Total Pageviews

Thursday, January 23, 2020

Next batch of articles expected to be posted here on Saturday

New articles on all my blogs today

"Substance abuse
hurts US productivity -- 
it may be worse than ever!"

"The Biden Crime Family 
is even bigger than 
I previously thought"

Not new, but the models were lonely
no nudity, but not for office viewing

Thank You for 54,000 page views

Moving on up 
from 20,000 
page views on 
September 1, 2018

For each 1,000 milestone,
tell readers about myself,
including my favorite
song of the past week,
followed by an 
appropriate length speech, 
which for today would be 
54 minutes long, and that
speech follows: 

Good afternoon
ladies and germs:

This afternoon 

I want to tell you 
everything you 
need to know 
about the 

The ECS  is 

zzzzzzz ... sorry, I seem to have 
put myself to sleep ...

Richard Greene,
since 1953

since 1965
Favorite song 
this week:"
"What Was It You Wanted"

since 1973

State University 
of New York, 
at Albany, 1975

Stern School 
of Business,
at New York 
University, 1977

Editor of an
and finance
since 1977
( named "ECONOMIC
LOGIC" since 1981 )

Happily married 
since 1983
( we had only one argument,
back in 1983, however, 
it is still in progress )
heh heh

Living in 
Bingham Farms, 
since 1987

Retired, lazy bum, 
since January 2005

Editor of the 
Economic Logic Blog,
since 2008

Editor of this
Honest Global
Warming Chart Blog,
since 2014

Editor of the 
Election Circus
politics blog,
since 2016 

Very disappointed 
that global warming
appears to have 
skipped Michigan !

My Favorite Quote:
“Politics is the art 
of looking for trouble, 
finding it everywhere, 
diagnosing it incorrectly, 
and applying 
the wrong remedies.” 
Groucho Marx

How long before Manhattan is underwater ?

Don't get any ideas -- I have already purchased an option for the first Manhattan Gondola Service designed to take Big Shot Wall Street Executives to work when the streets are flooded from climate change sea level rise.

According to the lower Manhattan tide gauge (below), it appears that I will not live long enough to get that expected Wall Street flooding.

Therefore I have decided to sell my gondola option, in a package deal, along with my 25% ownership of a bridge between Manhattan and Brooklyn.

Temperatures in Antarctica have no obvious trend -- One typical weather station (first chart) and all of Antarctica per UAH and RSS satellite compilations

NASA SCIENCE FRAUD: 2001 global temperature data vs. 2015 global temperature data

NOAA science fraud: Raw data says US winters are GETTING colder -- but after "adjustments" NOAA will tell you the opposite (because they say so)




NEW YORK TIMES IN 2014: "The End of Snow" -- a classic climate alarmist baloney sammich

"Baloney" translations:
Irish -- malarkey
Brooklyn USA = banana earl


on JANUARY 9, 2020

Will the next "Carrington Event" damage the electric grid ? And is it about time to protect the grid ?

Quotes directly below 
are from 
"The Sun Kings", 
by Stuart Clark.

“It began 
around 6:30 
in the evening 
on August 28. 

An aurora spread 
across the northern sky 
as far south as Cuba. 

The greatest intensity 
in color was at the Zenith. 

The aurora’s rays emitted 
an intense red light. 

Flashes of white light 
appeared among them. 

Similar auroras occurred 
in the 
southern hemisphere 
with one observed 
as far north as Sydney, 
Australia and in Chile.

The aurora continued 
on August 29, and then 
again on September 1 
and through September 3rd.

Telegraph operators 
were thrown from 
their equipment – 
equipment too hot 
to touch from the 
surge of electric 

An analysis showed 
hat equipment connected 
to the longest lines was 
damaged the most severely. 

These conditions 
were observed 
in the United States 
and London.”

The above events
actually happened 
in 1859, and are 
referred to as the 
Carrington Event, 
named for the
who reported on
the solar storm.

Other solar storms, 
roughly 40% the size 
of the Carrington Event, 
were in 1921 and 1989. 

The 1989 event 
caused the grid 
in Quebec, Canada 
to fail.

Another solar storm 
anywhere near the size 
of the Carrington Event, 
or even half that size,
could significantly damage
the current electric grid.

any of he 300 
high voltage 
in the U.S. 
and Canada 
could fail.

The risk 
is high 
it requires 
a year to build 
a custom size
high voltage 
and there are 
very few
available for 
now in service. 

The Congressional 
Research Service
has said:
“While a few 
manufacturers in 
the United States 
claim to be able to 
rated over 300 KV, 
it’s not certain 
they can do so.”

“High voltage 
transformers make up 
less than 3% of all
transformers in U.S. 
power substations, 
but they carry 60%-70% 
of the nation’s electricity.” 

“The destruction of more than 
three transmission substations 
would cause long-term blackouts 
in many areas of the country.” 

“Reportedly, a FERC power flow 
analysis in 2013 identified 
30 such critical HV transformer
substations across the continental 
United States; disabling as few as 
nine of these substations 
during a time of peak electricity 
demand reportedly could cause 
a ‘coast-to-coast blackout.’ ”
( from EIA's "High Voltage 
Transmission Lines" ) 

Burnouts of 
very high voltage 
would not be an 
ordinary type of 
blackout that 
would be fixed 
in a few days.

This potential disaster
could also result from 
an electromagnetic 
pulse (EMP) nuclear 

President Trump 
issued executive 
order, EO 13865,
in March, 2019, 
to establish actions 
needed to protect 
the country from 
such pulses. 

EO 13865 is 
the first action 
that would address
the civilian population,
not just the military, 
from a Carrington 
Event, or from an 
EMP nuclear attack.

Carrington Event 
is inevitable, with
a 100% probability.

Maybe this year, 
or this decade, 
or the next decade
 -- no one knows.

Not knowing 
the date
has resulted in 
almost no action
for decades.

President Trump's 
Executive Order 13865
is a start, but far from
a solution.

Are windmills giant bird shredders ? ( Of course they are ! ) That's a high price to pay for intermittent, expensive electricity!

I summarize 
the 42 page report
using direct quotes,
with a focus on 
the two papers 
within the report
that I found 
most interesting

My gruesome 
overall summary:
- Wind turbine blades
kill lots of insects.

- Small birds and bats 
come for fresh insect meals, 
and then some of them 
get shredded.  

- Large birds 
come for fresh small bird meals, 
and then some of them get shredded.

- If not counted within a few days,
predators make many dead birds
"disappear", creating the illusion
that the bird kill problem is small.

- Humans are killing
birds and bats to get 
intermittent, expensive 
wind power, generated 
with wind turbines, 
whose noise disturbs 
people, and I suppose 
animals too.  

- Using intermittent 
expensive wind power, 
when CO2-free 
nuclear power and 
cheap natural gas 
power are much
better choices, 
is a classic 
Forrest Gump 
energy policy,
even if you don't care 
about birds and bats 
as much as I do !
       Ye Editor

 all quotes below are from:
Papers from the Berlin Seminar"
Edited by Dr Benny Peiser

"The environmentally destructive effects of renewable energies has never been widely discussed – mainly because they are seen as reducing carbon dioxide emissions.

The German Wildlife Foundation is not generally against wind energy. 

But we are opposed to the unbridled expansion of energy projects in natural environments and natural spaces, a process that is increasingly happening today, especially in Germany.

In recent years, particularly in the hill country in the state of Hesse, the majority of wind turbines have been built in forests. 

Meanwhile, the federal government plans to double or triple the number of wind turbines in Germany. 

Today there are 28,000 of them, a figure which thus might increase to about 50,000–70,000. 

In Germany, on average, there is one wind turbine every 2.6 kilometers. 

Flying migratory insects rise up to heights above 60 metres and then allow themselves to be transported to more remote areas before oviposition. 

This process has evolved so as to enable these insects to find new environments without food competition, but they can be carried hundreds of kilometers away. 

Now, however, these insects hit wind turbines at 100 metres altitude and their dead bodies cake the turbine blades at certain times of year, causing a significant drop in the energy.

When I was CEO of REPower, the second largest German wind power manufacturer, we had to develop a new technology to allow us to clean the blades, which required washing at least annually, and sometimes twice each year.

Initial studies estimate that about 1200 billion migratory insects (or 3600 tons) are killed in this way. 

To give you an idea of the magnitude of this kill rate: it is about 5%. 
Dr. Benny Pieser

Ecological impacts of wind turbines: 
are they the greener option? 
Peter Henderson, 
Pisces Conservation Ltd and University of Oxford

While onshore and offshore wind turbines share some ecological impacts, it is useful to consider them separately. 

This is because, during construction, they impact different ecosystems and many terrestrial species do not move far offshore.

Offshore plant
Offshore wind farms create a new type of habitat that supports a higher biodiversity of benthic organisms than the surrounding, typically soft, sediments. 

This community generates increased use of the area by the benthos, fish, marine mammals and some bird species. 

With respect to birds, the key concerns are collisions, barrier effects and habitat loss. 

Particular concern is focused on species undertaking regular seasonal migrations. 

For example, hundreds of millions of birds cross the North and Baltic Seas at least twice every year. 

A study by Hüppop et al. (2006)14 concluded that almost half of these birds fly at altitudes at which they could be killed by a turbine. 

It is almost impossible to detect fatalities at offshore facilities and so we have no data upon which to assess the impact. 

Large-scale onshore wind farms:
Onshore wind farms are often unpopular because of damage to the landscape and visual amenity. 

This is a matter of personal taste rather than ecology and not discussed further here.

Land use:
Typically, horizontal wind turbines must be spaced 5–10 rotor diameters apart. 

The turbines and associated infrastructure, including roads and transmission lines, therefore only occupy a small portion of the total area of a wind farm. 

A survey by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory of large wind facilities in the United States found that they use between 30 and 141 acres (57 hectares) per megawatt of power output capacity. 

Bird deaths and bird habitat loss linked to wind turbines is a particularly contentious issue and brings into focus deep divisions within wildlife conservation organisations. 

The number of birds directly killed by collision with turbine blades is not insignificant. Smallwood (2013) estimated 573,000 bird fatalities/year at 51,630 megawatt (MW) of installed wind-energy capacity in the United States in 2012. 

This number included a worrying 83,000 raptor (birds of prey) fatalities. 

In Europe and the USA, it is the loss of large raptors that has attracted the most concern. 

It is clear that simply stating that killed birds are rarely observed cannot be used to argue that adverse impacts are not occurring.

The impacts of wind turbines on bats has been recently reviewed by Arnott et al. (2016).

The authors highlight the seriousness of the situation. 

Bats are killed in a variety of ways: by blunt force trauma, barotrauma and through inner ear damage and other injuries not readily noticed during examination of carcasses in the field. 

... some idea of the losses can be gained from German data. 

An estimated 10–12 bats are killed annually at each wind turbine in Germany, which suggests that, if all wind turbines are equally destructive, about 200,000 bats are annually killed at onshore wind turbines in Germany alone. 

These numbers are sufficient to produce concern for future populations, as bats are long-lived and have a low fecundity and so cannot quickly replace such losses.

The species most often killed in Europe are aerial-hawking, where the prey is pursued and caught in flight, they are relatively fast-flying, open-air, species.

As most bat fatalities in temperate countries occur during relatively low-wind conditions in late summer, restricting turbine operation in light wind conditions can produce an appreciable reduction in bat deaths. 

One simple approach is to increase the wind speed at which turbines start to operate during periods of the year when bats are particularly vulnerable. 

Such approaches may reduce mortalities by 50–90%. 

If bats are attracted by the availability of insects then it may be possible to reduce the death rate by painting turbines in colours less attractive to flying insects.

That wind turbines can kill large numbers of insects is supported by the remarkable fact that insect bodies adhering to the blades’ leading edges have been implicated in halving turbine power 
output in high winds.

It is known that the common turbine colours pure white and light grey both attract insects, as does UV-reflecting paint.

Wind turbines are of sufficient size to interfere with flying insect migrations.

For example, monarch butterflies in North America have been reported as killed by wind turbines.

Ecological issues 
relating to 
transmission lines 
on land
Large-scale use of wind generation requires the construction of extensive cable networks.

... placing high-voltage transmission lines underground is uncommon and can cost two to ten times as much as an overhead line.

Birds are probably the animals most impacted by above ground transmission cables. 

Power lines are one of the most important causes of bird mortality. 

They kill birds following collision and through electrocution. 

Electrocution tends to occur when large birds, such as white- tailed eagles, with a 2.45-m wingspan, take off from a perch on a pylon and touch a cable in the process, causing a fatal short circuit. 

Such large birds may also, on occasion, touch two power lines simultaneously while in flight, again causing electrocution. 

... high losses (sometimes in excess of 500 casualties per kilometre of power line per year) are reported from lines with multi-level arrangements, and with thin and low- hanging wires in sensitive areas.

Transmission line impacts are getting worse because of the need to build more transmission lines to support wind farms and solar installations. 

However, it may not be possible to design overhead lines that are more visible to some species of birds: a study on three particularly vulnerable species – kori bustards (Aerdeotis kori ), blue cranes (Anthropoides paradise ), and white storks (Ciconia ciconia ) – found that they typically look down while in flight. 

Therefore, the addition of tags, or reflective markers to make power lines visible are ineffective.

Wind power and birds of prey: 
problems and possible solutions 
Oliver Krüger, University of Bielefeld

 The growth of bird of prey populations in recent years is a very, very great conservation success story and thanks are owed to the many conservation organisations who have helped make this happen.

We know of several species that are adversely affected by wind energy: griffon vultures, sea eagles and golden eagles, for example. 

Bird collisions with wind turbines are often seen as a major nature conservation problem. 

The Norwegian town of Smola, for example, has a large population of sea eagles. 

Nevertheless, a wind farm was built there. 

Norwegian ornithologists warned against this, but their advice was ignored. 

In the last 16 years, more than 60 sea eagles have collided with the turbines. A classic example of ‘We told you so’.

The Altamont Pass in the USA is another example. 

The location is significant because large numbers of golden eagles pass through it. 

Again, despite the warnings of ornithologists, a wind farm was built, and now, every year, between 75 and 110 golden eagles are killed in this one location.

How do you determine the number of birds killed by each turbine? 

The area that has to be searched around each turbine is 3–10 hectares. 

Your immediate reaction might be to think you can search that area quite quickly, but there are 365 days in a year and 29,000 wind turbines. 

... even if you could find every corpse in theory, many would no longer be there by the time you came to look: scavengers get to work quickly.

So preparing a meaningful estimate is not trivial. 

The research approach was a so-called line-transect sample. 

One can complain a lot about such studies, but we did not make it easy for ourselves. In total, the research team walked more than 7,600 km under wind turbines in order to obtain the data. 

Moreover, there were 12,800 wind turbines in the study area, about half of the total German wind fleet at the time."

So to conclude, we all know that wind farms have significant impacts on the environment, as do the associated grid projects. 

From our perspective, it would seem that communities and habitats are just collateral damage: nobody cares. 

In Ireland, state bodies and agencies are part of the problem. 

There has never been a strategic environmental assessment of the national renewable plans, there has never been a cost-benefit analysis or a regulatory impact analysis, despite both being required by the Irish state, and I assume by other countries’ governments as well.

The environmental NGOs (environmental activists) are also part of the problem, 
and it absolutely breaks my heart to say that, having been a firm supporter of all these bodies.

In fact, some of our environmental NGOs have actually received funding from the wind industry, and it makes me so angry to see that going on. 

The NGOs are completely ideologically driven, and I have now come to the conclusion that it is a religion, and it’s nothing to do with science.

The state, and the environmental NGOs – with the exception of the Irish Raptor Study Group – are not playing their part, and not doing what they should be doing. We, as communities, must fight aline to uphold the idea of environmental protection. 

But we must do so without any resources to back us. 

In reality, I don’t know how long we can stay in the fight.

Concluding remarks 
by Hilmar Freiherr von Münchhausen, 
German Wildlife Foundation
This paper, produced by the Global Warming Policy Foundation and the German Wildlife Foundation, takes a Europe-wide look at the conflict between wind energy and nature conservation.

In many European countries, people are opposing wind energy projects that are destroying wildlife habitats.

We need to be aware that all energy sources have a negative impact on the environment and nature. 

It is therefore all the more important to generate reliable scientific results about these impacts. 

The German PROGRESS study, which reviews the effects of wind energy on bird life, shows the great effort and difficulty involved in collecting meaningful data. 

The study is so valuable because it provides scientifically sound quantitative results. 

This is of the utmost importance for a fact-based political discussion.

In particular, the consequences of wind turbines in forests are serious for many types of wildlife. 

We observe with great concern the massive expansion of wind power in Germany’s forest areas.

As a financially independent advocate of nature conservation and species conservation, the German Wildlife Foundation is implacably committed to the protection of wildlife and its habitats. 

The German Wildlife Foundation regards wind energy as an important contributor to the energy mix of the future. 

Its further expansion in Germany, Europe and also worldwide, however, should not be promoted at any price.

For Germany, at least for the construction of wind turbines in the forest, we demand a moratorium."