3 GW of previously suspended projects resumed, marking the highest level of coal construction in a decade. This expansion is driven by domestic investment and energy security concerns, even as China works toward its dual-carbon goals of peaking emissions by 2030 and achieving carbon neutrality by 2060. Coal still accounts for over half of China’s electricity generation, and the country has about 1.2 TW of coal-fired capacity, with roughly 100 GW slated for retirement in the next five years. China’s energy strategy reflects a dual approach: rapidly expanding nuclear power to reduce carbon emissions while maintaining coal capacity to ensure energy security and meet growing electricity demand. The C2N initiative exemplifies this approach by converting retiring coal plants into nuclear facilities, taking advantage of existing grid connections, cooling systems, and land. Advanced nuclear technologies, including Generation IV reactors and Hualong One designs, are central to this transition, enabling higher efficiency and integration with existing coal infrastructure.

How fabulous

A gaggle of geese

The climate IS changing. It is changing now more rapidly than it did 100 years ago. But that does not mean we can predict the future climate. Our historical records are limited and compromised, and we don't have computer models that can predict the future. In fact, it is a limitation of all time-series-based models that you cannot extrapolate very far beyond the end of the data set. This is true even for something as simple as stock market prices, and the climate is vastly more complicated.

The past climate tells us that the future climate will be variable and is unpredictable, at least to our understanding. The drivers of climate include subsea volcanism, solar variation, the path of the solar system and so on. We understand some of it, particularly its cyclic nature, but are a long way from predicting the future climate.

I think Bill Gates was trying to do that. But relationships (with his wife and Epstein) have got in the way.

My random thought today is what would you do if you had unlimited money. Like the tech bros or the head of Qantas, once they retire and are in their mid 70s. I don't really need anything more, possessions come with problems. Perhaps I would like a classic Bentley or a Hispano Suiza or something that costs millions, but only if I had a mechanic to look after it. I have a little plane, a Vixxen, and cannot think of a different make or model that I would rather have. I could travel more, but travel can be tiring as you get older. Maybe a couple of overseas trips each year, first class. I don't want a holiday house. But whatever I think of would not make a dent in the annual salaries those people earned, and they earned them for years or decades. How would you spend that money?

They start and end with the same letter.

Muscles disappear. If you diet, fat around the shoulders disappears. But that big spare tyre around the gut is immovable.

Nearest towns are 20 minutes either way. When I go downhill to town my Prado gets about 7 l/100 km. When I go the other way, uphill to the other town, I get about 11 l/100km. Of course.

Me too, all of that.

Change of venue

Working on my craft.

This paper examines the correlation between end-user electricity prices and the share of solar and wind energy in total electricity production in OECD countries. It is shown (i) that end-user prices in recent years (2020–2022) are positively correlated with the share of solar and wind and (ii) that the price of electricity in the majority of countries has risen with the solar and wind share since these types of energy came on the scene. (paper published 2024) Green Electricity Prices | Biophysical Economics and Sustainability | Springer Nature Link