Green Thinking: a contradiction in terms and the self-destruction of the West

Green Thinking

  • has a zealous purpose to eliminate Western Man-made Carbon Dioxide (CO2) emissions derived from the use of fossil fuels, supposedly to “save the world from Man-made overheating”.
  • has a determined and illogical obsession that any extra Man-made CO2 especially from the West is bound to cause massive and disruptive catastrophic Global overheating.
  • this obsession has been ruthlessly promoted by educators, researchers, certain members of the science establishment, the bulk of Western media and politicians throughout the Western world for the last 30 years.

However, Man-made Global Warming caused by CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuels is far from being an immediate and existential threat to the Planet.

But instead Man-made Global Warming now may result in a minor, probably advantageous warming event far in the future.

Such Man-made warming could well be overtaken by planetary cooling arising from much more powerful natural causes, like the effects of low Solar activity and planetary mechanics.

So regrettably, GREEN THINKING has produced an economic, scientific, psychologically and strategically damaging fallacy.

  • The negation of progress for all Man-kind
    • GREEN THINKING tries to reverse all the benefits of the Industrial Revolution and denigrates the massive advantages that the use of fossil fuels, Coal, Oil and Gas, have brought to the well-being of a growing World population in terms of longevity, health, safety and happiness.
    • GREEN THINKING wishes to deny these proven advances in well-being to the deprived and underdeveloped World.
    • GREEN THINKING denies that these advances will progressively bring greater well-being worldwide.
    • GREEN THINKING does not understand that well-being advances will eventually lead to the curtailment of further population growth on the planet.
  • CO2 and photosynthesis:  the stuff of life
    • Green Thinking simply forgets that atmospheric Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is the essential molecule for photosynthesis and thus the CO2 in the atmosphere is the foundation for all life on earth.

    • GREEN THINKING fails to understand that more CO2 in the atmosphere gives rise to more abundant life on Earth and that any reasonable and likely warming would be a real benefit both for the Biosphere and for Man-kind.
    • GREEN THINKING forgets that horticulturalists enhance plant productivity by adding CO2 to their heated Greenhouses, (at ~3-4 times current CO2 levels 1200 – 1500 ppmv).
    • GREEN THINKING fails to appreciate that the World is presently in a comparative state of CO2 starvation:  when Plants evolved there was no runaway warming from the high levels (<15 times) of atmospheric CO2 in those earlier times.

Screenshot 2022-01-12 at 18.06.38.png

    • GREEN THINKING is therefore in error, when it insists that atmospheric CO2, whether Natural or Man-made is pollutant.
    • GREEN THINKING continually tries to conflate Man-made CO2 emissions with all other types of real Man-made pollution:  toxic effluents, plastics, particulate matter, un-scrubbed sulphur dioxide, etcetera.
    • GREEN THINKING forgets that CO2, whether mostly Natural or Man-made, is equally well utilised by the natural processes of Photosynthesis.
    • GREEN THINKING supports Carbon Capture and Storage, (CCS):   Carbon Capture and Storage can only be seen as a costly and energy expensive way to try to throw away relatively insignificant quantities of useful plant food.
  • The real Greenhouse effect
    • GREEN THINKING forgets to admit that the bulk of the Greenhouse warming effect ~90% or more is attributable to the Water vapour in the atmosphere.
    • GREEN THINKING fails to understand that CO2 is only a minor player in the Greenhouse effect at less than 10% of the total effect of ~+33°C.
    • GREEN THINKING forgets that the Man-made CO2 emissions are a minor player in the Natural Carbon cycle.
    • GREEN THINKING carefully ignores all other influences on the Earth’s climate other than atmospheric CO2.
    • GREEN THINKING then only focusses on Man-made CO2 emissions:  this is in accordance with the limiting mandate of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the IPCC.
    • GREEN THINKING at the UN IPCC discounts the influence of the Sun’s energy output and the effects of planetary mechanics on Climate.
    • GREEN THINKING is thus in error, when it asserts that Man-made CO2 is the only control knob acting on the World’s climate.
  • Radiation physics and future Global temperatures
    • GREEN THINKING choses not to understand the well-established physics, (accepted by the IPCC in its detailed reports), which shows that there is no direct, straight-line relationship between future CO2 concentration in the atmosphere and any possible increase in temperature.
    • GREEN THINKING discounts the established scientific fact that the temperature enhancing effect of added atmospheric CO2 has diminished logarithmically as its concentration has increased.

Screenshot 2021-09-18 at 12.56.06.png

The previous diagram is a simplification resulting in an Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity in the region of +0.35 °C.

Professor William Happer has fully examined the temperature effects of CO2 as well as the other minor Greenhouse gasses confirming the fact that all other Greenhouse gasses are also close to saturation that they are now entirely marginal in their further  temperature effects.

So, any concern about their further temperature effects of all Greenhouse gasses is now simply alarmist.

Screenshot 2021-10-22 at 13.51.49.png

As Will Happer said in a recent lecture:

  • The important point here is the red line on this chart.  It shows what would happen if the concentration of CO2 was doubled.  The gap between the black line and the red line shows the extent of the effect of doubling CO2.  So, you can see that doubling CO2 now makes virtually no difference”.
  • “On the basis of this miniscule difference, we are supposed to give up our liberties, give up the gasoline engines in our automobiles, give up all the benefits of Western Industrial society and submit to dictatorial Government controls”.

“The message I want you to understand is:  don’t let anyone convince you that is a good bargain:  it is in fact a terrible bargain.” 

“Dependence of Earth’s Thermal Radiation on Five Most Abundant Greenhouse Gases”


Further analyses may represent differing environments, at different latitudes with differing climates at differing cloudiness and humidity across the world:  nonetheless they all show the same fundamental picture.  Other natural feedbacks may on occasions change the parameters nonetheless the basic result remains.  At a maximum the value for Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity cannot be greater than +0.75°C.

The participation of Clouds in the Greenhouse effect is not well understood but can only diminish the postulated warming effect of added Man-made CO2.

  • GREEN THINKING wrongly asserts:
    • that there is a direct, straight-line relationship between atmospheric CO2 concentration and its influence on temperature
    • that as temperatures warm, the resulting evaporation of added atmospheric water vapour, which accounts for the major part of the Greenhouse effect, would cause massive positive feedback amplifying the relatively minor temperature effect of increasing CO2.
    • that the massive positive temperature feedback will cause catastrophic Global overheating and vast damage in the near future.
  • GREEN THINKING does not understand and accept that the warming effect of any added CO2 is now so close to saturation that any extra CO2 in the atmosphere can only ever give rise to very limited further warming.
  • GREEN THINKING does not understand that a  low estimate of Climate Sensitivity for the doubling atmospheric CO2 from 410 ppmv up to 820ppmv is only in the region of +0.35°C.
  • GREEN THINKING ignores the fact that because of the logarithmic diminution effect doubling CO2 from the present level to ~800 ppmv can now only cause a reduction of radiation to space of ~3W/m2, (a mere ~1% effect for doubling CO2 concentration on temperature).
  • GREEN THINKING fails to understand that as the “Greenhouse” warming effectiveness of added CO2 has diminished logarithmically as its concentration increased, so:
    • CO2 at 20ppmv, ~42% of CO2 warming effectiveness is already taken up.
    • CO2 at 150ppmv, the minimum level of CO2 for plant and thus planetary viability, ~72% of CO2 warming effectiveness is taken up.
    • CO2 at 300ppmv, the long-term pre-industrial CO2 level, ~82% of CO2 warming effectiveness is taken up.
    • CO2 at the current level in the atmosphere at 410ppmv ~88% of the warming effectiveness of CO2 is already taken up.
    • CO2 at 820ppmv the level of Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity (ECS) ~96% of the warming effectiveness of CO2 would be taken up.
  • GREEN THINKING does not understand that at the current rate CO2 of emissions growth, ~+2.5ppmv/year, the transition to double the present CO2 concentration could take up to ~160 years.  Thus, the minor temperature increase that might be attained from further Man-made CO2 emissions is both miniscule and far in the future.
  • GREEN THINKING ignores the fact that because of the logarithmic diminution effect doubling CO2 from the present level to ~800 ppmv can now only cause a reduction of radiation to space of ~3W/m2, (a mere ~1% effect for doubling CO2 concentration on temperature), resulting in very limited temperature change, probably as low as only ~+0.35°C.
  • Real reductions of Man-made CO2 emissions
    • GREEN THINKING irrationally rejects the two realistic ways in which Man-kind might reduce its CO2 emissions, without economic collapse, (if it were necessary):
      • the use of natural Gas as opposed to coal for power generation
      • the use of Nuclear power.

Screenshot 2021-10-05 at 08.13.28.png

    • GREEN THINKING ignores the facts that neither the massive increases in Man-made CO2 emissions in the years 2002 – 2012 nor the COVID 19 outbreak with its significant reductions of Man-made CO2 emissions show any discernible inflexion on the Mauna Loa Keeling curve record of CO2 concentration.

Screenshot 2021-09-04 at 11.43.12.png

  • The Holocene context for Global Warming
    • GREEN THINKING forgets that last millennium 1000 – 2000 AD was the coldest millennium of our present benign but declining warm Holocene interglacial epoch.
    • GREEN THINKING ignores the Greenland Ice Cores that show that since the early temperature “Optimum” of the current benign warm Holocene interglacial epoch 8000 years ago each temperature high point:
      • Optimum
      • Minoan
      • Roman
      • Medieval
      • Modern

      was colder than each previous high point.

Screenshot 2021-09-18 at 12.57.26.png

    • GREEN THINKING ignores the fact that for the last 3 millennia, since a tipping point around ~1000BC, Global cooling has been progressing at roughly a twenty-fold higher rate on a millennial basis than in the earlier part of the Holocene epoch that encompassed its highest temperatures ~8000 years ago at the Holocene Climate Optimum.

Holocene Context for Catastrophic Man-made Global Warming

  • A real Climate Emergency is in prospect:  it is not from overheating 
    • GREEN THINKING has effectively expunged the idea that a real climate catastrophe would occur with any immediate even minor Global cooling, leading to the loss of agricultural productivity and jeopardising both the Biosphere and agriculture supporting the growing world population.
    • GREEN THINKING ignores the fact that in 2020 and 2021 there was already evidence of significant crop failures due to colder weather in the Northern Hemisphere.
    • GREEN THINKING forgets that most agricultural losses from any recent cooling have been substantially offset, so far, by the additional fertilisation effect of higher levels of atmospheric CO2.
    • Thus, GREEN THINKING has effectively eliminated all responsible consideration of the effects on agricultural production of a cooling episode, which could already be facing the World.
    • GREEN THINKING prefers to spread panic about Global Warming and ignores the fact that a cooling planet would be much more devastating for the Biosphere and for Man-kind than some marginal warming far in the future.
  • Solar activity and planetary geometry control Climate
    • GREEN THINKING ignores the cogent view, that the World has already entered a longish period, (~50+ years or more), of low Solar activity, which will give rise to significant resultant cooling:  such cooling was certainly observed during previous Solar minima.

Screenshot 2021-10-14 at 10.20.12.png

    • Low Solar activity and cooling is likely in itself to lead to more extreme weather events because the energy differential between the tropics and the poles will increase.
    • Low Solar activity apparently also results in a much more convoluted Jet stream, with excursions both towards and away from the poles:  these effects were well evidenced in 2021 by the Texas February cold catastrophe, the British Columbia heat wave, German flooding, etc
    • The local Jet Stream at the time of the German Flooding

Screenshot 2021-10-10 at 07.23.53.png

Global convoluted Jet stream effects in late December 2021 are shown below:Screenshot 2022-01-03 at 18.52.51.png

The consequential low temperature insertions across Russia and North America but with simultaneous warmth in Alaska.Screenshot 2022-01-03 at 18.53.22.png

Such extreme and apparently exceptional jet stream events are set to continue for as long as the period of reduced Solar activity persists.

  • Burning trees from overseas
    • GREEN THINKING asserts that burning imported Biomass, (dried wood chips), from cleared forests overseas is beneficial for CO2 emissions reduction, (the timber may regrow in due course), when in fact:
      • the immediate CO2 emissions from burning imported wood pellets are about 3.5 times that of using Natural Gas and about twice the emissions of Coal-firing for power generation
      • forest growth will take 50-100 years to recover.
      • those instantaneous extra CO2 emissions actually negate any possible CO2 emissions savings that might have been achieved from the investments in Weather-Dependent Renewables, Wind and Solar power: this certainly applies to the UK and Germany.
      • thus burning imported Biomass for electricity generation is entirely self-defeating.

Using farming techniques to grow food crops for conversion into fuels, such as palm oil or Bioethanol, etc. is equally self-defeating and causes food price inflation, damaging poorer economies.

  • Penalising the underdeveloped World 
    • GREEN THINKING expects the poorer Nations of the Developing world to renounce all opportunities to advance their well-being.  This is very unlikely, especially when sponsored by the Chinese programmes to install Coal-fired electricity generation throughout the underdeveloped world.

  • Green thinking and the end of the Holocene epoch
    • GREEN THINKING forgets that the real climate catastrophe will occur at the coming end of our benign, warm Holocene interglacial epoch:  on the basis of historic precedents, the end of our 11,000 year+ long Holocene interglacial is almost overdue and could well arrive with full effect this century or this millennium.
    • GREEN THINKING does not appreciate that the only way that atmospheric CO2 levels will ever truly reduce, (which will be detrimental for plant life and throughout the Biosphere), will be during some future ~100,000+ year long glaciation, as colder oceans eventually reabsorb atmospheric CO2 and marine life sequesters that dissolved CO2 as limestones.
    • GREEN THINKING fails to understand that the fact of eventual Oceanic reabsorption of CO2 makes any efforts of by Man-kind to control the Climate by a limited amount of Man-made CO2 emission reduction entirely pointless.
    • GREEN THINKING forgets that higher levels of atmospheric CO2, perhaps enhanced somewhat by Man-made CO2 emissions, may be able to protect the World from falling below the terminal CO2 level of ~150 ppmv in a coming glaciation, when all photosynthetic life on earth will eventually be extinguished.

GREEN THINKING:  Weather-Dependent Power

The main mechanism, so far, has been the mandating of “Renewable Energy”, using Weather-Dependent Solar and Wind technologies for power generation.  These forms of power generation, installed over the last 20 years are:

  • non-dispatchable, (can’t be turned on when needed to meet demand).
  • intermittent and seasonal, as the world turns and seasons change, Wind power and Solar Power output are attenuated and make Renewable Energy entirely dependent on the vagaries of the weather.
  • require massive installations and wide land coverage to collect relatively dilute energy inputs.
  • have low overall annual productivity / capacity percentages, when compared to conventional power generation.

The average achieved productivity / capacity percentage across the EU is shown below.

Screenshot 2021-12-16 at 15.25.27.png

  • the overall annual productivity of Weather-Dependent Renewables smooths out the seriously detrimental shorter term productivity lapses that occur whenever wide-spread anti-cyclonic weather conditions arise: those conditions often last for several days and can be widely established.
  • unreliability resulting in-long term outages, for example, static low wind weather patterns can often occur as has been experienced across Europe in the Summer of 2021.
  • the graphic below shows the Wind-power production from the 22.3 Gigawatts nameplate value of UK installed turbine fleet in April 2021, for the majority of the month productivity  / capacity percentages were less than 10% of the installed name plate value.
  • With Solar energy those precipitous losses of production occur on a daily basis was the world turns.

Screenshot 2021-12-02 at 11.11.20.png

The scale of the extended productivity loss that can occur with wind power can be seen.  A reasonable combined, (Onshore and Offshore Wind), productivity value for Onshore and Offshore wind power should be well in excess of in excess of 30%.

However from April 2021 to September 2021 combined Wind productivity / capacity percentage fell below 20% and even reached as low as 12% throughout July 2021.

This was compensated for somewhat by the intermittent input from solar power, which reached 15% in the summer months.

Nonetheless the combined Renewables productivity capacity % remained around 15% for the whole of the summer in 2021.

Screenshot 2022-01-08 at 17.34.56.png

Screenshot 2022-01-08 at 15.27.34.png

Comparing Performance and Cost characteristics of power generation technologies: 2020

The graphs above only addresses the ineffectiveness and the comparative costs of the primary “Weather-Dependent Renewable Energy” technologies, Wind power and Solar PV power.

There are other more onerous, less effective and more costly courses of action being proposed or implemented, such as:

  • ineffective heat pumps for domestic heating
  • the imposition of electric vehicles
  • steam reforming or electrolysis to produce hydrogen
  • etc.

to ineffectively “save the world” from Man-made CO2 emissions.

The estimates in the post above show the true scale of the fiscal damage and also the real failures to curtail actual CO2 emissions achieved by the obsessions of “GREEN THINKING” by:

  • effectively banning fracking for Natural Gas throughout Europe.
  • the irrational demonisation and legislative obstruction of Nuclear power generation.
  • the use of imported Biomass for power generation.
  • the provision of massive subsidies to support ineffective Weather-Dependent Power Generation.

Weather-Dependent Renewable technologies performance and cost Slides

Comparing Performance and Cost characteristics of power generation technologies: 2020

Green Policies:  the self-destruction of the West

There is now an absolute but erroneous conviction amongst the Governments of Western Nations that the only way to tackle their belief in :

  • “damaging” Man-made Global Warming
  • the Overheating Catastrophe
  • the immediate and existential threat of Climate Change

is to eliminate Man-made CO2 emissions, particularly in the West, and to fruitlessly expect other less privileged Nations, still with massive developmental demands, to join in:

the concept of Net Zero. 

GREEN THINKING has caused Western Governments, particularly in the European Union , the UK, Germany and now in the USA, to ignore their absolute priority to ensure stable, continuous and cost-effective power supplies for their populations.

Western Governments having bought into the GREEN THINKING that Catastrophic Man-made Global Warming is an immediate and existential Global threat that they, even when faced with simple but devastatingly and clearly wasteful calculations, are nonetheless still dismissive and assume a position of:

“wilful ignorance” and a stance of “don’t confuse me with facts, we are saving the world”.

An excellent way to undermine Western economies has been to render their power generation unreliable and expensive.

That objective of GREEN THINKING is progressively being achieved by Government policy but with no popular mandate throughout the Western world.

It is patently clear that Western actions in isolation can never save the World from the Climate Change, if it ever needed saving, but these actions can do untold fruitless self-harm to Western economies and populations.

The true beneficiaries of Western GREEN THINKING are Russia and China:  they are obviously unconcerned about the Western belief in an overheating Climate and are mocking the self-harming actions of their Western adversaries.

Russia, in particular, has done much to promote the idea of the Global Warming catastrophe in the West by financially encouraging the propaganda of “Western environmental NGOs”, this actual aggression is well understood and acknowledged  by NATO.

As a result China and Russia are gaining ever more destructive control over Western Nations and Society.

So, spending any effort, for emotional reasons and in the quasi-religious belief in the evil of Western Man-made CO2 emissions:

  • without full due diligence
  • without consideration of all alternative scientific views
  • without true and rigorous cost benefit analysis of the GDP scale costs
  • without detailed engineering consideration and unbiased costing for any proposed technical solutions.

Trying to stop the UK’s 1.0% or the EU’s 8.6% of something that has actually not been happening for 3 millennia has to be monumentally ill-considered.

So, Green Thinking is a contradiction in terms.

Green Thinking has made it impossible for Western politicians to carry out the wise and financially prudent energy policies by admitting that:

  • Climate Change due to Man-made CO2 emissions can only ever be, at worst, a minor problem amongst many other Global priorities in the far future, if  it is of any real concern at all by then, (Bjorn Lomborg).
  • Any active policies are hardly capable of affecting the Climate at all, especially if actions are unilateral and/or only supported by a minority of developed Nations.

Screenshot 2021-10-14 at 06.57.06.png

Prudent Climate policies would be to:

  • understand that Man-made Global Warming / Climate Change is not an immediate and existential threat to the World but instead just probably a minor problem far in the future.
  • have the courage to resist Green clamouring.
  • accept that Weather-Dependent Renewables are not viable without massive subsidies, financially wasteful and actually ineffective at reducing Man-made CO2 emissions.
  • accept that as Weather-Dependent Renewables are unreliable: they are unable to support the power supply of a developed Nation, (David Mackay).
  • rescind all Green oriented policies and expenditures and stop trying to control Global Climate Change.
  • save the people’s money and do nothing.

Listen to David Mackay, Richard Lindzen and Judith Curry

minute 12 onwards

Professor Richard Lindzen UK parliament committee testimony 28/1/2014 on IPCC AR5:

“Whatever the UK decides to do will have no impact on your climate, but will have a profound impact on your economy.  (You are) Trying to solve a problem that may not be a problem by taking actions that you know will hurt your economy.”

Professor Judith Curry’s Congressional testimony 14/1/2014:

“Motivated by the precautionary principle to avoid dangerous anthropogenic climate change, attempts to modify the climate through reducing CO2 emissions may turn out to be futile. The stagnation in greenhouse warming observed over the past 15+ years demonstrates that CO2 is not a control knob on climate variability on decadal time scales.”

These  quotes could be paraphrased as: 

“doing nothing for the next fifty years is a much better option than any active political measures to control climate.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s