Even the Pope sides with Futurecurrents

21 September 2016

Revealed: The renewable energy scam making global warming worse
The largest source of "clean" energy is not reducing carbon emissions by as much as official figures claim – and it is causing immense harm to the poor and to wildlife

gp049z71-800x533.jpg

Can’t see the trees for the wood
Greenpeace

By Michael Le Page

ON THE face of it, Europe is a leader in tackling climate change, on course to get 20 per cent of its energy from renewable sources by 2020. But don’t cheer just yet.

Why? Because the biggest source of renewable energy in the European Union isn’t one of the ones everyone talks about – wind, solar or even hydro. No, the EU now gets more than 60 per cent of its renewable energy from biomass: some from crops grown to make liquid biofuels, but mostly from waste wood and felled trees.

That means about a tenth of the energy that Europeans use for heating, transport and electricity will soon come from forests and farms. Many fear that this push for biomass will be disastrous for wildlife and drive up food prices...

https://www.newscientist.com/articl...able-energy-scam-making-global-warming-worse/
 
Expecting a one trillion dollar "day of reckoning" US coastal damage as hurricanes continue to gather strength from the oceans as they continue to heat and are not able to dissipate energy.

And that is just the damage above sea. The damage below the sea dwarfs this and is bordering on a E.L.E in the making for humanity and all living creatures in general.

Hurricane Matthew could inflict $200 billion in damage to coastal homes
Diana Olick | @DianaOlick
1 Hour AgoCNBC.com

COMMENTS Join the Discussion
About 11 million Floridians are in the path of Hurricane Matthew, which is now expected to come ashore as a deadly Category 4 storm.

Many of those people will evacuate their homes — as nearly 954,000 are at risk of major storm surge damage, according to CoreLogic. Those homes have a reconstruction value of just more than $189 billion. Add Georgia and South Carolina to the mix, and it rises to more than $200 billion.

This CoreLogic analysis measures the damage just from water. It does not assess additional damage from wind, which will be sustained in some areas at 125 mph. The worst of the damage will likely be where the storm makes direct landfall, which is now predicted to be Daytona Beach, Florida. Close to 97,000 homes with a reconstruction value of $19.4 billion are in danger of storm surge flooding.

103998728-RTSQX07.530x298.jpg

Randall Hill | Reuters
Workers install window shutters at an oceanfront home in anticipation of Hurricane Matthew in Garden City Beach, S.C., U.S. Oct. 5, 2016.

The numbers are considerably higher today than they were when Hurricane Andrew hit in 1992...

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/06/hurr...t-200-billion-in-damage-to-coastal-homes.html
 
Kaboom. Nuclear disaster.

When scientists add up all of the heat warming the oceans, land, and atmosphere and melting the ice, they find our climate is accumulating 4 Hiroshima atomic bombs worth of heat every second.
 
nitro said:
Expecting a one trillion dollar "day of reckoning" US coastal damage as hurricanes continue to gather strength from the oceans as they continue to heat and are not able to dissipate energy.

And that is just the damage above sea. The damage below the sea dwarfs this and is bordering on a E.L.E in the making for humanity and all living creatures in general.

Hurricane Matthew could inflict $200 billion in damage to coastal homes
Diana Olick | @DianaOlick
1 Hour AgoCNBC.com

COMMENTS Join the Discussion
About 11 million Floridians are in the path of Hurricane Matthew, which is now expected to come ashore as a deadly Category 4 storm.

Many of those people will evacuate their homes — as nearly 954,000 are at risk of major storm surge damage, according to CoreLogic. Those homes have a reconstruction value of just more than $189 billion. Add Georgia and South Carolina to the mix, and it rises to more than $200 billion.

This CoreLogic analysis measures the damage just from water. It does not assess additional damage from wind, which will be sustained in some areas at 125 mph. The worst of the damage will likely be where the storm makes direct landfall, which is now predicted to be Daytona Beach, Florida. Close to 97,000 homes with a reconstruction value of $19.4 billion are in danger of storm surge flooding.

103998728-RTSQX07.530x298.jpg

Randall Hill | Reuters
Workers install window shutters at an oceanfront home in anticipation of Hurricane Matthew in Garden City Beach, S.C., U.S. Oct. 5, 2016.

The numbers are considerably higher today than they were when Hurricane Andrew hit in 1992...

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/06/hurr...t-200-billion-in-damage-to-coastal-homes.html
More...

Ir is interesting that prior to 100 years ago, beachfront real estate was the least wanted and cheapest. It had not arable farming purpose or good soil. Fisherman and those who worked the oceans desired sheltered ports, not beachfront.

Beachfront houses were known to be exposed and regularly destroyed by the weather including frequent hurricanes. The Wright Brothers chose to do flights in Kitty Hawk because it had a constant wind and nobody would be there to spy on their experiments. The Wright Brothers found finding shelter at the North Carolina coast a challenge. In the modern era the entire North Carolina coast is filled with million dollar houses, expensive condos, and large hotels.

It appears the modern builders ignored the warnings of the past and the experience of our ancestors in regards to building on the coast. It is just a time until a monster storm wipes all of it out. This is not due to "global warming" but merely a repeat of the past.

The cost of North Carolina should have never had permanent structures built on the barrier islands. The islands continuously roll, it is just a time until the beach front houses disappear. Coupled with the hurricanes that occur regularly - it is not an proper place for high priced homes, and those who build there should not be surprised when they are wiped out both physically and financially.
 
gwb-trading said:
...
It appears the modern builders ignored the warnings of the past and the experience of our ancestors in regards to building on the coast. It is just a time until a monster storm wipes all of it out. This is not due to "global warming" but merely a repeat of the past..
More...
A question is, do we as a nation subsidize these people living on these coasts, or do insurance rates reflect only those areas?

Beachfront property is very nice - no question about it. But I fear HFGW has made it a really bad idea in places that are inherently swamps to begin with.

I don't see an engineering solution - how do you drain the water if there is nowhere for it to go? The only solution is to get it to freeze again back to the caps. Maybe in the future there will be around the clock massive snow making machines inhaling water from the ocean and turning into snow in Greenland, with some form of artificial refrigeration to keep it that way. The problem is that salt is an anti-freeze.

Even in this thread, I posted a picture of how much of FL landmass is already covered in water. You can see the time lapse photography of the devastation. With HFGW as massive amount of the ice caps melt, it will only get much much worse.

NYC is not far behind. In a hundred years or so, I would expect 30% of south FL to be well under water, and parts of NYC to be under a foot of water.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top