Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Economia e Produzione Industriale, Problemia Energetici

Germania. Non ridurrà le emissioni di gas a effetto serra al 2020.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela

2018-06-19.

Clima 001

Lo avevano già annunciato da tempo.

Merkel. «Tedeschi, volete ‘clima’ od acciaio?»

Merkel & Schulz. Clima addio. Avevano scherzato. Più tasse.

«Germany’s would-be coalition partners have agreed to drop plans to lower carbon dioxide emissions by 40 percent from 1990 levels by 2020»

*

«the targeted cut in emissions could no longer be achieved by 2020»

*

«The deal would represent something of a U-turn for Merkel, who has long presented herself as an advocate of climate protection policies on the international stage»

* * * * * * *

Di questi giorni arriva il mesto annuncio.

«The German government set itself the goal of reducing national greenhouse gas emissions until 2020 by 40 percent compared to 1990 levels»

*

«Germany is set to miss its 2020 greenhouse gas emissions target by 8 percent, according to German weekly magazine Der Spiegel»

*

«The climate protection report shows a gigantic gap between the government’s words and deeds when it comes to climate protection»

* * * * * * *

In parole poverissime, il traguardo prefissato era una pura e semplice utopia.

Se si potessero usare termini più propri, un delirio schizofrenico con screzio paranoide.

Delirio che però andava e va benissimo per bacchettare a destra e sinistra tutti gli altri stati, rei di non considerare nella sua gravità il problema del ‘clima’.

Traducendo dal linguaggio della Bundeskanzlerin Frau Merkel a linguaggio comune, la Germania continui a produrre imperterrita mentre gli altri chiudono gli stabilimenti perché inquinano.


Deutsche Welle. 2018-06-13. Germany to miss 2020 greenhouse gas emissions target

Economic and population growth are to blame for Germany missing its climate protection target. One of the leaders of the Greens said figures show that Chancellor Angela Merkel has more bark than bite on climate change.

*

Germany is set to miss its 2020 greenhouse gas emissions target by 8 percent, according to German weekly magazine Der Spiegel.

The German government set itself the goal of reducing national greenhouse gas emissions until 2020 by 40 percent compared to 1990 levels.

But a draft government report estimates that the country will only be able to reduce emissions by 32 percent. Officials had previously estimated a shortfall of 5 percent to 8 percent.

The document blames “unexpected economic developments and unexpected population growth” for the failure to meet the target. Increased economic activity and strong population growth generally cause an uptick in emissions due to increased use of fossil fuel energy.

“The climate protection report shows a gigantic gap between the government’s words and deeds when it comes to climate protection,” the German branch of the environmental protection group WWF said in a statement. “It’s a 120-decibel alarm and the government has to show it has heard it.”

Green Party leader lashes out at Merkel

Annalena Baerbock, co-leader of the Green Party, told Der Spiegel that the figures were proof Chancellor Angela Merkel, who has long championed the fight against climate change, “says a lot about the climate, but delivers very little.”

The new figures came a day after the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) said Germany needed to do more to realize its climate change goals.

The OECD also cited strong economic growth as a challenge to meeting emissions targets. Traffic emissions had increased as well, it said, presenting another problem for the country’s ability to meet its commitments.

Annunci
Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Scienza & Tecnica

Clima. Il riscaldamento antropico non esiste. – Corriere.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-04-13.

2018-04-09__clima__001

Il riscaldamento antropico ha poco o punto a che fare con le variazioni climatiche.

Germania. I negazionisti della stabilità climatica gettano la spugna.

Secondo i ‘climatologi’ l’Artico avrebbe dovuto sciogliersi nel 2012.

Arctic Sea Ice Gone in Summer Within Five Years?

Goodbye to an unrealistic climate goal

Trump. ‘Clima’ addio. Deobamizzazione a ritmo continuo.

Trump taglia la National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Petizione di 300 scienziati perché Mr Trump ritiri gli Usa dall’accordo di Parigi.

*

Per parlare in termini politicamente corretti, il ‘clima‘, ossia l’asserzione che esista il riscaldamento antropico, è stato ed è una gigantesca truffa volta ad acquisire gigantesche risorse economiche pubbliche da utilizzasi per finanziare realtà vicine o gestite direttamente dai liberal, che ne hanno tratto congruo sostentamento.

Di questi giorni è uscito un articolo di Mauro della Porta Raffo, per i tipi del Corriere della Sera.

Prende atto coraggiosamente della verità.

Constatiamo con piacere come persino il Corriere della Sera, per decenni corifeo dell’ideologia liberal e socialista, stia facendo marcia indietro, a tutta forza.

E questi sono solo a poco più di un mese dal 4 marzo. Figuriamoci cosa sarà tra un anno.


Corriere. 2018-04-08. Riscaldamento antropico: la verità

L’inquinamento causato dall’uomo ha niente o pochissimo a che fare col riscaldamento globale (naturale) ma moltissimo, tutto, a che vedere con il degrado della Terra.

*

L’Alaska?
Abbiamo studi assolutamente precisi a proposito del clima in Alaska. Accurati e recenti – pubblicati nel 2001 – dimostrano che tra l’1 e il 300 dopo Cristo, tra l’850 e il 1200 e dopo il 1800 le temperature colà sono state particolarmente alte. Negli intermedi, basse.

Non che i dati concernenti l’estesissimo Stato Usa possano essere considerati in relazione al pianeta Terra nel suo complesso. Ma – in particolare riguardo all’emisfero settentrionale – confermano, per quanto attiene ai periodi indicati, il susseguirsi dell’Optimum Climatico Medievale (altresì noto come Periodo Caldo Medievale), della Piccola Età Glaciale e, più indicativamente non dall’anno 1800 ma dalla metà dell’Ottocento, del Nuovo Periodo Caldo.

(Differenti rilevazioni concernono il primo dei lassi temporali elencati – dall’1 al 300 – il Periodo Caldo Romano).

Conferme ulteriori arrivano da studi specifici quanto alle variazioni delle temperature dei mari nonché di altre zone del preindicato emisfero nord. Come ebbi ad affermare (e qui ribadisco) sul Corriere della Sera in un lungo ed articolato intervento il 18 agosto 2009 (provocando irritate ed irrazionali reazioni – non prive di insulti – da parte dei catastrofisti e un gradito seppur parziale riconoscimento a firma Giovanni Sartori), il riscaldamento climatico attuale è del tutto naturale facendo storicamente seguito, non solo alle naturalissime variazioni poco fa ricordate, altresì alle infinite precedenti almeno a far luogo da 10700 anni fa, inizio teorico dell’attuale «periodo interglaciale».

Va qui ripetuto poi che ogni riferimento al cosiddetto Effetto Serra come a qualcosa di negativo già conferma che i cosiddetti «esperti» («persone che hanno smesso di ragionare» secondo Frank Lloyd Wright) non sanno di cosa parlano.
Se, difatti, tale Effetto non esistesse la temperatura media sul pianeta sarebbe decisamente inferiore e la vita avrebbe avuto molte difficoltà a svilupparsi.

È l’aberrazione dell’Effetto il pericolo.

L’aberrazione, l’alterazione, non la sua esistenza!

Devo qui infine ripetere che non esiste dimostrazione alcuna del fatto che il Buco dell’ozono esista da sempre visto che non era scientificamente possibile rilevarlo, che so?, ai tempi dei Romani o anche solo cento anni fa. Che la «scoperta, di fenomeni quali il Niño e la Niña definiti «nuovi» è ridicola.

Come ho scritto negli anni Ottanta – quando si cominciò a parlarne come appunto ‘novità climatiche’ – i termini Niño e Niña sono spagnoli e fanno riferimento, dai tempi dei conquistadores, al fatto che il primo aveva luogo (ovviamente, da sempre) periodicamente verso Natale ed essendo nella lingua di Cervantes chiamato Niño il Banbino Gesù…

Tutto ciò detto e ripetuto, l’uomo è il peggiore degli esseri viventi e la sua azione devastante. L’inquinamento antropico ha niente o pochissimo a che fare col riscaldamento globale (naturale) ma moltissimo, tutto, a che vedere con il degrado della Terra.

È per combattere tale degrado che si deve agire. Non lo si fa assolutamente essendo, risultando più facile, economicamente e politicamente assai più remunerativo sbraitare ed agitarsi demagogicamente senza senso.
E se cominciassimo a ripulire gli oceani? E se eliminassimo la plastica, flagello dell’umanità?

E se educassimo con la sferza e il bastone le nuove generazioni? Sogno. Quando si raggiunge il fondo qualcuno comincia a scavare!

Pubblicato in: Criminalità Organizzata

Germania. I negazionisti della stabilità climatica gettano la spugna.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-01-19.

Clima__001

«The difference between an increase of 1.5 degrees and two degrees means more storms, a 10-centimeter rise in sea levels and probably the loss of the ice caps in Greenland and West Antarctica»

*

«The fatal problem is that the 1.5-degree goal, which experts now deem unrealistic, is an essential detail of the Paris Climate Agreement»

*

«Emerging nations and economic giants like China have growth rates so high that …. they are also still counting on coal»

*

«That alone makes it completely unrealistic»

*

«But since then humanity’s massive burning of fossil fuels has already raised temperatures by one degree»

* * * * * * *

I negazionisti della stabilità climatica sono stati obbligati dalla dura realtà dei fatti a rinunciare a programmi e scadenze fissate dagli Accordi di Parigi.

L’umanità dovrà rassegnarsi al

«the loss of the ice caps in Greenland and West Antarctica»

Bloccare un fenomeno che non esiste

«it is completely unrealistic»

*

Questi erano una piccola parte dei proclami dei negazionisti della stabilità climatica.


Secondo i ‘climatologi’ l’Artico avrebbe dovuto sciogliersi nel 2012.


National Geographic News. 2007-127. Arctic Sea Ice Gone in Summer Within Five Years?

«The Arctic is screaming»

*

«The Arctic is often cited as the canary in the coal mine for climate warming»

*

«Now as a sign of climate warming, the canary has died»

*

«At this rate, the Arctic Ocean could be nearly ice-free at the end of summer by 2012»

* * * * * * * *

Sono pazzi da legare!! Hanno angariato il mondo per decine di anni con le loro ubbie ed adesso vengono a dirci: “tante scuse: tutto irrealistico”. Comodo il sistema, ne vero?

Sull’altare del ‘clima’ la Germania ha bruciato quasi mille miliardi: poco meno di quanto la Cina ha investito nel Progetto Belt and Road.

La differenza?

Il progetto tedesco era pura utopia, solo fonte di finanziamento a liberal e socialisti, il progetto cinese un’operazione reale e concreta di infrastrutture che resteranno nel tempo.


Deutsche Welle. 2018-01-16. Goodbye to an unrealistic climate goal

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) seems to think restricting global warming to below 1.5 degrees is not realistic anymore. What sounds like defeat could be an opportunity, writes Jens Thurau.

*

So far it’s just a news item – the actual IPCC report won’t be released until fall. But if media reports are to be believed, the world’s leading climate scientists appear to be admitting defeat when it comes to international climate protection. Their message: You can forget about keeping global warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius.

“With a 66 percent probability, it lies beyond our capabilities,” the IPCC is quoted as saying.

This infatuation with mathematical exactitude is one of the IPCC’s trademarks. In the past, it frequently led to reports that were hard to understand. But this time, the meaning is pretty clear: our greenhouse gas emissions until now and especially states’ current policies as well as their investments in the energy sector make sticking to the 1.5-degree cap practically impossible. 

The triumph of Paris

A mere two years ago, this goal was at the center of the much-lauded UN climate conference in Paris. It was what small island nations and many African and Asian countries rallied behind to challenge developed countries to make their climate protection policies more ambitious. And they succeeded.

Until then, the global climate goal was to not let global warming exceed two degrees Celsius, always compared to the temperature at the beginning of industrialization 150 years ago. But since then humanity’s massive burning of fossil fuels has already raised temperatures by one degree.

Trying to stick to the 1.5-degree goal would mean bringing the global economy to a screeching halt. That alone makes it completely unrealistic.

A lack of political will

But this doesn’t have to be the end of climate protection politics. Around the world, solar and wind power plants are being built and investments in sustainable economies are being made. Technologically, humanity could probably already make do without fossil fuels – but not in practice.

Emerging nations and economic giants like China have growth rates so high that their hunger for energy is basically insatiable. Although they like to use new, sustainable energy sources, they are also still counting on coal.

In the old industrial nations, including Germany, the political will for a swift transformation is lacking. Car and energy corporations form a powerful lobby that wants to stick to the status quo. For a year now, a climate change denier has been sitting in the oval office in Washington. But at some point, the pressure of new technologies will push these people off the world stage.

The fatal problem is that the 1.5-degree goal, which experts now deem unrealistic, is an essential detail of the Paris Climate Agreement, which is only supposed to come into effect for real in 2020. So far, this number has been the main motivation for many poor countries to continue supporting the agreement, even without the ignorant US government.

New honesty could be an opportunity

Maybe this new honesty on the part of the IPCC could present an opportunity. Developing nations in particular don’t have many alternatives to keeping international climate talks under UN leadership alive. And saying goodbye to unrealistic goals that only caused frustration could maybe even free some energy.

The IPCC’s clear words shine a light on what we’re dealing with. The difference between an increase of 1.5 degrees and two degrees means more storms, a 10-centimeter rise in sea levels and probably the loss of the ice caps in Greenland and West Antarctica. The existence of many small island nations is at stake. Nobody can say anymore that they didn’t know.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Unione Europea

Merkel & Schulz. Clima addio. Avevano scherzato. Più tasse.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-01-09.

Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio (1573–1610). Die Festnahme Christi (1598) - Il bacio di Giuda. Odessa Museum of Western and Eastern Art.

«Parigi val bene una Messa».

Con questa frase Enrico IV abiurò il protestantesimo e si ‘convertì‘ al cattolicesimo, diventando così re di Francia.

Pur di restare abbarbicati al potere, ed al denaro che vi è collegato, Frau Merkel ed Herr Schulz venderebbero l’anima al diavolo, se avessero ancora l’anima. In carenza, si rimangiano le promesse elettorali alla grande.

Giuda era davvero un galantuomo, degno di fede e fiducia.

*

«Germany’s would-be coalition partners have agreed to drop plans to lower carbon dioxide emissions by 40 percent from 1990 levels by 2020»

*

«the targeted cut in emissions could no longer be achieved by 2020»

*

«The deal would represent something of a U-turn for Merkel, who has long presented herself as an advocate of climate protection policies on the international stage»

* * * * * * * *

Ma i tedeschi si preparino a pagare ben salto il conto di una eventuale riedizione della Große Koalition, fatta per soddisfare le inconfessabili vogliose brame di dominio dei quegli egemoni.

«Her Christian Democrats (CDU) and their Christian Social Union (CSU) Bavarian allies promised tax relief»

*

«Merkel’s conservatives and the SPD also agreed to raise the threshold for the top income tax rate of 42 percent to 60,000 euros ($72,000) a year from a current 53,700 euros, another source said.»

Attenzione. Dovrebbero diminuire le tasse federali, compensate da un aumento di quelle dei Lander. E così il 43% dei tedeschi si vedrà aumentare le tasse di circa l’11%. Ma un aumento delle tasse in Germania si riverbererà su tutta l’Unione Europea, e proprio nel momento in cui l’America procede in senso opposto, riducendole ed anche in modo consistente.

Sprizzeranno gioia da tutti i pori e verosimilmente se ne ricorderanno alle prossime elezioni.

Già. In autunno si voterà in Baviera e, se tanto da tanto, la Csu riceverà una solenne bastonata di portata tale da far cadere il governo, sempre poi che riescano a formarlo.


Reuters. 2018-01-09. German coalition negotiators agree to scrap 2020 climate target: sources

Germany’s would-be coalition partners have agreed to drop plans to lower carbon dioxide emissions by 40 percent from 1990 levels by 2020, sources familiar with negotiations said on Monday — a potential embarrassment for Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Due to strong economic growth and higher-than-expected immigration, Germany is likely to miss its national emissions target for 2020 without any additional measures.

Negotiators for Merkel’s conservative bloc and the center-left Social Democrats (SPD) told Reuters the parties had agreed in exploratory talks on forming a government that the targeted cut in emissions could no longer be achieved by 2020.

Instead, they would aim to hit the 40 percent target in the early 2020s, the sources said, adding that both parties are still sticking to their goal of achieving a 55 percent cut in emissions by 2030.

The deal would represent something of a U-turn for Merkel, who has long presented herself as an advocate of climate protection policies on the international stage.

Merkel ally Michael Grosse-Broemer told reporters in the evening that negotiators had made significant progress, but there was still a lot of work to do before party leaders could discuss a joint and comprehensive policy paper on Thursday.

Grosse-Broemer declined to give any details.

Sources said both parties had also agreed that the share of renewable energy in Germany’s electricity consumption should rise to 65 percent by 2030 from roughly a third last year.

Currently, the government plans to raise the renewable energy quota to between 45 and 55 percent by 2025.

Negotiators also agreed to cut the tax on electricity in order to reduce energy costs, according to a document seen by Reuters. They also plan to tender an extra 4 gigawatts of solar energy as well as onshore and offshore wind-generating capacity.

The agreement, worked out by energy experts from both sides, must still be approved by party leaders.

The two sides want to stick to an already-agreed climate protection deal which foresees a commission to submit plans for an exit from coal-fired energy by the end of the year.

TAX CUTS

Merkel’s conservatives and the SPD also agreed to raise the threshold for the top income tax rate of 42 percent to 60,000 euros ($72,000) a year from a current 53,700 euros, another source said.

Her Christian Democrats (CDU) and their Christian Social Union (CSU) Bavarian allies promised tax relief during campaigning for September’s election and the initial agreement to raise the bar indicates the SPD is willing to compromise.

Sealing a deal with the SPD to renew their ‘grand coalition’, which has governed Germany since 2013, is Merkel’s best chance of securing a fourth term in office after the election weakened both parties.

Monday’s compromises mark a small step in the talks, however, as the would-be partners still have to bridge major differences on immigration, the future of the European Union and the economy.

SECOND TIME LUCKY?

Merkel, whose first attempt to form a coalition with the Greens and the pro-business Free Democrats (FDP) failed in November, said on Sunday at the start of five days of talks with the SPD that the negotiations could succeed.

Members of her party sounded similarly upbeat on Monday.

“Yesterday, we worked very factually and we did well,” said Julia Kloeckner, a senior member of the CDU. “We are aware of the fiscal limitations and we are optimistic.”

SPD leader Martin Schulz has vowed to put any agreement with the conservatives up for a vote by party members, many of whom are opposed to another coalition of the two largest parties in parliament.

The SPD want to improve the rights of workers and scrap Germany’s dual healthcare system of premium private care and more widely accessible public care, replacing it with a single “citizen’s insurance”.

They also oppose a plan by the conservatives to extend a ban that expires in March on family reunifications for some asylum seekers.

Pubblicato in: Economia e Produzione Industriale, Energie Alternative, Unione Europea

Russia. Il Lebedev Physics Institute ipotizza una nuova Piccola Era Glaciale.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2017-11-26.

2017-11-21__Little Ice Era__001

Sul ‘clima’ è stato detto tutto ed il suo contrario.

L’unica cosa certa è che i liberal ed i socialisti ideologici ci hanno guadagnato sopra bastimenti carichi di miliardi. Tutto gli stati occidentali vi hanno profuso fiumi di denaro finiti alla fine nelle tasche di quella genia.

Inutile, perfettamente inutile è ogni tentativo di confutazione logica. Denaro e logica non sono propriamente amici: è impossibile convincere un corrotto.

Adesso il Lebedev Physics Institute ipotizza l’avvento una nuova Piccola Era Glaciale.

«All sunspots have disappeared from the side of the Sun facing Earth, reported scientists at Moscow’s Lebedev Physics Institute, basing their conclusions on photos taken two weeks ago»

*

«The consequences could be far-reaching for the entire planet»

*

«The Little Ice Age brought colder winters to Europe and North America»

*

Noi siamo tutto tranne che la caricatura del frate predicatore medievale: non intendiamo quindi convincere nessuno.

Ciò che ci basta è che cessino quelle immani sovvenzioni statali ai poveri liberal e socialisti che avrebbero voluto tramutarsi da milionari a miliardari alle spese della Collettività.

Nota.

Si è perfettamente a corrente di una teoria propalata come verità assoluta, secondo la quale ad estati calde seguirebbero inverni freddi. I suoi supporter sostengono che quindi, a dir loro, gli inverni freddi sarebbero la evidente dimostrazione che il ‘clima’ vira verso il torrido. Costoro sembrerebbero ignorare che le temperature medie altro non sono che la somma algebrica dei dati nell’arco di un dato periodo temporale.


Russia Beyond. 2017-11-15. Solar minimum is coming: Earth faces a deep freeze future, say Russian scientists

All sunspots have disappeared from the side of the Sun facing Earth, reported scientists at Moscow’s Lebedev Physics Institute, basing their conclusions on photos taken two weeks ago. The consequences could be far-reaching for the entire planet.

Something is wrong with the Sun. In September, NASA announced the biggest solar flare in 12 years, which was unexpected considering that the Sun is heading into a period known as the solar minimum, when surface activity becomes muted.

In 2016, using observations of other sunlike stars made by NASA’s Kepler Space Telescope, scientists in the U.S. announced the Sun is entering a special phase of its magnetic evolution. These results offered the first real confirmation that the 11-year sunspot cycles are likely to disappear entirely. This means the Sun will have fewer sunspots than during the first half of its estimated 10 billion year life as a hydrogen-burning star.

Scientists originally thought this would happen slowly, but according to researchers at the Lebedev Physics Institute, it has already happened – complex sunspots and associated solar flares have completely disappeared on the Sun.

“Based on the picture that we are seeing now, the Sun is moving inevitably towards another low, that will be reached in late 2018 – the first half of 2019,” scientists said in a statement.

That’s just the first stage of the process, however. According to researchers in Moscow, the regions of hot plasma will also disappear, and then solar radiation will also drop to a zero.

“Finally, at the minimum point, the solar magnetic energy almost completely vanishes,” the researchers said. “In this form, our star can exist from several months to a year, after which new fluxes of the magnetic field begin to float from the depth of the Sun, the first spots appear, and the flywheel of the solar cycle starts a new 11-year revolution.”

Currently, individual spots and even faint flashes may still appear on the Sun for a short time, but this is only the last fading burst of activity. According to researchers, the sunspots will completely disappear within the next 2-3 months.

The consequences for Earth might be more cold, ice, and heavy snowfalls. The last so-called Little Ice Age, observed in the 17th-18th centuries, coincided with the known “failure of the solar cycle, during which for 50 years there were almost no sunspots on the Sun.”

The Little Ice Age brought colder winters to Europe and North America. In the mid-17th century, farms and villages in the Swiss Alps were destroyed by encroaching glaciers. Canals and rivers in Great Britain and the Netherlands frequently froze, and early settlers in North America reported exceptionally severe winters.


Lebedev Physics Institute. 2017-11-15. На Солнце исчезли пятна

Число пятен на Солнце, считающееся главной характеристикой уровня солнечной активности, стремительно падает до нуля. В настоящее время на обращенной к Земле стороне Солнца не наблюдается ни одного пятна. Есть ли сейчас пятна на обратной стороне Солнца, сказать трудно, но исходя из фотографий Солнца 2 недели назад, когда эта сторона была обращена к Земле, пятна отсутствуют и там. Тем самым наша звезда сейчас очень близка по внешнему виду к идеальному объекту, без каких-либо “недостатков”, каким его и представляли люди до начала 17 века. То, что на совершенном небесном теле, к каким относили тогда Солнце, существуют пятна, так потрясло современников, что первые сообщения об этом публиковались анонимно, либо в частных переписках, из опасений обвинений в ереси. И даже после того, как наличие пятен было доказано, “идеальность” Солнца пытались спасти, утверждая, что пятна являются облаками, отрицая доказанный сейчас факт принадлежности пятен к поверхности Солнца.

Число пятен на Солнце является главным параметром, по которому измеряется 11-летний солнечный цикл, история которого насчитывает уже почти 270 лет. Раз в 11 лет число пятен достигает максимума, а примерно посередине между этими пиками снижается до наименьшего значения, называемого солнечным минимумом. Природа этих изменений оставалась непонятной на протяжении почти 200 лет и лишь в середине XX века было установлено, что с шагом 11 лет меняется магнитное поле Солнце (поочерёдно усиливается и ослабляется). Так как пятна образуются в областях сильного поля, то в моменты максимальной напряженности поля достигает максимума и число пятен. Магнитная и связанная с ней электрическая энергия Солнца являются основным “топливом” для солнечной активности (солнечные вспышки и выбросы вещества имеют в своей основе электрическую и магнитную природу). По этой причине в годы максимума солнечного цикла растет и “взрывная” активность Солнца. В годы минимума она напротив затухает.

Исходя из картины, которую мы наблюдаем сейчас, Солнце неотвратимо движется к очередному минимуму, который будет достигнут в конце 2018 – первой половине 2019 годов. На этом пути на Солнце сначала должны полностью исчезнуть сложные группы пятен и связанные с ними солнечные вспышки, что похоже уже произошло. Затем в короне Солнца исчезают области горячей плазмы, а производимое ими рентгеновское излучение Солнца падает до почти нулевого фонового уровня. Оставшиеся солнечные пятна предельно упрощаются и, хотя визуально присутствуют на диске, не могут уже ни греть плазму, ни производить вспышки. На следующем этапе пятна на Солнце полностью исчезают, хотя области повышенного магнитного поля еще видны на диске. Наконец в точке минимума магнитная энергия Солнца практически полностью обращается в ноль, и оно вырождается в почти в идеально симметричный объект без каких-либо особенностей. В таком виде наша звезда может существовать от нескольких месяцев до года, после чего из глубины Солнца постепенно начинают всплывать новые потоки магнитного поля, появляются первые пятна, и маховик солнечного цикла начинает новый 11-летний оборот.

В настоящий момент Солнце, судя по всему, начало входить в третий этап, характеризующийся постепенным исчезновением пятен. На этом этапе всё еще на короткое время могут появляться отдельные пятна и даже происходить слабые вспышки, но это является лишь последними угасающими всплесками активности. Окончательное исчезновение пятен с Солнца может произойти уже в течение 2-3 ближайших месяцев.

Хотя низкая солнечная активность кажется благоприятной ситуацией для Земли, ученые в своих “апокалиптических прогнозах”, как ни парадоксально, крайне редко связывают их с высокой активностью Солнца и напротив, с опасением относятся к низкой. Вызвано это тем, что Солнце в доступной человечеству истории никогда не производило суперсвспышек, способных повлиять на жизнь. Периоды же “замораживания” солнечного цикла в истории наблюдались и показывали корреляцию с климатом. В частности, последний так называемый малый ледниковый период в истории Земли, наблюдавшийся на стыке 17 и 18 веков совпал по времени с известным сбоем солнечного цикла (минимумом Маундера), в течение которого на Солнце на протяжении почти 50 лет почти не было пятен — то есть активность замерла на несколько десятилетий в точке минимума.

Опасения о том, выйдет ли Солнце из очередного минимума, и не произойдет ли сбой, в ходе которого оно останется в нем, высказываются при приближении каждого солнечного минимума. За последние 200 лет, однако, повторений ситуации с минимумом Маундера не было. Из того, что видно на Солнце сейчас, его эволюция происходит пока в полном соответствии с поведением, которое наблюдалось в ходе предыдущих 11-летних циклов. Что будет потом, покажут дальнейшие исследования.

>>> Traduttore automatico <<<

Il numero di punti sul Sole, considerato la caratteristica principale del livello di attività solare, sta rapidamente scendendo a zero. Al momento attuale, nessuna macchia solare è osservata sul lato del Sole rivolto verso la Terra. Ora ci sono punti sul retro del Sole, è difficile da dire, ma sulla base delle foto del Sole 2 settimane fa, quando questo lato era rivolto verso la Terra, non ci sono nemmeno punti. Così, la nostra stella è ora molto vicina nell’aspetto all’oggetto ideale, senza “difetti”, come è stata rappresentata dalla gente prima dell’inizio del 17 ° secolo. Il fatto che il perfetto corpo celeste a cui ha attribuito quando il Sole, ci sono macchie, contemporanei così scioccato che i primi rapporti su di esso sono stati pubblicati in forma anonima o in corrispondenza privata, per paura di accuse di eresia. E anche dopo che le macchie sono state provate, l'”idealità” del Sole è stata tentata di salvare, sostenendo che le macchie sono nuvole, negando il fatto ormai dimostrato che le macchie appartengono alla superficie del Sole.

Il numero di punti sul Sole è il parametro principale, secondo il quale viene misurato il ciclo solare di 11 anni, la cui storia è già stata contata per quasi 270 anni. Una volta in 11 anni il numero di spot raggiunge il massimo e approssimativamente nel mezzo tra questi picchi si riduce al valore più basso, chiamato il minimo solare. La natura di questi cambiamenti è rimasta incomprensibile per quasi 200 anni e solo verso la metà del XX secolo è stato stabilito che il campo magnetico del Sole cambia con un passo di 11 anni (alternativamente amplificato e indebolito). Poiché i punti sono formati in regioni di un campo forte, il numero di punti raggiunge un massimo nei momenti di massima intensità del campo. L’energia elettrica magnetica e associata del Sole è il principale “combustibile” per l’attività solare (i brillamenti solari e le emissioni di materia sono fondamentalmente di natura elettrica e magnetica). Per questo motivo, negli anni del massimo del ciclo solare cresce anche l’attività “esplosiva” del Sole. Negli anni di minimo, è smorzato al contrario.

Sulla base del quadro che stiamo vedendo ora, il Sole si muove inevitabilmente verso un altro minimo, che sarà raggiunto alla fine del 2018 – la prima metà del 2019. Su questa strada, le complesse macchie solari e le brillamenti solari associati dovrebbero prima completamente scomparire sul Sole, il che sembra essere già accaduto. Quindi nella corona del Sole scompaiono le regioni del plasma caldo e la radiazione a raggi X del Sole prodotta da esse scende a un livello di fondo quasi zero. Le restanti macchie solari sono estremamente semplificate e, sebbene visivamente presenti sul disco, non possono più riscaldare il plasma o produrre bagliori. Nella fase successiva, le macchie sul Sole scompaiono completamente, sebbene le regioni del campo magnetico aumentato siano ancora visibili sul disco. Infine, nel punto minimo, l’energia magnetica solare svanisce quasi completamente e degenera in un oggetto quasi perfettamente simmetrico senza alcuna singolarità. In quanto tale, la nostra stella può esistere da pochi mesi a un anno, e poi dalle profondità del Sole a poco a poco cominciano ad emergere, nuovi flussi del campo magnetico, ci sono il primo posto, e ciclo solare il volano inizia una nuova rotazione di 11 anni.

Al momento, il sole, apparentemente, ha iniziato ad entrare nel terzo stadio, caratterizzato da una graduale scomparsa delle macchie. In questa fase, i singoli punti e persino i deboli bagliori possono ancora apparire per un breve periodo, ma questa è solo l’ultima esplosione di attività. La scomparsa definitiva delle macchie solari dal Sole potrebbe verificarsi entro i prossimi 2-3 mesi.

Anche se la bassa attività solare sembra essere una situazione favorevole per la Terra, gli scienziati nei loro “previsioni apocalittiche,” paradossalmente, raramente li associano con l’alta attività del Sole e d’altra parte, con apprensione sono bassi. È causato dal fatto che il Sole nella storia accessibile all’umanità non ha mai prodotto super-bagliori capaci di influenzare la vita. I periodi del “congelamento” del ciclo solare nella storia sono stati osservati e hanno mostrato una correlazione con il clima. In particolare, l’ultima cosiddetta Piccola Età Glaciale nella storia della Terra, che è stata osservata a livello della giunzione dei secoli 17 ° e 18 ha coinciso con il fallimento nota del ciclo solare (il minimo di Maunder), durante il quale il sole per quasi 50 anni, quasi senza macchie – che è, L’attività si bloccò per diversi decenni nel punto minimo.

I timori circa se il Sole uscirà dal minimo successivo e se ci sarà un malfunzionamento, durante il quale rimarrà in esso, saranno espressi all’approssimarsi di ogni minimo solare. Negli ultimi 200 anni, tuttavia, non ci sono state ripetizioni della situazione con il minimo di Maunder. Da ciò che è visibile sul Sole ora, la sua evoluzione è ancora in piena conformità con il comportamento osservato durante i precedenti cicli di 11 anni. Quello che accadrà dopo, mostrerà ulteriori ricerche.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Economia e Produzione Industriale, Energie Alternative, Unione Europea

Bonn. ‘Clima’. I patetici contorsionismi logici di Frau Merkel.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2017-11-13.

Ciminiere Tedesche

Qualsiasi persona con un residuo minimale di buona fede avrebbe dato le dimissioni, piuttosto che rinnegare sé stesso e le proprie idee.

Non è certo il caso di Frau Merkel.

*

«Germany should lead the fight against climate change and cut emissions without destroying jobs, Chancellor Angela Merkel said on Saturday»

*

«the dilemma of the center-right leader in tricky coalition negotiations to form the next government. »

*

«Merkel said industrialized countries had a special responsibility to reduce their emission of climate-damaging greenhouse gases»

*

«Due to strong economic growth and higher-than-expected immigration, Germany is at risk of missing its emissions target if the next government does not implement further measures»

*

«But the chancellor insisted that Germany’s “industrial core” should not be put at risk and any further climate measures should not force companies to relocate»

*

«If steel mills, aluminum factories, copper smelters, if they all leave our country and go somewhere where environmental regulations are not as strict, then we have won nothing for global climate»

*

«measures in order to avoid major disruptions and job losses»

*

«The Greens called on Merkel’s conservatives and the FDP to make concessions after the party itself gave ground on Tuesday by dropping its demand for fixed dates to ban cars with internal combustion engines and shut down coal-fired power stations»

*

«Juergen Trittin, another senior member of the Greens, warned Merkel personally that her political future was at stake.»

* * * * * * * *

Da questo discorso non è possibile riconoscere Frau Angela Merkel. È la ammissione che Mr Trump aveva ragione da vendere.

Due i punti nodali, detti in modo da cercare di non perdere la faccia.

«If steel mills, aluminum factories, copper smelters, if they all leave our country and go somewhere where environmental regulations are not as strict, then we have won nothing for global climate»

*

«Germany’s “industrial core” should not be put at risk and any further climate measures should not force companies to relocate»

*

«measures in order to avoid major disruptions and job losses»

* * * * * * * *

In pratica la Bundeskanzlerin Frau Merkel dice che prenderà tutte le misure possibili per il ‘clima’ sotto due condizioni:

– non obbligare le ditte a delocalizzare la produzione;

– evitare ulteriori perdite di posti di lavoro.

*

In poche parole, il ‘clima‘ in Germania è morto e sepolto.

Visto che bel risultato ha ottenuto AfD senza muovere un dito? L’Unione Europea ha cacciato nel tombino in venti anni circa 4,500 miliardi del Contribuente.


Reuters. 2017-11-13. Merkel tries to bridge climate gap as coalition talks heat up

BERLIN (Reuters) – Germany should lead the fight against climate change and cut emissions without destroying jobs, Chancellor Angela Merkel said on Saturday, treading a fine line as she tries to clinch a coalition deal with environmentalist and pro-business parties.

Merkel’s comments, made in her weekly podcast in the midst of 200-nation talks on limiting global warming in Bonn, show the dilemma of the center-right leader in tricky coalition negotiations to form the next government.

Merkel’s conservatives, which bled support to the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) in the Sept. 24 election, are trying to forge a coalition government with the pro-business Free Democrats (FDP) and the environmentalist Greens.

The unlikely partners have cited progress after three weeks of exploratory talks about a three-way coalition. But the Greens raised the pressure on Merkel ahead of a meeting on Sunday in which party leaders are due to thrash out differences over climate, immigration and euro zone policy.

The Greens want Merkel and the other parties to spell out which additional measures the next government will implement for Germany to reach its 2020 goal of lowering emissions by 40 percent from 1990 levels.

In her podcast, Merkel said industrialized countries had a special responsibility to reduce their emission of climate-damaging greenhouse gases, warning that time was running out.

“The urgency, I think we all see this in light of the natural disasters, is great,” Merkel said. Climate change is leading to droughts and famine and this is causing mass migration from poorer to richer countries, she added.

Referring to the Paris climate agreement, Merkel said: “As things stand right now, the target to keep the rise in temperature below two degrees Celsius – ideally at around 1.5 degrees – will be missed.”

WRESTLING

Due to strong economic growth and higher-than-expected immigration, Germany is at risk of missing its emissions target if the next government does not implement further measures.

“That’s why we are also wrestling in exploratory talks for a possible new coalition about this: How can we adopt even more measures in order to try and reach this 2020 goal,” Merkel said.

But the chancellor insisted that Germany’s “industrial core” should not be put at risk and any further climate measures should not force companies to relocate.

“If steel mills, aluminum factories, copper smelters, if they all leave our country and go somewhere where environmental regulations are not as strict, then we have won nothing for global climate,” Merkel said.

The government should therefore adopt a sound mix of regulatory policy, financial incentives and voluntary measures in order to avoid major disruptions and job losses, she said.

“We have to push ahead forcefully with electromobility and alternative drive systems,” Merkel said. She also suggested that the next government should give tax incentives for home owners to improve building insulation.

The Greens called on Merkel’s conservatives and the FDP to make concessions after the party itself gave ground on Tuesday by dropping its demand for fixed dates to ban cars with internal combustion engines and shut down coal-fired power stations.

“Instead of the week of truth, this was a week of disappointment,” parliamentary floor leader Anton Hofreiter told Der Spiegel magazine, adding that the Greens had done their part by offering “painful” compromises.

Juergen Trittin, another senior member of the Greens, warned Merkel personally that her political future was at stake.

“Mrs Merkel, the lead candidate of the conservatives and acting chancellor, she wants to get re-elected – with our votes,” Trittin said. “And for this, she must move now.”

Pubblicato in: Criminalità Organizzata

Secondo i ‘climatologi’ l’Artico avrebbe dovuto sciogliersi nel 2012.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2017-11-04.

Animali_che_Ridono__006_Muli

Dieci anni or sono augusti, strapagati ed encomiati scienziati del calibro di Mark Serreze e di Jay Zwally, considerati le massime autorità sul ‘clima’, avevano fatto una importante profezia, che puntualmente andiamo a verificare se mai si fosse avverata. Ecco cosa avevano profetato.

«The Arctic is screaming»

*

«The Arctic is often cited as the canary in the coal mine for climate warming»

*

«Now as a sign of climate warming, the canary has died»

*

«At this rate, the Arctic Ocean could be nearly ice-free at the end of summer by 2012»

* * * * * * * *

Bene.

Adesso andiamo a verificare quanto si sia avverato di simile previsione.

«Over the past ten years since they made that forecast, there has been a huge increase in Arctic ice.»

*

«End of September Arctic sea ice extent is up 20% over the past decade.»

*

«NASA also says that the last decade has been very hot in the Arctic»

* * * * * * * *

«The scientists behind the global warming scam are completely incompetent. They have no idea what they are talking about and don’t follow any scientific method. They don’t understand climate. They don’t understand physics. They don’t understand statistics. They don’t understand integrity.

It is a pathetic clown show – not science.»

* * * * * * * *

Volendo usare una terminologia forbitamente politicamente corretta, codesti sedicenti ‘scienziati’ sono solo una associazione per delinquere a fine di estorcere stipendi e finanziamenti dalle tasche dei Contribuenti.

In dieci anni negli soli Stati Uniti, il ‘clima’ ha chiesto ed ottenuto più di 1,400 miliardi di dollari americani per poter proseguire i propri ‘studi‘.

L’unico posto consono per simile genia è dapprima un’aula di tribunale, quindi un campo di lavoro forzato a vita.

Criminali perversi loro, criminaletti creduli tutti coloro che li sostengono ed osannano.

Nota.

Sono debitore dello spunto al dr. Massimo Cesare Pernigotti.


National Geographic News. 2007-127. Arctic Sea Ice Gone in Summer Within Five Years?

An already relentless melting of the Arctic greatly accelerated this summer—a sign that some scientists worry could mean global warming has passed an ominous tipping point.

One scientist even speculated that summer sea ice could be gone in five years.

Greenland’s ice sheet melted nearly 19 billion tons more than the previous high mark, and the volume of Arctic sea ice at summer’s end was half what it was just four years ago, according to new NASA satellite data obtained by the Associated Press (AP).

“The Arctic is screaming,” said Mark Serreze, senior scientist at the government’s snow and ice data center in Boulder, Colorado.

2012

Just last year two top scientists surprised their colleagues by projecting that the Arctic sea ice was melting so rapidly that it could disappear entirely by the summer of 2040.

This week, after reviewing his own new data, NASA climate scientist Jay Zwally said: “At this rate, the Arctic Ocean could be nearly ice-free at the end of summer by 2012, much faster than previous predictions.”

So scientists in recent days have been asking themselves these questions: Was the record melt seen all over the Arctic in 2007 a blip amid relentless and steady warming? Or has everything sped up to a new climate cycle that goes beyond the worst case scenarios presented by computer models?

“The Arctic is often cited as the canary in the coal mine for climate warming,” said Zwally, who as a teenager hauled coal. “Now as a sign of climate warming, the canary has died. It is time to start getting out of the coal mines.”

The burning of coal, oil, and other fossil fuels produces carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that are responsible for man-made global warming. For the past several days, government diplomats have been debating in Bali, Indonesia, the outlines of a new climate treaty calling for tougher limits on these gases.

What happens in the Arctic has implications for the rest of the world. Faster melting there means eventual sea level rise and more immediate changes in winter weather because of less sea ice.

In the United States, a weakened Arctic blast moving south to collide with moist air from the Gulf of Mexico can mean less rain and snow in some areas, including the drought-stricken Southeast, said Michael MacCracken, a former federal climate scientist who now heads the nonprofit Climate Institute.

“I don’t pay much attention to one year … but this year the change is so big, particularly in the Arctic sea ice, that you’ve got to stop and say, ‘What is going on here?’ You can’t look away from what’s happening here,” said Waleed Abdalati, NASA’s chief of cyrospheric sciences. “This is going to be a watershed year.”

The Facts

2007 shattered records for Arctic melt in the following ways:

—About 552 billion tons of ice melted this summer from the Greenland ice sheet, according to preliminary satellite data to be released by NASA Wednesday. That’s 15 percent more than the annual average summer melt, beating 2005’s record.

—A record amount of surface ice was lost over Greenland this year, 12 percent more than the previous worst year, 2005, according to data the University of Colorado released Monday. That’s nearly quadruple the amount that melted just 15 years ago. It’s an amount of water that could cover Washington, D.C., a half-mile deep, researchers calculated.

—The surface area of summer sea ice floating in the Arctic Ocean this summer was nearly 23 percent below the previous record. The dwindling sea ice already has affected wildlife, with 6,000 walruses coming ashore in northwest Alaska in October for the first time in recorded history. Another first: the Northwest Passage was open to navigation.

—Still to be released is NASA data showing the remaining Arctic sea ice to be unusually thin—another record. That makes it more likely to melt in future summers. Combining the shrinking area covered by sea ice with the new thinness of the remaining ice, scientists calculate that the overall volume of ice is half of 2004’s total.

—Alaska’s frozen permafrost (see magazine article) is warming, although it’s not quite thawing yet. But temperature measurements 66 feet deep in the frozen soil rose nearly four-tenths of a degree from 2006 to 2007, according to measurements from the University of Alaska. While that may not sound like much, “it’s very significant,” said University of Alaska professor Vladimir Romanovsky.

—Surface temperatures in the Arctic Ocean this summer were the highest in 77 years of record-keeping, with some places eight degrees Fahrenheit above normal, according to research to be released Wednesday by University of Washington’s Michael Steele.

“New Regime”

Greenland, in particular, is a significant bellwether. Most of its surface is covered by ice. If it completely melted—something key scientists think would likely take centuries, not decades—it could add more than 22 feet to the world’s sea level.

However, for nearly the past 30 years, the data pattern of its ice sheet melt has zigzagged. A bad year, like 2005, would be followed by a couple of lesser years.

According to that pattern, 2007 shouldn’t have been a major melt year, but it was, said Konrad Steffen, of the University of Colorado, which gathered the latest data.

“I’m quite concerned,” he said. “Now I look at 2008. Will it be even warmer than the past year?”

Other new data, from a NASA satellite, measure ice volume. NASA geophysicist Scott Luthcke, reviewing it and other Greenland numbers, concluded: “We are quite likely entering a new regime.”

Melting of sea ice and Greenland’s ice sheets also alarms scientists because they become part of a troubling spiral.

White sea ice reflects about 80 percent of the sun’s heat off Earth, NASA’s Zwally said. When there is no sea ice, about 90 percent of the heat goes into the ocean which then warms everything else up. Warmer oceans then lead to more melting.

“That feedback is the key to why the models predict that the Arctic warming is going to be faster,” Zwally said. “It’s getting even worse than the models predicted.”

Tipping Point

NASA scientist James Hansen, the lone-wolf researcher often called the godfather of global warming, on Thursday was to tell scientists and others at the American Geophysical Union scientific in San Francisco that in some ways Earth has hit one of his so-called tipping points, based on Greenland melt data.

“We have passed that and some other tipping points in the way that I will define them,” Hansen said in an email. “We have not passed a point of no return. We can still roll things back in time — but it is going to require a quick turn in direction.”

Last year, Cecilia Bitz at the University of Washington and Marika Holland at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Colorado startled their colleagues when they predicted an Arctic free of sea ice in just a few decades. Both say they are surprised by the dramatic melt of 2007.

Bitz, unlike others at NASA, believes that “next year we’ll be back to normal, but we’ll be seeing big anomalies again, occurring more frequently in the future.”

And that normal, she said, is still a “relentless decline” in ice.


Real Climate Science. 2017-10-23. National Geographic/NASA : Arctic Sea Ice Gone By 2012

Ten years ago, NASA’s top expert predicted an ice-free Arctic by 2012. NSIDC’s top expert said the Arctic was “screaming.”

2017-10-30__Clima__001

Over the past ten years since they made that forecast, there has been a huge increase in Arctic ice.

2017-10-30__Clima__002

End of September Arctic sea ice extent is up 20% over the past decade.

2017-10-30__Clima__003

The scientists behind the global warming scam are completely incompetent. They have no idea what they are talking about and don’t follow any scientific method. They don’t understand climate. They don’t understand physics. They don’t understand statistics. They don’t understand integrity.

It is a pathetic clown show – not science.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Economia e Produzione Industriale, Energie Alternative

Germania. La Cnn denuncia lo ‘sporco segreto’ di Frau Merkel.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2017-08-03.

Fossa dei Serpenti

Why Germany has a dirty climate secret

Leggere questo articolo comparso sulla Cnn porta a ritenere che la cura dimagrante dell’audicence inizi ad espletare i suoi benefici effetti.

Quando i redattori della Cnn si dimenticano di essere, oppure forse di essere stati, dei liberal democratici, scrivono anche cose di buon senso.

*

«Germany’s Angela Merkel is often referred to as the “climate chancellor” because of her impassioned stand on climate protection, which has included the muscular arm-twisting of laggard nations in Europe and beyond — as she demonstrated at the G20 summit in Hamburg in earlier this month»

*

«And during her three full terms in office, she’s guided Germany’s vaunted Energiewende, or renewable energy transition, which has vastly increased the number of renewables in the power mix to make up a third of the country’s electricity supply today — and an astounding 85% of power generation on particularly sunny, windy days»

*

«But Germany’s headline success story has a dark underside that is usually overlooked in all the fanfare»

*

«Greenhouse gas emissions in Germany have not sunk significantly since 2009, but rather have stagnated at about 900 million tons of carbon dioxide a year: the highest in Europe by far»

*

«But, stubbornly, emissions refuse to budge»

*

«Germany’s dirty secret underscores the inevitable conclusion that renewables are alone not enough to beat global warming»

*

«living the illusion that more solar panels, hydro-power plants, and wind turbines will solve the problem while also fueling a booming industry that creates jobs and revenue»

*

«Germany has more coal-fired plants than any other country in the EU.»

*

«Germany’s electricity sector, more dependent on coal than renewables, accounts for over a third of the nation’s carbon emissions. …. But so far, Berlin hasn’t even stopped the construction of new coal plants (although the oldest ones are being shuttered.)»

*

«Banning Combustion Engines Is the Wrong Line to Take»

*

«Germany and the rest of the developed world have to critically examine their societies’ levels of consumption. The world’s current volume of consumption and economic growth are unsustainable»

*

«Germany may not be the leader of the free world»

* * * * * *

«living the illusion»

Sembrerebbe quasi che l’articolista si sia letto i post di senzanubi.

Nota.

Frau Merkel è preoccupatissima di cosa avverrà in Germania nel 2050. Se si fosse letta le statistiche di Destatis, l’ufficio centrale di statistica tedesco, troverebbe che a tale data i tedeschi autoctoni saranno ridotti a meno di quindici milioni, e tutti presi con i problema della sopravvivenza, anche a costo di bruciare copertoni d’auto.


Cnn. 2017-07-26. Why Germany has a dirty climate secret

Germany’s Angela Merkel is often referred to as the “climate chancellor” because of her impassioned stand on climate protection, which has included the muscular arm-twisting of laggard nations in Europe and beyond — as she demonstrated at the G20 summit in Hamburg in earlier this month.

And during her three full terms in office, she’s guided Germany’s vaunted Energiewende, or renewable energy transition, which has vastly increased the number of renewables in the power mix to make up a third of the country’s electricity supply today — and an astounding 85% of power generation on particularly sunny, windy days.

But Germany’s headline success story has a dark underside that is usually overlooked in all the fanfare. Greenhouse gas emissions in Germany have not sunk significantly since 2009, but rather have stagnated at about 900 million tons of carbon dioxide a year: the highest in Europe by far. (France’s, for example, are less than half as much.)

More renewables come online everyday in Germany — boosted recently by the mighty contribution of a new fleet of state-of-the-art offshore wind turbines in the North and Baltic Seas. And the government’s entirely realistic goal is that at least 60% of all energy, including heat and transport, should be green by 2050.

But, stubbornly, emissions refuse to budge. In fact, Germany is in real danger of not meeting either its 2020 or its 2030 emissions targets, the kind of goals it has pushed other countries to adopt.

If even Germany can’t live up to its obligations, the international goal set at the 2015 Paris climate summit of keeping the rise in global temperatures below two degrees Celsius simply isn’t realistic.

Germany’s dirty secret underscores the inevitable conclusion that renewables are alone not enough to beat global warming.

There are other fronts just as critical in the battle to halt rising temperatures across the world, such as phasing out coal, pricing carbon emissions, reducing consumption, and rethinking our transportation systems. In these areas, the ostensible wunderkind of Germany is a delinquent, not the pioneer it could be.

Berlin, however, isn’t alone, either in failing to sink emissions or living the illusion that more solar panels, hydro-power plants, and wind turbines will solve the problem while also fueling a booming industry that creates jobs and revenue.

Germany — and other countries too — can begin to redress this glaring deficit in climate policy by grabbing the bull by the horns and going to the source of the problem: greenhouse gas emissions themselves. The Paris Agreement took a crucial step in this direction by setting emissions targets for individual sectors, such as energy, transportation, agriculture, and industry.

There’s no better place to start than coal, particularly carbon-intensive among fossil fuels. Germany has more coal-fired plants than any other country in the EU.

Germany’s electricity sector, more dependent on coal than renewables, accounts for over a third of the nation’s carbon emissions. Germany could end subsidies to the industry and, as the Green Party advocates, pledge to exit coal completely by 2030. But so far, Berlin hasn’t even stopped the construction of new coal plants (although the oldest ones are being shuttered.)

Resistance to such an offensive course lies not only in the industrial lobbies of the conservative parties, such as Merkel’s Christian Democrats, but also Germany’s biggest leftist party, the Social Democrats (SPD), which fears the loss of jobs in regions that have long voted SPD.

Carbon emissions are still rising in Europe’s transport sector, led by Germany, the main culprits being diesel fuel-powered vehicles, luxury cars, and road freight transport. Germany coddles its world-class automobile industry, which has been extremely slow to embrace alternatives to the combustion-fueled engine. Despite new lines of electric cars — long after Tesla and other foreign carmakers forged ahead — the Germans remain wedded to their big gas guzzlers.

Just last week Germany’s powerful lobby group Association of the Automotive Industry (VDA) issued a communiqué entitled “Banning Combustion Engines Is the Wrong Line to Take,” which argued that prioritizing alternative, low-carbon mobility over conventional automobiles is unfair and harmful to German industry.

Berlin has even intervened at EU level to water down regulations to sink automobile emissions over time. Nothing better illustrates the industry’s attitude than the scandal over VW and other carmakers cheating on diesel emissions tests, which the German government turned a blind eye to in the first place, and still drags its heels in ending.

The option of putting serious prices on industrial emissions, coal burning, and high-pollution automobiles is one way forward. There are punitive pricing systems currently in place, but the cost to polluters is far too low to act as a real deterrent.

The EU’s emissions trading scheme, a cap-and-trade permit system to regulate industry pollution, hasn’t worked for years. Getting it on its feet would be a decisive move in making emitters pay, providing dollars-and-cents motivation to cut energy use and switch to renewables.

Lastly, Germany and the rest of the developed world have to critically examine their societies’ levels of consumption. The world’s current volume of consumption and economic growth are unsustainable as our population expands — a fact that most economists and climate scientists agree on. But the lion’s share of politicians either won’t face this fact or are too timid to address it publicly, fearing a voter backlash when it comes to readjusting lifestyles.

Germany may not be the leader of the free world, as is sometimes claimed, but it is Europe’s leading force and could trailblaze on climate protection as it has on renewable energy on a global scale. But first it has to be credible with much greater efforts at home. Others are likely to follow, just as they have on renewables.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Geopolitica Mondiale

Deutsche Welle. G20. Merkel ha fallito.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2017-07-10.

2017-07-04__Merkel__001 MERKEL_BIMBA_Molino_foto-per-illustrare-concorso-vignette

Ricordiamo come il Deutsche Welle sia ufficioso organo di stampa del Governo tedesco, edito in trenta lingue differenti, di strettissima osservanza liberal socialista.

*

G20. Quattro passi falsi di Frau Merkel. 2017-07-08

G20. Incontro Trump – Putin. Primo report. Putin e Trump abbottonati. 2017-07-07

G20. Il silenzio della stampa liberal. 2017-07-07

*

Il G20 deve essere andato veramente male a giudicare dal titolo del Deutsche Welle

G20: success for Africa, failure for climate

*

«Traditionally, G20 leaders focus on issues relating to global economic growth, international trade and financial market regulations. The 2017 Hamburg summit was no different»

*

«However, Germany attempted to use its presidency to rally global leaders behind a number of causes, which the summit had not previously had on its agenda.»

*

«build a common front in the fight against antimicrobial resistance …. Women’s economic empowerment also featured in the discussions …. a general consensus among the G20 leaders in combating international terrorism …. We agreed to give a chance to globalization and fight protectionism and unfair business practices …. increasing vigilance on international market structures, profit shifting, and bad taxation practices»

*

«The issue of international trade however was a hotly contested subject against the backdrop of US President Donald Trump’s “America First” agenda»

*

«The G20 leaders also recognized Trump’s utterance of pulling out of the Paris climate deal. The remaining 19 members agreed that the Paris deal is irreversible. It will now be supported by a Hamburg action plan for climate and energy»

*

«Germany wanted to use its G20 presidency to put what some call the “Merkel plan for Africa” at the core of the discussion»

*

«The Africa focus, however, appears to have been overshadowed by the G20’s internal relations»

*

«We are very happy that Merkel chose to focus on Africa»

*

«But apart from showing appreciation, African leaders have not done much so far to support her plans. Merkel has earned their goodwill, but not their resources»

*

«While Merkel expressed her wish “to find compromises” to these pressing global issues, many were left unresolved»

* * * * * * *

Riassumiamo.

«During a meeting on climate change, Trump left for his bilateral with Vladimir Putin» [Fonte]

*

«Merkel is facing elections at home at a time when Germany seems more divided than it has been in a long time»

*

«The problem is, it’s only her dream»

*

Il Deutsche Welle sintetizza in modo perfetto: è stato solo un sogno di Frau Merkel.

* * * * * * *

Nota.

Si consideri con attenzione questo titolo della Bbc.

G20 Hamburg: Leaders fail to bridge Trump climate chasm

È tutto un programma.

Ammette che i leader mondiali hanno fallito, non che abbia fallito Mr Trump.

Rimettendo in uso carbone e petrolio a fini energetici, l’economia americana otterrà sostanziali risparmi nei costi di produzione. Serviranno ovviamente i tempi tecnici, ma alla fine l’economia americana potrebbe concretamente distruggere quella europea.


Deutsche Welle. 2017-07-09. G20: success for Africa, failure for climate

Germany has prioritized the achievement of “strong, sustainable and balanced global economic growth” and Africa in its G20 presidency. Did it achieve this? Abu-Bakarr Jalloh reports from Hamburg.

*

Traditionally, G20 leaders focus on issues relating to global economic growth, international trade and financial market regulations. The 2017 Hamburg summit was no different. However, Germany attempted to use its presidency to rally global leaders behind a number of causes, which the summit had not previously had on its agenda.

Support for science

Digital technology, for instance, was on the agenda and the threats of global pandemics. The 2014 outbreak of Ebola in West Africa, which had a ripple effect on the global economy, led to the G20 leaders’ decision to devote greater attention to combating dangerous diseases.

The issue of antimicrobial resistance, which is the resistance of bacteria, viruses or parasites to antibiotics and other drugs, first appeared on the agenda in last year’s summit in Hangzou, China. The increased resistance to the conventional drugs has complicated the treatment of diseases such as HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria. According to Merkel, the leaders agreed to “increase the fight against pandemic diseases that could crash the global economy” and “build a common front in the fight against antimicrobial resistance.” A G20 working group is will in future take up the issue of the appropriate use of antibiotics.

More financial equality?

Women’s economic empowerment also featured in the discussions. The German chancellor reported that an agreement had been reached on how to reduce “the pay gap between men and women.” Germany had been pushing for a 25 percent reduction by 2025 of the existing barriers that prevent women’s development, especially in developing nations.

There was also a general consensus among the G20 leaders in combating international terrorism. They agreed to dry up the sources of financing for terrorist organizations. They intend to do this through “closer cooperation and improved exchange of information,” according to Merkel.

“We agreed to give a chance to globalization and fight protectionism and unfair business practices,” Merkel said. According to Merkel, a consensus was also reached in “securing financial stability” for the global economy and “increasing vigilance on international market structures, profit shifting, and bad taxation practices.” The issue of international trade however was a hotly contested subject against the backdrop of US President Donald Trump’s “America First” agenda.

The G20 leaders also recognized Trump’s utterance of pulling out of the Paris climate deal. The remaining 19 members agreed that the Paris deal is irreversible. It will now be supported by a Hamburg action plan for climate and energy. While Merkel expressed her wish “to find compromises” to these pressing global issues, many were left unresolved

What’s in it for Africa?

Germany wanted to use its G20 presidency to put what some call the “Merkel plan for Africa” at the core of the discussion. The Africa focus, however, appears to have been overshadowed by the G20’s internal relations, notably the Trump administration’s decision to pull out of the Paris climate pact.

Berlin, however, seemed determined to roll out its Africa agenda despite the odds and despite Germany’s expected leadership on various other political matters, such as the future of the European Union, the intake of refugees and climate change. Moreover, Merkel is facing elections at home at a time when Germany seems more divided than it has been in a long time. How high Africa will feature on her agenda remains to be seen.

Observations from Africa

“We are very happy that Merkel chose to focus on Africa,” said Ibrahima Kone, a member of the African Union delegation at the summit, which urged the G20 members to help “educate its citizens.” According to Kone, AU President Alpha Conde was thrilled by Germany’s newly found interest in the continent. But apart from showing appreciation, African leaders have not done much so far to support her plans. Merkel has earned their goodwill, but not their resources.

Merkel seems to be facing a long path in her her bid to change Europe’s role in Africa. “We agreed to continue to be in Africa, but want to shift away from development aid to partnership, which includes forming agreements with individual countries,” said Merkel. The chancellor’s “Compact with Africa” initiative aims to “make investment projects viable, bankable and fundable.” She also announced that the United States agreed to pay a substantial sum for relief efforts in famine-affected parts of East Africa.

My personal take: dreams of a prosperous Africa

From a personal standpoint, this year’s G20 summit has left many unresolved issues, especially surrounding the sudden interest in Africa. Because, who dreams of a prosperous Africa? It’s certainly not the political elite, and if you think it is Germany, then think again. The image of ‘poor Africa’,the child with bloated stomach and running nose, sells and aid organizations thrive on it.

Whether Merkel’s will is driven by a notion of trying to correct Germany’s dark past in Africa, is an attempt to curb the flow of African migrants or to rid Germany’s train stations of the images of malnourished African children, her plan seems to be the best Africa has seen from Europe in a while.

It combines classical development aid with private sector investments, a two-way business agenda and programs for the youth. Merkel had hoped to get her African development agenda endorsed at the G20 summit. And she did. The problem is, it’s only her dream.

 

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Energie Alternative, Geopolitica Mondiale, Putin, Unione Europea

Putin e Merkel. Una strana telefonata. Help me, please, Mr Putin!

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2017-07-01.

Putin-Merkel__

I rapporti tra Mr Putin e Frau Merkel sono tutto tranne che cordiali.

Ma potrebbero, usiamo il tempo condizionale ed il verbo ausiliare di potenzialità, anche subire variazioni. Verosimilmente in peggio.

I problemi esistenti sono molti e variegati nelle loro interazioni.

*

Putin incontra Merkel: «Ue non si intrometta in affari Russia»

«Vladimir Putin e Angela Merkel hanno affrontato il tema delle proteste in Russia e il presidente russo ha sottolineato che la reazione delle forze dell’ordine è stata «più moderata e liberale» che in alcuni Paesi europei. Putin poi ha sottolineato che come la Russia «non interviene negli affari interni di altri Paesi»: sarebbe il caso, ha sottolineato, che gli altri «non s’intromettessero» nella vita politica interna russa. ….

La cancelliera tedesca Angela Merkel, esprimendo la sua preoccupazione per le notizie relative a violenze e abusi a danno di omosessuali, in particolare in Cecenia, ha chiesto al presidente russo Vladimir Putin di «usare la sua influenza» per mettere fine a queste violazioni.»

*

Putin a Merkel: ‘Nostra polizia più moderata di alcuni Paesi Ue’

«La cancelliera tedesca Angela Merkel in visita a Sochi ha chiesto al presidente russo Vladimir Putin di “proteggere i diritti dei gay in Cecenia”, dopo la denuncia di Novaya Gazeta. Nel corso della conferenza stampa congiunta si è anche parlato delle proteste in Russia ed il presidente russo ha sottolineato che la reazione delle forze dell’ordine è stata “più moderata e liberale” che in alcuni Paesi europei. Putin poi ha detto che come la Russia “non interviene negli affari interni di altri Paesi”: sarebbe il caso, ha sottolineato, che gli altri “non s’intromettessero” nella vita politica interna russa.»

*

Putin a Merkel: «Reazioni polizia a proteste più moderate che in Ue, altri Paesi non si immischino»

«Faccia a faccia fra i due leader a Sochi, il presidente russo: «Forze dell’ordine in Russia più moderate che in altri Paesi europei». La Cancelliera tedesca: «Per togliere sanzioni a Mosca necessario rispetto di accordi di Minsk sull’Ucraina …. Si è parlato delle recenti proteste in Russia, ma anche delle sanzioni a Mosca, nel faccia a faccia fra il presidente Vladimir Putin e la Cancelliera tedesca Angela Merkel a Sochi. La reazione della polizia alle proteste in Russia è «più moderata e liberale» che in alcuni Paesi Ue ha sottolineato Putin ribadendo come Mosca «non interviene negli affari interni degli altri Paesi» e sarebbe il caso che anche le altre nazioni «non si intromettessero» nella vita politica russa.»

*

La Merkel, inconsapevole fin dall’inizio, sta diventando disperata

«- La Merkel è una pasticciona gravemente sopravvalutata. È da lungo tempo la babbea di Washington ed ha urtato contro l’implacabile muro di pietra della posizione di Putin sull’Ucraina, dove lui ha le carte migliori.

– Presa fra i due, sta iniziando a creparsi, sia politicamente che emozionalmente.

– I suoi oppositori interni odorano il suo sangue.»

* * * * * * *

Se è vero che in Francia Mr Macron ha vinto le elezioni presidenziali ed il suo partito ha conquistato la maggioranza assoluta all’Assemblea Nazionale, se è vero che la Bundeskanzlerin Frau Merkel ha ottime probabilità di essere riconfermata alla cancelleria alle elezioni di settembre, è anche vero che questi due paesi, specie poi la Germania, sembrerebbero essere sempre più isolati nell’ambito internazionale.

La Germania ha un pil 2016 di 3,466,639 milioni Usd e la Francia di 2,463,222: essendo il pil mondiale 2016 di 75,278,09 milioni Usd, Germania e Francia rendono conto del 4.6% e del 3.27%, rispettivamente.

Ma se si prendessero in considerazioni le spese militari, si dovrebbe constatare come gli Stati Uniti spendano nel 2017 611.2 miliardi Usd, mentre la Germania ne spende 41.1 e la Francia 55.7. La conseguenza è semplice: gli Stati Uniti contano come potenza militare, mentre Francia e Germania contano poco meno di nulla.

Non solo. Francia e Germania, la Macron & Merkel Masonry Ltd, non è riuscita a prendere atto del cambiamento epocale avvenuto negli Stati Uniti con l’ascesa di Mr Trump, e si sono poste in rotta di collisione con quella che fu la potenza mondiale loro patrona. I rapporti con gli Stati Uniti sono, quanto meno, gelidi, e gli Stati Uniti, al di là delle belle parole, non hanno nessuna intenzione di correre il rischio di una guerra globale per difendere l’Europa.

G20. Il cuoco servirà cosciotti Merkel mit bratkartoffeln.

Merkel. «Tedeschi, volete ‘clima’ od acciaio?»

Energie alternative e sussidi di stato. Fallimenti, manutenzione e ricambi.

*

La Bundeskanzlerin Frau Merkel ha rilasciato icastiche dichiarazioni:

«we Europeans must really take our fate into our own hands» [Bundeskanzlerin Frau Merkel – NYT]

*

«really take our fate into our own hands.» [Bundeskanzlerin Frau Merkel – NYT]

*

«I believe that climate change is certainly caused by humans» [Bundeskanzlerin Frau Merkel – Ccn]

*

«The Paris deal isn’t just any other deal. It is a key agreement that shapes today’s globalization» [Bundeskanzlerin Frau Merkel]

*

Ma tra il dire ed il fare c’è di mezzo il mare.

Sulle attuali difficoltà dell’Unione Europea forse il più onesto è stato JC Juncker:

«Bisogna smetterla di parlare degli Stati Uniti d’Europa,  la gente non li vuole» [JC Juncker]

*

Cerchiamo di sintetizzare per sommi capi.

– Se è vero che Mr Macron e Frau Merkel sono egemoni nei loro rispettivi paesi, in campo internazionale contano ben poco, per non dire frasi impietose.

– In seno all’Unione Europea sicuramente Francia e Germania hanno un grande peso, ma ogni giorno che passa si ingrossano le file dei paesi scontenti della loro politica estera e di quella economica. I paesi del Visegrad sono in rotta di collisione.

– La situazione economica dell’Unione è molto meno florida di quanto possa sembrare. Ma le apparenze non vicariano certo la sostanza. L’Ecb a breve dovrà cessare i QE ed i tassi mondiali stanno lentamente innalzandosi.

– Olanda, Spagna, Italia e Grecia hanno governi altamente instabili e provvisori. Economicamente parlando, sono bombe ad orologieria.

*

La Germina poi ha una lunga serie di problemi conflittuali.

– I titoli riportati evidenziano quanto Frau Merkel abbia evidenti problemi sessuali irrisolti: sarebbero fatti suoi, ma lei li butta in politica estera come se fossero prioritari, e questo irrita le controparti.

– Frau Merkel, da brava femmina petulante, vorrebbe sempre mettere il naso in affari non suoi: non a caso Mr Putin le ha risposto «come la Russia “non interviene negli affari interni di altri Paesi”: sarebbe il caso, ha sottolineato, che gli altri “non s’intromettessero” nella vita politica interna russa.» Roba da sprofondare venti metri sotto terra.

– Frau Merkel ha la maglietta sporca. A parole invoca sanzioni sempre più rigide nei confronti della Russia, poi, sottobanco, importa quote molto consistenti di gas russo, di cui non può farne a meno. Non solo: ha imposto agli altri paesi EU, tranne la Francia, di star fuori dall’affaruccio del Nord Stream 2, che fa le corna all’amata Ukraina, e le sue ditte commerciano alla grande proprio con quella Russia che a parole Frau Merkel sanziona. Se è vero che le femmine sono doppiogiochiste nate, a Frau Merkel nessuno potrebbe negarle un morbo di Jacobs, una trisomia X. Ma adesso Mr Trump ha fatto fare una legge che sanziona anche tutte le ditte che hanno simili mercimoni con la Russia: un uppercut in volto alla cancelliera, che ha reagito come una gallina spennacchiata.

– E poi, Frau Merkel: ma il gas naturale non era inquinante? E come la si mette con l’Accordo di Parigi?

– Ma il ‘clima‘ è il grande amore di Frau Merkel. Piccolo particolare: è un topic oramai abbandonato dagli Stati Uniti, che si sono ritirati dall’Accordo di Parigi. del ‘clima‘ non gliene interessa nulla. Ma la confindustria tedesca è in rivolta.

Francia e Germania piangono non sul clima ma sull’Unep. Un gran bel gruzzolo.

Questa Unione Europea si sta collassando. – Handelsblatt.

Germania. Trump ha ragione. – Handelsblatt.

Industriali tedeschi: Trump ha ragione e Merkel torto. – Handelsblatt.

Handelsblatt. Ciò che rendeva forte la Germania ora la rende vulnerabile.

Il problema è banale. L’economia tedesca e le sue esportazioni sono strettamente connesse al business del ‘clima‘: senza questo paravento di sordide manovre economiche e commerciali l’economia tedesca corre il rischio di crollare come un castello di carte.

Merkel’s House of Cards

Questo è uno dei recenti titoli di Handelsblatt, il giornale della confindustria tedesca.

*

I tempi mutano rapidamente ma Frau Merkel resta impavida a difendere il giurassico dei suoi sogni.

Eppure i messaggi di chiarimento sono evidenti, il mondo è cambiato. Uno per tutti:

Deutsche Bank rejects Democrats’ call for Trump finance details

* * * * * * *

Conclusione.

Vedremo al prossimo G20 cosa saprà fare Frau Merkel, ma la vediamo male, molto male, cosa che poi non spiace mica a molta gente.

Frau Merkel è isolata, e tutti sanno che è una perdente, anche se poi vincerà una cancelleria svuotata di reale potere.

Dubitiamo molto che Mr Putin si adoperi a suo favore.

Come prognostico si potrebbe suggerire che, come il G7 terminò come G1, anche il G20 terminerà allo stesso modo: G1 e G19.

                        


Kremlin. President of Russia. 2017-06-30. Telephone conversation with Federal Chancellor of Germany Angela Merkel

At the initiative of the German side, Vladimir Putin had a telephone conversation with Federal Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany Angela Merkel.

June 30, 2017 19:30

In anticipation of the G20 Summit to be held in Hamburg on July 7–8, the leaders discussed the main items on the forum’s agenda. They also spoke about the Paris Agreement on climate change and issues of bilateral cooperation.