Deindustrialization, Degrowth and Climate Alarmism

I originally posted this in February 06, 2016: Aside from Greenpeace, World Wildlife Fund (WWF), Oxfam and other big environmental NGOs, one prominent anti-coal (and anti-fossil fuels, anti-mining, anti-...) crusader to "save the planet" is Atty. Tony la Vina, outgoing Dean of the Ateneo School of Government.  In his 3 recent columns (January 16, January 26, February 06, 2016) in The Standard, he articulated various anti-coal alarmism claims, below. I added some data and 2 articles from WUWT by Eric Worral.  The various "planet saviours" celebrated big time last December during the UN FCCC's COP 21 in Paris, saying they signed a deal that will further limit fossil fuels like coal. But look at the chart -- coal power is projected to experience the biggest rise and share to total global energy use. See WUWT,  Is our certain fate a coal-burning climate apocalypse? No!  July 21, 2015. In Tony LV's article today in The Standard,  Coal is not least costly technolo

From  http://wattsupwiththat.com/  by Willis Eschenbach,  Thirty Years of Subsidies , November 5, 2015. He pointed at the US federal government energy subsidies -- in the US alone (EU, Canada, Japan, etc. not included), in 2013 alone (previous years not included). Subsidies to coal + nat gas + nuke = $5.1 billion. Subsidies to all renewables including biofuels = $15.0 billion.   Of which for solar and wind alone = $11.3 billion.  Wow. Source:  http://www.eia.gov/analysis/requests/subsidy/ The above subsidies to renewables also do NOT include: -- subsidies by state and city governments, that's by the federal government alone; -- subsidies via "renewable energy mandates" or mandatory use of renewables even if cheaper energy from non-renewables are available; -- implicit subsidies via cap-and-trade, carbon taxes to fossil fuels. So is the US and the rest of the world shifting more to solar and wind because of those direct and indirect subsidies for them, vs. taxes and penalt

The Washington Post ran a story last October 12, 2015,  As appetite for electricity soars, the world keeps turning to coal . It is a climate alarmist story and yet the authors recognize that as of 2012, the world -- rich, middle income and poor countries combined -- was dependent on 68% fossil fuels (coal + natural gas + oil) for their electricity needs. The 21% renewables are largely "old renewables" like big hydro and geothermal. The "new renewables" like wind and solar should contribute something like 2-4% of total. In terms of total global electricity output from 1980 to 2012 (32 years), the biggest increase in GWh are (1) coal with 6.1 M and (2) natural gas with 4.1 M. Percentage wise, biggest increase were recorded by nat gas and nuke. So although it is a climate alarmism article, there is honesty in recognizing that if people want more and stable electricity, fossil fuels are inevitable and reliable energy sources. From a nice US Chamber of Commerce article l

On  May 31, 2011 , I made these observations: Kyotoism, the philosophy that the Kyoto Protocol (KP) of binding carbon emission reduction by many rich and industrialized countries will help "save the planet", is dying. KP was adopted in 1997 in Kyoto, Japan, and became binding by 2005. It will expire by the end of 2012. Thus, the rush by the UN and many governments to have a new binding agreement that will supplant KP by 2013. The point organization to prolong climate alarmism -- more environmental regulations, more carbon and energy taxation, more climate bureaucracies and frequent global climate meetings/junkets, more climate loans -- is the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UN FCCC). Thus, there have been huge global climate meetings called the Conference of Parties (COP) in the past, particularly the COP 15 in Copenhagen, Denmark in December 2009, then the COP 16 in Cancun, Mexico in December 2010. The next COP meeting will be in Durban, South Africa, this coming

Interview at Sonshine Radio, DZAR 1026 These are my answers to the guide questions for a live interview on “ECO-Hour episode,” DZAR 1026 Sonshine Radio Manila, Aug. 8, 2015,  hosted by Jomel and Rascille Laranas. Climate alarmism vs climate realities     1.         What is your reaction on the research which said that 72% of Filipinos are very concerned about climate change? Are you one of the 72%? Why or Why not? à  Expected. Many Filipinos and people in the world are stilled hoodwinked by the climate alarmism movement. 2.         Should climate change or global warming be a cause of alarm among us? Or is the media projecting it in a way that will somehow threaten us or push us to action? Can we say that ‘climate change is nothing but a lie’? à  No.CC and GW are true, they are not lies, but they are cyclical and natura. What is a big lie is the adjective “man-made” and forgetting or deliberately, explicitly removing “nature-made.” Source: Dr. Roy Spencer,  Senate EPW Hearing: “Climate

Two chilling news from  No Tricks Zone  about environmental militance and deception  in German.The  first article  was published on May 26, 2015, and the  second  article  was posted on March 21, 2014. The first paper is an example of "regulatory capture", wind lobbyists writing the renewables cronyism law in one state in Germany. "The FDP Free Democrats accused Wenzel of having parts of the 79-page draft legislation “dictated to him by the wind industry.”   Bild quotes Free Democrat Dr. Gero Hocker, an environment expert:    "The Environment Minister must concede that the wind lobby took over the job of drafting the law. That’s an outrage!”" Good work, FDP. Fiscalize the green zealots mainly responsible for ever-rising energy prices in Germany. From the second article, FNF's website, Liberal, was also quoted saying "The proposed law by Environment Senator Joachim Lohse foresees a system of monitoring that allows for detection of violations and punishm