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.

@StephenO52985 @25_cycle @Ceist8 @MarcEHJones @Sian_Parry @philthegamer69 @TheDisproof @ScienceNotDogma @ryankatzrosene @hausfath @AndrewDessler @rahmstorf @violin4all What a ridiculous comment. There are decades of empirical evidence for AGW. You may not like it, but the evidence is now better than 5 sigma confidence.

@25_cycle @Ceist8 @MarcEHJones @Sian_Parry @philthegamer69 @TheDisproof @ScienceNotDogma @Climatehope2 @ryankatzrosene @hausfath @AndrewDessler @rahmstorf @violin4all Have you actually checked the information against the real facts? Science is not supposed to be a religion which is what the whole net zero nutjobs have turned it in to. Also net zero is the same as burning cancer patients alive then claiming you cured their cancer.

❗️An observation ❗️ One thing that’s is clear is the inability of a Reform voter to engage in an honest adult debate. They are so consumed with hate it’s rotting their soul. They are the worst of us. Sad to see.

@VincentJCurtis1 @ChrisGloninger @fatman45_real Standard bluster and hatred from the denier. Why you have 'research scientist' in your profile is a total mystery, since you have clearly never been near either.

@ChrisGloninger @Climatehope2 @fatman45_real I'm astonished that you two graduated from the paper mills that you did. Or did you fatman? Must inevitably occur? In what millennium? I don't that that news report was intended to be parsed by a barracks lawyer.

Sure. One? Charney Report, 1979: 1.5–4.5°C sensitivity. ✅ Hansen, 1988: Warming trajectory. ✅ Arctic sea ice collapse. ✅ Stratospheric cooling + surface warming simultaneously. ✅ Ocean heat content rise. ✅ Should I keep going or is one enough?

And of course @MarcEHJones ! Thanks Marc.

Australia Electricity Emissions Apr Update: Average NEM emission intensity over last 12 months: 526 kg CO2-e/MWh. Down 23% since 2020, down 38% since 2015 Sth Australia reductions leading the way thanks to its increase in wind & PV generation. Down 30% since 2020, 69% since 2015

@renewablesmiffy Porter is one of the most shameless liars around. Totally despicable.

Now she is rewriting the official Spanish report to make it say what she wanted it to say. A demonstration that if you state things with confidence people will believe you even if it is BS

@ChrisGloninger I just post this simple picture, Chris. Seems to work:

@fatman45_real @VincentJCurtis1 @ChrisGloninger Sigh. The prediction was not that disaster would happen by 2000. It was that if we didn't stop emitting GHGs by 2000, disaster would inevitably happen in the future. Which is completely correct.

@VincentJCurtis1 @ChrisGloninger Notice the use of one of the propagandist's favorite weasel words - "could". Which means it was equally true that whole nations could *not* be wiped out.

@VincentJCurtis1 @ThomasKundera1 @ChrisGloninger "Temperatures haven't risen since 1998" Stupid lie. "nothing significant is happening to the oceans or climate." Another stupid lie.

@ThomasKundera1 @ChrisGloninger Temperatures haven't risen since 1998; nothing significant is happening to the oceans or climate. Here's another failed forecast.

@liber8SA "In Australia, where I live, governments are allowing the clearance of huge areas of remnant native habitat" Are you protesting about the mining for coal and gas in Australia and all the damage that does to the environment directly and indirectly?

@Climatehope2 In Australia, where I live, governments are allowing the clearance of huge areas of remnant native habitat to make way for the "renewables". The UK gets 5% of its power from burning American old growth forests. What's the environmental payoff from this level of destruction?

Australia really is setting a cracking pace in its installation of storage to support renewable energy. energy-storage.news/australias-bat…

@liber8SA 🤣 Great try. But utterly, utterly wrong.

@Climatehope2 The environmental benefits of global greening are significant, particularly in arid areas. Also diesel fuel and fertilisers mean more food from less land, definitely an environmental win 👍

@liber8SA Whine, whine, whine. How big is the environmental footprint of fossil fuels?

@Climatehope2 If this unlikely pipedream becomes reality then we'll all be having a miserable time because making a weather dependent energy system work is very expensive indeed and has a much heavier environmental footprint than most people realise.

This is what happens when you go big on renewable energy: pv-magazine.com/2026/04/30/ren…

@Posthorne01 At the cost of upsetting the fossil fuel companies. Oh dear.

@Climatehope2 At what cost?

@liber8SA 🤣 You are going to have SUCH a miserable time in the coming years as wind, solar and storage become the dominant energy supply on the whole planet. Commiserations.

@Climatehope2 Doesn't generate any power. Only needed because windmills and solar are fundamentally useless. What a colossal waste of money.

@inandaway Ask Google. energy-storage.news/google-bets-bi…

@Climatehope2 How much battery storage and its cost will be required for a 400 MW data centre to run on renewables alone to ensure full operational capacity 24/7?

@NicholasLe81575 @roaldcs I agree that the sooner we build out more renewables, storage and transmission, the better.

@Climatehope2 @roaldcs Indeed but same gris engineers wanted EGL1&2 ten years ago OFGEM said Niet, Non, Nein thats why we have the constraint costs today and a build cost nearly 3x higher

Britain is now paying to turn off wind and turn on gas at the same time. If that doesn’t scream failure of central planning, nothing does. This is not a “technical glitch”. It’s the predictable outcome of trying to design an energy system from the top down. Planners pushed massive wind build-out in Scotland because “that’s where the wind is”. Fair enough. But they didn’t build the grid to move that power to demand centers like London or the Midlands. Result: 15 GW of capacity, but only ~7 GW can flow south. So what happens? On windy days: Wind produces too much → gets curtailed Gas is fired up elsewhere → to replace it Consumers pay twice £350M to shut down wind. Over £1B to turn on gas. Total ~£1.35B. That’s not energy policy. That’s burning money. Why does this happen? Because central planning breaks the price signal. A single national price tells producers nothing about where electricity is needed. So capital flows to where subsidies and permits are easiest, not where the system actually needs generation. The grid becomes the bottleneck, and the system operator ends up micromanaging reality in real time. Then comes the second layer of distortion: Contracts for Difference. Wind farms get paid even when they don’t produce. Gas plants get paid to step in. Nobody is truly exposed to market risk. So inefficiency isn’t punished. It’s institutionalized. The system isn’t failing despite intervention. It’s failing because of it. A market system would do the opposite: Locational pricing → build where demand is No guaranteed payouts → real risk, real discipline Investment follows scarcity, not policy targets Instead, we have a centrally coordinated patchwork trying to override physics with spreadsheets. Wind isn’t the problem. Gas isn’t the problem. The problem is a system where no one faces the real cost of being wrong.

@roaldcs That was a lot of random, completely obvious statements to show that you had to Google the Eastern Green Links. Grid engineers know what they are doing. They a building a grid fit for the Electrotech revolution. It takes time and money.

EGL 1–4 are big HVDC links. They can certainly help move power and relieve bottlenecks. They don’t prove that central planners ‘get it right’. Large projects don’t solve the core grid problems: demand volatility price signals dispatch decisions investment timing Those are coordination problems, not cable problems. You can build more capacity and still have: curtailment price spikes misallocation If anything, projects like Eastern Green Link 3 and Eastern Green Link 4 show how slow, political and capital-intensive planning is. Grids work best when incentives align, not when someone assumes ‘more infrastructure = problem solved.’ So no, EGL doesn’t prove planners are right. It just shows they’re building more wires.

Ever heard of paleoclimatology? Ice cores give us 800,000 years of temperature and CO2 data. Ocean sediments go back millions. Tree rings, coral skeletons, cave formations - scientists have been reading Earth's climate history like a book for decades. The hottest year on record is not a claim built on 155 years of weather stations. It is built on evidence that predates the human species by a considerable margin. Also…NASA, NOAA, Berkeley Earth, the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts and the Japan Meteorological Agency all reached the same conclusion independently. Five separate institutions. Zero of them are Al Gore. But thanks for the automobile reference. Really devastating stuff.

Good to see this large battery being built. It should reduce curtailment in Scotland and support more wind capacity. solarpowerportal.co.uk/energy-storage…