SWEDES Fleeing Lefty SWEDEN!….GUESS WHY!!

In migrant-surged Sweden, now it’s the Swedes who are fleeing

by Monica Showalter at American Thinker:

 

Sweden has drawn praise for opening its doors to thousands of fleeing Middle Eastern and African refugees and migrants, in numbers comparable only to Germany:

When it comes to refugees, [U.N. Secretary-General Antonio] Guterres praised Sweden for being “absolutely exemplary” and said Europe had failed to provide support by taking coordinated action to ensure equal distribution in the area.

“Instead, Europe was totally unable to find solidarity for this kind of integrated European solution. There was no European solution.  As there was no solidarity at all, two countries, Sweden and Germany have essentially been the ones receiving the overwhelming majority of the refugees, which is absolutely unfair, which doesn’t make any sense.”

Turns out that wasn’t such a bright idea, given that Swedish cities such as Malmö have turned into Muslim-dominant no-go hellholes, which Swedes now find unlivable.  The migrants freely admitted to Sweden have placed about as much value on that entry as the price they paid for it, which is nothing.

Now it’s the Swedes who are fleeing, setting off a second refugee wave of sorts as Swedes move away to either the Swedish hinterlands or else to other countries, according to this Gatestone report.

• “As a parent, you become angry, desperate… The result is that those who can, and can afford it, move…. To a quieter part of the country or abroad. Those who do not have the same opportunities [to move] remain where they are. It’s devastating…” — Former Minister of Labour Sven Otto Littorin, who now lives and works in Dubai, on Facebook.
• “About 13 percent of the population in Sweden experience problems in their own residential areas with crime, violence or vandalism. It is one of the highest proportions in Europe.” By comparison, the other Nordic countries were placed among the countries with the lowest percentage of the population who experience such problems….” — Statistics Sweden, April 25, 2019.

Swedes are on the move. Problems in many municipalities are prompting Swedes to leave for other areas with fewer socioeconomic problems. The issue has recently gained the attention of the Swedish mainstream media.

They’re calling it a “population exchange,” which isn’t exactly a gain.  According to Gatestone:

Take the small, picturesque town of Filipstad (population 10,000), for example. Swedish television recently made a documentary about the town, which finds itself in both a financial and an existential crisis. “We are experiencing a population exchange. You can think of that what you want… But it is simply a statement of fact that this is actually what we are going through and we have to deal with it”, Jim Frölander, integration manager in the Filipstad municipality, says in the documentary. Between 2012 and 2018, 640 native Swedes left the town, and 963 foreign-born people moved into the town. Those leaving are people of working age (20-64), which means that the municipality’s tax revenues are shrinking, exacerbating [the] town’s financial crisis.

Oh, sure — the idea of taking in thousands of unassimilated and hostile Muslims into Sweden’s cities may have sounded great to the country’s central planners.  Its own population after all, is in a death spiral as a result of its past socialist policies, which created a high-cost, low-marriage, low-child, graying country with a potential pension crisis.  But Sweden also wanted to virtue-signal to other countries as it opened its gates to all comers and drew all that U.N. praise.

What this report signals is that Sweden ended up exchanging its well educated, law-abiding, and high-social-capital population for an unemployable, uneducated, lawless, and low-social-capital one.  The central planning here — and as this excellent New York Post article notes, it is a country with a lot of central planning — didn’t quite work out the way they thought it would.  Sweden isn’t gaining the population its social engineers thought it would gain from this top-down maneuver; it’s actually losing its most productive citizens as an unintended consequence, because for every unassimilated refugee coming in, a Swede is moving out.

Now it’s the Swedes who are voting with their feet.  Countries that fought to keep high numbers of unvetted, unassimilated, and hostile migrants from their shores drew a lot of opprobrium, but at least they aren’t seeing this kind of flight.  It all boils down to migrants placing about as much value on the country they are admitted to as the price they actually paid for it.

 

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/10/in_migrantsurged_sweden_now_its_the_swedes_who_are_fleeing.html

 

 

THANK GOD FOR GLOBAL WARMING!!!

by Glenn H. Ray:

The first university learning degree I received was in 1956 with a major in Geography and minor in Russian.    I was exploring.   Grades had meaning then.   I wanted to study the world and learn a foreign language.   Russian was an easy choice for me….nothing to do with ancestry.  It had to do with my and my country’s  future.  The fascist, terrifying USSR was then the powerful enemy of our American way.

My instructors, solid professors, were all male and all phD’s….NO funky graduate students who could barely speak English, and no easy gradings for leftists as in our ‘modern’ era.    Tuition cost me only $30 per quarter.

We undergraduates were often told at the beginning of each  class instruction to look to the front, to the back and to both sides and then yourself because in two years three of you today’s  students will no longer be at the University of Minnesota’s College of Liberal Arts.   They told the Truth as it turned out.

To get this first college degree I had to study climatology,  geology,  geomorphology,  astronomy, as well as geography of the world’s continents and their countries which truly fascinated me.

No longer did I have to cheat about reading novels in those English classes.   I suffer a dyslexia, (not yet ‘invented’ then, so I had no clue)…. I couldn’t, can’t,  make anything out of  reading real novels.    I have those  remarkable visual skills I was born with, instead.

It was the content of novels.    I’d buy the classic comics such as Dicken’s Tale of Two Cities, zip through them, enjoy them enough to search out and then read accurately  in the actual novel the most exciting sections of the novel.    Anything by William Thackeray, and such, was  too dull, to distant visually from the mind or whatever,  to remember or  grasp anything.  Mentally, I couldn’t connect  every time I’d try to read a novel.

I have a personal library in my old age of a couple thousand books, mostly  texts,  histories,  biographies,  “1984”, reality stuff including nineteenth century readings like McGuffey readers.   Here, my memory was solid.   I loved sharing these  learnings, so my first career became teaching high schoolers…….

I learned something about the disappearance of the dinosaurs those 65 million years ago…..you remember, those huge creatures running around America’s Dakota’s, eating those fern trees and the tonnage of the Brontosaurs, the ones especially  tasty to Tyrannosaurus Rex…..

……and the more recent stuff including  the glacial periods of tens of thousands of years ago…..like the last one  in northern Minnesota around Duluth before Lake Superior was born with the melting of thousands of feet of glacial ice!!!

THANK GOD FOR THAT GLOBAL WARMING OR WE HUMANS WOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN ABLE TO LIVE HERE….but our today’s lefty Democrat Party doesn’t give a damn about TRUTH!.   They don’t seem to be interested in knowledge either.

Neither were the Soviets, folks.

Please continue reading below regarding Truth instead of today’s Politics regarding “Global Warming”:

No U.S. Warming Since 2005

The Selling of Global Warming!

Is White Man Responsible for The World’s Greatest Fraud in History?

…..

The Reports of Iceland’s Glacial Death Have Been Greatly Exaggerated

by Anthony Watts  at  American Thinker:

 

The media is abuzz over the first icy “casualty” of climate change: a small glacier in Iceland named Okjökull, also known as “OK.”

The claim, made in a press release from Rice University, is OK became the first glacier in Iceland to lose its glacial status because of global warming. According to the press release, “This will be the first monument to a glacier lost to climate change anywhere in the world.”

Of course, the fearmongers do not say why the glacier has stopped growing. Instead, they simply invoke the new universal boogeyman of “climate change” as the reason. And then they tell us about the movie, website, and hiking opportunities to witness the death of a glacier.

For the record, OK is still around, even though it hasn’t grown since roughly 2003. But here comes the interesting part. According to the U.S. Geological Survey, “Ok is a lava shield volcano in west-central Iceland, to the west of Langjökull.”

As the U.S. Geological Survey noted, OK is actually an icecap on top of a volcano — located on a volcanically active Iceland. Yes, OK is slowly disappearing, but it is completely disingenuous to say climate change is without any doubt the main reason for OK’s demise.

Even if we assume there’s no heat from the volcano, what else could be causing OK’s ice loss? To answer that question, you need to understand how glaciers work. According to the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC):

“A glacier forms when snow accumulates over time, turns to ice, and begins to flow outwards and downwards under the pressure of its own weight… Glacier retreat, melt, and ablation result from increasing temperature, evaporation, and wind scouring. Ablation is a natural and seasonal part of glacier life. As long as snow accumulation equals or is greater than melt and ablation, a glacier will remain in balance or even grow. Once winter snowfall decreases, or summer melt increases, the glacier will begin to retreat.”

If snow is not added, glaciers don’t grow, and they naturally lose ice due to sublimation, ablation, and melt. I don’t think these people pushing OK’s death fully understand glaciers. The process of ice loss in a high-latitude glacier is mainly due to three things, with temperature coming in last.

1. Calving into the sea (not applicable on this glacier since it is landlocked).
2. Ice loss through sublimation (evaporation directly to the atmosphere) or ablation (wind scouring).
3. In some cases, melting due to elevated temperature (yet to be proven about this glacier).

Al Gore, in his movie An Inconvenient Truth, made the mistake of blaming ice loss at Mt. Kilimanjaro on “global warming.” But inconveniently for Gore, the ice loss was entirely the result of there being a lack of precipitation, thus allowing the ice to sublimate.

In Iceland, glaciers are dependent on precipitation. And changes in the North Atlantic Oscillation could easily explain the change in precipitation. In a recent story from NASA’s Jet Propulsion Lab, scientists were “shocked” to find the previously shrinking Jakobshavn glacier in Greenland growing again.

“At first we didn’t believe it. We had pretty much assumed that Jakobshavn would just keep going on as it had over the last 20 years,” said Ala Khazendar of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory.

“The researchers suspect the cold water was set in motion by a climate pattern called the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), which causes the northern Atlantic Ocean to switch slowly between warm and cold every five to 20 years.”

Besides natural cycles, there is a man-made element to consider: carbon soot from the industrial revolution. NSIDC says:

“Over 90 percent of the measured alpine glaciers in the world are retreating, in almost every major glaciated region. The causes of this widespread retreat are varied, but the underlying primary causes are a warming climate and the effects of increased soot and dust in areas of higher agricultural and industrial activity.”

Although some warming may be involved, and precipitation pattern shifts due to changes in ocean currents can easily explain the lack of snowfall, there’s also the fact that OK’s ice is collecting soot, and that darker soot is absorbing more sunlight, thus warming the glacier.

Glaciers have been expanding and shrinking for millennia. In the case of the OK glacier, it may not have even existed a few hundred years ago, according to a study by the U.S. Geological Survey, which concluded, referring to the 13th to 15th century, “OK may not have had a glacier at this time because of the preceding warmer period.”

Given that we didn’t have gas-guzzling SUVs to drive back then, and global population was a tiny fraction of what it is now, I can’t get too excited about activists who claim OK’s ice reduction is due to our current use of life-improving and life-saving conventional energy sources.

Finally, how long will that memorial plaque last? Just look at what recently happened at Glacier National Park, where they had to remove plaques indicating they expected the glaciers to be gone due to climate change by 2020. And what if “OK” starts growing again? Will it become Iceland’s first zombie glacier?

Anthony Watts (awatts@heartland.org) is a senior fellow of The Heartland Institute.

 

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/08/the_reports_of_icelands_glacial_death_have_been_greatly_exaggerated.html

PS from ghr:    Today’s American neofeminized fascist Democrat Party crowd competing to rule  our nation’s Presidency is  being  featured on fascist CNN.

The  Dem dogma of these candidates dictates that white man, particularly the  American one,  has caused the recent heating  of the oceans, New York City, California, the Alps and elsewhere where ever lefty folks stir.   Leftists throughout America constantly spill out their beans that Mother Earth is about to melt into oblivion if America doesn’t choose them to rule our Nation and then the  World politically.  It’s their most threatening  tool when selling their current propaganda.

Today’s Dem feminizers are not, and never will be interested in Truths, especially  the most important ones.   They forever “feel” rather than think!

Knowing something about planet Earth used to be considered important in American schools before the rise of the Pocahontas Elizabeth Warren hordes.   Massachusetts hasn’t been always Massachusetts.  California hasn’t always been open door California.   Her Democrats galloping to rule our America don’t seem to know that either.  But, they all sell white man, his Christians, Conservatives, and Inventors created global warming.

Please do today’s American  humanity, what’s left of it,  a favor.   Look up the geography of America’s Dakotas of 66,000,000 years ago and describe its animal and plant environment.   If that figure has too many zeros for you Dems to bother,  research to discover the climate and animal life around where Duluth, Minnesota now sits, 12,000 to 20,000 and more years ago!

 

Total Eclipse of the Sun Crossing Northern Argentina

I live and work  in my half acre of garden  paradise.  Every visit, every hour of “work” is a pleasure….actually a drug I’ve been hooked on since I was principle manager of our neighborhood’s Victory Garden beginning in 1942.

Somewhere between 1942 and 1945, the primary years of our American involvement in World War II, I became aware of the event of the total eclipse of the Sun.  Not that there was at that time any actual arrival of such an eclipse either in Minnesota or anywhere in these United States.   It could have been Biblical in its arrival into my mind.   I only remember when laboring and pretending to  play games weeding or killing potato beetles  in the Victory Garden I managed at my age going on eight years old,  I was already aware the Sun might  some day be covered by the moon for awhile as the moon travels across the sky.  I think I learned so in Sunday Bible School.

I had to wait till June, 1976, when the Sun while shining across St. Paul and Minneapolis early one morning,  its radiance would be completely blocked for a period of time by the moon.   If so strange things might occur on Mother Earth with in the blocked radiance.

This event was to occur around 6:30AM on this one and only Saturday June morning in a lifetime.

I  and some friends of mine were graduating from the University of Minnesota that very June the very next week.  Total eclipses of the Sun were more into my line of graduation study than any of the half dozen of sleepy heads I had coaxed into awakening that 5:30AM to travel and meet at some hillside overlooking a broad eastern slope with downtown St. Paul on the far left,  guessing in amateur language what we were supposed to enjoy, experience, remember, or hate!

We waited.  We waited some more and then remarks, buy no threats yet…..”THIS BETTER BE GOOD, GLENN!!!    We waited some more…..and then it began…..on  the upper left?!?

We had to protect our eyes.  I used sunglasses covered with photo print tint.

It took five more minutes before all of us saw that beginning of the blockage on the  left of the Sun was indeed the curve of the Moon.

Silence reigned for nearly an hour!   When the Total Eclipse arrived,  our Earth in view fell under a profound shadow stirring  cool wind  and noisy plants.  Some four legged dogs howled.   We two leggeds stood stunned.

Clouds and rain were forecast for that morning.

Rain is not in the forecast among those in San Juan, Argentina.  Nor is it throughout the path across the North of that country.   Take the time…..Take the travel…..There is nothing to sell except BEING THERE and EXPERIENCING an Earth maximum personally!!

Truth IS, Earth’s Climate IS ALWAYS CHANGING!

CLIMATE CHANGE: WHAT CAN’T IT DO?

by John Hinderaker  at PowerLine:

I wrote a couple of weeks ago about the fact that Lake Superior and other Great Lakes were nearing record high levels this year. Which was bad, of course–flooding and so on. Was it due to climate change? Perhaps. But just a few years ago–in 2013–the Great Lakes were low. That, too, was bad, and as the headlines linked in my prior post indicate, that definitely was due to climate change.

Now the Washington Post reports: “The Great Lakes are overflowing with record amounts of water.”

The effects of this high water have been wide-reaching. Beaches have shrunk, while water has inundated docks and destroyed roads.
***
A combination of major winter snowfalls…

Due to global warming?

…and excessive rainfall are primary drivers for this year’s high water.

The Post has a relatively long memory, for a newspaper, so it recalls that just a few years ago, climate change was causing the Great Lakes to dry up. Most of us, if our theory was so decisively refuted by nature, would preserve a discreet silence. But global warming obsessives are undeterred. Low water, high water, below average precipitation, above average precipitation–these seemingly disparate phenomena, which have existed forever and which most attribute to natural cycles, have a common cause: climate change!

While experts work to better understand effects of climate change on Great Lakes water levels, they are seeing increased evidence of a new normal characterized by rapid shifts between extreme high and low levels.

“We are undoubtedly observing the effects of a warming climate in the Great Lakes,” wrote Richard Rood, a University of Michigan climate scientist. “We are at the beginning of what’s going to be a number of decades where the climate is going to be changing very fast. During that time, we will have many unexpected weather events, and we need to learn from these events to better prepare for the future.”

Unexpected weather events, like rainfall and a lack of rainfall. First the “undoubted” effect of global warming on the Great Lakes was drought, now it is too much snow and rain. Whatever. The nice thing about “climate change” as a dogma is that the weather is guaranteed to change, so whatever happens is consistent with the theory that continues to bring in the big bucks. As I’ve said before: I will be more impressed with the global warming fanatics if they predict something before it happens.

Meanwhile, is there any truth to the claim that we are experiencing unprecedented swings in Great Lakes water levels? I will reproduce again a chart from the Wall Street Journal showing water levels in Lake Michigan and Lake Huron from 1990 to the present:

THE GLOBAL WARMING LIE CAMPAIGN CONTINUES

Countless billions of American dollars have been spent in the past twenty years supporting  the con-artist Al Gore political campaign that the Earth is dramatically heating up, and that this heating up is, will be a killer to all human kind, and that the white man is responsible for this coming disaster unless you and your government support  the cause financially and politically by  supporting Democrats and Fascists throughout the World.

Yet there is NO evidence whatsoever that white man’s inventions have any significant effect upon global warming whatsoever BEYOND THE POLITICAL.

It’s all a racket!?!   …. Al Gore, a con-artist of the Ages?!!   YES, ACCORDING TO WHAT MANKIND DOES KNOW ABOUT OUR EARTH’S PAST.

Twelve thousand years ago most of my Minnesota was a thousand or more feet under ice for several thousand years.   Yet, 65,000,000 years ago the Dakota plains to the West of us in Minnesota were populated by dinosaurs, jungles, and ferns hundreds of feet tall.

You, dear adult readers, should have been taught such reality when you were in school….but your teachers were poorly educated…..and have much slouched now selling fascism to your children.

Craig Rucker has been stalwart for years in his efforts challenging the Al Gore corrupt financial and political world selling GLOBAL WARMING!

He wrote the other day:

“Glenn,

The global warming campaign would have more credibility if its proponents weren’t constantly getting caught in the lie.

They spin the facts and the media let’s them get away with it.  Sadly for team warming, there are still plenty of us out there who won’t let bogus claims go unchallenged.  If the science was actually settled, why distort the news?

Case in point, check out the excellent article Dr. Jay Lehr posted at CFACT.orgdebunking (yet again) the spurious claim that 97% of scientists all agree that no global warming claim, no matter how wild, dare ever be challenged.

Many articles have been written to refute this claim but they all dig into the statistical weeds. Common sense alone should set you straight. If the reader wishes he or she could read the original paper by Naomi Oreskes that started it all in Science Magazine in December of 2004. Be aware you might die laughing…

Simple proof of this erroneous talking point is provided by the Global Warming Petition Project at the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine in 2015. They obtained signatures on a Declaration from 31,478 American scientists, including 9,021 with Ph.D.s that stated they did not believe man kind had a significant impact on his climate. The declaration included the words: “There is no convincing scientific evidence that human releases of carbon dioxide methane or other greenhouse gases are causing or will in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate. Moreover, there is substantial evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environment of the Earth.”

They made all the names available in a paper back book.It is rather doubtful that these people all comprise the 3% of non believers.

Check out Dr. Lehr’s full account.

Science works on objective reality, not consensus.

Especially not a phony consensus.

For nature and people too,

Craig Rucker President

Minnesota Temperature Extremes Recorded, in case you didn’t know!

JanuaryHighest Temperature69 °F (21 °C)January 24, 1981MontevideoLowest Temperature−57 °F (−49 °C)January 20, 1996Embarrass

FebruaryHighest Temperature76 °F (24 °C)February 26, 1896Pleasant MoundLowest Temperature−60 °F (−51 °C)February 2, 1996Tower

MarchHighest Temperature88 °F (31 °C)March 23, 1910MontevideoLowest Temperature−50 °F (−46 °C)March 2, 1897Pine City

AprilHighest Temperature101 °F (38 °C)April 22, 1980HawleyLowest Temperature−22 °F (−30 °C)April 6, 1979Karlstad

MayHighest Temperature112 °F (44 °C)May 31, 1934Maple PlainLowest Temperature4 °F (−16 °C)May 1, 1909
May 2, 1909Pine River

JuneHighest Temperature110 °F (43 °C)June 29, 1931CanbyLowest Temperature15 °F (−9 °C)June 1, 1964Bigfork

JulyHighest Temperature114 °F (46 °C)July 29, 1917 July 6, 1936Beardsley
MoorheadLowest Temperature24 °F (−4 °C)July 7, 1997Tower

AugustHighest Temperature110 °F (43 °C)August 10, 1947
August 1, 1988 Beardsley  MontevideoLowest Temperature21 °F (−6 °C)August 28, 1996
August 2, 2002 Tower
Kelliher

SeptemberHighest Temperature111 °F (44 °C)September 11, 1931Beardsley Lowest Temperature10 °F (−12 °C)September 30, 1930
September 22, 1974Big Falls  

OctoberHighest Temperature98 °F (37 °C)October 5, 1963BeardsleyLowest Temperature−16 °F (−27 °C)October 26, 1936Roseau

NovemberHighest Temperature84 °F (29 °C)November 1, 1950WinonaLowest Temperature−45 °F (−43 °C)November 30, 1896Pine City

DecemberHighest Temperature74 °F (23 °C)December 9, 1939WheatonLowest Temperature−57 °F (−49 °C)December 31, 1898Pine City

THE DEM’S GREAT GREEN FRAUD OF THE WEST RIDES AGAIN!

BIOMASS: ANOTHER “GREEN” FRAUD

by  John Hinderaker  at  PowerLine:

I would have said that nothing could exceed the folly of wind and solar energy, but biomass may come close. This Vox article is headlined: “Europe’s renewable energy policy is built on burning American trees.” You no doubt have heard of “biomass,” but likely don’t know what it actually means. As the headline suggests, it mostly means American trees.

In the lowland forests of the American southeast, loblolly pines and cypress trees are grabbing carbon dioxide from the air right now. Using power from the sun, they release the oxygen and bind the carbon, building trunks, barks, and leaves.

But much of that carbon won’t stay there. As it turns out, millions of tons of wood from these forests each year are being shipped across the Atlantic, and burned in power plants in countries like the UK and the Netherlands, in the name of slowing climate change.

This chart is revealing, to say the least. I had no idea that burning trees played such a large role in Europe’s “green” energy initiative:

This “green” energy story is all about economics:

[I]n 2009, the EU committed itself to 20 percent renewable energy by 2020, and put biomass on the renewables list. Several countries, like the United Kingdom, subsidized the biomass industry, creating a sudden market for wood not good enough for the timber industry. In the United States, Canada, and Eastern Europe, crooked trees, bark, treetops, and sawdust have been pulped, pressed into pellets, and heat-dried in kilns. By 2014, biomass accounted for 40 percent of the EU’s renewable energy, by far the largest source. By 2020, it’s projected to make up 60 percent, and the US plans to follow suit.

What goes on a “renewable” list depends entirely on political influence. Nuclear energy isn’t on the list, even though it emits no carbon dioxide. Hydroelectric isn’t on many “renewable” lists, either.

There are few bigger players in the biomass industry than Drax Group, whose flagship power plant in the north of England sucks up nearly a quarter of global wood pellet production, about two-thirds of it from the US. The UK has bought big into biomass, and Drax powers 10 percent of the British electric grid, in large part thanks to massive government subsidies: about $1.2 billion a year.

As always, the “green” world depends on subsidies.

Burning wood emits carbon dioxide, of course, but not as much as coal. (Much more, on the other hand, than nuclear or hydroelectric.) At the same time, trees absorb carbon dioxide–it is called photosynthesis, and when I was young, kids learned about this in junior high school. So biomass is doubly questionable if you believe the global warming hype.

The Vox article takes for granted all of the hyperbole about global warming, but points out that the premise on which burning wood is “carbon neutral” is the assumption that all wood will eventually decay and release CO2 back into the atmosphere. That might be true (it isn’t, actually, which is why we have oil and gas) but only on a time scale that is too long to be helpful if you think the world is facing a climate crisis.

To quote an infamous Congresswoman in an entirely different context, it’s all about the Benjamins. Whether an energy source is denominated “green” or not depends on the political clout of the companies that profit from its use.

This discussion of biomass reminds me of how retrograde “green” technologies are. Wood burning? Yeah, that was a great idea in 1000 AD. Wind energy? It works intermittently, at a low level. When I was growing up in South Dakota, every farm had a windmill. They were used mostly to drive pumps for wells, I believe. But they became extinct as better, more reliable sources of energy became universally available. Do today’s greenies have any understanding of how hopelessly old-fashioned their policies are? I doubt it.

Share

Tweet

Red

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/03/biomass-another-green-fraud.php

It’s Getting Cold Again

Bitter Cold Shows Reliable Energy Sources Are Critical

Article sent by Mark Waldeland:

https://www.americanexperiment.org/2019/02/star-tribune-bitter-cold-shows-reliable-energy-sources-critical/

Star Tribune: Bitter Cold Shows Reliable Energy Sources Are Critical – American Experiment The Star Tribune has published an opinion piece I wrote on how Minnesota’s bitter cold should be a wake-up call for energy policy in our state. Instead of mandating the use of wind and solar, which generated just 24 percent of its installed capacity, and provided just four percent of MISO’s … http://www.americanexperiment.org

[ , , , ]

This week’s urgent notice from Xcel to conserve natural gas shows there is real danger in putting all of our eggs into the renewables-plus-natural gas basket. At minimum, pursuing a grid powered entirely by solar, wind and natural gas would require more natural gas pipeline capacity, which is likely to be opposed by the factions that are currently challenging the replacement of the Line 3 pipeline.

Lest I be accused of unfairness, it’s true that any number of unforeseen circumstances could prevent a coal, nuclear or natural gas plant from being able to run during a cold snap like this. But the key word is “unforeseen.” The intermittency of wind and solar is a feature, not a bug, which is why Minnesota lawmakers should reconsider the wisdom of enacting a mandate requiring 50 percent of our electricity to come from intermittent renewable sources.

If Minnesota lawmakers are sincere in their belief that we must reduce carbon dioxide emissions as soon as possible, they must lift Minnesota’s ban on new nuclear power plants, which has been in place since 1994.

Not only would nuclear power plants be essentially guaranteed to run in minus-24-degree weather, but a forthcoming study by American Experiment has found that new nuclear power plants could not only achieve a lower emissions rate by 2030, but also save Minnesota $22.3 billion through 2050.

Minnesota can show true leadership, and provide reliable, affordable and safe electricity by legalizing new nuclear power, not by doubling Minnesota’s reliance on intermittent renewable power (and natural gas).

“Winter” Arrives in Global Warming Minnesota?!?

Newspaper headlines from Feb. 3, 1996, the day after a state record low temperature of 60 degrees below zero in Tower, Minn. (Photo from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources)

By PIONEER PRESS | news@pioneerpress.com

PUBLISHED: January 31, 2016 at 3:49 pm | UPDATED: January 27, 2019 at 4:18 pm

 

It could reach minus 27 in St. Paul and Minneapolis on Tuesday night, according to the National Weather Service. Two decades ago in St. Louis County, they would have considered that a tropical paradise.

Next week will mark the 23rd anniversary of the coldest temperature ever recorded in Minnesota — a Hoth-like 60 degrees below zero on Feb. 2, 1996.

It happened outside of Tower, Minn., a city of about 500 roughly 25 miles south of the Canadian border in the northeast corner of the state. According to a Minnesota Department of Natural Resources account, a few factors besides the obvious (that’d be a “deeply cold air mass”) drove the record reading.

The city sits in a slight topographic bowl, making it a collection basin for cold air, which tends to sink as low as possible. And with nearly four feet of standing snow, the thermometer — perched at five feet — was that much closer to where the coldest air rested.

Things weren’t so hot in the Twin Cities, either, with a temperature of 32 degrees below zero at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport — just a few degrees off the coldest day on record in the metro (minus 34 in January 1936.)

Six days later, it was bikini season in Tower: The high hit 48 degrees on Feb. 8, 1996.

As far as lows go, the 60-below mark is tied for fifth all-time in the United States, behind:

• Prospect Creek, Alaska, 80 below, January 1971
• Rogers Pass, Mont., 70 below, January 1954
• Yellowstone National Park, Wyo., 66 below, February 1933
• Maybell, Colo., 61 below, February 1985

https://www.twincities.com/2016/01/31/60-below-minnesotas-coldest-day-record-february-1996-tower/