Climate Elite Say Thee, Not Me, Must $acrifice For The Planet

Posted: August 31, 2020 by oldbrew in alarmism, climate, Critique, ideology
Tags: ,

Climate virtue signalling is a popular sport among the uber-wealthy and glitterati, but hard-working taxpayers are left to stump up most of the cash for the futile pursuit of imaginary carbon redemption that they demand.

PA Pundits - International

By Peter Murphy~

The rich are different from you and me, as the saying goes. They have money. The super-rich have even more.

Some of the wealthiest people on the planet are driving and funding the climate change political agenda for more electric cars, wind turbines and solar panels, and eradication of nuclear energy and fossil fuels. Their message is clear: America and the world must reduce their reliance on traditional energy sources and adapt in order to save the planet. That means higher costs, less energy consumption and reduced living standards.

The problem with such people advocating these climate policies, with all their negative ramifications, is that none of them are leading by example, which calls into question their own sincerity and the validity of their cause.

One example among many is Michael Bloomberg, the successful former three-term mayor of New York City and spectacularly unsuccessful presidential…

View original post 761 more words

  1. Alvin Scott says:

    Hi Roger, I just look at your “Posts in your own Bubble”

    But on this one your logic and the guy with the post is pathetic.

    Hydrogen will/could/should lead to lower costs energy for everyone

    Those in countries which Fossil Fuels left them behind for 100 years

    So please get your fact right or is just keep Fossil Fuels

    Sorry Rog your blog will last until new Hydrogen innovation makes it.

    Best Regards

    Alvin Scott


    The information contained in this email is intended only for the use of the person(s) to whom it is addressed and may be confidential or contain legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any perusal, use, distribution, copying or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error please immediately advise us by return email and delete the email document without making a copy.

  2. oldbrew says:

    So please get your fact right

    Hydrogen is not going to lower anyone’s costs.

    China’s Trendy Hydrogen Is Three Times More Expensive Than Gasoline

    Where will all the theoretical hydrogen be stored?

  3. Graeme No.3 says:

    how will hydrogen lead to lower costs? If you are going to generate it from HP steam + natural gas
    then your yield will be a maximum of 15.4% with the remander CO2 which would have to “captured”.
    If you are planning on continuous hydrolysis of KOH in water then your yield will be a maximum of 62%. Using that in a fuel cell at 60% efficiency then the combined efficiency is 62X60 or 37%, so that the hydrogen would be close to 3 times the cost of electricity: it would be cheaper to use the ekectricity directly. .

  4. JB says:

    Another bloke that has no conception of the energy valence in chemistry.

    I’ve always thought it novel that the elite with their wealth, go about undermining the very structure that provides them with their highly affluent and precarious state. Its as if they believe they are untouchable with their monetary affluence, and can manipulate industry and technology to the snap of their fingers without suffering any backwash. Yet time and again, the history of civil/economic collapse is freighted with these numbskulls.

    Denis Poirier’s theorem holds:

    Knowledge is Power.
    Time is Money.
    Power equals Work divided by Time.
    Therefore Money equals Work divided by Knowledge.

    Thus Money approaches infinity as Knowledge approaches zero.

  5. ivan says:


    Pray tell at which university you got your engineering degree so I can future engineers to keep away from it because you don’t appear to have any engineering knowledge or you wouldn’t spout such stupidity.

    As others have said hydrogen is not a viable alternative to real fuels for driving a nations economy.

  6. oldbrew says:

    Industries already use hydrogen in various ways, mostly produced using gas. No doubt they would be delighted to find a cheap or at least cheaper way of obtaining it, if such a method turned up one day.

    As of 2019, roughly 70 million tons of hydrogen are produced annually worldwide for various uses

    Would they like to rely on wind and sun for that? Don’t think so.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s