#woke

Global Coal-fired power statistics – Diary of a Wimpy Kid

What is it with the self-flagellation over coal-fired power? The announcement that the Morrison government intends underwriting “ONE” coal-fired power plant brings with it the hysteria of publicly force-feeding kindergarten kids with highly radioactive sludge at recess time. Naturally, none of this outrage is based on facts. It is all tokenism.

Here are the stats for coal-fired power stations globally:

Coal Capacity

Australia has only 2.5% of the coal-fired capacity of China. Versus our total of 58, China has almost 3,000 in service.

Coal Operation

Coal-fired plants that have been announced, are under construction, permitted and pre-permit stage around the globe total 1,046. Where are the climate activists in China, India, Vietnam, Pakistan, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Philippines, Japan, Russia, Mongolia, Botswana, Nigeria, Zimbabwe, South Korea, Thailand, Malawi, Serbia, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Turkey, Egypt, Poland and South Africa?

New Coal

The mt CO2-e output of each country is as follows. Note China produces 36x more CO2.

Coal CO2

So China and India are responsible for 58% of coal-fired power generated emissions and will be 50% of all new capacity additions going forward.

Coal CO2 Contrib

China has 100x more coal-fired power on the drawing board than Australia yet we behave as though we are the biggest climate sinners on the planet! China and India have consistently been 70%+ of all new coal-fired plant capacity additions since 2006.

Coal Capa

So do Australian activists honestly think that canning one domestic new coal-fired power plant will have the slightest effect on global temperatures when our Asian and African neighbours are full speed ahead?

There have also been arguments made by activists that our coal exports should be counted against our totals in terms of emissions. Fine. Then by that logic, FNF Media expects the total emissions of every car sold in Australia (including fuel consumed) to be charged back to Japan, China, Korea, America and Europe. Every aircraft, every electronic device, every imported building material, crane, bulldozer, wind turbine, solar panel and truck that transports it. It would equal itself out pretty quickly.

Our global neighbours seem to be prioritizing national growth over climate alarmism. For it would appear they do not have the same level of brain-washed fanatics telling our kids that they have inherited a planet that will make them the last people on earth to survive.

The quickest route for Australia to end its prosperity is to cower to this insanity. To fall in line to the idea that renewables are cheaper (they aren’t) and more green is preposterous. Wind turbine blades are being put into landfill and solar panels are toxic to recycle and likely to end in the same place. Germany is giving us a great beta test case of how renewables are failing them. Indulge yourself here.

Coal-fired plants in Australia are forced to run sub-optimally to cater to the demands of the fluctuations in renewables which must be given priority to the grid. Ask anyone in large scale manufacturing how being forced to run at fluctuating levels destroys efficiency. It really is that simple.

Coal Price

Thermal coal prices are far from going out of control. So our power plant electricity generation isn’t becoming pricier due to input costs.

We have to stop becoming emotional about numbers and data and look at what they are telling us rather than build a narrative and reverse engineer the results. It always catches up to us in the end.

Our government needs to show some backbone and provide easy to understand data about reality. Rather than fold at the confected outrage which appears backed by crony capitalists.

Now that former PM Turnbull is weighing in on the debate (contradicting comments made while PM) saying that it is lunacy to pursue coal. Given his record of poor judgment, it stands to reason building cleaner coal-fired power plants is a sensible way to lower energy prices and remain a competitive global economy.

As FNF Media likes to say, the numbers will always be right in the end. Fiddle them at your peril.

Yael Stone forgets that the scheduled flights will still take off

Image result for yael stone"

Yet more moral preening from celebrities. While Yael Stone might think such virtue signalling has a purpose, she needs to get to grips with the fact that the scheduled flights between the US and Australia will still be taking off, with or without her. Did she miss Ricky Gervais’ Golden Globes introduction?

Her net impact is likely to be a number so close to zero so we thought we’d assist with the maths before she pulls the plug.

280 million trips were made by commercial aircraft last year according to the IATA. Her one way trip to Australia would mean she represents represent 0.000000357% of all annual flights taken.

Given that airlines, by the IATA’s own stats, annually produce the equivalent to 2% of all man-made emissions or 0.000016% of the total CO2 in the atmosphere, her flight would make up around 0.0000000000057%.

The Boeing 777-300ER that would likely carry her has a maximum take-off weight of 351,000kg. Let’s assume she weighs 50kg and carries 50kg of luggage. Her impact on the pilot’s fuel calculations would be 0.0028%.

Overall her “skin in the game” as she calls it, would result in a 0.0000000000000022344% personal impact on flight shaming based CO2 emissions.

FNF Media strongly advises she reads the 20-year forecast from Boeing.

Demand in the commercial market is forecast to more than double in the next two decades. To meet this demand…the number of jet airplanes in service nearly doubling to 50,660.

HuffPo thinks a MasterChef judge is a prominent voice in Australia

You have to hand it to HuffPo. No bias at all. The prominent Aussie who suggested NZ PM Jacinda Ardern rotate leadership away from Scott Morrison is new Master Chef judge, Melissa Leong. Woke.

Expressing deep gratitude for New Zealand’s assistance is a given. For all of our sporting rivalry, there is mutual respect in times of need. Qantas even honored a 2x VC winner, NZ Army Captain Charles Upham, by naming a Boeing 737-800 after him.

Recall Australia sent 148 rescue squad specialists to assist in the 2011 Christchurch earthquake rescue efforts. This type of mutual assistance isn’t anything new. It’s what mates do.

We can be absolutely sure if NZ suffered another disaster, ScoMo (or any other Aussie PM for that matter) would be the first to offer assistance. Although it wouldn’t be too hard to envisage the lefty media suggesting they were merely the actions of a whacko religious white patriarch trying to score political points at the expense of others misery.

So spare the theatrics to morally preen on Twitter. If Leong loves Jacinda Ardern so much, she can move to NZ anytime and bask in her political radiance immediately. What is she waiting for? There are no visa restrictions. Or maybe question why 11% of the NZ population lives in Aus with no plans to move back?!

#TurnArdern

Although she is the high priestess of woke and a darling of the left, it seems not all New Zealanders are fans of their PM Jacinda Ardern.

A new Twitter hashtag, #TurnArdern, has emerged which encourages people to flip over magazine covers adorned with her face.

It was started by a 66-yo bricklayer, Colin Wilson, from Christchurch who said,

People are sick and tired of all the fluff articles – people want a prime minister and not a fashion model…A lot of us feel she spends a lot of time doing photo shoots instead of running the country.”

While the mainstream media lavishes praise on her, her domestic record is dreadful.

ACF hires alarmist MCCCRH to sledge Cricket Australia for inaction on climate change

A Monash Climate Change Communication Research Hub (MCCCRH) study commissioned by the Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF), urged Cricket Australia (CA) to use its popularity to push for greater climate action and do more to look after player and spectator welfare. Hardly an impartial voice to undertake a study when MCCCRH states that it “conducts social research and leads impact focused projects to build media and policy infrastructure that adequately addresses climate change in Australia.”

The ACF campaign director, Paul Sinclair, said, “Cricket Australia should stop being silent and being a spectator on climate change. It should get in the game and be a climate champion for action to cut pollution from coal and to get onto clean energy.

Can the ACF tell FNF Media how many fans think about climate change as they head out to watch a game? It would seem by the sheer length of the beer snakes produced in Bay 13 at ‘The G’ that fans know how to keep well hydrated during play.

Perhaps the ACF should encourage CA to admonish the likes of Steve Smith who carries 10 cricket bats in his kit. Surely allowing New Balance to fell so many willow trees to enable Smith to indulge such a privilege is in direct violation of the UN Sports and Climate Action Initiative (UNSCAI) to reduce the carbon footprint in sports. Note CA has not signed up to this UN compact.

Perhaps ACF should request the air travel intensive Big Bash League (BBL) be banned to save the planet?

Perhaps Kookaburra needs to stop using leather in cricket balls? What do we make the stumps from? Plastic, aluminum? No good. Bamboo?

The ACF couldn’t resist a sledge at CA for having fossil fuel company, Alinta Energy, as a prime sponsor. ACF gave CA stick for having Marsh & Lloyds as commercial partners given they have plans to insure the proposed Adani coal mine. Why hasn’t the ACF slammed Rugby Australia for having Qantas and Land Rover as sponsors for the Wallabies?

In addition to its failings for not signing up to UNSCAI, CA was also criticized for declining to answer with respect to supporting Australia to be a net zero GHG polluter by 2050. It also failed to answer whether it supported turning Australia 100% renewable or whether CA had plans to transition to 100% renewable power itself. CA even copped flak for not recording the number of days abandoned due to extreme heat. Probably because the number is so minuscule, if any that no such records need keeping.

Which begs the question, if the science is so settled, why is it imperative for the ACF to shame CA for non compliance to their religion? We have already seen bodies with absolutely no climate scientific pedigree sign up and make public statements about the dangers of inaction on climate change. Based on what exactly? Is this how consensus is formed? Through group think based shaming which is disproven by the data?

The Australian Medical Association (AMA). It has little professional clue about the climate yet it pushes the narrative even though the far bigger worry should be the percentage of doctors abandoning the organization in droves because of the stance. Our Reserve Bank as well as regulators APRA and ASIC are on board pontificating about global warming, despite corporate Australia, by their own studies, showing less commitment. Such is the trend against climate alarmism by listed corporations, it seems regulators feel the need to dial up legislation to force adoption so it can get more funding to play Big Brother.

The ACF’s true colors come out in the pull quote on p. 18,

It is conceivable that directors who fail to consider the impacts of climate change risk for their business, now, could be found liable for breaching their statutory duty of due diligence going forwards.”

There you have it folks. Lobby for a change in the Australian Corporations Act. Let’s make sure that CA directors can be hauled over coals (no pun intended) for not using a carbon neutral yacht to transport players to the next Ashes series in the UK.

Don’t laugh, the International Olympic Committee and UN argue that, “Sport is not just a victim of climate change; it is also a contributor, through greenhouse gas emissions.

C’mon CA! Ban all merchandise. Tell off KFC for giving fans paper buckets to put on their heads every game. Think of all that virgin pulp that will end up in landfill. No more interstate or international games unless players can be carbon neutral. No more day/night matches unless the light towers are 100% renewable. Players can only have two bats to share between them.

In closing we should cast great doubt over Monash University’s ability to be impartial. The institution’s alarmist climate credentials are well documented.

Recall Monash University made up c.20% of the academics who signed an open letter in support of the lunatics of the Extinction Rebellion. We showed that most of those academics came from fields such as stand up comedy, poetry, arts/education, sports management, archaeology, LatAm studies, sex, health and society, social services, veterinary biology, culture, gender and racism. Few from actual climate science fields. We even proved that Matthew Flinders, who died in 1814, was a signatory to the same open letter, proving once again that alarmists are very poor at policing things that damage credibility. It is all about the number that sign, regardless of background.

Hopefully CA has a jolly good laugh and tells the ACF that it will happily comply as long as the ACF guarantees to offset any lost predicted revenues due to the ACF’s dud prophecies. Perhaps CA should simply ask the ACF why the IPCC admits within its own research (not the summaries written by politicians that hypes the panic and fear mongering) that 98% of the models it uses grossly overestimate warming.

Climate protestors enjoy a day out

Note FNF Media signalled what he thought of their factually incorrect placards. No doubt these people made their way thanks to the wonderment of fossil fuel powered transport thanks to the free wheel of capitalism

Sad to see so many kids brainwashed by parents who read The Guardian, which has openly admitted it sensationalizes it’s own language. Although reading the SMH this morning it is hard to believe that new ownership is allowing it to go down the very path that led it to where it is today.

Why the WEF’s 2020 gender gap report rankings are utterly meaningless

The most glaringly obvious anomaly in the World Economic Forum’s (WEF)’s 2020 Gender Gap report is that Syrian women are supposedly luckier to have a higher health and survival ‘gender gap’ score even though they live 15 years shorter than Aussie women. Go figure?!?

Await the media parroting headlines based on the WEF’s executive summary of the latest 371-page 2020 report on gender equality without any context. Australia slipped in the rankings, so don’t be surprised to see our media slam us without analysing the data behind the claims. Because within the data, it is marginal. Moreover, the basis of the data collection is frankly ridiculous.

We should remind ourselves that the WEF is an organisation that prides itself on rank hypocrisy. It wasn’t so long ago that 1,500 private jets landed in Davos to debate the number one concern at the WEF conference – climate change. As there is no airport at Davos, some took helicopters from Zurich Airport to the summit.

The WEF believes that the economic gender gap will take 257 years to close, up from 202 years in 2018. Technological change is driving a disproportionate effect, with women more highly represented in roles hit hardest by AI (e.g. retail). What’s more, not enough women are entering professions where wage growth is fastest. It is most likely the old white male patriarchy that forced women to go into retail rather than of their own volition.

It would be all too easy to chastise Australia for falling from 39th to 44th position, but the reality is that we improved our overall score versus 2018. Before the luvvies lavish praise on New Zealand, which climbed two places to 6th but saw its aggregate score decline, Australia is only 8.5% below NZ. So is that worth beating ourselves up for?

In the subcategory of Economic Participation and Opportunity, Australia ranks 49th vs NZ at 27th. Even though there is only a 4% difference. Liberal heads will explode to know that Trump’s America ranks above NZ.

In terms of educational attainment, Australia ranks =1st, despite the quality of our education system leaving much to be desired. Although it is a bit disingenuous as 38 countries are equal first. We just happen to benefit from alphabetical ordering.

Australia ranks 104th in health & survival but it is less than 1% difference to the 39 first placed countries (which include Angola and Syria). Although if we take Syria as a reference market, the average healthy life expectancy for women is 59.5 years vs 52.5 for men meaning that the gender gap helps score the war-torn country higher than Australia. Australia is 74.1 and 71.3 years respectively. Still,  FNF Media is sure Syrian men and women would gladly trade places with Australians even if, in this instance, the gender gap narrowed on this metric.

Note that even last placed China is less than 4% off the top spot in the health and survival gender gap subcategory. Precious little insight.

Political empowerment is where Australia gets smashed with a paltry rank of 57th. Presumably, if Australia had more female politicians then perhaps our rank would catapult. Should the voting public be admonished if Dr Keryn Phelps was beaten by Dave Sharma? Do voters select candidates on ability or genitalia?

Of interest, all one need do is a simple weighted average of the four subcategories to come up with the aggregated ranking scores provided by WEF.

If we stripped out political empowerment, Australia is within 1% of NZ and 4% of where #1 ranked Iceland is. Hardly anything to feel triggered by. Our score would be 0.898 vs the 0.731 awarded. NZ would be 90.8% vs 0.799 awarded. Iceland would be 93.5% vs 87.7%. Why haven’t the media done their homework?

In short, the supposed gap WEF thinks will take 99.5 years to close won’t be anything near that for Australia.

Which stands to reason, shouldn’t some categories be weighted higher than others in terms of closing a gender gap? Surely women in one part of the world might rank economic participation at 50% as opposed to 25%. Given health is so close across 153 countries measured, is it worth ditching that as a metric?

Between countries, maybe Zambian women place 100% emphasis in their struggle on economic wellbeing but Icelandic women 100% on political empowerment. If that was so, Zambian women would rank 0.831 vs Icelandic women at 0.701. The most value that could be added by the WEF would be to ask women in each country what was important to them. That way we wouldn’t have to standardise rules and regulations. Because this report effectively says that we should all aspire to be Iceland even if ambitious women in Botswana don’t wish to seek a career in politics.

The WEF concluded the 371-page report with,

The Global Gender Gap Report 2020 provides a comprehensive overview of the current state of the global gender gap and of efforts and insights to close it. The index offers a benchmarking tool to track progress and to reveal best practices across countries and subjects. This year the report finds that the gender gap has closed slightly since last year, yet it will still require 99.5 years to achieve full parity at the current pace.”

Unfortunately if one flips through to the country profiles, there are so many statistical gaps in certain categories making meaningful comparisons even more meaningless than they already are.

Therein lies the fatal flaw in this doorstopper. Data can be used in ways to paint a picture. It is so easy to put Australia in a negative light but in most metrics, while our rank may have fallen our raw scores have improved. But don’t be surprised if the media just tells you how bad we are. Narratives are easy to draw from a document that proves the adage of “garbage in, garbage out!” Yet don’t be surprised to see politicians making hay over the findings, if we can even call them that!