Environment
Rising Seas Not Resulting in Disappearing Islands
From Heartland Daily News
A spate of recent articles acknowledges a fact that Climate Realism has long discussed. Most island nations, rather than sinking beneath the waves as seas rise amid modest warming, as predicted by climate alarmists and island profiteers, are, in fact growing.
Writing for The Pipeline, Buck Throckmorton thoroughly debunks claims that recent collapses of houses built on the shores of barrier islands in North Carolina were caused by climate change:
[B]arrier islands … are impermanent deposits of sand, which reshape, move, merge, appear, and disappear due to tides, winds, and storms.
The movement of barrier islands is not due to rising sea levels, it is due to a naturally occurring force called “longshore drift.” Where there are man-made efforts to stabilize barrier islands with jetties and sea walls, this produces other impacts on currents that cause erosion in some waterfront areas and new sand deposits in others. Beach houses in the Outer Banks are not being lost due to rising sea levels, they are being lost due to shifting sands.
Throckmorton also pointed to the disappearance of Tucker’s Island, off the coast of New Jersey, which completely disappeared due to “long-shore drift,” not rising seas.
NOAA describes the impact of long-shore drift, thusly:
Longshore drift may also create or destroy entire barrier islands along a shoreline. A barrier island is a long offshore deposit of sand situated parallel to the coast. As longshore drifts deposit, remove, and redeposit sand, barrier islands constantly change.
Semi-permanent, shifting barrier islands are not the only types of islands not being destroyed by climate change-induced rising seas. Even The New York Times (NYT) was recently forced by reality to admit that coral atolls, long the poster child of rising seas claiming nations, have been expanding and adding land amidst the Earth’s slight recent warming.
As recently as April 2024, with a story titled “Why Time Is Running Out Across the Maldives’ Lovely Little Islands,“ the NYT was still pushing the lie that rising seas threaten dozens of island nations, consisting of hundreds of small coral atolls, with extinction. Reality forced the NYT to reverse itself in the space of just three months. The author of a late June article, “A Surprising Climate Find,” wrote:
Of late, though, scientists have begun telling a surprising new story about these islands. By comparing mid-20th century aerial photos with recent satellite images, they’ve been able to see how the islands have evolved over time. What they found is startling: Even though sea levels have risen, many islands haven’t shrunk. Most, in fact, have been stable. Some have even grown.
The problem with this narrative is that the fact of growing islands during the recent period of climate change is not new news. In fact, as my colleague Linnea Lueken noted in a recent piece, the study the NYT references was published in 2018, six years ago. It found 89 percent of islands in the Pacific and Indian Oceans increased in area or were stable, and only 11 percent showed any sign of contracting.
Indeed, geological understanding of coral atoll growth and demise is not newly discovered.
“Scientists have known for decades, if not more than a hundred years, that atoll islands uniquely change with changing sea levels,” Lueken points out. “Charles Darwin was the first to propose that reefs were many thousands of feet thick, and grow upwards towards the light. He was partially correct, though reality is more complicated than his theory.”
Repeated studies show that what is true of the Maldives, growth amid rising seas, is equally true of the islands that make up Tuvalu and Kiribati, and across the island chains of Micronesia. One well-cited study from 2015 reported that 40 percent of islands in the Pacific and Indian Oceans were stable, and another 40 percent had grown, in recent decades.
Oceans, oceans everywhere, and nowhere can be found the much-bemoaned decline in island nations hyped be climate hucksters with regularity. When even the NYT is forced to admit this truth, you know the climate alarm narrative is in trouble.
Sources: The Pipeline; The New York Times; Climate Realism
The Dual Challenge: Energy and Environment
Scott Tinker
The world faces two important and interrelated challenges. Affordable and reliable energy for all, and protecting the environment. The energy-environment challenge is not simple, but it is solvable if we understand and address the complex fabric of energy security, scale of energy demand, physics of energy density, distribution of energy resources, interconnectedness of the land, air, water and atmosphere, and the extreme disparity in global wealth and economic health. The truth is that there are no good and bad, clean and dirty, renewable and nonrenewable energy sources. They all have benefits, and they all have challenges. Climate change is an important issue, but it is not the only environmental issue. Solar and wind are important low carbon solutions, but they are only part of the solution. We must put our best minds to the task of addressing the dual challenge, working together to better the world.
From the Fraser Institute
By Elmira Aliakbari and Julio Mejía
Doubling Canadian natural gas production and exporting to Asia could reduce global emissions by up to 630 million tonnes—nearly as much as Canada produces in a year
Canada could help significantly reduce global greenhouse gas emissions by increasing natural gas production and exporting the additional supply to Asia in the form of liquefied natural gas (LNG), according to a new study from the Fraser Institute, an independent, non-partisan Canadian public policy think tank.
“As countries like China and India continue to burn coal for power, Canadian LNG offers a lower-emission alternative with the potential for major global impact,” said Elmira Aliakbari, director of natural resource studies at the Fraser Institute and coauthor of the study, Exporting Canadian LNG to the World: A Practical Solution for Reducing GHG Emissions
The study estimates the impact from Canada doubling its natural gas production and exporting to Asia to replace coal-fired power. In that scenario, global emissions could drop up to 630 million tonnes annually, which is the equivalent of removing approximately 137 million cars from the road. More specifically, replacing coal-fired power in China with Canadian LNG could cut emissions by up to 62 per cent for every unit of power produced.
“Focusing only on domestic emissions ignores Canada’s potential to support global climate goals,” said Aliakbari. “By displacing coal abroad, Canadian LNG can play a critical role in cutting total global emissions even if domestic emissions were to increase.”
However, regulatory uncertainty and a range of federal and provincial policies continue to hinder LNG development in Canada, despite strong global demand.
“Policymakers need to clear a path if Canada is going to play a meaningful role in reducing global emissions,” Aliakbari added.
Exporting Canadian LNG to the World: A Practical Solution for Reducing GHG Emissions
- Coal, a major source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, remains a leading energy source in many Asian countries, especially China and India. Some European countries have also turned back to coal as sanctions on Russian energy intensified following the invasion of Ukraine.
- As the world seeks practical solutions for reducing greenhouse-gas emissions, natural gas, with its lower carbon footprint, offers a promising alternative to coal.
- With abundant reserve, Canada is well positioned to help reduce global reliance on coal. By exporting Canadian liquified natural gas (LNG) and helping Asian and European countries reduce their reliance on coal, Canada can lower net global GHG emissions.
- Exporting LNG from Canada to China and substituting LNG for coal in the generation of power there can eliminate between 291 and 687 gCO₂eq per kWh of power generated, a reduction of between 34% and 62%.
- If Canada were to double its current natural gas production and export the additional supply to Asia as LNG to displace an equivalent amount of coal used to generate power, global GHG emissions could be reduced by up to 630 million tonnes annually, a significant reduction equivalent to 89% of Canada’s total GHG emissions.
- Canada enjoys several competitive advantages, including cooler temperatures that reduce liquefaction energy costs and a strategic location that offers shorter shipping routes to Europe and Asia compared to many other suppliers.
- Regulatory challenges and a mix of federal and provincial policies, however, have slowed or blocked LNG developments in Canada.
Elmira Aliakbari
Julio Mejía
Anti-Trump protests planned across the country on Saturday as LA violence continues
Telegram founder Pavel Durov exposes crackdown on digital privacy in Tucker Carlson interview
Carney’s Promise of Expediting Resource Projects Feels Like a Modern Version of the Wicked Stepmother from Disney’s Cinderella
