Rebel Yid on Twitter Rebel Yid on Facebook
Print This Post Print This Post

Obsolete Energy Policy

wristify-mit-325x325

from Digital Trends, MIT students develop wearable cooling device that could make air conditioning obsolete

The chief benefit of this device is that it offers a more personalized approach to temperature control, one that’s vastly more efficient than current heating and cooling methods. It takes millions of watts to raise or lower the temperature of an entire building, but Wristify can run on a small lithium battery. If everybody had one of these things on their wrist instead of relying on air conditioning or heaters all the time, the potential energy savings could be massive.

Read more: http://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/mit-students-develop-personal-cooling-device-make-air-conditioning-obsolete/#ixzz3HRGk5ofJ
Follow us: @digitaltrends on Twitter | digitaltrendsftw on Facebook

HKO

such technology renders current concepts of energy policy obsolete

 

Print This Post Print This Post

The Illusion of Certainty

forumula

Our financial system is man made; controlled by laws passed by legislators, administered by some very educated bureaucrats , and often staffed by Phds. We have numerous agencies from the SEC to the FDIC to the Fed to Fannie Mae and many more.  Our financial system is designed and run by the top minds in business.  Every lever and every action is in the hands of some of the smartest  men and women  in the country. Yet few predicted or were able to protect us against odds that led to the collapse of our very man controlled financial system.  The history of our financial system is filled with such failures.

Yet we are supposed to believe that a climate system that is well beyond the control of man, and far more interrelated and complicated than our financial system can be known and predicted with such a high degree of certainty that we should make wholesale changes in our economy and our lives or face catastrophic consequences.

Print This Post Print This Post

Prejudging Technologies

Holman Jenkins writes in The Wall Street Journal,  The Climate Speech Obama Didn’t Give, 6/28/2013

Excerpts:

If we are serious about climate change, we must seriously factor in the accelerating rate of technological change already in our society. I’m personally impressed with what I read about the progress of nanobatteries, which may soon turn solar into a real contributor rather than a sinkhole for taxpayer charity. I’m impressed with the prospects for cheaper, inherently safe nuclear power, like in the new documentary, “Pandora’s Promise” (go see it!).

So here’s what we can really do to help future generations and ourselves. We can maintain the dynamism of our economy, from which new technology emerges. We can broadly favor low-carbon energy without prejudging (probably wrongly) which technologies will succeed. Carbon capture, for instance, may well be the sort of white elephant boondoggle we’ll be glad we avoided.

Now I believe these new technologies will emerge or not emerge largely irrespective of what government does, though a little help can’t hurt. I also believe, no matter what we do, the rest of the world will choose economic growth over reducing atmospheric carbon. So technology is our only hope.

The tax reform I envision other countries could adopt out of self-interest, not self-punishment. But it also doesn’t matter what they do. If the technologies that emerge are truly superior and competitive, other countries will adopt them anyway.

Either way, we will not have impoverished ourselves with futile gestures. We will have done absolutely the best thing government can do to address the risk that human greenhouse emissions will lead to dangerous climate change. We will have resisted the temptation—all too typical of Washington—to do foolish or cynical things in the guise of acting against global warming.

Print This Post Print This Post

Global Warming – Again

From To the Horror of Global Warming Alarmists, Global Cooling Is Here by Peter Ferrara in Forbes.com:

Booker could have been writing about Robinson when he concluded his Sunday Telegraph commentary by writing, “Has there ever in history been such an almighty disconnect between observable reality and the delusions of a political class that is quite impervious to any rational discussion?”

“Here in Britain, where we had our fifth freezing winter in a row, the Central England Temperature record – according to an expert analysis on the US science blog Watts Up With That – shows that in this century, average winter temperatures have dropped by 1.45C, more than twice as much as their rise between 1850 and 1999, and twice as much as the entire net rise in global temperatures recorded in the 20th century.”

A news report from India (The Hindu April 22, 2013) stated, “March in Russia saw the harshest frosts in 50 years, with temperatures dropping to –25° Celsius in central parts of the country and –45° in the north. It was the coldest spring month in Moscow in half a century….Weathermen say spring is a full month behind schedule in Russia.” The news report summarized,

“Russia is famous for its biting frosts but this year, abnormally icy weather also hit much of Europe, the United States, China and India. Record snowfalls brought Kiev, capital of Ukraine, to a standstill for several days in late March, closed roads across many parts of Britain, buried thousands of sheep beneath six-metre deep snowdrifts in Northern Ireland, and left more than 1,000,000 homes without electricity in Poland. British authorities said March was the second coldest in its records dating back to 1910. China experienced the severest winter weather in 30 years and New Delhi in January recorded the lowest temperature in 44 years.”

Booker adds, “Last week it was reported that 3,318 places in the USA had recorded their lowest temperatures for this time of year since records began. Similar record cold was experienced by places in every province of Canada. So cold has the Russian winter been that Moscow had its deepest snowfall in 134 years of observations.”

But there is a fundamental problem with the temperature records from this contentious period, when climate science crashed into political science. The land based records, which have been under the control of global warming alarmists at the British Met Office and the Hadley Centre Climate Research Unit, and at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in the U.S., show much more warming during this period than the incorruptible satellite atmosphere temperature records. Those satellite records have been further confirmed by atmospheric weather balloons. But the land based records can be subject to tampering and falsification.

Faith in Global Warming is collapsing in formerly staunch Europe following increasingly severe winters which have now started continuing into spring. Christopher Booker explained in The Sunday Telegraph on April 27, 2013,

Print This Post Print This Post

A Scientist Faces His Own Global Warming Theory

Lorrie Goldstein writes in The Toronto Sun, Green ‘drivel’ exposed – The godfather of global warming lowers the boom on climate change hysteria, 6/23/12.

Excerpts:

Having observed that global temperatures since the turn of the millennium have not gone up in the way computer-based climate models predicted, Lovelock acknowledged, “the problem is we don’t know what the climate is doing. We thought we knew 20 years ago.” Now, Lovelock has given a follow-up interview to the UK’s Guardian newspaper in which he delivers more bombshells sure to anger the global green movement, which for years worshipped his Gaia theory and apocalyptic predictions that billions would die from man-made climate change by the end of this century.

Lovelock still believes anthropogenic global warming is occurring and that mankind must lower its greenhouse gas emissions, but says it’s now clear the doomsday predictions, including his own (and Al Gore’s) were incorrect.

He responds to attacks on his revised views by noting that, unlike many climate scientists who fear a loss of government funding if they admit error, as a freelance scientist, he’s never been afraid to revise his theories in the face of new evidence. Indeed, that’s how science advances.

HKO comments:

A scientist changes his theory when it conflicts with reality.  A political ideologue tries to change the reality.  Changing reality requires the heavy hand of a government authority.

Lovelock also notes the reality that few of the climate ideologues wish to face. They accuse those who dispute them for being  interests of the energy companies.  Besides the fact that many of the energy companies support climate ideologues because it thins the herd of their competition, the ideologues also refuse to admit the being paid by the government to find proof of anthropomorphic global warming does not also distort their findings.