Steven Koonin: Separating Climate Science from Propaganda | Ep. 22
Вставка
- Опубліковано 17 гру 2023
- In this episode Dr. Atlas interviews Professor Steven Koonin of NYU. Koonin served as Undersecretary for Science in the Department of Energy from 2009 to 2011 and was a professor at Cal Tech for nearly 30 years where he served as Vice President and Provost. They have a fascinating conversation about the science on climate change and the general state of science, as climate and energy have become so prominent in the media and public policy debates.
Dr. Scott Atlas is a world-renowned expert in health care policy and frequent policy advisor to policymakers and government officials. He investigates the role of government and the private sector in health care quality and access, global trends in health care innovation, and the key economic and civil liberty issues related to health policy. Independent Truths features Dr. Atlas in conversation with high profile, news-making guests around public health policy, science, civil liberties, censorship and free speech, higher education, the media, and more.
Independent Truths with Dr. Scott Atlas online:
www.independent.org/scottatlas/
Follow on X:
www.x.com/ScottAtlas_IT
UA-cam playlist of episodes:
• The Independent with S...
Rumble
rumble.com/user/IndependentIn...
Apple Podcasts
podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
Spotify
open.spotify.com/show/33UrHov...
Amazon Podcasts
music.amazon.com/podcasts/10a...
Google Podcasts
podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0...
The Independent Institute is a non-profit, non-partisan, public-policy research and educational organization that shapes ideas into profound and lasting impact through publications, conferences, and multi-media programs. Our mission is to boldly advance peaceful, prosperous, and free societies grounded in a commitment to human worth and dignity.
INDEPENDENT INSTITUTE ONLINE:
WEBSITE: www.independent.org
FACEBOOK: / independentinstitute
X: www.x.com/independentinst
GETTR: gettr.com/user/independentinst
UA-cam: / independentinstitute
RUMBLE: rumble.com/user/IndependentIn...
LINKEDIN: / independent-institute
MEMBERSHIP: secure.independent.org/donate/
A citizen has an obligation to be self-educated. That is our job. Our duty...necessary for Democracy to exist.
Agreed. I'd add that it's necessary for one's sanity.
Just watch consumers in grocery stores- buying sugar products heaped up in their carts- none of it is healthy for sure , but they refuse to think about health lol that's a doctors job Then they wonder why they are obese and diabetic
Hence the reason why some organisations, NGO's etc don't want the proletariat to be able to read... The Catholic church, the government in Afghanistan etc comes to mind...
@@TheJon2442 For a while it suited the ruling class to have a literate and numerate workforce, but it was risky. Now that they've got AI to replace us, though, they want to return us to a state of ignorance.
OMG WHAT SANITY YOU SPEAK it’s glorious enlightenment on this Christmas Eve much appreciated
"It's entirely a political construct." Dr. Koonin is exactly correct in saying so.
Global warming is caused by physics not politics.
So all the thousands of climate scientists using satellites and supercomputers and studying ancient ice cores and sediment records are blatantly lying are they. This man works for BP for fux sake.
That's absurd. There's a lot of science supporting concern about climate change.
@@budawang77yeah….who funds that “science”…..??
@@laviajera4269 this man works for British petroleum. The elites own the fossil fuel companies. They are selling a hundred million barrels a day. It’s the biggest money spinner in the world. And they have no intention of stopping.
I was a high school science teacher for over 40 years. Whenever I try to discuss this issue with adults , I'm shouted down before I can finish my first sentence. These suckers do not want to know anything that may question their beliefs. It's like a religion.
“I believe it. Al Gore said it. And that settles it”
Not like, it is a religion. More of a death cult really.
Religious attitude and laziness!
But the architects of these current psyops already know the effect of their propaganda on the public , and they will continue to use the methods because it gets the architects what they want!
Covid was the definitive proof 😢
@@stevenhanson6057
That would be funny if it wasn't so serious 😢
In Canada, we have a carbon tax, clean electricity bills in parliament, and it is totally based on the political side of the climate debate. There is no science no data, no debate allowed.
Our government thinks 40 million Canadians can save the world. We are the sacrificial lambs being sent to impoverishment by these delusional ideas.
Yes, why do Canadians continue to vote for this though, or is Team Trudeau to charismatic to resist?
I believe in good times, people are too busy to analyze what is going on. Now that inflation is running rabid in Canada, people are cluing in. At least that is what is happening to me. Since it costs me money, I now look at it more carefully.
They would never even consider an economic argument against decarbonization. You won't ever find a cost/benefit analysis in Scientific American, for example - creepy globalist stooges that they are
You're so right. e.g. when I asked my sister why she voted Greens, she said "because I like trees"!
It's just so good to hear the Truth. Thank you both for this great information...Everyone needs all the best honest commentary possible. We are so disgusted with the media peddling deception .
The scary part is I talk to many dems and almost everyone is over the top on climate change but when asked, have no clear idea why. I ask what is their biggest fear, and its almost always people will die from starvation. But its fine to destroy 3rd world economies and ability to feed themselves😮 in the name of CC. these are the same people that think destroying a baby is not only ok, but a moral imperative, and don’t dare question it! Hmmm…and who’s the doorknob in this narrative? Must be the Trump voter!
It's not just media. What about scientists themselves or the corporations that go full steam ahead with this nonsense. Stellantis was given $15 billion to build a $500 million EV battery plant in Windsor, Ontario, Canada. Never in the history of our country have we thrown away money like that. Canada is broker than broke and raising taxes everywhere to slow the decline. But nobody questions any of this stuff. Just like with Covid it's the regular people that go along with things that are responsible. I argue with people at work about this all the time and get nowhere just like I got nowhere with Covid. How is the west going to have EVs when we are reducing electrical generating capacity? I thing they have a plan behind this where it's all a scam to take away our mobility by taking away our cars and forcing digital ID and digital currency.
If anyone seriously wanted to separate climate science from propaganda, they would never listen to Steven Koonin on this issue because A) He is NOT a climate scientist, and B) His books and claims have been widely and repeatedly debunked.
Man, if we could all just go to dinner with you two and listen to you talk. A cheap dinner....because we're poor this year. The Applebee's crowd would hang on every word. We are living the consequence of the last fifteen years of liberal self-righteousness.
Exactly, except for those 4 years when everything was going so well until we all got a nasty cold
Total bs,record cold start to European winter for 22 years,China has record snow and ice ,no global boiling here,fossil fuels are the best ,at current extraction rates in Australia,we still have 200 years of supply,and a carbon tax,unreliables,virtue signalling,and wind and solar panels are hugely expensive,not cheap at all!
I have to wonder how many will dismiss this because it doesn’t fit their narrative 🤦🏼♀️ Excellent interview!
Good point. But I wonder how many people will agree with this cos it fits their narrative.
@@chain8847 I wonder how many will check references and decide for themselves.
When someone recommends that you go look at the original data, there is no narrative being pushed except "think for yourself".@@chain8847
@@CycleWerkz which references are those.
@@chain8847 - Read :The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels," by Alex Epstein and then reference every publication and white paper listed in the bibliography or Steven Koonin's book "Unsettled" and follow up on his bibliography.
Steve is a beacon of truth and integrity.
It's just so good to hear the Truth. Thank you both for this great information...Everyone needs all the best honest commentary possible. We are so disgusted with the media peddling deception.
information
Mr. Koonin, please double check your statement regarding cost of wind and pv generation cost compared to NG and Coal. I too have seen these reports but then found them to be misleading. If Wind and PV weren't given a phase lead advantage, and weren't given energy credits to supply massive energy every night during load dips, income would not pay the interest on capital alone. Even the gov reports indicate capital cost to build a 3MW turbine is >$4M. Even assuming 900kW average,
13000 years ago there was three kilometers of ice on top of my home. When this interglacial ends the ice will start building again. It will happen no matter what the carbon dioxide level is at.
The problem with intermitent power is NOT solveble by batteryes. There are not even close of the amount of battery needed for that. And even if it was so the price of electricity would doubble many times and wind would without a doubt be the most expensive type of producing electricity. Also the batteryes for cars would be much, much more expensive. Wind is a disaster and we should quickly see so we do not build more of it.
Anybody who thinks wind and solar are the answers are delusional.
Agree the cost doesn't result in enough reliable energy and they impact environment as well. We put photovoltaic panels in. We have 20 panels and on a sunny day we can produce more than we need. But not at night. And cloudy days we may or may not produce enough depending how clouded. From Novembr to March the vast majority of time we are deeply clouded more days than not. The batteries to store and supply energy we need consistently even when we do produce enough are out of our price range at them moment. Very, very expensive.
The other BIG issue that almost everyone overlooks is that wind and solar can only [unreliably] provide electricity, which is just one fifth of all energy use. There are currently NO technically and economically viable non-carbon alternatives for that remaining four-fifths.
Two brave men!
I have so much respect for both of them.
So grateful to them for speaking out.
Dr. Atlas on Covid. Professor Koonin on climate. 👍
Every corner of publicly funded science should be openly published. If my tax dollars paid for it, I shouldn't have to pay to see the results. I can't check the data myself if it requires paid membership in a scientific journal.
It's got the usual UA-cam disclaimer on it so it's worth a look.
"In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. In their totality and in their interactions these phenomena do consittute a common threat which demands the solidarity of all peoples." - Alexander King & Bertrand Schneider, The First Global Revolution (Club of Rome)
I'm not honestly sure which side you're on now, thank you for including the entire quote, in their totality these phenomena do constitute a common threat which demands the solidarity of all people.
Great interveiw stev is pointing out the facts
The most tragic aspect of the climate debate is the corruption of science and the organizations/publications related to the field. The damage in reputation is catastrophic and as time passes, the misrepresentations, cowardice and incompetence of the scientific community will further degrade the trust of scientists. Steve, your voice is needed and I hope you can have an influence on your community and professional organizations to alert them to the consequences of not speaking up for the truth.
In the UK, £40 per year of every electricity bill pays for wind turbines to be STOPPED when the wing is HIGH … Why ? Because the national grid can’t cope with the extra power !
Meanwhile electric car chargers are limited to two or three per street because the existing cable can’t cope with the load ! Methinks they haven’t thought this through properly !?!
Exactly. Ideology meets reality.
When the wind is very high the turbine blades have to be feathered (de-clutched) otherwise the whole installation would be destroyed!
Thought you would like to know.
Also recently signed contracts for nee wind farms include a subsidy of 67% which we taxpayers will of course be paying for. Wonder if Rishi pays tax on his £700 million, eh?
Generation sources cannot add power to the grid without corresponding load. Too much generation is never a problem.
First you need to come to the realization that the people behind this control scheme never had any intention of mass numbers of electric cars for the general public. 15 minute cities…
The ICAO standard atmosphere has not been adjusted to my knowledge to cater for the rise in 1. mean Sea Level 2. Pressure of 1013.25Hp/mb , and 3. a temperature of +15C. Aviation calculations must be off by some margin. If the atmosphere is holding 950 gigatons of CO2, one would expect the mean pressure of Air to have increased.
From what I have gathered from listening to scientists who have worked on past IPCCs, it is mostly the Summaries that get mostly messed up.
The data in the report is good. The experts argue over verbiage like "likely" or "mostly" when interpreting the data, but the assessments in the report are overall good.
It is bureaucrats that get involved after. They draw up Summaries and Executive Summaries that are watered down. And from that the media runs with the most provocative thing they can find.
The IPCC itself is first and foremost a political organization. An arm of the UN, after all. It's very name has Climate change in it. Important to consider that source also :)
The models they use are seriously flawed, consistently predict temperatures twice as high as what actually happens and the 1st IPCC report admitted “the climate is a coupled non linear chaotic system, therefore long term prediction of climate extremes is not possible”, there is not climate emergency or crisis.
Nailed it. The IPCC is also a billion dollar bureaucratic organization whose sole existence and funding are predicated on extolling a climate crisis. No climate crisis no more IPCC and no more money.
Years ago I looked into their data and found that they were falsifying temperature data and making specious arguments. They also fabricate physically fallacious theories about the ability of CO2 to absorb and hold long wave radiation. That was 20 years ago but I have ignored the IPCC ever since, along with the MSM coverage
this madness has to stop
Great discussion , thank you both.
Way too much of today's science, particularly climate science, has become an unhealthy mix of politics and a new religion. When somebody asks if you "believe" in climate change/global warming, you have lost the argument. It is no longer a question of science. Also, when that somebody announces, firmly, that the science is settled, here is the answer, do not question what we say, that person is without question an ignorant fool. Somehow, and I do not know how, we must extract good science from politics and its new religion. Science used to be the completely objective search for truth. That is no longer one of its criteria.
Excellent discussion by Doctors Atlas and Koonin. Thank you both very much.
Steve Koonin always worth a listen!
I looked up how much gasoline was used in British Columbia, Canada. In order to replace the equivalent kWhs, we would need 6 more site C hydro-electric dams. That’s an insane amount of infrastructure. We could refit every building with solar panels, mini hydro generators, wind turbines, and batteries. It’s doable, but the big power generation companies don’t want you self sufficient!!
Tesla cars and charging infrastructure is a viable replacement for about 50% of the cars on the road. Not so much in Canada though, we need that 60% of waste heat from the engine to keep warm.
*JUST CAME ACROSS THIS CHANNEL, THIS ARTICLE IS ZO-O-O-O WELL DONE, THAT I'M NOW A NEWBIE SUBSCRIBER* 😻😻😻‼️‼️‼️
The climate emergency, climate crisis meme can't be understood by looking into "why that's said". The only way one can understand the meme is in terms of why no one denies it, nor questions it. Why no one counters it. We are (1) fearful, or (3) don't have detailed knowledge, to counter, and contradict it. These political memes such a climate crisis, transing kids, etc. spread through fear. Through fear of contradiction. For example, on social media, where the transing culture grew, people who objected to any aspect of it were banned as 'hateful'. So that'll be the 3rd reason why a nonesense meme can take over: (3) all its critics were censored.
Notice how I picked the term: "no one denies it" because the consequences of questioning anying said by a climate fanatic is getting slurred with "climate denier". Likewise the consequences of questioning transing kids is to be called a "transphobe". These memes spread through a culture of censorship and shaming.
What is your explanation for the permafrost in Alaska melting? I have family who live there and I would truly love to be able to provide them an explanation that does not rest on the idea of climate change. But I can't come up with anything : (
There was a “mini ice age” that ended in the late 19th century. Glaciers in the northern hemisphere began receding then and are just beginning to halt their retreat. They will soon begin advancing again without regard for CO2 levels.
@@owakonzee Tell that to Alaska, lol. Permafrost melting is accelerating at a stupid rate this decade.
@@thesquatchdoctor3356 severe wildfires are contributing to this..but the question remains...why so many fires around? Only someone who can see beyond the controlled media even google will see the truth standing beside the ly.
Dr Koonin is being very gracious towards the silent majority of climate scientists who don't make the outlandish claims. If what he says is correct why don't the others speak up for themselves? When things make no sense follow the influence of $$s! (Either directly or indirectly)
...because that can't get published in mainstream media and articles because they are in conflict with the alarmism narrative.
Climate scientists are not silent and they do not make outlandish claims. Their work is found in the scientific literature.
They don't speak up because they get fired for speaking out against the narrative, or defunded. Hard to do research and run a lab with no $.
Many scientists lost their careers after speaking up for themselves
Amazing video. LOVE this straightforward, fact driven video.
There Were many more heat waves in the 1930s, then there are now at and CO2 level were much lower. Does not correlate. Although freezing and dying and poverty correlates well with lack of carbon-based energy. Natural gas is clean. Fracking is good.
Understand "signal noise" on an otherwise clear trend line to know your error is monumental.
@@astronautical1082 Could you be any more vague?
@@anthonymorris5084 Actually, I've been very precise. 'Exceptions do not make the rule" is another way of saying the same thing.
@@astronautical1082you were vague by not specifying what signal noise and what trend line you are talking about
@@owakonzee Global temperature trend line and exceptional years which do not change the larger trend.
Trillions of dollars wasted and immeasurable unnecessary angst. All for essentially nothing.
Rapidly collapsing ecosystems driven by rates of change which far exceed the rates to which life is adapted is NOT nothing.
@@astronautical1082 There is no evidence of rapidly collapsing ecosystems. What there is is a lot of habitat loss due to encroachment, which does have solutions that are both doable and less costly than bowing down to the alter of the climate gods.
The climate crisis is a ruse. This is all about undermining capitalism and destroying the Western world which they openly despise. What better way to achieve this than to deprive the Western world with inexpensive reliable energy, the life blood of industrialization, western power and prosperity. All in the guise of saving the planet to shame people into capitulation.
France followed the Henry Ford model of mass-produced nuclear reactors with interchangeable parts. We followed Hollywood Mansions model of unique custom designs for each. Gee, I wonder which is cheaper to build and maintain (and design safety protocols)? Apparently, we don't want to succeed at nuclear energy.....
People who think we can affect theclimate are certifiable!
They are acting rationally if they believe people are the problem and population needs to be reduced (these are their claims)
Great discussion.
WEF / UN / WHO
Climate change refers to long-term shifts in temperatures and weather patterns, NOT caused by human activities, especially NOT CAUSED by the burning of fossil fuels
Brilliant!
Read his book, "Unsettled?", one of the best if not one of the best climate books I have read.
What really effects weather ? The Sun , volcanos , weather warfare ( HARRP Transmitter , VLF Transmitters , chem trails , weather warfare satellites .
You should interview Tony Hellar!
Uber driver bought a Tesla, but in much less than a year, the batteries were down to 10% efficiency so the guy could only travel about 30 to 35 miles on a FULL CHARGE. This was in the Southern USA. Picture this in Alaska, or Yukon or North West Territories or Siberia where the temperatures routinely are quite low so that even brand new batteries start out at less than 50% efficient in the winter months both for charging and discharging. That means that these batteries are wasting more energy than you can shake a stick at, and from where does the energy come to recharge the car? It comes from conventional energy sources, not green ones. Politicians and their supporters need a reality check so that if they still believe in utter nonsense they are then no longer allowed to participate in ANY decision-making processes.
Computer modeling has caused more controversy, in multiple areas of science, than it’s worth. It’s somewhat akin to what CT scanning technology did to medical diagnostics. When doctors began seeing new anomalies with CT scanners, the level of misdiagnosis increased significantly. Modeling is worse, by far. Differing from the concrete information output of the CT scan, modeling is ANYTHING but concrete when attempting to analyze something as COMPLEX AS GLOBAL WEATHER PATTERNS. What a great basis upon which to establish your “religion” of global warming, or climate change, or whatever the next scare tactic is created by government, industry, and most of all THE MEDIA….
Good clear thinking from Koonin - a treasure. He does not really understand BEVs. The market has solved all these issues.
No it hasn't. BEV's are terrible for the environment during manufacture, they produce way more tyre particulates and if they're not charged on renewable energy (as a lot aren't), they don't make much difference. Don't even get me started on recycling the toxic batteries. EV's follow a political narrative - there is no science to say they will make any difference.
It's a religion, no discussion is allowed. Good video!
You never mentioned the title of his book. I'm interested on reading it
He did in the beginning "Unsettled: What Climate Science Tells Us, What It Doesn't, and Why It Matters"
Everytime i read the UN explanation of climate change the less sense it actually makes.
The UN, butting in with irrelevant nonsense on global warming, but can't do anything about the actual crisis in the world, which it was formed to prevent, Russia (a permanent Security Council member) prosecuting a brutal war on Ukraine, and terrorists in Gaza funded by Iran leading to huge suffering in Israel and Gaza.
With respect to hybrid electric cars, the batteries here in France tend to be so small that the vehicle runs, in practical daily usage, almost entirely on gasoline or diesel...or at least that is the criticism I have heard. Concerning electric power distribution, we have here two different electricity costs: one is during the day (7am to 11pm) and the other during the night (11pm to 7am). The cost per kWh is MUCH cheaper at night. So, most home chargers default to charging only during the night...which is quite a sensible use of the distribution system.
Mankind can change with climate over time. Farming has had massive changes in the last 100 years. It will have more changes as times change.
"The LAWS OF THERMODYNAMICS is the only physical theory of universal content, which I am convinced, that within the framework of applicability of its basic concepts will never be overthrown." -- ALBERT EINSTEIN
The 2nd law of thermodynamics say that a colder object (the atmosphere) cannot warm a hotter object (the Earth's surface.) The HYPOTHESIS of the greenhouse effect obviously breaks this law. The 1st law of thermodynamics say that energy can neither be created nor destroyed. The heat originating from the suface cannot heat the surface more (by "back-radiation"), and thus MAGICALLY "create" more heat in the system. The hypothesis of the greenhouse effect obviously breaks this law also. The hypothesis of the greenhouse effect breaks both the 1st and the 2nd law of thermodynamics!
Where did Albert Einstein go wrong? What did he not understand?
That’s mostly true, except there is a phenomenon where solid objects radiate heat into the atmosphere and actually become colder than the adjacent air. This is why you can see frost on the ground when the air temp is 33 degrees F.
What the theorists miss about CO2 is that it absorbs less of the spectrum and is in much lower concentrations than H2O (the only relevant “greenhouse gas”.) Global warming theory ascribes super powers to CO2 and probably breaks all laws of thermodynamics in the process
ALL common sense... Thank you!
Funny how UA-cam still has a context banner that makes statements which are soundly refuted by the attached video. I guess the algo hasn't figured that out yet 😂
one way to put it when you choose lies over truth, there is a certain admiration for just power it in
What is your explanation for the permafrost in Alaska melting? I have family who live there and I would truly love to be able to provide them an explanation that does not rest on the idea of climate change. But I can't come up with anything : (
The world is coming out of an ice age.
@@kennethwers But why right now is the question they keep asking, like it's been in the last ten years that all the buildings started sinking. They think there's got to be something going on in our lifetime that's making it happen all of a sudden, but it's not like there's that many volcanoes going off or anything
@@thesquatchdoctor3356 Why not right now?
@@ulrichenevoldsen8371 I think my sister's response would be "god made this world with cause and effect, we're seeing an effect, let's find the cause".
@@thesquatchdoctor3356 First. Refrain from calling it "climate change" which I suspect you are really referring to "Andropogenic global warming due to carbon dioxide emissions from humans" . Agree. The climate changes. And the largest effect is from the sun. The complexity of the relationship of all forms of electromagnetic forces emanating from the sun and the response from the earth is quite large. But as changes in heat on earth - on very large scales - is always preceded by changes in the sun and the sun/earth relationship. The changes humans view can appear short in duration, yet the cause has been occurring for long time periods (mostly). Historically, some of the causes can be abrupt. Learning these relationships can take many years of study to come to understand them. For myself, I have been watching climate and solar data since I entered college in 1977. Dr. Koonin is well balanced. But to explain more requires delving into much more data. Or. The more you know, the more you need to know.
what creates the electricity to charge the batteries? coal, oil, or burning wood?
The waste from nuclear negates the claim of "emission free". How about geothermal, tidal?... these are much more reliable. NO BATTERIES NEEDED.
If you are worried about Co2, mount a hydrogen generator on your gas or diesel engine.
Gives an estimated 30% increase in both economy and power.
This ( because it uses only water and electricity from the vehicle) deminishes CO2 exhaust by 90%.
CO2 is 4 parts in 10,000, up from 3 in 10,000 a century ago. What caused the 1880 to 1940 warming then?
The temperature peak in the 1940s was caused by maxima in solar intensity, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) and the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) occurring simultaneously in that decade.
In 1981, at a time when northern hemisphere temperatures had not risen from the peak in the 1940s, Hansen et al published a paper in Science which correctly predicted that the warming signal due to increasing CO2 concentration would become evident above the background signal later that decade, and also correctly predicted the amount of warming over the next forty years.
Climate Impact of Increasing Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide
J. Hansen, D. Johnson, A. Lacis, S. Lebedeff P. Lee, D. Rind, G. Russell
Science Volume 213, pages 957-966, 1981.
@@pshehan1 I guess he didn't predict that the data would also clearly show that humanity has never been safer, healthier or more prosperous than at any time in history.
@@anthonymorris5084 What has that to do with the science of climate change?
@@pshehan1 If humanity has never been safer, healthier or more prosperous, then warming clearly isn't an issue.
@@pshehan1 So... Natural phenomona are quite capable of increasing global temperatures. Given that climate models have way over estimated the rate of recent warming, then it is entirely possible that recent warming is entirely of natural origin by means of a mechanism/s not yet understood, and there must be mechanisms not understood as the models have failed.
Yes, it takes decades to change our energy system. Someone needs to tell Gavin Nersalini.
I wish Mr. Koogan would understand that the large wind turbines cost more energy to build and put in place then they create. So they are a net loss each way. And yes nuclear is far better as not a back up sourdlce but as a 1st source.
Wind and solar are only slightly cheaper because of massive subsidy . They are also enormously polluting (mining).
Both are a huge mistake , a red herring.
I am totally amazed at even MR. KOONAN referring to crude oil.as FOCCIL FUEL!!!
That term was begun by non other than ROCKEFELLER in 1909 to create a misconception of limited fuel. Crude oil is accessed at 20,000 feet below the surface. THERE AIN'T NO FOCCILS DOWN THERE.
Also we -- in Canada and the USA have a combined oil reserves of ( presently) of some 5000 years in North Dakota and Saskatchewan and under the eastern side of the Rockies.
That's only two,,, not counting all the other CRUDE OIL fields in North America!!!!
..As the year 1000 AD approached, Christians in Europe fully expected the second coming of Christ. Many left their villages and towns and stood in the fields waiting - moral panics are not uncommon in the Christian world.
People think I hate wind and solar energy. I would personally use it I think it's amazing for remote personal use. However you should not try to run NYC on wind or solar
Canada has ruled that, by 2026, 20% of all new vehicles sold in Canada must be electric.
😢😢
Question -- if- in Canada the lib pols have their way and ban desiel fuel ( which is made from crude oil NOT FOCCIL FUEL,which does not exist) how willl they get to start the wind gens all over the country.
They have huge desiel engines that are needed to get them to begin to turn???
There is no wind strong enough to get them turning on their own.
I imagine they could suck power from the grid. If the grid was down, due to a 100% renewables grid, they would need batteries, but current batteries don't function well in the cold. If the generator is down due to icing, of course you need energy to melt the ice before getting them spinning.
I thought you were going in the direction of the manufacturing, transportation to the sire, site preparation and election, without diesel, but a cold start would be a concern also.
The intermittent nature of renewables makes it difficult to maintain the frequency of the grid, there would need to be substantial battery (or other dispatchable sources) to stabilize the grid. If you use too much of your battery storage to cold start the grid, you won't have enough to stabilize the grid.
In 15-minute cities, you won't ever travel more than 40 miles, if that.
Follow the money. It's hard to believe government data after all the lies. Still with the co2.
1:50 it called alarmism
Politicize is the wrong word- religionization is what is taking place.
The natural method of battery backup to renewables. Recent reports estimate the cost for USA is $350 trillion. and this relates to £30 trillion min in the uk.All based on current lithium. Battery costs. We need additional energy to charge batteries for transport which is higher than the present grid demand. So where is this coming from . Also gas fired heating and hot water will be massively increased in elec demand double at peak to the current grid. So we will need 4 times the elec supply. Where is this coming from ?? No one knows , and population increases. will increase demand plus social development of many countries will demand much more elec than now in order to develop. Where is all this to come from ? Base loads will depend on guaranteed supplies as there. Will not be enough materials for batteries beyond EVs. Hence fossil fuel backups will be needed. So that this makes renewables very expensive but will result in less CO2. All this will need to be worked out based on the weather records.
We are still at the end of an ice age. How funny it is, that temperature rises?
Technically, we are in an interglacial period within an ice age. The defination of an ice age is permanent ice at the poles, which nwe most certainly have
26:15 - “pandemics” ***
Has politics historically distroyed most all countries. What do you see of history and science, honest science
Would i know how to interpret the Antartica ice cores or Greenland ice cores ,well no.The scientists can , trust it.
Corelation of temp. And carbon dioxide isnt observed in the ice cores.
Ironically, UA-cam chooses to put its nostrum on climate beneath your presentation. Big Brother is watching.
❤ genesis 3:15
I wish someone could explain why CO2 levels have consistently risen 2-3 ppm annually, while human emissions have at least quadrupled during the last 60 years. 1960 was 8 billion tons, now it’s around 38 billion tons annually. The whole time, levels of increase remained 2-3 ppm. Is it because human emissions don’t matter that much?
Just speculation on my part, because I'm no expert, but a contributing factor could be the greening of the planet. All that extra wood sequestering the CO2 that, in turn, stimulated its growth.
Pretty much. CO2 is not a thermostat. While it is a green house gas, it is not the main one (water is much more important as a greenhouse gas). More importantly CO2 has a very complex chemistry with lots of equilibria that is often not considered when people hype on about the CO2 is going to burn up the planet narrative.
CO2 is logarithmic. The more you add the less effect it has on warming.
@@anthonymorris5084Professor Ian Plimer said this too.
Maybecit's because there are now almost twice as many people in the world as there were 60 years ago.
Koonin is correct in almost all he's saying including that wind/solar are the cheapest way to generate electricity. But he's wrong about batteries. Wind/solar with batteries is the cheapest way to generate electricity. The cost of lithium batteries has fallen 90% since 2010 and after a brief break of that price fall with the Russian invasion of Ukraine, prices are now falling again. Musk predicts they'll fall another 50% in the next 5 yrs. This will not only make wind/solar/batteries much cheaper than anything else, this battery price fall will make EVs cheaper than gas cars. They're almost there now, with a Model 3 RWD at $39,000 and a Tesla $25,000 car on the horizon. .....
A few other points. Studies have indicated that if Texas were all wind/solar, they would've needed only a 49 hr battery reserve to have made through the arctic blast they got a couple of yrs ago. And that was a 30 yr weather event. The needed battery reserve is different in different locations, depending on how much wind and sun your area gets, but everywhere, this already an affordable electrical generation source.
And I've reduced my fueling costs by 75% in my Model Y compared to the similar sized gas car it replaced. Why is that? Because electric motors are about 3 times more efficient than gasoline engines. About 70% of the energy produced by a gasoline engine just goes up in waste heat and only 20% of the energy is used to move the car forward. It's the opposite with an electric motor. Only about 20% of the energy goes up in waste heat and 70% of the energy is used to move the car forward. Even with a fossil fuel grid, they still produce fewer emissions than gasoline. Plus, no oil changes, no transmission fluid changes, no spark plug changes, brakes last 200,000 miles because most braking is done by regen not friction brakes, etc., etc. My running costs are much lower. .... With Teslas approaching parity in purchase price, I think it's a no-brainer to but an EV for 90% of use cases.
I would be interested in a link to the study you mentioned about 49 hr battery to backup a total wind and solar Texas.
A study in Germany determined that battery backup, for
@@douglasjacobs882 If you look at Texas grid production in that period even wind didn't stay at zero for very long. It was close to zero for only a very short period of time and then recovered to about 2/3rds of the pre Arctic Front production.
I could give you a l*nk, but UA-cam would not post my reply. Apparently I've done that too much and they think I'm a robot, or something, and they've given me a warning about that..... But I would recommend you looking up Tony Seba and the work he's done. He's been right the falling cost of wind/solar/battery. His predictions were laughed at in 2010, especially the one about lithium batteries falling 90% in 10 yrs. He was right, of course. ..... And also a good read is the Tesla Impact Report. Some great info there about wind/solar/battery and EVs, and their impact on the environment compared to oil/gas/ coal and gasoline cars. With estimated costs to build out the infrastructure too. ...
The politicians who are largely responsible for implementing the energy transition policies are finely tuned vote catchers with little or no understanding whatsoever of energy generation and distribution.
The politicians who govern our western nations are elected by popular vote and not on merit.
The elected politicians thus rely upon their preferred unelected enlightened advisors to develop policies that will give them the best chance of being re-elected when their term is up.
The biggest political canary in all western political arenas is “Climate Change”. The one who promises to deliver the best solutions to this imaginary catastrophe gets the most votes. Western politics has never been so corrupted by such a pervasive destructive ideology. During the 15th. Century, the greatest empire in the Americas ritually sacrificed and Cannibalised hundreds of thousands of humans to appease the sun god. If the weather improved and the land yielded a plentiful harvest, then the enormous human sacrifice was validated.
If el-Nino occurred and led to famine, then more human sacrifices were needed. Today’s litmus test as to the efficacy of the climate god sacrifices is atmospheric CO2 concentration and average global temperature measurement. If the atmospheric CO2 concentration rises, then more sacrifices are required ( higher carbon tax, higher energy cost, less choices for energy production, demonising CO2, etc.) we are now sacrificing our future prosperity on the alters of climate change based upon policies drafted by the high priests of climate change and enacted by politicians who don’t understand what they are doing. Welcome to man made climate disaster policies that are destroying the future prosperity of all western democracies.
For intelligent people you obviously have not read or seen the field reports presented by the scientists who are actually doing research and collecting data over the past 20+ years. Good thing your in the entertainment industry with a relatively small audience and not in a position of authority. Good luck with your show. Adios Ya'll
Someone is making lot of money by TRYING to go green. It will take 50 years olus to go totally green efficiently
You talk about looking for information - why don’t you give us the relevant web sites, and the relevan5 information, instead of talking in vague generalities?
Read the Word of God, fully transparent revelation of Jesus Christ, Who is God, Creator of all that is seen and unseen, ...the Word is infallible and our future is secure as we turn to God.
Too bad that Steve does not drive a Tesla EV; if he did, he would not assert that it takes an hour to get a full charge. That the battery is half the price of the car (it’s more like 1/5 or 1/6); no would he be fretting about range. I have read his book and agree with his assessment about climate change.
The battery will be half the price of a Tesla that is out of warranty.
Sorry. Did you say he worked for British petroleum. Ridiculous.
Also undersecretary for energy under Obama
@@N91CZ Yes ridiculous. A bit like John Kerry is special presidential envoy for the climate. He’s worth a hundred million dollars. Owns yachts and private jets. Ridiculous
Scientists do not talk in terms of crisis or emergency. One man's catastrophe is another man's mild inconvenience and another's benefit. Welcome to Sunny Siberia.
Average global temperature has risen by 1 C over the last fifty years, and the predicted changes in terms of ice cap melt, sea level rise, fall in ocean pH and changes in rainfall patterns have occurred as predicted. This is based on decades long trends, not single event data.
The real damage will occur if CO2 concentration continues to rise at an accelerating rate
Will real damage occur? According to established laws of physics (Schwartzchild, Stefan and Boltzmann, Planck) - doubling co2 results in a temp rise of less than 1’c. - it’s logarithmic. Now, temp could rise more than that due to other reasons, but not due to co2.
@@phenn6376 Rates of change are exceeding the rates to which life is adapted. If you are unaware of innumerable ecological indicators in decline due to rapid warming then you do not have the standing you assign yourself.
@@phenn6376 I know that the relationship is logarithmic. That is why the equilibrium climate sensitivity, (ECS) is the rise per doubling of CO2 concentration.
In 1990, the first IPCC report was prepared which predicted that the most likely amount of warming with each doubling of CO2 concentration, the equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) was 3 C.
Global temperature data and Mauna Loa CO2 data have shown that prediction to be correct.
RSS satellite temperature rise from 1979 to 2021
0.90 C
Mauna Loa CO2 concentration rise
338 to 415 ppm.
So according to the logarithmic relationship between temperature and CO2 concentration, for the period in question
0.90 = k ln(415/338)
Solving the equation for k gives the proportionality constant, k= 4.39.
So the temperature rise with doubling of CO2 concentration (ECS) is
4.39 x ln2
= 4.39 x 0.693
= 3.0 C
The observed ECS is therefore in agreement with the theoretically predicted value. In science, that is the strongest evidence you can get that the theory is correct.
The warming is not due to the sun as solar intensity has been declining for decades toward the Grand Solar Minimum.
Also, if the temperature rise was caused by increasing solar radiation, the troposphere and stratosphere would both warm.
If caused by an increase in greenhouse gases, the troposphere would warm and the stratosphere would cool. That was predicted in1967, and has been shown to be what is happening by satellite data.
Syukuro Manabe, the surviving scientist who made the prediction (his collaborator Richard Wetherald had since died) was awarded the Nobel prize in physics in 2021.
While all of these changes may or may not be occurring, they are not presenting any kind of problem. They certainly aren't creating anything even close to catastrophic.
@@anthonymorris5084 Those changes ARE occuring, and are presenting a problem which people in many parts of the world will find catastrophic as the trends continue.
He does not convince me. The environment is changing at a startling rate over my 60 years of adulthood, being an outdoors person. I am fully accepting with James Hansons analysis as it matches what I have been seeing through my life.
You're 60? So you're familiar with the endless scare of Armageddon. You lived through the 1973 energy crisis that never materialized. You lived through the predictions of global starvation from over population, and the impending ice age. You lived through Y2K. All of which started with "scientists say" and never materialized. Have you learned nothing?
James hansem made the claim that if co2 doubled lower manhatten would be under water,since then co2 levels have increased by 30%, but there has been no change in the rate of sea level rise. So Jamse Hansen's prediction has been falsified by the observational evidence.
The purpose of this video is patent in the commentaries around yours. Thank you for doing your own thinking. I was starting to despair.
SO maybe you can volunteer to convince the Chinese to taking their coal fired plants off line and stop building the 100 or so planned or under construction.
@@soliton977 Maybe we all should. Where does that invalidate the need to stop burning fossil fuels?
When we have problems are we supposed to work on solutions or are we supposed to search for excuses not to?
Maybe we should invest on finding solutions and on improving solutions found.
By his own admission Steve Koonin has no expertise in climate science. He just plays one on UA-cam. Here he introduces himself in a debate between 6 climate scientists; 3 on on each side.
So, I am Steve Koonin and I am
13 Chair of the subcommittee that is
14 responsible for reviewing the
15 statement and making recommendations
16 up the chain.
17 And I am a professor,
18 of civil and urban engineering in the
19 engineering school here at NYU and a
20 professor of information, operations
21 and management in the NYU business
22 school. And I have never taken a
23 course in either of those subjects!
Carbon is a miracle of nature not a pollutant, and warming climate is very beneficial for Life and human civilization. These are facts
This is pure propaganda.
Which? These guys or the UN?
Oil company profits are more important than the future of earth's climate aren't they?
Look at the profits made by the windmill and solar panel makers and you may come to a different conclusion.
CO2 is a colorless, odorless plant food. Nothing toxic about it. The End.
Did you know that international oil companies are heavily invested in massive wind farms and additionally solar farms, encouraged by massive 65%-80% governmental subsidies. In fact they encourage greenwashing because for every megawatt of greenwashed energy you need at least 1 megawatt of electrical energy produced from fossil fuels in case the wind farms become becalmed ( no wind) or wind speeds become too high and there is insufficient sunlight for solar energy farms.
Thus so-called renewable energy sources are not green, are never going to replace fossil fuels and will result in higher energy costs.
The terror of the situation is that people with with Liberal Arts degrees - most civil servants and bureaucrats are not equipped to understand this.
Did you know that international oil companies are heavily invested in massive wind farms and additionally solar farms, encouraged by massive 65%-80% governmental subsidies. In fact they encourage greenwashing because for every megawatt of greenwashed energy you need at least 1 megawatt of electrical energy produced from fossil fuels in case the wind farms become becalmed ( no wind) or wind speeds become too high and there is insufficient sunlight for solar energy farms.
Thus so-called renewable energy sources are not green, are never going to replace fossil fuels and will result in higher energy costs.
The terror of the situation is that people with with Liberal Arts degrees - most civil servants and bureaucrats are not equipped to understand this.
@@yngve2062 The forecast for the climate in the near future is dire (with lots of evidence to back it up).
At that time you will be begging for higher energy bills if it would stop the consequences.
Is Climate change real? How can you even ask? You are very hurtful.
Atlas has no business to pretend any scientific wisdom. He was fired from his academic position at the stanford medical school
💰
So, I wonder who's funding you pair.
Now,let me think...
Just a scam to pick our
Pockets
Vymýšľate HLÚPOSTI a oblbujete ľudstvo vážení.
Čo viete o planete???HISTÓRIA SA OPAKUJE😂😂😂
Trust SCIENTISTS???? Hahahaha hahahahahaha hahahaha
Money.humgty
hungry hippos