Climatehope (@climatehope.bsky.social)

Today's thread. What Frightens Deniers. You can tell they're frightened when they get hysterical and into attack mode. 1. The IPCC.

@I_D_A_U_ Go on mute, you worthless troll.

@Climatehope2 Talking to yourself about yourself again.

It's the fossil fuel industry that is doubling down on the lies as they rake in the profits from war and shortages. You can't ration the wind and the sun. reneweconomy.com.au/what-fossil-ma…

@I_D_A_U_ I wonder if you are trying to be so stupid, or does it come naturally, without effort?

@Climatehope2 Wind and sun ration you every time they go away.

@CrazyheadUK Who is 'we'?

@Climatehope2 Drop the semantics—can renewables replace fossil fuels? Will we have enough storage in the next 10 years to cover multi-day lulls without backup—yes or no?

In the long term, the only answer is to remove our dependency on using fossil fuels whose price is set internationally. In the short term, this is a potential mechanism to reduce prices. theguardian.com/environment/20…

What a day 36kwh of lovely clean 🌞 renewables House batteries full water is hot 210l at 45c Nissan leaf battery at 80% Tesla is at 60% None of my energy is stuck in the middle east being bombed. More renewables 🌞 and less fossil 💩

On BBC Question Time, @Helen_Whately just said ‘we can’t afford Net Zero.’ If we see cars and homes washed away like this leading scientist warns could now happen, all politicians and media commentators who’ve argued against Net zero should be held partially responsible.

All the bleating from the right wing idiots about the North Sea is stupid, ignorant and/or dishonest. There is precious little to extract and what there is will be sold at international prices. For energy, you need renewables. eciu.net/media/press-re…

@BrknMan @BoycottsBat @POLITICOEurope It's unlikely that he has actually read any of the tripe that he posted links to. The summary would have told him that it reinforced his prejudices and therefore had to be right.

@Climatehope2 @BoycottsBat @POLITICOEurope I feel sorry for him. Thinking opinions written in a book are evidence . If he reads this one does it make the earth flat? amzn.eu/d/055OsNgv

The U.K. government is expected to publish a long-awaited plan to decarbonize new homes next week, with ministers set to mandate low-carbon heating for all new-builds and solar panels on the vast majority. politico.eu/article/uk-gre…

@CrazyheadUK "We don't have the technology to store the energy created by renewables." So you admit this was a lie. "When the sun don't shine or the wind don't blow the light go out." This is just as much a lie. Thanks for shifting the goalposts.

@Climatehope2 Calling people stupid doesn’t change the fact that energy storage already exists across multiple technologies. The challenge is scaling it, not inventing it.

😬UK gas prices just hit highest level since 2022😬 At current prices… * New wind & solar from latest "AR7" auction would cut the bill for UK gas imports by £5.5bn/y * A single (1) home heat pump would cut bill for gas imports by more than £600/y

This Nature paper, which is clearly a big hit with the usual suspects in the fossil fool community, finds that over the past ~3 million years, climate shifts weren’t always tightly coupled to CO₂, with oceans and ice sheets doing plenty of the work. Deniers immediately declare CO₂ irrelevant. Scientists note two awkward details: today's CO₂ spike is far faster and higher than anything in that record, and in past cycles temperature often rose first because warming oceans released CO₂, which then amplified and sustained the heat. This time we're doing the outgassing ourselves. Discovering that past climate was complicated is not proof that present climate change is imaginary, just that feedbacks exist, and we're currently pulling the biggest lever. nature.com/articles/s4158…

Of course the right wing press pushes the fossil fuel agenda. They are owned by deniers. theguardian.com/environment/20…

@BoycottsBat @BrknMan @POLITICOEurope "I'm not going down the rabbit hole of spending hours looking for evidence to back up what I'm saying." Translation: "There is no evidence to back up what I am saying".

1. It is almost impossible to find data via a search engine which will contradict the rhetoric being pushed by our globalist overlords. 2. This is X. I'm not going down the rabbit hole of spending hours looking for evidence to back up what I'm saying. I treat it rather as I might a conversation in the pub. If you want to compete on "sources" you've won. My principle argument here is that we should maintain a broad energy portfolio and that we should exploit the energy we have available to us. That's where I came in. Meanwhile, it is simply not possible for the insignificant quantity to CO2 mankind produces to be having a catastrophic effect on the climate. The cause lies elsewhere, but nobody seems interested in funding research into where. Meanwhile, the green lobby has been caught time and time again falsifying data. Why might that be? Further, if renewable energy is so cheap, why is a massive surcharge on our bills required to make it viable. And why are energy companies pulling out of renewables developments at such a rate? I know what I know because I take and interest and have watched it all happen in real time.

@BoycottsBat @BrknMan @POLITICOEurope Books on Amazon? FFS, don't be a clown. 5 year olds would see through that nonsense.

@BrknMan @POLITICOEurope amzn.eu/d/08AZwjpW amzn.eu/d/03P2ugVW amzn.eu/d/04sASz8r amzn.eu/d/03YYOmVY amzn.eu/d/03YYOmVY amzn.eu/d/03YYOmVY There you are; a wee reading list for you. Have a look at those if you want proof.

@RalphHillier There is no overlap between you and science.

@Climatehope2 Making assumptions about me not a great example of scientific methodology

Today's thread. What Frightens Deniers. You can tell they're frightened when they get hysterical and into attack mode. 1. The IPCC.

Really interesting. "You can't reduce what you don't measure". thedriven.io/2026/03/20/bat…

@RalphHillier I could provide a bunch of evidence about climate models but I have experience of brain-dead deniers like you. You will ignore anything that doesn't fit your prejudices. You have a closed mind and are unable to learn anything new.

@Climatehope2 Great response bet you're a daemon in the debating society

@cat240359 You have followed his posts 'for years' and learned nothing. How embarrassing for you.

@Climatehope2 Yeah, nah. I have followed David's post for years. David's modelling assumes no grid congestion. In real life, that is impossible (and ignores cost to consumers).

If - as an economist - you don't understand renewables (the cheapest form of electricity generation in most places) then you have no business commenting on the subject. Moreover, if you don't know about the trillions spent on fossil fuel subsidies - time to shut up.

@ENaughtius You can go on mute. You are clearly insane.

@cat240359 Stop lying. Texas has loads of renewables and low prices.

@Climatehope2 Except that "renewables" are (virtually) all privately owned, for profit. Nowhere with high % renewables has lower (or even reasonable) electricity costs; Germany, California, South Australia, as examples.

@Liveleigh1 The ocean is a net sink for CO2. Energy density is a stupid metric pushed by RE haters. We mine hydrocarbons because we have a long history of doing so and polluting the environment, and because we haven't moved off fossil fuels fast enough. How energy dense is sunlight?

@Climatehope2 Interesting. You ignore the ocean, don't understand energy density, and yet your graph proves it. You think we mine more hydrocarbons because of a whim? This is really entertaining. Why do we mine more energy dense minerals? Can't wait for this reply.

Whenever RE haters tell you how reliable fossil fuel generation is, just show them this. reneweconomy.com.au/australias-coa…