The cost of pursuing wind and solar.

In the early to mid eighties, the world started pursuing solar and wind electricity generation to get away from the very polluting coal power generation which is still the most prominent form of power generation.

Right from the start, they knew that humans don't control the sun and the wind, and that peak energy demands were when the sun didn't shine and the wind wasn't at its strongest. As temperature gradients decrease at night, the wind usually subsides. They also knew that there was no way to store significant amounts of electricity—batteries have a puny energy density. Even now, petrol (gasoline) is 100 times more energy dense than lithium ion batteries.

To make matters worse, there had been a safe, clean form of electricity generation available since the early sixties. What's more, it generated electricity 24/7/365 in massive amounts. To make matters even worse, it's been calculated that nuclear derived electricity saved about 1.84 million lives and prevented the release of 64 gigatonnes of CO₂.

Had the world pursued nuclear electricity generation for these almost 40 years (it's now July, 2022) as they have been pursuing wind and solar, most developed countries could have generated the overwhelming majority of their electricity needs from nuclear power. I'm talking 80% plus. Millions of people would not have died unnecessary early deaths and global warming would have been much less.

After relentlessly pursuing wind and solar electricity for 40 years, there's not one town on Earth with a population of 5,000 or more relying solely on them. That qualifies as a dismal failure.

The German case

By 2010, Germany had decided to go green in their electricity generation. This program is called Energiewende. Following Fukushima in 2011, Germany closed 8 of its 17 nuclear reactors. That made them more reliant on coal and increased not only CO₂ production, but also deaths from coal power station pollution. They have approximately 1,100 excess deaths yearly due to shutting down their nuclear power plants. That means Germany's Energiewende costs more lives yearly than the combined death toll of Chernobyl and Fukushima.

Despite the many claims that renewable energy is cheap, Germany and Denmark, two of the most rabid followers of green power, have of the most expensive electricity in Europe. Here is more. If renewable energy is so cheap, why the high prices in places where it is most used?

The following is from Wikipedia: In 2014 Sigmar Gabriel, German minister of economic affairs and energy, lobbied Swedish company Vattenfall to continue investments in brown coal mines in Germany, explaining that "we cannot simultaneously quit nuclear energy and coal-based power generation". And then they wonder why hothouse gas production rose again and over a thousand extra people die each year.

The following is also from the Wikipedia Energiewende entry: In 2019, Germany's Federal Court of Auditors determined the program had cost €160 billion over the last 5 years and criticised the expenses for being "in extreme disproportion to the results". Despite widespread initial support, the program is perceived as "expensive, chaotic and unfair", and a "massive failure" as of 2019.

Following Russia's invasion of the Ukraine, many European countries face natural gas shortages, among them Germany. That made them fall back on coal again for electricity production. If they had nuclear energy, this would not have been the case. Here's what happened to electricity prices in Germany since Putin's invasion of the Ukraine. Thank Energiewende for these prices. Had they copious amounts of nuclear power...

Despite nuclear power stations closing, more electricity is generated from nuclear power than ever before. Read this interesting page on nuclear energy. Individual nuclear power stations now generate more power than ever before, which brings the total electricity generated by nuclear power to the highest levels ever. And many countries have made u-turns on their plans to shut down their nuclear power stations, and others are getting their first: Belarus, Bangladesh and Turkey are all constructing their first nuclear power plants.

Why the madness?

In two words: political correctness. Nuclear power generation is anathema to the libtard. It doesn't matter how many people die or if the Gulf Stream stops flowing and north-western Europe becomes bitterly cold—as cold as Canada at the same latitudes—as long as the principles of political correctness triumph.

Keep in mind that most people in all democratically elected governments, and nearly all in the media, are arts and humanities monkeys. They understand nothing except feelings and slogans. Reality and numbers are not on their radar. What is strange is that Angela Merkel, she has a doctorate in quantum chemistry, knowingly sold her country down the drain.

Political correctness has a price, a very high price, not only in monetary terms, but also in human lives. Self-government (such a politically-correct concept) in Africa has so far cost millions of lives, but who cares? Not your libtard. Earth can spiral into the sun, as long as political correctness is maintaned to the very end.

So, you want to be a politician

To become a politician you need only two things:

• A constituency in which to stand
• Enough votes to be elected

To deal with the first, find a strong political party and join them. From your point of view, they must optimise your chances of making it into parliament. Don't choose a small political party, except if it's up and coming and clearly going places fast.

Now you must make your way up in your party so you're given a seat to represent. You'll hear about hard, dedicated work for years, but that's nonsense. Brown-nosing and backstabbing will work better and are the two most popular ways of getting somewhere in politics, but there's something even better—building a huge popular support. No party can resist a candidate who brings waves of votes with him. You'll leapfrog the old party stalwarts with years of dedication into a seat.

Building your following

This has nothing to do with honesty, putting people first, dedication, or any of what's commonly trumpeted. It has everything to do with playing the great unwashed. Don't concern yourself with the few of higher intelligence—they don't swing constituencies. Work the masses.

So, how do you do this? The two abilities that will serve you best are acting and speech-making. Study them. Hitler went to beer halls and delivered speeches, closely watching the reaction of the crowd to what he was saying and his mannerisms. What eventually made him untouchable was his huge public support. No party could afford to ditch him or even speak in less than glowing terms about him. He was democratically elected. He told the hoi-polloi what they wanted to hear; they were better than other people and together they would make Germany great again. You can't beat telling people what they want to hear to make them like you. Let that be a lesson to you.

Some people have a face and a voice one just likes. Ronald Reagan was such a one and most likely the most popular President America ever had. He often had a trace of a smile on his face and loved telling jokes. Hitler was threatening and promised to rain hell and damnation on everybody in Germany's way. You must know your audience and your times and adapt to them—they won't adapt to you. Mingle with the masses and find out what they think and what they want and tell them you heartily agree with them and will give them what they want. You want to be an elected politician, right?

You can't beat Count Victor Lustig as someone to learn from. Pay attention to his Ten Commandments. Politicians and confidence tricksters are both in the people business, and both must know how to sway them. You really have only one commandment, the eleventh—don't get caught.

Follow this advice and you'll soon be on easy street from where you can rake it in. You don't have to know anything about anything, except how to hoodwink people and get the masses on your side.

Why do bad things happen?

The misery so often visible on Earth is a major cause of people deciding there’s no loving God behind everything.

But the complexity of creation, both physical and biological, demands a higher intelligence. Nobody can point to anything complex, like encoded information, arising without an intelligent source. So, how does this work?

Viewpoint

We see things as humans from an Earthly viewpoint, which is understandable; we’ve only ever been humans living on Earth. For us, the highest value is human life, especially our own. But see things from the standpoint of some creatures we’re familiar with, say a sheep. Nobody can say a sheep does not value his life as much as we do. Prey animals flee from predators and often show terror when facing death. We slaughter tens or hundreds of thousands of cattle and sheep daily without blinking an eye. If we don't value the life of lower animals as much as they do, who’s to say the creator of the Universe values human lives as much as we do? This leads to the next point.

Knowledge

We know humans have lives on Earth—we see that every day. We’re intrigued by what happens after death and speculate about it, but let’s be honest—no one’s ever come back from death with a report of how it is. There are near-death experiences, but they’re not widely accepted and too varied to convince. And they cover at best a few minutes. But how would we see death if we knew what lay beyond? Would Earthly death still be such a big deal? Even total annihilation is a painless nothingness.

The creator of the Universe can reconstruct us from our genetic code and engrams to the same state we were on Earth. A few improvements in our genetic codes, and we never die. Would such a creator not value our short lives on Earth less than we do?

Accountability and choice

Mankind wants to row its own boat and not be accountable to a Cosmic Creator.How can mankind now expect this creator to step in and save them from their own choices? Will we then ever get the message that while humans can manage many things, there are many we cannot manage? Will we be willing to hand over government of Earth to the creator if we don’t come face to face with the full consequences of human government?

Conclusion

Seen this way, what’s happening on Earth makes sense. Compared to what comes after, our time on Earth is short and not that important. The creator of the Universe will doubtlessly know far more than we know and it’s arrogant of us to question him. In the book of Job, Job questioned God about his misfortunes, and God’s only reply was, how can you question me? It’s like a cat or a dog questioning our decisions.

Delta Strain Mortality Rate in Australia

This is at least the third peak in daily case numbers and by far the largest. But the death rate is only 20-25% that of the second peak, despite the more cases now. The site to which the link leads is updated daily. Go to the Daily new confirmed COVID-19 cases graph at the top and then scroll down to the Daily new confirmed COVID-19 deaths graph and compare.

The governments and the media are quiet about this. A bit of perspective; go to Cumulative confirmed COVID-19 deaths. From 1 March 2020 to 23 August 2021, there were 984 deaths. That's almost 17 months, say 16.5. Air pollution from coal-fired power stations kill about 795 in Australia annually. That's 1093 in 16.5 months—more than COVID. Gladys said nothing about that. Alcohol kills about 4,000 annually in Australia. That's 5,500 in the time COVID has been going. Total silence.

The grog shop near where I live is open in this lockdown. That's the BWS in Lavington. It's a drive-through, but they get out and go into the shop. Just checked, the one in town is open from 09H00 to 19H00.

The authorities are loath to give up the power COVID handed them and the media would like the easy news (find TV or radio news or a newspaper without COVID in it) to continue.

I've had my second shot on 1 July, and I'm still treated as if I have leprosy—a very lowly contagious disease, btw. I have to wear a mask and sign in everywhere I go. What's next? Should I ring a bell and shout, unclean, unclean?

How to easily stop and reverse global warming

The technology to do this has existed for many decades. The problem is people.

The human factor

Two overlapping groups are the problem.

• the libtards—those who can’t distinguish between reality and the ideals of political correctness, and side with the latter
• the teeming masses—they keep politicians in power and politicians will never upset them

As I ennumerate what should be done, starting with the most important, you’ll see how these two groups are the problem.

What should be done

• replace all fossil fuel power stations with nuclear ones and ignore the libtards
• stop all animal farming and go vegan—that’s right, redneck, from now on you’re a vegan

The above are the two remedies which will have by far the most effect on global warming. There are too many smaller ones to mention. I’ll name a few.

• let private vehicle licence fees rise exponentially with fuel consumption—more below
• stamp out all inefficient energy use—more below
• replace all huge ships with nuclear‑driven ones
• stop wasting money trying to create city, state, and country scale wind and solar electricity—it’s pie in the sky; build nuclear power stations

Vehicle licensing fees

Set a fuel‑consumption reference, say 7.5L/100Km. Have a certain test, say a long distance trip involving some cities on the way, and get the figures for the vehicles. Let a vehicle using 8.5L/100Km pay ten times more (10¹ times), one using 9.5L/100Km 100 times more (10² times), etc. One can use decimals for the power if the excess use is a fraction of a litre. Yes, bogan/redneck, you’ll have to sell your 4WD/SUV and get a small car.

Of course, everyone will claim they must use a big, fuel‑hungry vehicle. Each case should be individually evaluated and inapproprate vehicle use (no load, only a driver in a fuel‑hungry vehcle) heavily fined.

Inefficient energy use

There is so much of that. Below only a few.

• cretins love to let their vehicles idle for minutes on end—starting and about seven seconds of idling use the same amount of fuel—there are billions of cretins in the world
• running empy or near‑empty buses all over the planet
• open, cooled shelves in supermarkets—not just here and there, all over the world
• stupid people setting their air‑conditioners to the maximum heat (often 30°C) in winter and on the minimum in summer;in summer, the AC should only be able to start cooling at 28°C and not cool below 24° and in winter it should start at 18°C and not heat above 22°C
• open doors and windows in rooms with AC and AC left on for hours when people leave

Doing all this will work, but it will upset most people. Tough titties, I say. Do we want to beat global warming, or don’t we? Of course, the politicians would not want to upset voters and so lose their cushy, well‑paid jobs. So, global warming is with us and may yet wreak havoc with the planet.

Political correctness is a mental illness

The other day I thought that if schizophrenia is characterised by delusions and hallucinations then political correctness is schizophrenia without hallucinations.

Dictionary.com has a hallucination as a sensory experience of something that does not exist outside the mind and a delusion as a fixed false belief that is resistant to reason or confrontation with actual fact.

The politically correct (henceforth called libtards for short) don't generally suffer from hallucinations. But they have strong delusions completely resistant to evidence. I'll name only a few. Note that goes for by far the majority of libtards, but not every single one of them.

Nuclear Power Generation

You cannot be a card-carrying member of libtards incorporated if you don't throw a hissy fit at the mention of nuclear power generation. It doesn't matter if one tells them that nuclear power generation kills fewest people per unit of electricity generated. Fewer than even their darlings, solar and wind power generation. Here is more.

Then, of course, there's France which gets more than 70% of its electricity from nuclear power which is the world and Europe's biggest exporter of electricity. Here are the world figures. Note that they export to the politically correct countries heavily relying on renewables - think mostly Germany here. Strangely enough, the two libtard nests with their renewables, Germany and Denmark, have the most expensive electricity in Europe. And France has no health or other problems from all their nuclear-power-generated electricity. The French don't glow in the dark. Strange, isn't it?

But do these figures change their warped little libtard minds? Not by a long shot. Is it normal to ignore decisive evidence and stick to one's delusions? Maybe in the madhouse.

Race

There are libtards who say there is only one race, the human race. No, libtard. Humans are a species. Homo Sapiens. Sapiens is Latin and means wise or clever. Obviously, the reality-denying libtards don't belong to this species. The definition of a species is something like, a group that can freely pair and consistently produce fertile offspring. A cross between a Collie and a Labrador is a fertile dog. Not so a cross between a donkey and a horse—a mule.

A race is more something like a subspecies. The definition of a subspecies is something like, a subgroup in a species which breeds true and has common features identifying them as members of that subgroup and separating them from other groups in the species. By breeding true I mean Chinese have Chinese kids, German Shepards have German Shepard pups, Caucasians have Caucasian kids, etc.

We know that some dog races are faster than the others—only a libtard will put his money on the Bulldog in a race between a Bulldog and a Whippet. Similarly, some are cleverer. A Kelpie will leave a Boxer far behind in obedience training. Africans seem to be faster than the rest of us if one goes by Olympic medals in sprints. But when Vasco da Gama sailed around Africa in about 1498 the Africans did not have writing (already more than 2,000 years old in other parts), they did not use the wheel (even older) and they had no form of mathematics. Eratosthenes calculated the circumference of the Earth in Alexandria, Egypt in about 250BC. Do you think the state of the Africans at any stage, or even now, is a sign of intelligence? Obviously, that cannot be.

In 2002 Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen published a book called, IQ And The Wealth of Nations. Basically, the higher the average IQ of a country, the wealthier they were. This book caused many libtards to prolapse their uteruses (strictly speaking, uteri) and twist their spermatic cords. A flurry of testing was launched to prove these two wrong. Unfortunately for the libtards, however... The results were so unanimous that they couldn't be questioned. Here's one with the results lower down on the page and here's what happens if one dares contradict the libtards. Here is a short version of the history of research into race and intelligence. Academics even say suppressing the debate on this issue may do harm.

What the libtards do is try to nullify these results. They say intelligence is hard to define and cannot be measured. Although the race IQs are different, that means nothing according to the libtard. The fact that Africa is a mess is whitey's fault. In the process of doing this, the libtards talk more BS than was in the Augean stables. It's a pity Hercules is not here.

Homosexuality

According to the libtards homosexuality is just a harmless variant of normal. So, how come the astronomical suicide and self-harm rate amongst homosexuals? Here is more. Of course, that's society's fault. And what about their predilection for serial killing? More than 40% of US serial killers are homosexual and more than half their serial killer victims were killed by homosexuals. Look at this. I suppose we should not mention that. This is no evidence that there is something seriously wrong with homosexuality, according to the libtards. They stick their heads in the sand.

Islam is a peaceful religion

Yeah, right.

But those were naughty Muslims, the libtards say. They didn't know that their own religion is a religion of peace. Well, what did they read in the Quran and the Hadiths? Kill the infidel, they read. Cut his throat. You may not want to fight, but fighting is good for you, they read. Here's their favourite verse in the Quran, the verse of the sword Here's another opinion. And this person actually went to the trouble to extract violent passages and he gives references. But despite all that, the libtard says, Islam is a religion of peace.

The evidence is clear, political correctness has a major problem recognising reality. Evidence means nothing to the libtard. That means they're delusional. Political correctness should be in the psychiatry textbooks. Someone should be looking for medication to at least control the madness of these poor people.

Bushfires in Australia

It's now 6 January 2020.  Australia had disastrous bushfires in the past week or two and some are still going.  About 3.5 million Hectares were scorched, at least 20 people are dead, the army is apparently helping to bury 100,000 dead cattle and more than 1,500 homes were burned down.  The prime minister, Scott Morrison promised a two bilion dollar recovery package.  The actual cost of the fires will, of course, only be known later.

Here are some resources confirming the above figures:

• Seven TV Network
• BBC A Visual Guide 
• The Guardian - Australian Edition

In the winter of 2019, I was in a car driving through the Mount Hotham area in Victoria.   There were masses of deadwood on the forest floor as far as one could see.  And it didn't stop as one drove along.  "This is a bushfire waiting to happen," I told my friend.  The order to evacuate Hotham came on the 3rd of January.

It's hard to set a Eucalyptus tree ablaze.  In New Zealand, we used to start the woodfires using pine and only then added the Eucalyptus wood.  One needs a lot of kindling to set fire to Eucalyptus wood.  This kindling is in plentiful supply in the woods of Australia.  And the authorities do nothing about it.  They have no incentive - they are never held accountable.  To say they were derelict in their duty would be a euphemism.  Gross negligence is closer to the mark.  And still, the law protects them.

The CSIRO did a study on wildfires in Tasmania which you can get here.  They studied three plans of action:

1. Do nothing - popular with those living on the taxpayer dollar the world over.
2. A maximal treatment, with the most possible prescribed burning within ecological constraints.
3. 12 hypothetically more implementable state-wide prescribed-burning plans.

 Of the third option they said:

Leverage analysis of the 12 more-realistic implementable plans indicated that such prescribed burning would have only a minimal effect, if any, on fire extent and that none of these prescribed-burning plans substantially reduced fire intensity. 

This means it won't work.

Of the second option they said:

Statistical modelling showed that an unrealistically large maximal treatment scenario could reduce fire intensity in three flammable vegetation types, and reduce fire probability in almost every vegetation type.

My point is that bushfires are so devastating that expensive, large-scale preventative measures are justified.

Keeping that in mind, option two is clearly the way to go.  But they are already making excuses stating backburning won't work.  One of the problems is it can only be done in the right weather conditions.  They didn't say it, but I say it, backburns can get and have got out of hand.  So, if backburns are not the way to go, what is?

Finland had a decrease in forest fires over the past few decades.  They fare much better as far as forest fires are concerned than neighbouring Sweden.  The do clear deadwood from the forest floor and they go so far as to clean the forest floor of combustible material after cutting down trees.

It is justified to use armies of prisoners and able welfare recipients to clear the ground in Australian bushland.  It may not be politically correct, but political correctness should yield to reality.  And these bushfires were and are very real.  Of course, if anything is preferable to violating the principles of political correctness, go for the bushfires.

Getting the kindling out of the woods is most likely the most important thing to do that will yield results the soonest.  One should focus on the big gains first.