Excellent interview - Tom Harris on “America Out Loud” with Frank Lasee - insane “Net Zero” agenda from solar to 50 storey windmills exterminating bats and killing hundreds of bald eagles

Bio for Frank Lasee here:

Frank Lasee - Wikipedia

From the interview here:

“Global Warming more frightening than Nuclear war,” Biden says (blubrry.com)

Lots of interesting points made. Censorship and denial of actual evidence and references to scientific papers like this one from 2016

Carbon Dioxide Fertilization Greening Earth, Study Finds - NASA

“From a quarter to half of Earth’s vegetated lands has shown significant greening over the last 35 years largely due to rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, according to a new study published in the journal Nature Climate Change on April 25.”

Carbon dioxide – the gas of life.

Frank highlights the fact that water vapour is much more important greenhouse gas than CO2 or methane (CH4) or Nitrous oxide.

\Water vapour makex up around 20-40 million parts PER BILLION of the atmosphere.

CO2 makes up 420,000 parts per billion, methane makes up 1,800 PARTS per billion and nitrous oxide 331 parts Per BILLION

To put that in context, nitrogen makes up 780 million parts per billion, oxygen 210 million parts per billion and argon 10 million parts per billion.

And yet the climate “Net Zero” clowns want to reduce the already tiny proportions.

Frank said that were around 80,000 windmills deployed in the US so far, but that half a million would be required to achieve resident Biden’s energy plans. He said that windmills cannot be built with a mile of any house and their 50-storey size still causes epilepsy from light flashing off blades. He mentioned other impacts on flora and fauna as well as impacts on people.

Of especial interest was the reference to this paper published in 2018:

Large-scale wind power has its down side — Harvard Gazette

“In two papers — published today in the journals Environmental Research Letters and Joule — Harvard University researchers find that the transition to wind or solar power in the U.S. would require five to 20 times more land than previously thought, and, if such large-scale wind farms were built, would warm average surface temperatures over the continental U.S. by 0.24 degrees Celsius.”

Since the impact on the US is mirrored across most of the planet, it would be fair to say that wind turbines CAUSE global warming and this needs to be set off against an imagined impact from CO2, CH4 and N2O.

“One of the first steps to understanding the environmental impact of renewable technologies is to understand how much land would be required to meet future U.S. energy demands. Even starting with today’s energy demands, the land area and associated power densities required have long been debated by energy experts.”

“… the U.S. Geological Survey released the locations of 57,636 wind turbines around the U.S. Using this data set, in combination with several other U.S. government databases, Keith and postdoctoral fellow Lee Miller were able to quantify the power density of 411 wind farms and 1,150 solar photovoltaic plants operating in the U.S. during 2016.”

“For wind, we found that the average power density — meaning the rate of energy generation divided by the encompassing area of the wind plant — was up to 100 times lower than estimates by some leading energy experts,” said Miller.

Sounds about average for the error rate of Net Zero proponents!

“Miller and Keith repeated the calculation for solar power and found that its climate impacts were about 10 times smaller than wind’s.”

“For solar energy, the average power density (measured in watts per meter squared) is 10 times higher than wind power, but also much lower than estimates by leading energy experts.”

Remember the intention is to impoverish the poor, the sick and the elderly by raising energy prices and taxation to pay for the trillions of bucks needed for new transmission lines and all those forests of windmills and mile upon square mile of solar panels.

“The direct climate impacts of wind power are instant, while the benefits of reduced emissions accumulate slowly,” said Keith. “If your perspective is the next 10 years, wind power actually has — in some respects — more climate impact than coal or gas. If your perspective is the next thousand years, then wind power has enormously less climatic impact than coal or gas.”

Let’s see, what was the target date? 2030 or 2050 to eliminate hydrocarbon usage? Six to 24 years to secure a benefit that accrues over a thousand years. Windmills last how long? Ten years?

Let’s re-state the words from the 2018 linked right at the top:

“… the transition to wind or solar power in the U.S. would require five to 20 times more land than previously thought.”

Now, that paper was published six Years ago. I wonder of the reading and comprehension ability of the chicken littles wearing the sandwich boards proclaiming “the end of the world is nigh” have got past the first page yet.

Decades ago, I thought that renewable energy would be free because all the capital costs were paid for with taxes – so that just the maintenance costs would be incurred – so replacing heavily taxed oil and gas. Silly me.

Onwards!

Please subscribe or donate via Ko-fi – any amount from 3 bucks upwards. Don’t worry and God Bless, if you can’t or don’t want to. Ko-fi donations here: https://ko-fi.com/peterhalligan - an annual subscription of 100 bucks is one third less than a $3 Ko-fi donation a week!