The Reference Frame: German offshore wind turbines: hiding all the disadvantages

Imagine that I do agree that in 50 or 100 years, the world will be flooded by similar sources of energy and at the same time, they will start to be economically competitive, perhaps because the price of fossil fuels will have increased. Doesn't it make sense to build them already now, even though they're not competitive yet? My answer is a resounding No. Because it only takes a few years to build such wind farms, it only makes sense to build them a few years before the moment when they become economical. By waiting for this moment, you save for electricity itself; and you save once more because the wind power (or solar power) technology is getting more efficient, advanced, and cheaper, so the more you wait, the better product you get.

Decreasing Meat Consumption: A Great Way to Reduce Emissions

So next time you’re making dinner or eating at a restaurant, think twice about how much your meal’s emissions are contributing to the problem you already care so much about.

Activate (?) your science | Climate Etc.

Administrators of government agencies, professional societies, and even some universities are actively encouraging ‘activation’. This needs to be looked at closely in terms of protecting the integrity of science.

California Air Board Relents on College Carbon [Dioxide Hoax Scam Swindle] Credits | KQED's Climate Watch

In an August 24 letter to state assemblyman Nathan Fletcher that was obtained by KQED, Air Board chair Mary Nichols explains that the board doesn’t want to disadvantage the nine California universities covered by the cap-and-trade program (meaning they emit more than 25,000 metric tons per year of greenhouse gases) simply because of emissions from a combined heat-and-power plant.

“California has a long history of supporting CHP,” Nichols writes. “Public and private entities that have taken steps to build or purchase combined heat-and-power facilities should be rewarded for their actions, not penalized.”