What happened to global warming?

[Sunsettommy]

BBC news

Friday, 9 October 2009

By Paul Hudson
Climate correspondent, BBC News

EXCERPT:

This headline may come as a bit of a surprise, so too might that fact that the warmest year recorded globally was not in 2008 or 2007, but in 1998.

But it is true. For the last 11 years we have not observed any increase in global temperatures.

And our climate models did not forecast it, even though man-made carbon dioxide, the gas thought to be responsible for warming our planet, has continued to rise.

So what on Earth is going on?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8299079.stm
==========================================================
Finally,the BBC is more evenhanded and even stating what skeptics have been claiming.No warming trend for at least 8 years.

[Mike Davis]

A step in the right direction but a very small step. This group is so far into the faith that they think they are unbiased in their reporting. They even think the UK MET is the absolute authority on climate. They are now paying lip service to other views.

[mcclane]

I read the most of the article, and near the end that interviewed the Met for an opposing view.  Typical media hype, and something I've noticed about the media, when it comes to 'green' this and that, or climate change 'this and that', they always interview hippie groups like greenpeace for their views, anything that states unequivocally that man is responsible for climate change.  In other words, when it comes to climate change the media always provides only one side of the story (and it is always the greenie side).

on the other hand, when the media does report on the skeptics side, they always have to bring up both sides of the story, the skeptics and the greenies.  Kind of unbalanced and unfair, no wonder all the regular joes out there are taking sides with the greenies.

[Richard111]

How about this then? Power plants to push up energy bills

Quote:By Sam Fleming
Last updated at 10:16 PM on 12th November 2009

Householders face painful levies on their energy bills to subsidise a fleet of power stations that will stand idle for much of the year, senior industry sources say.
Energy giants reckon a system of 'capacity payments' may have to be introduced to pay for the gas-fired generation that will be needed to back up unreliable wind farms.

Read more on the link.

[Sunsettommy]

Their money "Gone with the Wind".

[Mike Davis]

Richard111:
It is the Wind Turbines that stand idle most of the year. They should just build the gas fired plants and abandon plans for the Wind Turbines.

[mcclane]

wind power, what a joke.

[Mike Davis]

Mcclane:
Wind power is fine for those things it was designed to do such as flying kites, wind surfing, hang gliding and many other pursuits. On the other hand wind would still be the primary option of energy if not for other forms being cheaper and more efficient. I knew a man who used wind for his main energy source because it was cheaper to buy the turbine, batteries, and 12 volt electronics than to pay the price the power company wanted to put power on his property. So along with propane which was delivered for heating, cooking, etc. he lived quite nicely. The money he saved paid for the replacement parts but he would have been better of with commercial power.