Contributed by Allan MacRae © 2020
Some 265 academics, overwhelmingly NOT from the technically-competent fields of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Medicine recently wrote a foolish letter to Canada’s Prime Minister, stating the following false nonsense:
“Instead of purchasing equity in oil and gas, Canadian governments should pursue the retraining of fossil fuel workers, and public ownership of Canada’s renewable energy sector, where government coordination and large-scale investment are needed in the short term and where investments will be repaid.”
The Calgary-based group “Friends of Science“ posted a detailed review of the academics letter, entitled “BITING THE HAND THAT FEEDS YOU”, not too subtly suggesting that these academics do not pull-their-weight in the economic spectrum, and were dependent on real wealth-producing enterprises like the energy industry to support their pseudo-intellectual blatherings:
It is past time that these technologically-innumerate academics learned some basic scientific and economic realities, knowledge that many of us acquire as children:
A GREEN ENERGY PRIMER – GRID-CONNECTED WIND AND SOLAR ENERGY BOTH FAIL DUE TO INTERMITTENCY AND DIFFUSIVITY.
INTERMITTENCY means the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow 24/7, and the electric grid needs reliable dispatchable generation, not generation that goes up and down uncontrollably. Battery storage is touted as the solution, but it does not economically exist at grid-scale.
DIFFUSIVITY means it takes far too much land area to replace conventional energy with wind and/or solar generation – it would take fully ~10% of all the land area in Britain to do so. In the USA, this 10% would total about 300,000 square miles, or all of Connecticut, Delaware, Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia.
Energy experts have known these facts since ~forever. In 2002 my co-authors and I published the following statements that have both proven correct–to-date:
a. “Climate science does not support the theory of catastrophic human-made global warming – the alleged warming crisis does not exist.”
b. “The ultimate agenda of pro-Kyoto advocates is to eliminate fossil fuels, but this would result in a catastrophic shortfall in global energy supply – the wasteful, inefficient energy solutions proposed by Kyoto advocates simply cannot replace fossil fuels.”
“DEBATE ON THE KYOTO ACCORD”
Published by APEGA in the PEGG, reprinted by other professional journals, The Globe and Mail and La Presse,
by Dr. Sallie Baliunas (Harvard-Smithsonian), Dr. Tim Patterson (Carleton U) and Allan MacRae, November 2002
http://www.friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/KyotoAPEGA2002REV1.pdf
Dr. Sallie Baliunas on “Weather Cooking with the Help of Satan”
Since then, trillions of dollars of scarce global resources have been squandered on worthless green energy schemes that are not green and produce little useful (dispatchable) energy. The result of this green energy virtue-signalling has been the destabilization of electrical grids, runaway energy costs, energy poverty, increased winter deaths, and INsignificant reduction in CO2 emissions. What a foolish green debacle!
I also suggest they read the following paper. In the unlikely event that they become even marginally competent, they will reverse their erroneous positions on climate and energy, and retract their imbecilic letter.
THE CATASTROPHIC ANTHROPOGENIC GLOBAL WARMING (CAGW) AND THE HUMAN-MADE CLIMATE CHANGE CRISES ARE PROVED FALSE
By Allan M.R. MacRae, B.A.Sc.(Eng.), M.Eng., January 10, 2020
https://thsresearch.files.wordpress.com/2020/01/the-catastrophic-anthropogenic-global-warming-cagw-and-the-humanmade-climate-change-crises-are-proved-false.pdf
“There are numerous highly credible observations that falsify the CAGW hypothesis and many are listed herein, but as Albert Einstein famously stated “One would be enough”.
Respectfully submitted,
Allan MacRae, Calgary
Allen MacRae, you hit the nail on the head. Let’s hope the public wakes up to the truth.
“265 academics” clearly need more definition of the areas of academic expertise they represent before their opinions are accorded the respect given to climate-students from more appropriate scientific academics..
I trust this report was sent to justin, and his climate zealot crew?
If they persist in blindly following the fraudulent hypothesis of the IPCC, costing the Canadian taxpayers $billions, they should at least be made aware of their folly.