John Dodders

We're all doomed

The Forties Pipeline System (FPS) This is the pipeline system that carries most of the oil from the North Sea to the UK. It collects the oil from 85 different North Sea oilfields, and flows around 550,000 barrels of oil per day back to the UK mainland. For context, in total the North Sea has around 400 offshore platforms between the UK and Norway, producing and exporting both oil and gas. FPS is a British oil pipeline system. Exploration drilling for North Sea oil is currently banned on the UK Continental Shelf. It has been since the current government came to power. As a result of the drilling ban, the Forties Pipeline System is currently uninvestable according to its owner INEOS. They haven’t invested in its upkeep for 2 years. INEOS have said the pipeline will close by 2035, but without investment maybe as early as 2030, which is now just 3.5 years away. 550,000 barrels / day is equivalent to 38.96 GW of primary energy. This is 10x more energy than the UK’s new Hinkley Point C nuclear power project, which is projected to cost £48 billion for 3.2GW of electrical power. Electrical energy is joule for joule more valuable than chemical energy, but the comparison of scale is real. 38.9 GW is more energy than the entire National Grid carries. The largest energy system in the UK is not the grid it is this underwater pipeline system. With drilling banned, and the North Sea entering a period of forced closure, the Forties Pipeline System is going to close in the not too distant future. Once the pipeline is no longer economical, the entire Central North Sea oil production will collapse with it. This isn’t something that closes down gracefully, the entire Central North Sea basin reaches market through a single pipe. BP recently announced they are selling up their remaining assets and getting out, Exxon, Chevron, etc are all already long gone. Nobody wants their brand near this collapse. The tax rate is 78%, the government wants this national infrastructure to shut down. It will. The German Chancellor recently called their nuclear fleet closure a “Strategic Blunder”, interesting choice of words. But I think it was obviously a blunder to anyone outside their propaganda bubble. Likewise the UK’s North Sea. The German nuclear fleet averaged 10.3 GW of primary energy output over its operational life, which is around 1/4 the primary energy of the Forties Pipeline System. The UK has a few other pipeline systems but this one is by far the largest and the most critical. Now this infrastructure, isn’t supposed to last forever. But when it goes you should have a plan. In the UK nobody talks about this. It’s taboo. A lot of people think “yeah but they won’t let that happen”… well it happened in Germany, and it happened in Japan. A lot of people want it to happen, and a lot of those people are in politics. So what replaces this? Nothing? Is the UK just going to go silently into the night?

The Iberian blackout was DEFINITELY caused by renewables according to the report by system operator REE 1. The initial fault was traced to a faulty solar inverter 2. Wind and solar generators tripped when solar generators disconnected due to negative prices. This was a violation of the grid code 3. This loss of wind and solar caused frequency to fall outside grid code tolerances leading to conventional generators and interconnectors tripping and a full grid collapse You may find the facts inconvenient but those ARE the facts

Greater Gabbard has received £2.2bn in subsidies but it only cost £1.4bn to build it (exc. OFTO sale proceeds). London Array has received £2.9bn in subsidies but net cost as ~£2.3bn. WODS received £1.8bn subsidies vs £1.1bn net cost (3/n)

🚨 LMFAO! SEN. JOHN KENNEDY just DROPPED this hilarious line: "My Democratic colleagues really like Keir Starmer...who is just to the left of Lenin. He's very unpopular with the people of the UK. He's polling right up there with gonorrhea!" "I don't know how much longer he can last, but this guy, he would give Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez a run for her money in terms of his loony woke ideas!" 😭

This is the moment it became obvious what the deal was. Octopus was no more than 5 years old at the time. Its business model was servicing the government's agenda, and supplying it with bullshit. x.com/BorisJohnson/s…

@clim8resistance @Ed_Miliband The UK is the Saudi Arabia of wind, apparently.

It's okay though, because @Ed_Miliband has lowered bills by £300, and created "hundreds of thousands of green jobs" and we're a "clean energy superpower".

First, anyone believing the "science" in the Guardian is a fool. Second, the study says Greenland has lost ~ 26 gigatonnes of ice per year … but Greenland contains about 2.8 million gigatonnes of ice. So it will lose all of its ice in about 100,000 years … EVERYONE PANIC! w.

@AndyMeanie It's what communists do.

This vendetta against the companies keeping Britain running is zealotry.

How can every continent be warming twice as fast as every other continent? wmo.int/sites/default/…

@ryanweather @RogerPielkeJr Hundreds of climate related papers using the RCP8.5 scenario continue to be published despite this. It's scientific malpractice: scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?start=…

It's official: the world's climate policy was built upon "implausible" climate model scenarios, now dumped. 🗑️A decade of "doomer" research of "worst-case scenarios" ... never happened. 🚨RCP8.5 is Officially Dead - by @RogerPielkeJr rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/rcp85-is-off…

“The worst case didn't happen because we fought to prevent it.” — Fact-free propaganda. There is no evidence whatsoever. Check the Keeling curve. The worst case did not happen because it was not science but an activist tool for climate scientists to distort the scientific record

"2024 was the hottest year ever recorded." Perhaps since daily records were kept. Ice cores suffer from poor spatial and temporal resolution (10s to 100s of years), as well as diffusion that effectively removes climatic changes that occur over 10s to 100s of years.

Hundreds of climate related papers continue to be published using the now falsified RCP8.5 scenario. It's a merigoround of scientific malpractice feeding policy choices that heavily impacts the taxpayer. @RogerPielkeJr scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?start=…

I told Senator Sheldon WhiteClub today that I won’t be listening to or caring about any of his lessons on morality knowing that he joined an all-white Rhode Island Country Club. I’m also done with the likes of AOC, Al Gore, John Kerry, and the rest of the lying cabal that make stupid climate predictions, plunder tens of billions of tax dollars, enrich their well-connected allies, and are committed to strangulating out of existence entire sectors of our economy. Climate alarmist AOC wants to be taken seriously while also insisting the world is imminently about to end due to climate change (Just under 5 years remain on her nutty Jan 2019 prediction that only 12 years of life are left on Earth). Al Gore is now speaking publicly about his concern with global freezing after decades of grift talking about global warming. “Within the decade there will be no more snows of Kilimanjaro,” said Gore in 2006 (There’s still snow on Kilimanjaro year-round). Gore also predicted in 2009 ice-free Arctic summers within 5-7 years. John Kerry warned in 2009 that the Arctic would be ice-free by 2013. These people are dishonest, power-hungry hacks. The GREEN NEW SCAM is DEAD!!!

Europeans watching China open 50 additional new coal powered energy plants in 2025 adding 78GW to their grid.

"Tens of 1000s of research papers have been published using these scenarios, a similar number of media headlines have amplified their findings, & governments have built these implausible scenarios into policy & regulation...all of this is built on a foundation of sand."

You are a liar, @ChrisGloninger. I have never once claimed that climate change isn't real. Not once. I agree that greenhouse gases cause some warming in the lower atmosphere. I have always held that position, and I have discussed it HUNDREDS of times on here. Do I need to bring the receipts to prove it to ya? Where I am in disagreement with you is in it being an existential crisis or urgent problem. But something tells me you already know that and are intentionally lying for clout. Let me make something clear to you, son. If you slander me again, you and I are going to have some serious problems. Dr. Christy and I know each other. We live in the same town. The Monday after this paper was published, I stopped by his office, and he said I should share this paper to social media. Christy also then gave me the USHCN dataset that he had used to compute the results for his paper (the dataset contains 1,211 of the 1,218 USHCN stations with near-complete daily data, the gaps in which he filled in himself by hand using the original paper forms at NOAA NCEI and threading closed stations with open adjacent stations that still have data, where he bias-corrected values for quality control). I used a different approach and validated his results almost to a T (see image on the left). The purpose of Christy's paper was to discuss long-term trends in heat and cold extremes in the U.S. It was not an attempt to debunk global warming. No one ever claimed it was, myself included. I have never attempted to debunk it because I agree with global warming theory, at least in principle. As I said, I have been over this hundreds of times. Based on the results, increases in heat extremes do not show up in the national average. Significant increases are exclusively confined to the Four Corners and Pacific Southwest regions. Almost every other region show modest decreases, with the Southeast and Ohio River Valleys at near record lows recently. I find it odd that you'd accuse Dr. Christy and I of "cherry-picking" U.S. data that represents 1.5% of the global land surface, when you decided to cherry-pick an even smaller area to illustrate a moot point. I also find it odd that you'd accuse us of cherry-picking considering you just posted a lame video about the ongoing U.S. drought and tried tying it to GLOBAL climate change. Evidently, you don't believe your own BS or follow your own rules. Increases in heat extremes in the Pacific Southwest and Four Corners are not matched anywhere else in the Lower 48. If greenhouse gases are causing the increase in those two areas, why not the rest of the nation? Dr. Christy and I have hypothesized that this is an artifact of urbanization, land use change, and poor station siting, and we may decide to test this using NASA Landsat data. Dr. Roy Spencer has already been working on this in small increments. Next time you take a swing at me, you better not miss.