Again Reality Goes In Opposite Direction Of Climate Models…”Confidence In Models Correspondingly Low”

by P. Gosselin, March 27, 2019 in NoTricksZone

Real vegetation development in southern Africa takes a very different course than claimed by climate models

By Die kalte Sonne
(German translated by P Gosselin)

Climate models provide answers to all conceivable questions about the future. Political decision-makers are grateful for this information because they can make their plans accordingly.

But are the forecasts derived from models correct at all?

A research team led by Timm Hoffman has now compared the model projections with real vegetation development in southern Africa using historical photos. The sobering result: Nature has mostly developed quite differently than assumed by the models. In contrast to the model assumptions, no significant long-term trend in precipitation could be observed. Vegetation belts, which were supposed to shrink, ended up expanding. Confidence in the models is correspondingly low.

Political planning or even CO2 damage calculations based on the simulations are not possible. Here is the abstract of the work published in the journal Anthropocene in March 2019:

Southern Africa vegetation expanding, images show. Source: here.

China boosts coal mining capacity despite climate pledges

by M. Xu  & D. Patton, March 26, 2019 in Reuters

BEIJING (Reuters) – China added 194 million tonnes of coal mining capacity in 2018, data from the energy bureau showed on Tuesday, despite vows to eliminate excess capacity in the sector and to reduce fossil fuel consumption.

Total coal mining capacity in the country was at 3.53 billion tonnes per year by the end of 2018, according to a statement from the National Energy Administration (NEA). That compares to 3.34 billion tonnes at the end of 2017.

INFO-SCE: 5% d’augmentation de production d’électricité en Chine : cela fait quoi?

by Science,  Climat et Energie, 27 mars 2019

Selon le dernier rapport de l’IEA, la consommation d’énergie mondiale a augmenté de 2,3% en 2018 ce qui représente la plus forte augmentation des dix dernières années. Le gaz naturel fut le plus consommé et représente 45% de l’augmentation de la consommation totale d’énergie.

Suite à cette augmentation de consommation d’énergie les émissions de CO2 se sont accrues de 1,7% pour atteindre 33,1 Gt en 2018. Près d’un tiers de ces émissions provient des centrales de charbon, surtout celles de la Chine.

Il faut noter que les émissions de CO2 en Chine ont augmenté de 2,5%, ou 230 Mt, pour atteindre 9,5 Gt. Un bond de plus de 5% de la production d’électricité à partir de centrales au charbon a entraîné une augmentation des émissions de 250 Mt, ce qui a plus que compensé l’impact de la baisse de l’utilisation du charbon en dehors du secteur de l’énergie.

Pour comparer…la Belgique émet 115 Mt de CO2.

DONC…l’augmentation des émissions en Chine dues au charbon en 2018 représente plus du double de toutes les émissions de CO2 de la Belgique.

Report : The “New Energy Economy”: An Exercise in Magical Thinking

by Mark P. Mills, March 26, 2019 in ManhattanInstitute


A movement has been growing for decades to replace hydrocarbons, which collectively supply 84% of the world’s energy. It began with the fear that we were running out of oil. That fear has since migrated to the belief that, because of climate change and other environmental concerns, society can no longer tolerate burning oil, natural gas, and coal—all of which have turned out to be abundant.

So far, wind, solar, and batteries—the favored alternatives to hydrocarbons—provide about 2% of the world’s energy and 3% of America’s. Nonetheless, a bold new claim has gained popularity: that we’re on the cusp of a tech-driven energy revolution that not only can, but inevitably will, rapidly replace all hydrocarbons.

This “new energy economy” rests on the belief—a centerpiece of the Green New Deal and other similar proposals both here and in Europe—that the technologies of wind and solar power and battery storage are undergoing the kind of disruption experienced in computing and communications, dramatically lowering costs and increasing efficiency. But this core analogy glosses over profound differences, grounded in physics, between systems that produce energy and those that produce information.

In the world of people, cars, planes, and factories, increases in consumption, speed, or carrying capacity cause hardware to expand, not shrink. The energy needed to move a ton of people, heat a ton of steel or silicon, or grow a ton of food is determined by properties of nature whose boundaries are set by laws of gravity, inertia, friction, mass, and thermodynamics—not clever software.

This paper highlights the physics of energy to illustrate why there is no possibility that the world is undergoing—or can undergo—a near-term transition to a “new energy economy.”

Among the reasons: