Weekly clippings #47 - Temp vs CO2, growing islands, net-zero trap, renewables challenged, non-peaks, carbon colonialism, ESG backlash, failed predictions

Welcome to another weekly collection of Examining ESG. This week features:

Science

• 425 million years of temperature vs CO2
• Island shorelines are growing due to human influence

Investment/Economics

• Net-zero isn’t happening and is a threat to human well-being
• Three Non-Economic Challenges Facing the Renewable-Energy Transition
• A history of failed peak oil predictions
• How Alberta’s embracing of intermittent generating sources is causing grid weakness
• The President of Guyana defends humanity against carbon colonialism
• Canadian banks caught in ESG backlash

Absurdities

• Al Gore’s failed Kilimanjaro snow prediction
• Bill Gates says 'electricity unfortunately has to be reliable'
• Al Gore’s failed Maldives prediction

SCIENCE

The Relationship between Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentration and Global Temperature for the Last 425 Million Years "Atmospheric CO2 concentration is correlated weakly but negatively with linearly-detrended T proxies over the last 425 million years. Of 68 correlation coefficients (half non-parametric) between CO2 and T proxies encompassing all known major Phanerozoic climate transitions, 77.9% are non-discernible (p > 0.05) and 60.0% of discernible correlations are negative."

"Why did higher past levels of atmospheric CO2 not drive increases in global temperature in the ancient climate? The differences between ΔRFCO2 and atmospheric CO2 concentration as an index of respective impact on temperature are muted in a CO2-rich environment such as the older Phanerozoic, where atmospheric CO2 concentration reached many times the contemporary atmospheric concentration of CO2. At such high atmospheric CO2 concentrations the marginal forcing of CO2 becomes negligible (Figure 8b). At the estimated baseline concentration of atmospheric CO2 across the recent Phanerozoic, 1000 ppmv, CO2 has already lost 85.7% of its maximum radiative forcing power as computed using MODTRAN (Figure 8b). At this concentration, even a relatively large increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration, therefore, yields a small and even negligible increase in the marginal forcing of temperature."

"Risk Assessment and Contemporary Carbon Policies

"At the current atmospheric concentration of CO2 (~407 ppmv [1]), the marginal forcing power is smaller than during natural glacial cycles but still greater than during most of the Phanerozoic Eon. The half-decay of CO2 marginal forcing (~337 ppmv) was surpassed in 1980, while the exponential marginal forcing decay constant (~367 ppmv) was exceeded in 1999. At the current atmospheric CO2 concentration, which is approaching 410 ppmv, atmospheric CO2 has lost nearly two-thirds of its cumulative marginal forcing power.

"Such diminishing returns in marginal forcing of temperature by atmospheric CO2 have two implications for contemporary climate policies. First, if anthropogenic CO2 emissions continue at today’s levels or increase in the coming decades, the consequent increasing concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere from anthropogenic sources will have exponentially smaller forcing impact on global temperature. As implied by the decline in marginal forcing, when atmospheric CO2 concentration reaches 1000 ppmv, near the baseline value for most of the Phanerozoic Eon (Figure 5), marginal forcing will decline to 14.3% of its maximum (computed using MODTRAN; Figure 8b). Such diminishing returns ensure that additional increments in anthropogenic emissions from today’s level will have exponentially smaller marginal impact on global temperature. This consequence of diminishing returns in marginal forcing by CO2 has been incorporated into policy assessments in reference to national responsibilities for CO2 emissions under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and Kyoto Protocol [82,83,84,85].

"Second, and conversely, as atmospheric CO2 concentration increases, any unit reductions in atmospheric CO2 concentration that may be achieved by deliberate mitigation of CO2 emissions will yield exponentially smaller reductions of temperature forcing. Diminishing returns in marginal forcing by atmospheric CO2 ensure, therefore, that efforts to mitigate global warming by reducing emissions of CO2, exemplified by carbon sequestration, will become relatively more expensive per unit of climate benefit returned. This consequence of atmospheric physics will increase the cost-benefit ratio of CO2 mitigation policies exponentially, at least insofar as the cost-benefit ratio is limited to climate.

Our take: this fits in with the mainstream scientific conclusion that the warming effect of CO2 is a logarithmic one and that the main effect is at low concentrations of CO2. Since the CO2 effect is nearly saturated now, further CO2 can only have a small effect. Further, the study finds that the correlation between CO2 and temperature is either nil or mostly negative over the last 425 million years.

Evolutionary dynamics of island shoreline in the context of climate change: insights from extensive empirical evidence "Over the past three decades, the entire region experienced a cumulative increase in land area of 157.21 km2 across more than 13,000 islands." "Contrary to initial assumptions, our empirical data does not conclusively link the widespread erosion of island shorelines primarily to historical sea-level rise, suggesting that human activities might mask the effects of sea-level rise."

Our take: this fits in with the idea that the human ability to adapt nature to improve human life, what Alex Epstein calls climate mastery, is more powerful than the slight trend towards rising sea levels natural cycles are presently creating.

INVESTMENT/ECONOMICS 

“Net zero” isn’t a Megatrend: It’s a Mega-trap "The “transition to net zero” isn’t happening and “green energy” has long generated red ink. When will the herd finally acknowledge reality?  In this article, I demonstrate that:

1. Globally, and as the UN defines it, the “transition to net zero” simply isn’t happening. At best, it’s unfolding at a snail’s pace: at its current rate, reaching something close to “net zero” will take 400 years!
2. Charitably, on a worldwide basis the odds of reaching “net zero by 2050” are very long. Realistically, planet Earth won’t come anywhere near it. Indeed, it’s more likely that during the next quarter-century the polar opposite will occur: it will transition away from “net zero.”
3. On current trends, the Albanese government will fail to reach its “renewable energy target” (82% of the country’s electricity generated from intermittent and thus unreliable sources such as wind and solar by 2030).
4. Even if it succeeded, it wouldn’t matter: neither in Australia nor globally can electricity from either intermittent or nuclear sources achieve “net zero by 2050.”
5. Australia‘s energy transition, as opposed to its electricity transition, isn’t occurring. Politicians will therefore abandon it – and their Paris, COP28, etc., commitments – as their miniscule benefits and immense costs become apparent to the general public.
6. The trillions of dollars which governments and businesses have (in Neiron’s words) “invested to reduce and eliminate CO2 emissions in order to halt global warming” are thus a colossal waste. As such, this so-called mega-trend clearly offers no “long-term growth potential to investors.”
7. Quite the contrary: over more than 15 years “green energy investments” have generated almost continuous – and cumulatively massive – losses."

"Once the public recognises that “climate action” is a bigger threat to their well-being than “climate change,” the intermittent-unreliable energy mania will collapse."

Our take: the more we read from Leithner the more we like him. He takes deep dives into important issues facing investors and seems to have solid methodology and a firm grasp of reality.

Three Non-Economic Challenges Facing the Renewable-Energy Transition  "The first challenge is the massive land consumption of wind- and solar-power generation. When measured in 2010, renewable energies generated 525 GW of power, but consumed 398,000 square kilometers. This contrasts starkly with natural gas power production, which generated 3,530 GW of power while consuming only 1,800 square kilometers of land area.

"Another hurdle is land disruption caused by mining, coupled with the necessary increase in metal extraction, posing a significant barrier to the clean-energy transition. Massive new quantities of mining and refinement of metals and minerals will be required to produce and store wind and solar power at the larger scales of deployment envisioned by advocates of the renewable-energy transition. On average, building wind and solar systems needs over 10 times the material needed for hydrocarbon-based machines providing the same energy.

"The third issue is “energy returns on investment” (EROI), which represents the ratio of energy delivered to society from one energy unit invested in obtaining that particular energy. Wind and solar power exhibit a lower Energy Return on Investment (EROI) than conventional electricity production, producing lower levels of electricity per unit cost. Societies that direct resources into lower-return endeavours, such as wind and solar power forsake the economic gains that would accrue from continuing to use energy sources that provide a higher economic return on investment, economic gains that are necessary for a society to prosper."

Our take: wind and solar advocates won't let little things like land use and massive mining requirements stand in their way, but the poor return on investment will stop them dead when subsidies run out.

A history of ‘unrealized’ peaks "Throughout history, repeated predictions of peak oil supply have repeatedly been moved further into the future, and at ever-higher levels. The past peak supply predictions were way off the mark, misled by mistaken assumptions on the size of the recoverable resource base, an underestimation of the impact of technology advancement, and the general resourcefulness of the industry." "Ultimately, peak oil supply has never come to pass, and predictions of peak oil demand are following a similar trend. Time and again, oil has defied expectations regarding peaks. Logic and history suggest that it will continue to do so.  It all underscores the need for stakeholders to recognize the need for continued investment into the oil industry, today, tomorrow, and many decades into the future."

Our take: just one in a long tradition of failed predictions of doom in the environment and energy fields.

2nd grid alert in a week leads to rotating power outages in Alberta. What’s going on? Alberta’s electricity market is unique in Canada in that it is a for-profit, deregulated system.

It pays generators only for the power they actually dispatch onto the grid and pays nothing for standby generating capacity.

The current market’s rules were designed 25 years ago, when the bulk of Alberta’s power was generated by coal-burning plants.

Today, the rapid phase-out of coal combined the astonishing growth of renewable power — in 2023, Alberta accounted for over

90 per cent of Canada’s total deployment of new wind and solar facilities — means the old rules are no longer optimal.

Our take: with as much available energy as any jurisdiction in the world, only anti-human government policies can create a fragile grid where a super-powered one is within reach and was once in place. Di no bureaucrat think that adding intermittent and unreliable generation to a previously stable grid would create problems, or that paying for instant power when its available instead of reliable power would create a pricing problem?

Carbon Colonialists - On the depantsing of a BBC reporter by the president of Guyana."What exactly are Western elites offering the developed world? To freeze their current standards of living at a fraction of that enjoyed in the G7? To leave life-changing wealth underground in the name of climate change? To do so even after the hypocritical behavior displayed by these same countries during the energy crisis? Who in their right mind would acquiesce to such nonsense? 

"Because all humans everywhere want a better standard of living for themselves and their families. Period. If riches are to be found in the ground—be it gold, silver, oil, coal, natural gas, diamonds, lithium, nickel, or copper—somebody somewhere is going to do something about it. The human endeavor makes this an iron-clad axiom, and no amount of fretting about carbon emissions from the already-rich will suppress this impulse. If the G7 hesitates to enable countries like Guyana in monetizing their natural resources, the Chinese and Russians will certainly fill the void."

Our take: the President argues strongly, but mostly on economic grounds. His argument would have been stronger if he used the moral arguments of Alex Epstein and explained how net-zero policies are anti-human and thus deeply immoral.

BMO drops anti-coal policy amid Wall Street rebuke of ESG "BMO Bank quietly dropped its policy restricting lending to the coal industry in late 2023, helping it avoid being labelled an energy “boycotter” in West Virginia."

Canadian banks caught in ESG backlash from U.S. state officials "My action today represents our continued commitment to protect state funds from furthering these politically motivated, subjective ESG policies that attempt to cut off financing for our coal, oil and natural gas industries and harm our state,” Mr. Moore said in a statement."

Our take: now that some governments are realizing how damaging the core ideas of ESG are to their constituents and are pushing back, companies are retreating from some of their their anti-human, anti-reason policies.

ABSURDITIES

Our take: You likely recall how Al Gore made a real name for himself with his book and movie An Inconvenient Truth. His work was lauded by climate alarmists the world over and he was even the co-winner of a Nobel Peace Prize, although we note this is not the same type of prize as in the other fields. The Peace prize is a joke, really. Well, making the rounds these days is just one of his completely failed predictions.

Bill Gates says 'electricity unfortunately has to be reliable' "Electricity unfortunately, has to be reliable. It's got to work during, you know, say the ten day period that Tokyo, who needs 23GW of electricity has. You'd have no solar and no wind for, say, ten day period. And so the, the need to have baseload generation like nuclear and others or to have a miracle in storage so that you can save that energy is very high."

Our take: maybe there's hope yet for Mr. Gates.

Hey, Remember How Al Gore Said the Maldives Were Gonna Disappear?

Yeah, that was just another lie.