Cont: Global warming discussion V

[dann]

You're doing it again.

Yes, he is!

How Germany Is Beating the Fossil Fuel Industry (Thom Hartmann on YouTube, July 31, 2026 – 9:34 min.)
More of Germany’s electricity came from wind and solar power than fossil fuels for the first time ever in 2025. Solar and onshore wind have grown rapidly under Germany’s “Energiewende” strategy over the past two decades, as the nation transitions away from both coal and nuclear power.

However, Stout's post nevertheless references and even links to some very unfortunate facts.
Google tells us:

Klimafolgen und Debatte

• Emissionsarme Anlage: Das Projekt soll primär mit erneuerbarer Wasserkraft betrieben werden, wodurch die CO2-Intensität bei der Verflüssigung im Vergleich zu herkömmlichen Anlagen um bis zu 90 Prozent niedriger sein soll. [1, 2]
• Kritik von Umweltschützern: Da die Lieferungen bis in die 2050er Jahre hineinreichen, sehen Umweltschützer die verbindlichen Klimaziele Deutschlands (Klimaneutralität bis 2045) und der EU (bis 2050) gefährdet, zumal es sich bei verflüssigtem Erdgas um einen fossilen Energieträger handelt. [1]
• Versorgungssicherheit: Befürworter und das Handelsblatt betonen hingegen die notwendige Diversifizierung und Absicherung des europäischen Gasmarktes nach dem Wegfall russischer Lieferungen. [1, 2]

1) That the project is supposed to be low in emmissions remains to be seen. I tend to doubt it. I fear that it's one of the fossil-fuel industry's usual attempts at greenwashing, but I know too little about the details to say so for sure.
2) That environmentalists are up in arms against it no surprise. In fact, everybody should be.
3) That one of the excuses for the project is energy diversification was to be expected.

So what appears to have happened is that a right-of-center government not only sided with the fossil-fuel industry but even installed one of its representatives as the Federal Minister for Economic Affairs and Energy:

Katarina Reiche (Wikipedia)
Im September 2019 gab der Energiekonzern E.ON bekannt, dass Katherina Reiche für den Vorsitz der Geschäftsführung der innogy-Tochter innogy Westenergie GmbH vorgesehen sei,[45] den sie vom 1. Januar 2020 bis zum Wechsel ins Bundeswirtschaftsministerium innehatte.[46] Im Juni 2020 wurde sie Vorsitzende des Nationalen Wasserstoffrates der Bundesregierung.[47]

The current German government seems to be doing its utmost to push back against the transition to renewables in general. One of the excuses is the one that is also often heard in the USA: the limitations of the electric grid – as if that problem is unsolvable:

Menschheit lebt auf Pump ()junge Welt, July 31, 2026)
Erneuerbare Energien: Zum Overshoot Day streicht Bundesregierung Solarförderung und belastet kleine Anlagenbetreiber zusätzlich

 

[dann]

You're wrong to think it's just because 'big oil' pays these journalist to write such articles.
Allister Heath
You get the picture. Someone with attitudes like this doesn't need money from big oil to write anti-climate articles. His readers have similar views. The whole world could be burning and they wouldn't care so long as it didn't affect their personal wealth.

Is your claim that The Sunday Telegraph has no ties to Big Oil?

Alister Heath (Wikipedia)
Allister Georges Freund Heath OBE (born 1977), is a right-wing French-British business journalist, author and commentator. He was appointed as editor of The Sunday Telegraph in April 2017.[1][2]

The Sunday Telegraph (Wikipedia)
In March 2026 it was announced that Axel Springer SE had agreed to purchase the Telegraph Media Group for £575 million (including The Sunday Telegraph), after the groups ownership had been in limbo since 2023.[12]

Google tells me:

Axel Springer's connection to "oil money" stems from two main financial intersections:
Norway's sovereign wealth fund (built on North Sea oil revenues) purchasing its real estate, and its primary private equity backer having extensive fossil fuel investments.[1, 2]

For those of you who don't know why Roger Ramjets mentions Alistair Heath specifically, i.e. the editor of The Sunday Telegraph, see post 2,516.

 

[Stout]

You're doing it again.

Doing what again? Pointing out inconvenient truths?

 

[dann]

 

[Roger Ramjets]

The current German government seems to be doing its utmost to push back against the transition to renewables in general. One of the excuses is the one that is also often heard in the USA: the limitations of the electric grid – as if that problem is unsolvable:

To be fair, upgrading the grid is the main reason electricity costs a bit more in Germany - the tax pays for it. I don't see anything wrong with that, except that politically it might have been better to get the money from elsewhere. The 'high' cost of electricity in Germany has allowed right-wing denialists to gain popularity.

 

[Roger Ramjets]

Doing what again? Pointing out inconvenient truths?

You 'pointed out' nothing, just made a vague insinuation with no facts. I'm pretty sure I know what you were referring to, but why should I have to do the research? If you have a real argument with actual 'truth', bring it. Otherwise....

 

[dann]

To be fair, upgrading the grid is the main reason electricity costs a bit more in Germany - the tax pays for it. I don't see anything wrong with that, except that politically it might have been better to get the money from elsewhere. The 'high' cost of electricity in Germany has allowed right-wing denialists to gain popularity.

To be fair, you should look at this, from the junge Welt article quoted in post 2,522:

Die Überlastung stellt vor allem im Norden ein Problem dar, das nur durch einen zügigen Ausbau des Stromnetzes gelöst werden kann. »Denn auch wenn im Norden Deutschlands große Mengen an Strom aus erneuerbaren Energien zur Verfügung stehen, können diese bislang nicht immer in den Süden weitergeleitet werden – statt dessen muss der dort installierte fossile Kraftwerkspark zusätzlichen Strom liefern«, erklärte der Informationsdienst des Instituts für deutsche Wirtschaft (IWD) bereits 2024 die Malaise.

It's a way to prevent cheap electricity based on renewables from the northern federal states (and probably even from Scandinavia) to flow to the southern federal states where electricity is based mainly on fossil fuels.
Bavaria was always a very right-wing state. Google AI:

Bavaria is a major conservative stronghold in Germany, led by the Christian Social Union (CSU) and influenced by rural traditions and right-wing populist groups. [1, 2, 3, 4]

 

[Roger Ramjets]

Is your claim that The Sunday Telegraph has no ties to Big Oil?

No, I'm saying the author of that article didn't need backing from 'big oil' to write that piece.

The Sunday Telegraph (Wikipedia)
In March 2026 it was announced that Axel Springer SE had agreed to purchase the Telegraph Media Group for £575 million (including The Sunday Telegraph), after the groups ownership had been in limbo since 2023.

George Monbiot on bsky, July 30, 2026
For years, Telegraph columnists told us climate breakdown is a hoax. Now they say: it's real, but it's too late to do anything about it, so let the bodies pile high (again).

The argument that they are only doing it because fossil-fuel companies pay them is itself a form of denialism. Oil companies might fund people who push their POV, but only because they were already doing it. We need to face the fact that individuals are often just as much or more to blame than faceless corporations.

In this case however the 'ties' are tenuous. Axel Springer is a media company. There is nothing suspicious about a media company buying a newspaper. Your purported ties to big oil consist of:-
1. "Axel Springer sells Berlin headquarters to Norwegian oil fund and Blackstone". It was a real estate deal.
2. "Axel Springer's largest shareholder is U.S. private equity holder KKR, which has major investments in oil, gas and <untranslatable>"

There is zero indication that this media company is getting instructions from investment firms on what to put in their articles. We are already at 3 degrees of separation here. just another 3 to go before we discover the mastermind behind it all - Kevin Bacon.

 

[Roger Ramjets]

To be fair, you should look at this, from the junge Welt article quoted in post 2,522:

It's a way to prevent cheap electricity based on renewables from the northern federal states (and probably even from Scandinavia) to flow to the southern federal states where electricity is based mainly on fossil fuels.
Bavaria was always a very right-wing state.

I don't speak German, but I managed to find the paragraph you quoted in the translation:-

The overload is a problem, especially in the north, which can only be solved by a rapid expansion of the power grid. “Even if large quantities of electricity from renewable energies are available in the north of Germany, they cannot always be forwarded to the south – instead, the fossil power plant park installed there must supply additional electricity,” the information service of the Institute for German Economy (IWD) explained the malaise as early as 2024.

I'm not seeing the slant you're putting on on it. However even if it's true that Bavaria is deliberately putting a spanner in the works, it still means the grid needs to be upgraded. This is hardly a surprise. Clean energy is focused on electricity, so increasing it naturally implies the need for more grid capacity.

We have the same issue in New Zealand. One way to mitigate it is more rooftop solar. However the upfront costs are high, so its cost-effectiveness is marginal for low power users like me (especially at my age). I am inching towards it though. Right now I'm working on providing an area for the solar panels (can't go on the main roof because it faces the wrong way). My plan is to install a low voltage off-grid system that doesn't require certification and supplies much of my daily needs. This will also be useful when the next cyclone takes out the grid. If that works out I might look at a grid-tied setup, but the cost of electricity will have to go up a lot to justify it.

The other thing I'm looking at is replacing the battery in my Leaf, which is now in its 15th year. However I'm not driving much these days so that's another purchase that's hard to justify. I don't enjoy driving long distances either, which is another reason not to increase the car's range!

 

[a_unique_person]

Doing what again? Pointing out inconvenient truths?

The worst case scenario for climate disaster has been removed from the list of possible scenarios because of the postive actions taken by nations so far.

 

[The Atheist]

We have the same issue in New Zealand. One way to mitigate it is more rooftop solar. However the upfront costs are high, so its cost-effectiveness is marginal for low power users like me (especially at my age).

Something to look into for you: a few years back, I owned Solar Power Ltd.

The business was based on assembling our own solar panels from components, which was much cheaper than buying the complete panels. It wasn't highly technical and might well still be available, although those panels were a few generations back.

 

[The Atheist]

If it wasn't for the planet being literally on fire and thousands of people dying from heat, I'd simply be amused by climate deniers. To say anything negative about climate action when we're on the cusp of shattering all heat records is far beyond eye-rolling absurdity.

And if you think the wildfires in the NH are bad, wait until October and see how Aussie looks.

 

[dann]

You're wrong to think it's just (!) because 'big oil' pays these journalist to write such articles.

The argument that they are only (!) doing it because fossil-fuel companies pay them is itself a form of denialism.

Your strawman is dumb! Your repetition doesn't improve it!
What I said was:

It's what the fossil-fuel companies pay them to do!

The reason why you are so zealous about this point is that you prefer to make ordinary people who fall for the astroturfing and disinformation from the fossil-fuel industry more responsible for global warming than the industrialists and their bribed politicians.

 

[Stout]

You 'pointed out' nothing, just made a vague insinuation with no facts. I'm pretty sure I know what you were referring to, but why should I have to do the research? If you have a real argument with actual 'truth', bring it. Otherwise....

You sound butthurt that Germany has entered into a long term deal to import gas while gouging their electricity using customers despite copious amounts of "cheap" wind and solar.

But if it's positivity you want, I can deliver.

Due to the loss of Nord Stream, Germany is no longer Russia's bitch.

https://www.c-span.org/clip/white-house-event/germans-laugh-after-trump-warns-of-reliance-on-foreign-oil/5029974

 

[Roger Ramjets]

You sound butthurt that Germany has entered into a long term deal to import gas while gouging their electricity using customers despite copious amounts of "cheap" wind and solar.

Strange that you would think that, I said nothing about it.

But if it's positivity you want, I can deliver.

Due to the loss of Nord Stream, Germany is no longer Russia's bitch.

https://www.c-span.org/clip/white-house-event/germans-laugh-after-trump-warns-of-reliance-on-foreign-oil/5029974

A video of Trump speaking? If this is your idea of 'truth'...

 

[Roger Ramjets]

Your strawman is dumb! Your repetition doesn't improve it!
What I said was:
It's what the fossil-fuel companies pay them to do!

The reason why you are so zealous about this point is that you prefer to make ordinary people who fall for the astroturfing and disinformation from the fossil-fuel industry more responsible for global warming than the industrialists and their bribed politicians.

Journalists are not 'ordinary' people, they are (supposed to be) professionals who hold accuracy and truth in higher regard. However they often think their position gives them the right to do the opposite. They aren't (or shouldn't be) falling for astroturfing.

let me rephrase what I said in a way that hopefully you will understand. People like Alister Heath push their narrative whether big oil pays them or not - it's not a big (or any) part of the equation. In this case you can't even show that big oil is having any influence, and indeed none is needed to make him spew his denialism.

You say I prefer to blame ordinary people, but that's not true. I blame anyone and everyone who is a part of it according to how much they are involved. That even includes myself, but much more people like Alister Heath who have far more influence and are using it to hold back progress instead of contributing to it.

 

[dann]

Let me rephrase what I said in a way you'll hopefully understand:
Big Oil pays them to push the narrative!
They'll all pretend that this is not the reason why the narrative is what it is.
And no, there probably isn't any formalized contract: 'For services rendered ...'

It’s Outrageous That Media Organizations Are Still Taking Fossil Fuel Money (Current Affairs, June 7, 2024)
The U.N. Secretary-General, António Guterres, has been admirably clear about the risks to the world from the climate crisis and at pointing to the culprits. He has called the fossil fuel companies “the godfathers of climate chaos” and recently called for a ban on fossil fuel ads. This is an important step, because advertisements are propaganda, and it should be obvious that no society that wants to survive should permit companies to try to trick the public into participating in its own suicide.
Yet strangely enough, despite the obvious self-interest that everyone has in survival, the response to the call for a ban on fossil fuel ads has been almost complete silence.

I assume that "strangely enough" is sarcasm.

 

[dann]

Russell Seitz on X, Aug 1, 2026

I removed the text from Seitz's tweet because it was a reply to something else, a tweet by Michael Shermer accusing Fauci of being a liar and based on an article with quotes from Fauci's diary that actually show the opposite, i.e. that he's a scientist who changes his mind when new evidence appears, e.g. the lab leak idea, but also that he occasionally believed others when they recommended measures that later turned out to be insufficient, e.g. the six-foot distancing rule, which he later "acknowledged ... “sort of just appeared” and wasn’t based on any controlled study."

For those of you who don't have access to X and thus to Shermer's tweet with the link to the awful article he embraces and links to, here's a link to the article: Written for an Audience of One (JusttheFacts.Media, Aug 31, 2026)
(In this case, it really isn't 'just the facts.')

 

[Stout]

A video of Trump speaking? If this is your idea of 'truth'...

I'm aware it's rather cryptic, but if you look deep within the title of the article, the idea of Germany being laughing off the idea of being dependant on Russian gas kind of pops out. See, Germany was happy being dependant on Russia at the time but they came to regret that which is a good and positive thing since we're all trying to be good and positive.

Now they're set to become dependant on Canadian gas, also a good and positive thing because everybody loves Canada, including our oil and gas.

 

[dann]

No, not everybody loves Canada, and those who do are probably just unaware of Canada's role in anthropogenic global warming: CO₂ emissions per capita. I guess Carney is happy that Trump's USA takes the focus away from his Canada.

As for Germany becoming dependent on Canadian gas, I very much doubt it.

1) It's about diversification, about avoiding becoming dependent on any one supplier.

2) As wind & solar keep getting cheaper, it's doubtful that electricity consumers in Bavaria and Baden-Würtemberg will continue to put up with the prices they have to pay to the semi-monopolies:
Der Süden wehrt sich gegen teurere Energie (Staatsanzeiger, May 2, 2025)

3) And consumers in Germany North aren't likely to continue to have to subsidize their southern compatriots.
Strom könnte in Bayern bald mehr kosten als im Norden (n-tv Nachrichten, Aug 13, 2025)

4) It is not as if businesspeople in Germany are happy with the situation:

Energiewende: Wie Deutschland dem Stromnetz-Ausbau im Weg steht (Handelsblatt, Juli 26, 2026)
Die Bundesregierung hält am landesweiten, einheitlichen Strompreis fest, obwohl das System höchst ineffizient ist und Milliarden kostet.

5) In the southern federal states of Germany, they are feeling the heat much more than in the northern coastal states:
Heat records in Bavaria: June 2026 hotter than ever:

Hitzerekorde in Bayern: Juni 2026 so heiß wie nie (SAT.1 Bayern on YouTube, July 20, 2026 – 26 sec.)
Außergewöhnliche Hitzewelle: Der Juni hat in Bayern neue Temperaturrekorde gebracht. An vielen Orten gab es bis zu zwei Wochen mit mehr als 30 Grad am Stück und bis zu acht Tropennächte hintereinander.

6) The grid (as mentioned in post 2,521) is already a choking point for the full use of renewables:

Deutschlands neue Stromautobahnen (Energie-Experten, April 16, 2025)
Wind- und Solarparks in Deutschland müssen immer wieder abgeschaltet werden, damit das Stromnetz nicht wegen Überlastung zusammenbricht. Nun werden die Leitungskapazitäten erweitert. Profitiert davon auch die Schweiz?

Stout knows nothing and doesn't understand any of this.