Letters to the Editor

Is diesel the new green fuel?

quill pen

To the Editor
Climate Conversation

23rd December 2014

Are Climatists giving a green tick to diesel power?

Ten thousand professional climate crusaders recently attended yet another Climate Carnival in Lima, Peru. Did they use green power to minimise their carbon footprint? No way; massive diesel generators were trucked in on diesel-powered lorries because the local hydro/solar power could not cope. The delegates were also moved between hotels and the venue in more than 300 diesel buses—few bothered to walk or ride bicycles.

In sunny Spain, the government solar subsidies were so generous that some entrepreneurs managed to produce solar energy for 24 hours per day. However, inspectors discovered that diesel generators were being operated at night, thus producing great profits in selling “solar” energy to the grid.

Then in “go-green, vote-blue” Britain, wind power is proving so erratic that thousands of reliable diesel generators are being installed by utilities and businesses to maintain power when the grid becomes unstable.

Finally we have people who disconnect from the grid, aiming to become independent by generating their own power from small solar and wind installations. After the first long spell of cloudy windless weather, most turn to a reliable on-demand diesel backup generator to keep the fridge running and the lights on.

It seems that diesel is the new “green” fuel. In some bitter winter, when real blackouts hit UK or Europe, maybe clean “green” coal will be re-discovered and cranked up again.

Viv Forbes

Rosewood,
Queensland,
Australia.

forbes [at] carbon-sense [dot] com

20 Thoughts on “Letters to the Editor

  1. Diesel power plants are definitely not Green.
    France has finally woken up and will remove the preferential taxation of Diesel over petrol.
    Boris Johnson The London Mayor wants Diesel powered cars banned from London, for the same reason, particulate matter.
    This is typical policy’s pursued by those politicians who believe in the evil of CO2. Diesels have a better CO2 output in grams per KM than a petrol engine can do.
    The EU Politician’s want a pat on the back for reduced CO2, but are quite happy for you to breathe the muck in the air.

  2. Britain is full of diesel cars thanks to the efforts to reduce CO2 emissions. Now that they have discovered that diesel is dirty, they want to penalise people for using it

  3. Richard C (NZ) on December 24, 2014 at 8:53 am said:

    10 Ways To Deal With A Climate Change believer – The BBQ Guide

    By Ian Wishart, author, “Air Con”, “Totalitaria”

    I see earnest believers Rod Lamberts and Will Grant have made a pitch to the gullible this Christmas season with their 12 ways guide to dealing with a climate change ‘denier’. It seems only fitting to roast and season these turkeys – ever so gently and respectfully, of course.

    Accordingly, here’s my 10-point guide to dealing with those earnest inner-city types you may encounter at holiday get-togethers, The Whole Anthropogenic-warming Types (TWAWTs)

    >>>>>>
    http://www.investigatemagazine.co.nz/Investigate/14207/10-ways-deal-climate-change-believer-bbq-guide/

    5. Certainty isn’t the issue.

    “…….you can also remind the TWAWT that human existence is a balance of risk-analysis. The climate change industry is demanding $45 trillion in new taxes, subsidies and the like, and a huge transference of political and economic control to politicians and lobbyists associated with the climate-industrial complex.”

    9. ‘Oh, so you’re a conspiracy theorist?’

    “They might ask if you believe in some kind of grand conspiracy to mislead the public about climate…to which you will respond: ‘Follow the evidence, and the money’ and read them a few quotes from leading believers talking about their agenda:……”

    [For example]

    “The United Nations is the chosen instrument of God; to be a chosen instrument means to be a divine messenger carrying the banner of God’s inner vision and outer manifestation. One day, the world will…treasure and cherish the soul of the United Nations as its very own with pride, for this soul is all-loving, all-nourishing, and all-fulfilling”

    – Sri Chinmoy, UN Interfaith Meditation Group

  4. Climate change is caused by squirrels and beavers and is causing goats to shrink.

    It’s true, I read it in the BBC/Guardian/Independent.

  5. Richard C (NZ) on December 24, 2014 at 10:35 am said:

    Viv Forbes has a hard act to follow at American Thinker:

    Articles & Blog Posts by Sierra Rayne
    http://www.americanthinker.com/author/sierra_rayne/

    ‘Sierra Rayne is looking like a giant of a man’

    Posted on July 25, 2014 by john1282

    I just can’t believe how Rayne get’s after it day after day–this is one of his most comprehensive and enlightening essays yet, and that means really, really good.

    Effectively.

    I will admit moron climate researcher/advocates and their running dog moron journalist supporters give him a target rich environment. [see essay below]

    http://junkscience.com/2014/07/25/sierra-rayne-is-looking-like-a-giant-of-a-man/

    ‘The Climate Maggot Problem’

    By Sierra Rayne

    The war on rigorous science is now coming from all directions.

    Over at National Review, Reihan Salam has a piece regarding Australia’s purported repeal of its carbon tax where he argues that “the key to reducing carbon emissions is encouraging fundamental breakthroughs in low- and zero-carbon energy that will give rise to attractive business models that don’t require artificial subsidies, and that thus can spread rapidly across borders, and in particular to the developing world.” The only reason you would want to reduce carbon emissions in such a manner is because you’ve bought into climate alarmism. Apparently NRO is throwing in the towel on this core issue. You can’t rationally argue from both sides of the fence, but we all know it is really just about money. Follow the money on the climate trail and the answers become clear.

    Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/07/the_climate_maggot_problem.html#ixzz3MlSQn3sc

  6. Richard C (NZ) on December 24, 2014 at 10:44 am said:

    >”The war on rigorous science is now coming from all directions.”

    Not just the rigourous science:

    ‘Nature admits peer review filters out controversial “champion” papers’

    http://joannenova.com.au/2014/12/nature-admits-peer-review-filters-out-controversial-champion-papers/

  7. Richard C (NZ) on December 24, 2014 at 11:07 am said:

    Rayne:

    Just for curiosity, I reviewed National Review’s mission statement once again: “It stands athwart history, yelling Stop, at a time when no one is inclined to do so, or to have much patience with those who so urge it.” Fine, then why is this magazine yelling “go” on emissions reductions when real conservatives are all yelling “stop”? As I read NRO’s mission statement — and Buckley is clear as a bell with his views — everything within it rejects everything that Salam is arguing for in terms of emissions reductions at this point in the scientific debate, especially when coupled to government regulations and innovation subsidies.

    And,

    But if the answer for some on the right to the question of whether or not to reduce emissions is yes, then to reject the market mechanism of a carbon tax in favor of regulations and subsidies and the nebulous world of “encouraging” innovation is pure nonsense, placing one in an inferior intellectual position to those on the left and undermining the right’s arguments on all other debates about the role of government versus the role of the market.

    # # #

    Tony Abbott yelled “stop” the carbon tax, now he’s yelling “go” on emissions reductions by regulations and subsidies. He should just stop at “stop”.

  8. Richard C (NZ) on December 24, 2014 at 11:21 am said:

    Rayne:

    Which leads us to the other side of the war on science, coming from the left. Over at the Washington Post, Danielle Paquette has an article entitled “Attack of the Chicago climate change maggots.” The climate change debate is certainly breeding maggots on all sides of the political spectrum, but not the ones Paquette is describing. The real climate maggots are feeding at the tax dollar trough of climate alarmism.

    Paquette provides some statistics to support her claims that the insect versions of maggots are becoming more problematic in the Windy City due to climate change:

    “In Chicago over the past century, downpours that force human waste up pipes and into homes — storms that dump at least 1.5 inches of rain in a single day — have struck the city more often. Annual precipitation in the Midwest grew about 20 percent during the past century. Rains of more than 2.5 inches a day are expected to increase another 50 percent in the next 20 years. That means more flooding — and more clean-up costs for people like Burns.”

    […]

    The devil is always in the details for climate science, as in all other areas of science. Shoddy science reporting just cherry-picks information but fails to investigate whether historical patterns match the hysterical claims and required causal mechanisms. In this case, the historical climate data for Chicago in no way supports any claims that anthropogenic climate change is leading to more storms with precipitation over 1.5 inches.

    See graph http://admin.americanthinker.com/images/bucket/2014-07/192824_5_.png

    # # #

    Thus “Attack of the Chicago climate change maggots” is relegated to “Attack of the Killer Tomatoes!” and “Mars Attacks!” comedic status.

  9. Richard C (NZ) on December 24, 2014 at 12:46 pm said:

    Thing is, it takes time for design breakthroughs to work their way into fleets and some of the diesel breakthroughs are only reaching the market now e.g. Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR).

    ‘SCR can cut ship NOx emissions’ – Acid News June 2014

    The technology to drastically cut ship NOx emissions is widely available, performs well, and may even slightly reduce ship fuel consumption. The costs of installation and operation are modest and expected to fall over time.

    International shipping is a major source of emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx). Globally, ocean-going vessels emitted about 25 million tons of NOx in 2007, representing about 15 per cent of total anthropogenic emissions. While NOx emissions from land-based sources in industrialised countries are gradually coming down, those from shipping show a continuous increase.

    Ship NOx emissions can be mitigated by several means, including engine controls such as exhaust gas recirculation (EGR), exhaust gas after-treatment such as Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR), or the use of alternative fuels such as gas or methanol.

    In a new report, the International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT) has investigated the viability of SCR technology to achieve compliance with the international Tier III NOx standards that will apply to new ships in designated NOx Emission Control Areas (NECAs) as from 2016. The Tier III standards require approximately 75 per cent lower emissions as compared to the Tier II standards that apply globally for new ship engines built after 1 January 2011.

    ICCT notes that SCR technology is already used in millions of vehicles and power plants with a cumulative capacity of half a million megawatts worldwide, and that it is the only technology currently available to achieve compliance with the Tier III NOx standards for all applicable ship engines. (Other technologies can either achieve Tier II standard or achieve Tier III standard for only a subset of applicable ship engines.) State-of-the-art SCR systems can reduce NOx emissions by more than 90 per cent.

    The maritime sector has had more than two decades of experience with SCR, and the report found that overall, approximately 1250 SCR systems have been installed on marine vessels in the past decade. Those vessels with the longest track records have accumulated up to 80,000 hours of operation over the past two decades.

    SCR has been used on a variety of vessel and engine types using various fuels, including low-sulphur distillate fuel and high-sulphur residual fuel. Many current SCR applications are retrofits, where the after-treatment system has been retroactively applied to existing engines.

    Continues>>>>>>
    http://www.airclim.org/acidnews/scr-can-cut-ship-nox-emissions

    ‘Technology Development for High Efficiency Clean Diesel Engines and a Pathway to 50% Thermal Efficiency’

    Donald Stanton, Research & Technology [Cummins]
    August 5, 2009

    Page 11,

    Diesel particulate filter size reduction with lower deltaP and combined SCR functionality

    As SCR NOx conversion efficiency increases, PM emissions [particulate matter] reduced drastically

    http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2014/03/f8/deer09_stanton.pdf

    ‘New GM V6 diesel’ [VM Motori developed] – APRIL 2007

    Late next year General Motors will launch a new-generation light-duty turbodiesel
    engine featuring real-time cylinder- pressure monitoring to reduce engine-
    out emissions. The 2.9-L V6 will debut in the 2009 Cadillac CTS in Europe, and will also
    power Opel, Saab, and Vauxhall models. It is designed to meet the upcoming
    Euro 5 regulations, which are expected to require significantly lower oxides of nitrogen
    (NOx) and particulate matter (PM) emissions.

    Page 23,

    Innovations for the future
    Partial flow deep bed filter with SCR technology

    https://www.sae.org/automag/techbriefs/04-2007/1-115-4-22.pdf

    # # #

    The VM Motori motor was a design breakthrough for diesel motors:

    Inside The Banks VM Motori 3.0L 630T V6 Diesel Engine
    http://www.dieselpowermag.com/tech/1208dp_banks_vm_motori_630t_v6_diesel_engine/

    VM Motori http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VM_Motori

  10. Richard C (NZ) on December 24, 2014 at 1:11 pm said:

    >”The London Mayor wants Diesel powered cars banned from London, for the same reason, particulate matter.”

    Much in Particulate Matter (PM) and the PM reduction technology Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) downthread here:

    https://www.climateconversation.org.nz/2014/12/letters-to-the-editor-3/comment-page-1/#comment-1266294

  11. Richard C (NZ) on December 24, 2014 at 2:01 pm said:

    Acid News:

    “Engines certified to NOx emission standards are typically tuned to reduce emissions by operating at off-optimal combustion conditions, with negative impacts on fuel efficiency. When applying SCR, however, such engines can instead be tuned for maximum fuel efficiency. For example, SCR was estimated to provide a fuel economy benefit of 3–5 per cent under the EU’s Euro V standards for heavy-duty vehicles, with fuel cost savings partially offset by the additional cost of the urea used for SCR.”

    Except “off-optimal combustion conditions” implies that engines can be in optimal combustion mode whatever the configuration – not so. A diesel that, by design, actually runs in optimal combustion conditions doesn’t need SCR, as Mazda have proved with SKYACTIVE-D:

    http://www.mazda.com/technology/skyactiv/engine/skyactiv-d.html

  12. Richard C (NZ) on December 24, 2014 at 2:50 pm said:

    tech briefs re GM V6:

    “The engine’s compression ratio is 16.5:1.”

    And requires SCR,

    By comparison Mazda’s SKYACTIV-D compression ratio is 14.0:1

    And does not require SCR.

  13. Today’s award for complete tosh goes to Stuff and Prof Ralph Sims

    Prime Minister John Key and Climate Change Minister Tim Groser are, deep down, climate change sceptics, Massey University’s Professor Ralph Sims believes.

    How else, he asks, could they make the decisions they do when 97 per cent of scientists warn the world their children and grandchildren live in will be one of regular superstorms, out-of-control forest fires and coastal cities lost to the seas?

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/science/64511101/carbon-credits-not-the-answer

  14. Richard C (NZ) on December 30, 2014 at 7:40 am said:

    Steve Goreham was top of the Google News ‘Climate Science’ category this morning:

    2014: The Year Of Futility In The Fight Against Climate Change

    http://dailycaller.com/2014/12/29/2014-the-year-of-futility-in-the-fight-against-climate-change/

  15. Richard C (NZ) on December 30, 2014 at 9:07 am said:

    Peter Hannam, SMH reporter, and Matthew England, professor at the University of NSW’s Climate Change Research Centre, tying themselves in knots:

    ‘Climate shift in the Pacific may accelerate global warming’

    Peter Hannam, December 29, 2014

    Known as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, the El Nino-like pattern typically lasts 15-30 years and is understood to operate as an accelerator on global surface temperatures during its positive phase – and a brake during its negative phase – as the ocean takes up fluctuating amounts of the extra heat being trapped by rising greenhouse gas emissions.

    “It certainly could be an early sign of a change but you’d probably want to see another year or two before it’s a genuine phase shift,” Matthew England, a professor at the University of NSW’s Climate Change Research Centre, said. “This could be the start of another ramping up of warming.”

    The last positive phase of the PDO, also known as the Interdecadal Pacific Oscillation, ran from about 1978 to 1998, a period of a rapid increase of surface temperatures. Since then, temperature increases have flattened out, despite an increase in greenhouse gases, as oceans have taken up more of the excess heat.

    http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/climate-shift-in-the-pacific-may-accelerate-global-warming-20141229-12f6dp.html

    So Hannam concedes the 1978-1998 warming (the only warming in the IPCC’s 1951-2010 anthro attribution period) coincides with the PDO “accelerator” phase (“ramping up” as Englend puts it).

    But (Hannam),

    >”[the PDO is]….a brake during its negative phase – as the ocean takes up fluctuating amounts of the extra heat being trapped by rising greenhouse gas emissions”

    Problematic because the IPCC in AR5 Chapter 3 Observations: Ocean, was unable to identify an air-sea flux that would achieve the ocean uptake, over and above the natural fluxes.

  16. Richard C (NZ) on January 2, 2015 at 8:13 am said:

    AirAsia flight QZ8501: ‘Unique weather’ may have caused plane crash, says CEO

    Referring to floods in Malaysia and Thailand, he [Tony Fernandes] suggested that climate change may have played a part in more dangerous conditions for air travel: “There’s a lot of rain, so that is something we need to look at carefully because the weather is changing. The weather is changing”.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/asia/64561864/airasia-flight-qz8501-unique-weather-may-have-caused-plane-crash-says-ceo

    Now it’s Weather Change?

  17. “He then added that there were “some very unique weather conditions” in the area at the time.”

    First point, there is no such thing as “very unique”

    Second point, all weather is unique. At no point will the weather be exactly the same as any previous point in time.

  18. We have reached peak BS

    Climate change study predicts refugees fleeing into Antarctica

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/earthnews/3353247/Climate-change-study-predicts-refugees-fleeing-into-Antarctica.html

  19. Richard Treadgold on January 4, 2015 at 10:45 am said:

    Yes, it’s stupid, but it was written 7 years ago. People were stupider then.

  20. Oops didn’t see the date! I forgot that the heady days of 2008 were full of crass stupidity like this. It will make an interesting history lesson one day

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post Navigation