Renewal Lease 2010-2021: Fill & Download for Free

I bought REIT stock in 2006. It is worth about 2/3 of what I paid for it. I bought rental houses in 2008 & 2010. The houses tripled in value. I leveraged the houses so all of the gain was on borrowed money.So you can leverage real estate further than stock, and reap the gain on the leveraged capital gain as well as whatever cash you put in yourself.REits pay {relatively} steady dividends. Owning SFRs is steady until there is a vacancy and or major repairs and renovations.In 2020, though, the querist {had to look that up) point that returns are similar rings true. I earn {net} about 4% of the market value of the SFRs after expenses on the houses, earn about 4% of market value in dividends on the stock. I would sit on any cash that came my way today, though , because I think there will be big declines when lease renewals drop, evictions leap, defaults climb, and foreclosures creep up, as the pandemic grinds on, and government fails to keep up. Both investment types will lose market value and be cheaper to buy in 2021. Inmyarrogantopinion imao.

The so called climate change energy crisis is political not based on science as massive number of research papers debunk human emissions of minute amounts of CO2 is irrelevant to the climate.“Over 400 Scientific Papers Published In 2020 Support A Skeptical Position On Climate AlarmBy Kenneth Richard on 29. January 2021In 2020, more than 400 scientific papers were published that cast doubt on the position that anthropogenic CO2 emissions function as the climate’s fundamental control knob…or that otherwise serve to question the efficacy of climate models or the related “consensus” positions commonly endorsed by policymakers and mainstream media sources.Over 400 scientific papers published in 2020 affirm the position that there are significant limitations and uncertainties inherent in our understanding of climate and climate changes, emphasizing that climate science is not settled.More specifically, the papers in this compilation support these four main skeptical positions — categorized here as N(1) – N(4) — which question the climate alarm popularized in today’s headlines.N(1) Natural mechanisms play well more than a negligible role (as claimed by the IPCC) in the net changes in the climate system, which includes temperature variations, precipitation patterns, weather events, etc., and the influence of increased CO2 concentrations on climatic changes are less pronounced than currently imagined.N(2) The warming/sea levels/glacier and sea ice retreat/precipitation extremes…experienced during the modern era are neither unprecedented or remarkable, nor do they fall outside the range of natural variability.N(3) The computer climate models are neither reliable or consistently accurate, the uncertainty and error ranges are irreducible, and projections of future climate states (i.e., an intensification of the hydrological cycle) are not supported by observations and/or are little more than speculation.N(4) Current emissions-mitigation policies, especially related to the advocacy for renewables, are often ineffective and even harmful to the environment, whereas elevated CO2 and a warmer climate provide unheralded benefits to the biosphere (i.e., a greener planet and enhanced crop yields, lower mortality with warming).”An energy crisis can be natural caused by severe storms knocking our electrical power or man made by poor choices in government energy policy evident in the UK from harmful subsidies to renewables causing mortal heat poverty. Research shows more seniors die of fuel poverty than road accidents.“The UK Government's 2015 Fuel Poverty Report showed that 4.5 million households, or 17% of UK households, were in fuel poverty.[6]“A survey of families on Universal Credit and Child Tax Credit in October 2020 found that 26% are already cutting back on heating and electricity. The survey further found that 60% had gone into debt, and families borrowed over £1,700 in the last two months alone. The COVID-19 pandemic had caused 38% of families worse off than before.[7]”Another longer term energy crisis happens when governments fail to prepare for increasing future demand thinking somehow renewable will magically fill the gap.Biden cancelling the Keystone XL’s pipeline and the oil gas and coal leases on federal land is an example of short sited thinking because demand for oil is rising as wind and solar renewables are failing due to intermittency.Sources: Biden to halt all oil, gas & coal leasing on Federal lands & watersGuest “we told you so” by David MiddletonThis is not related to the 60-day procedural mortarium currently in place.While this is based on anonymous sources, I did hear rumors of something even worse than this on Friday, and it’s inline with what we were expecting… (For readers who don’t know, I am a petroleum geologist/geophysicist and have been working the Federal waters of the Gulf of Mexico since 1988).Biden prepares to end new oil and coal leases on federal landBy JENNIFER A. DLOUHY AND ARI NATTER on 1/21/2021WASHINGTON (Bloomberg) –President Joe Biden is poised to suspend the sale of oil and gas leases on federal land, which accounts for about a tenth of U.S. supplies, according to four people familiar with the matter.The moratorium, which would also freeze coal leasing, is set to be unveiled along with a raft of other climate policies next week, according to the people, who asked for anonymity to discuss plans not yet public. The moratorium is separate from a 60-day leasing and permitting pause ordered Wednesday, two people said.The move would block the sale of new mining and drilling rights across some 700 million acres of federal land. It could also block offshore oil and gas leasing, though details are still being developed, some of the people said.Spokesmen for the White House and Interior Department, which overseas leasing on federal land, declined to comment.[…]Oil industry leaders and politicians from the Western U.S. have warned the move could harm some local economies where drilling and mining flourishes — while crippling U.S. energy production to the detriment of American consumers. The Western Energy Alliance, which battled Obama-era rules targeting oil drilling, has vowed to immediately go to court to challenge any leasing ban.“Blocking American companies from accessing our country’s natural resources is bad for American jobs, bad for state budgets and bad for national security. It also raises serious legal concerns,” said Anne Bradbury, chief executive of the American Exploration and Production Council.Federal lands and waters together accounted for 22% of total U.S. oil production and 12% of U.S. natural gas production in 2019, according to the Energy Information Administration. Onshore federal lands provide about 8% of the nation’s oil and 9% of its natural gas, according to the Bureau of Land Management. Data for 2020 are not yet available.[…]Oil industry advocates argue that drilling blockades do nothing to stifle emissions — just shift that crude production elsewhere. “The world is still going to need natural gas and oil under any scenario for a long time,” said Dan Naatz, senior vice president with the Independent Petroleum Association of America. “A leasing ban is just going to ship that production to Saudi Arabia, to Russia, where there are far less stringent environmental controls.”[…]World OilWhile idiotic, such a move might actually be legal and would be far less damaging than a totally illegal refusal to approve permits for existing leases. It would simply result in the US importing about 1 million bbl/d more from Saudi Arabia, Russia and Iran by the end of this decade.NOIAIt would also kill about 500,000 jobs on top of the up to 70,000 jobs Biden killed the day he was installed into office.Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) confronted Secretary of Transportation nominee Pete Buttigieg over the Keystone XL decision on Thursday morning, during Buttigieg’s confirmation hearing. If the administration was serious about infrastructure, Cruz asked, why was it killing an infrastructure project with “good, paying union jobs”?When Buttigieg said the idea was that “net” jobs created in more climate-friendly industries would be positive, Cruz retorted that that was little comfort to the Keystone XL workers who were being laid off: “So for those workers, the answer is somebody else will get a job?”BreitbartSources: Biden to halt all oil, gas & coal leasing on Federal lands & watersWhat is an energy crisis? How can it be prevented?Natural energy crisis are a function of where you live with SEVERE WEATHER EITHER IN THE SUMMER OR THE WINTER causing devastation. When storms wreck havoc with grid electricity the effect can be life and or health threatening. Too much heavy snowfall causes power lines to break for example.“3 hours ago December 17, 2020.Deadly snowstorm to be followed by freezing temperatures in Northeast: LatestA deadly snowstorm is slamming the Northeast, closing schools and leaving nearly 4 feet of snow in some areas.Weather News & Videos - ABC News”In the UK research shows seniors are dying in the thousands from heat poverty, more than road accidents because of the 50% increase in electricity rates due to the cost doubling from wind and solar renewables. In India and China millions are dying or suffering ill health because they lack grid electricity forcing cooling with solid fuels like cattle dung. Also the Paris Accord is preventing sensible investment in grid electricity using coal and fossil fuels because of the unfounded view that trace amount of CO2 plant food emissions from industry at 3% of 0.04% or 0.012 % molecules of CO2 threatens unprecedented heating of the planet.The alarmist campaign by the UN getting governments around the world to sign the PARIS ACCORD and reduce fossil fuel energy and coal in particular because of the pseudo-science that carbon dioxide emissions from industry are making the climate DANGEROUSLY HOT. This agreement is the major and devastating energy crisis of our time. Yet, there is abundant evidence that solar radiation is the driver of temperature and it is in decline.Coal is an abundant and cheap source of energy particularly in developing nations like India and Africa. Demonizing coal by developed nations for effete advantage has a terrible impact on the lives of the poor.Living in the dark off the electricity grid.THE SOCIAL INJUSTICE OF ENERGY POVERTYEnergy Poverty is devastatingEnergy poverty is devastating for more than 2 billion impoverished peoples living without electricity for light and heat. Cooking happens the way it has for centuries before – over smoky indoor fires that do no favors for lungs or life expectancies. I witnessed the tragedy first hand working in the China countryside in the winter where peasants are forced to live with their animals in a vain attempt to keep warm. Their weathered faces from the harsh life in the dark without heat is very sad.Once upon a time, social justice was synonymous with equal access to modern amenities — electric lighting so poor children could read at night, refrigerators so milk could be kept on hand, and washing machines to save the hands and backs of women. Malthus was rightly denounced by generations of socialists as a cruel aristocrat who cloaked his elitism in pseudo-science, and claimed that Nature couldn't possibly feed any more hungry months.Now, at the very moment modern energy arrives for global poor — something a prior generation of socialists would have celebrated and, indeed, demanded — today's leading left-wing leaders advocate a return to energy penury. The loudest advocates of cheap energy for the poor are on the libertarian Right, while The Nation dresses up neo-Malthusianism as revolutionary socialism.Left-wing politics was once about destabilizing power relations between the West and the Rest. Now, under the sign of climate justice, it's about sustaining them.Left-wing politicians like Al Gore, Obama and Naomi Klein crusading against cheap coal and efficient fossil fuels represents the greatest progressive reversal in history.http://***http://thebreakthrough.org/index.php/voices/michael-shellenberger-and-ted-nordhaus/its-not-about-the-climate***This is immoral.Climate movement’s immoral spendingBy Tom HarrisThe consequence of overconfidence about climate science is tragic. According to the San Francisco-based Climate Policy Initiative, of the $1 billion spent worldwide each day on climate finance, 94 percent goes to mitigation, trying to control future climate. Only 6 percent of global climate finance is dedicated to helping vulnerable people cope with climate change today. In developing countries, even less, an abysmal 5 percent, goes to adaptation. Based on a theory about climate, we are letting people die today so as to possibly help those in the distant future."Providing the world’s most deprived countries with solar panels instead of better health care or education is inexcusable self-indulgence. Green energy sources may be good to keep on a single light or to charge a cellphone. But three billion people suffer from the effects of indoor air pollution because they burn wood, coal or dung to cook. These people need access to affordable, reliable electricity today. Too often clean alternatives, because they aren’t considered “renewable,” aren’t receiving the funding they deserve.We all know how well its access could help lift those without it out of poverty.The UN is more interested in chasing the chimera of “global warming” and its unproven science. The reason, of course, is power. Money and control equal power."Is the focus on "global warming" immoral?Tom Harris: Climate movement's immoral spendingIntroduction – Coal IndiaCoal India is the largest coal manufacturer in the world with total production of 567 MT in FY2018. Coal India produces 84% of the coal produced in India with a market share of 60% to 65%. The estimated geological resource of India coal stood at ~315 Billion tons as of 1st April 2017. Coal India has total coal reserves of ~88.4 Billion tons (68.6 BT resources + 19.8 BT reserves) as of 1st April 2013. Coal India operates 369 mines via 8 coal producing subsidiaries.From the Office for National Statistics. (UK)“Excess winter deaths, England and Wales, 1999/2000–2009/2010In the winter period (December to March) of 2009/10 there were an estimated 25,400 more deaths in England and Wales, compared with the average for the non-winter period (see definition below). This was a decrease of 30 per cent compared with the number in the previous winter, but is slightly higher than the level seen in 2007/08.Females experience greater excess winter mortality than males: in 2009/10 there were 10,600 excess winter deaths in males and 14,800 excess winter deaths in females. The greatest increase in deaths each winter is in the elderly population. In the winter of 2009/10 there were 20,600 more deaths among those aged 75 and over, compared with levels in the non-winter period. In contrast, there were 4,900 excess winter deaths among those under the age of 75.The number of extra deaths occurring in winter varies depending on temperature, the level of disease in the population, and other factors. Increases in deaths from respiratory and circulatory diseases cause most of the excess winter mortality. Influenza is often implicated in winter deaths as it can cause complications such as bronchitis and pneumonia, especially in the elderly. However, relatively few death certificates actually mention influenza. The winter of 2009/10 was the coldest since 1995/96 (The Met Office, 2010), but levels of influenza were relatively low for most of the winter season (Health Protection Agency, 2010).”Excess deaths hover around the 25000 mark in most years. In 1999-2000 it was 48000 and in 2008-2009 it was 36000. Between 1999 and 2009 over 314000 excess deaths are recorded.We all understand the reality – fuel poverty caused by increasing costs causes old people to die. More women die because there are more elderly women than men since they live longer.Cold homes and energy povertySUMMARYElectricity available from a national grid is a boon to civilization enabling economic, social and educational progress.Energy for grid power around the world from fossil fuels with coal being the major provider is at 99.2% after trillions wasted in subsidies of renewables.Wind and solar fail as a source of grid electricity with less than 1% use world wide.Renewables fail because they are intermittent when the wind does not blow or the sun does not shine.Vainly introducing wind and solar to the grid increases the cost because of the need for double back up with fossil fuels to kick in when the renewables fail.The earth is in the Holocene interglacial of the Quaternary Ice Age and at the peak of warming.Warm is never too warm based on past evidence and is always more beneficial than cold.We can expect falling into a cooling period like the Little Ice Age soon from the evidence of the decline of solar activity of Cycle 24-25.Further the greatest fear is the next cycle of glaciation not global warming as we are at the peak of the current interglacial.During the last glaciation most of the USA and Canada became inhospitable covered in ice > 1 mile thick.There is no evidence that Co2 including our emissions from fossil fuels has any effect on the climate.Solar cycles and activity correlates well with temperature not Co2.The sun has gone blank with few sunspots leading to the earth cooling.Most of earth’s history has been tropical with robust growth of plants and animals and not like the current ice age.Humans are a tropical specie and thrive in warmer weather.Fear of global warming is bad science and terrible public policy.REFERENCESThese two graphs illustrate a fundamental dilemma about the energy crisis. Electricity costs increase significantly because of increased renewables. Germany and Denmark have the most renewables and highest electricity cost. The reason is the intermittency requires a double fossil fuel back up constantly ready to kick in when the wind does not blow (at the coldest and hottest weather) and when the sun does not shine (during cold cloudy weather increasing abound).“Fact 1: We are in an ice age, the Quaternary to name it, and have been for 2.58 million years. Given that the previous four ice ages lasted for right at 30 my, we likely have more than 27 my to go (the two ice ages that kicked things off were of snowball-Earth proportions and lasted much longer. Ice ages occur every 155 my, and we don’t know why. That’s a much longer cycle than Milankovitch cycles can account for. Those tell us things like why North Africa has been a desert for 5 ky when before that it was a populated savanna.“Fact 2: We are in an interglacial, the Holocene epoch to give it its name, a respite from glaciation. During an ice age, interglacials occur at 90 to 125 ky intervals and last approximately 7 to 14 ky. The Holocene is 11.7 ky old, but there is new evidence that the Allerød oscillation 13.9 ky ago was the actual start with a meteor strike 1 ky in producing the Younger Dryas cooling.* If we are actually, 13.9 ky into our interglacial, then natural cycles tell us we will be rapidly descending back into glaciation in 5… 4… 3…[Charles Tips QUORA writer and former Science Editor organized these facts.]“The combination of glacials and interglacials looks like this:THE sun continues to be very quiet and it has been without sunspots this year 62% of the time as we approach what is likely to be one of the deepest solar minimums in a long, long time.Daily observations of the number of sunspots since 1 January 1977 according to Solar Influences Data Analysis CenterNew research shows fear of global warming is bad science.Marine species evolved, thrived, and diversified in 35 to 40°C ocean temperatures and CO2 concentrations “5-10x higher than present-day values” (Voosen, 2019 and Henkes et al., 2018).Image Source: Wunsch, 2018In the near-surface layer of the ocean (0-20 m), temperatures rose more than 5 times faster from 1900 to 1945 (~1.2°C, 0.27°C/decade) than they did during 1945 to 2010 (~0.3°C, 0.046°C/decade), which is the opposite of what would be expected if CO2 emissions were driving thermal changes in the ocean (Gouretski et al., 2012).Image Source: Gouretski et al., 2012II. The astounding warmth of the distant past – when marine species thrivedA year ago, Henkes et al. (2018) determined marine animals “thrived” in water temperatures that averaged 35-40°C in “widespread regions of the oceans,” which is more than 20°C warmer than today’s average ocean surface temperature (~16°C).The authors note that today’s tropical temperatures (25-30°C) can be equated to the “icehouse” conditions of the Carboniferous.Further, when marine animals thrived in waters >20°C warmer than today, this warmth was accompanied by CO2 levels “5-10x higher than present-day values” – about 2000 to 4000 ppm.Image Source: Henkes et al., 2018In a new paper published in Science, Voosen, 2019 uses the data compiled by Henkes et al. (2018) to further reiterate“Some 450 million years ago, ocean waters averaged 35°C to 40°C, more than 20°C warmer than today. Yet marine life thrived, even diversified and to construct a graphical representation of global ocean temperatures from the Paleozoic onwards. Voosen affirms “marine life diversified in extreme heat” and “mammals evolved during a warm period.”Image Source: Voosen, 2019In sum, coupling the 1) insignificant thermal ocean changes during modern times and the 2) extreme warmth (and high CO2 levels) of the distant past would seem to support the contention that marine animals are not currently in any sort of obvious danger from either rapid warming or high CO2 levels.https://notrickszone.com/2019/07...NO, global warming has not happened and is not happening now.The evidence shows temperatures have hardly increased over the past 140 years at 0.8 ‘ C and are now falling at 0.4 ‘ C. This small increase is easily explained by solar activity and natural variability. Measuring global temperatures at this level of precision is not credible and it is certainly not cause for concern as climate always seesaws hot and cold everywhere so the range of statistical error must be very high.Figure 1: The world's surface air temperature change ("anomaly"), relative to the world's mean temperature of 58° F or 14.5° C, averaged over land and oceans from 1975 to 20082. Inset are two periods of no warming or cooling within this overall warming trend.Just as important is when there was truly global warming in the past marine and other life thrived and this is when Co2 levels were 5 X HIGHER THAN TODYAY!We are in the Holocene interglacial warmer period of our Quaternary Ice Age of the past 2.5 million years. What is happening as to warming is no different and in fact cooler than temperatures of the Medieval Warm period where humans, plants and animals thrived.Holocene climatic optimum - WikipediaThis graph is taken from Wikipedia. It shows eight different reconstructions of Holocene temperature. The thick black line is the average of these. Time progresses from left to right.On this graph the Stone Age is shown only about one degree warmer than present day, but most sources mention that Scandinavian Stone Age was about 2-3 degrees warmer than the present; this need not to be mutually excluding statements, because the curve reconstructs the entire Earth's temperature, and on higher latitudes the temperature variations were greater than about equator.Some reconstructions show a vertical dramatic increase in temperature around the year 2000, but it seems not reasonable to the author, since that kind of graphs cannot possibly show temperature in specific years, it must necessarily be smoothed by a kind of mathematical rolling average, perhaps with periods of hundred years, and then a high temperature in a single year, for example, 2004 will be much less visible.The trend seems to be that Holocene's highest temperature was reached in the Hunter Stone Age about 8,000 years before present, thereafter the temperature has generally been steadily falling, however, superimposed by many cold and warm periods, including the modern warm period.However, generally speaking, the Holocene represents an amazing stable climate, where the cooling through the period has been limited to a few degrees.History of Earth's ClimateThis chart shows the seesaw hot and cold blips over 100 + years but ending where the temperature started and now returning to the colder temperatures from 1950 to 1980.Big data finds the Medieval Warm Period – no denial hereJennifer MarohasyJennifer Marohasy22 August 20177:49 AMAccording to author Leo Tolstoy, born at the very end of the Little Ice Age, in quite a cold country:The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he already knows, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.So, our new technical paper in GeoResJ (vol. 14, pages 36-46) will likely be ignored. Because after applying the latest big data technique to six 2,000 year-long proxy-temperature series we cannot confirm that recent warming is anything but natural – what might have occurred anyway, even if there was no industrial revolution.Over the last few years, I’ve worked with Dr John Abbot using artificial neural networks (ANN) to forecast monthly rainfall. We now have a bunch of papers in international climate science journals showing these forecasts to be more skilful than output from general circulation models.During the past year, we’ve extended this work to estimating what global temperatures would have been during the twentieth century in the absence of human-emission of carbon dioxide.We began by deconstructing the six-proxy series from different geographic regions – series already published in the mainstream climate science literature. One of these, the Northern Hemisphere composite series begins in 50 AD, ends in the year 2000, and is derived from studies of pollen, lake sediments, stalagmites and boreholes.Typical of most such temperature series, it zigzags up and down while showing two rising trends: the first peaks about 1200 AD and corresponds with a period known as the Medieval Warm Period (MWP), while the second peaks in 1980 and then shows decline. In between, is the Little Ice Age (LIA), which according to the Northern Hemisphere composite bottomed-out in 1650 AD. (Of course, the MWP corresponded with a period of generally good harvests in England – when men dressed in tunics and built grand cathedrals with tall spires. It preceded the LIA when there was famine and the Great Plague of London.)Ignoring for the moment the MWP and LIA, you might want to simply dismiss this temperature series on the basis it peaks in 1980: it doesn’t continue to rise to the very end of the record: to the year 2000?In fact, this decline is typical of most such proxy reconstructions – derived from pollen, stalagmites, boreholes, coral cores and especially tree rings. Within mainstream climate science the decline after 1980 is referred to as “the divergence problem”, and then hidden.In denial of this problem, leading climate scientists have been known to even graft temperature measurements from thermometers onto the proxy record after 1980 to literally ‘hide the decline’. Phil Jones, the head of the Climate Research Unit, University of East Anglia, aptly described the technique as a ‘trick’.Grafting thermometer data onto the end of the proxy record generally ‘fixes’ the problem after 1980, while remodelling effectively flattens the Medieval Warm Period.There are, however, multiple lines of evidence indicating it was about a degree warmer across Europe during the MWP – corresponding with the 1200 AD rise in our Northern Hemisphere composite. In fact, there are oodles of published technical papers based on proxy records that provide a relatively warm temperature profile for this period. This was before the Little Ice Age when it was too cold to inhabit Greenland.The modern inhabitation of Upernavik, in north west Greenland, only began in 1826, which corresponds with the beginning of the industrial age. So, the end of the Little Ice Age corresponds with the beginning of industrialisation. But did industrialisation cause the global warming? Tolstoy’s ‘intelligent man’ would immediately reply: But yes!In our new paper in GeoResJ, we make the assumption that an artificial neural network – remember our big data/machine learning technique – trained on proxy temperatures up until 1830, would be able to forecast the combined effect of natural climate cycles through the twentieth century.Using the proxy record from the Northern Hemisphere composite, decomposing this through signal analysis and then using the resulting component sine waves as input into an ANN, John Abbot and I generated forecasts for the period from 1830 to 2000.Our results show up to 1°C of warming. The average divergence between the proxy temperature record and our ANN projection is just 0.09 degree Celsius. This suggests that even if there had been no industrial revolution and burning of fossil fuels, there would have still been warming through the twentieth century – to at least 1980, and of almost 1°C.The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, relying on General Circulation Models, and giving us the Paris Accord, also estimates warming of approximately 1°C, but claims this is all our fault (human caused).For more information, including charts and a link to the full paper read Jennifer Marohasy’s latest blog post.Illustration: Detail from Peasants before an Inn, Jan Steen, The Mauritshuis Royal Picture Gallery, The Hague.The greatest concern about the climate is the risk we are returning to the devastation of seesaw glaciation of the LITTLE ICE AGE. An abrupt return of falling temperatures is very concerning. NASA Goddard Institute finds warming of 0.8* Celsius (1.4* Fahrenheit) since 1880. This means an average of only 0.0175 degree Celsius temperature increase annually. This minute amount is within the statistical error of data or natural variability of climate.The earth is cooling not warming!It is not disputed that we are in an ice age from 2.5 million years ago so have temperatures changed upward enough that we break out into the nest global warming period?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ic...An ice age is a long period of reduction in the temperature of the Earth's surface and atmosphere, resulting in the presence or expansion of continental and polar icesheets and alpine glaciers. ... By this definition, we are in an interglacial period—the Holocene.Earth is currently in the Quaternary glaciation, known in popular terminology as the Ice Age.Individual pulses of cold climate are termed "glacial periods" (or, alternatively, "glacials", "glaciations", "glacial stages", "stadials", "stades", or colloquially, "ice ages"), and intermittent warm periods are called "interglacials" or "interstadials" with both climatic pulses part of the Quaternary or other periods in Earth's history.In the terminology of glaciology, ice age implies the presence of extensive ice sheets in both northern and southern hemispheres.The earth is cooling as temperatures declineLikely coldest April since 1895 – U.S. farmers delay planting cropsAnthony Watts / 1 day ago April 26, 2018Farmers are suffering as the cold, wet spring has put a stunning halt to agriculture. Ice Age Farmer Report – 19 Apr 2018Soil temperatures are below normal, and not conducive to planting yet.Ice Age Farmer highly recommends putting in your own greenhouse.“According to Mike Tannura of T-Storm Weather, there’s a strong correlation between historically cold April months and below trend yields. On Monday, Tannura told AgriTalk After The Bell host Chip Flory that April 2018 will go down as one of the three coldest Aprils since 1895.“Based on the data we’re looking at today, there’s a chance it could be the coldest of the entire period going back to 1895,” he said.Here are some of the Ice Age Farmer’s warnings:· Folks in Ohio are not able to start planting.· Folks in Nebraska are not able to start planting.· Folks in Illinois are not able to start planting.· Folks in North Dakota are not able to start planting.· Folks in South Dakota are not able to start planting.· None of Iowa’s farmland is ready for plantingClimate Scam Collapsing: ‘Reality Is Cooling…MORE Snowfall’Published on November 19, 2018Written by Tony HellerThe global warming scam is beginning to collapse. Even CBS News Boston is starting to understand.BOSTON (CBS) — Despite the snow blitz of 2015, many baby boomers still insist that, overall, we don’t get the harsh bitter cold and deep snowy winters like we did in the good ole days.Weather records prove that just isn’t the case and despite the ongoing claims that snows are becoming rare and hurting winter sports, this millennium has been a blessing to snow lovers and winter sports enthusiasts.The last decade stands out like a sore thumb! It has had 29 major impact northeast winter storms with NO previous 10-year period with more than 10 storms! In Boston, 7 out of the last 10 years have produced snowfall above the average 43.7 inches.2008-09: 65.9″2009-10: 35.7″2010-11: 81.0″2011-12: 9.3″2012-13: 63.4″2013-14: 58.9″2014-15: 110.6″ Greatest On Record Back To 18722015-16: 36.1″2016-17: 47.6″2017-18: 59.9″https://principia-scientific.org...Monday, 01 October 2018THE SUN DRIVES THE CLIMATE NOT MINUTE AMOUNTS NEAR ZERO OF HUMAN EMISSIONS OF CO2. SOLAR CYCLES MATTER MOST TO TEMPERATURE CHANGE.THE ABOVE CHART SHOWS VERY STRONG CORRELATION BETWEEN SOLAR CYCLES AND TEMPERATURE.This solar evidence destroys the unproven human made climate change idea.Recent in depth academic research supports the robustness of the 11 year solar cycle to explain natural variability not Co2.GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, VOL. 38, L14809, doi:10.1029/2011GL047964, 2011On the robustness of the solar cycle signal in the Pacific regionS. Bal,1,2 S. Schimanke,1,3 T. Spangehl,1 and U. Cubasch1Received 6 May 2011; revised 9 June 2011; accepted 10 June 2011; published 27 July 2011.[1] The potential role of the stratosphere for the 11‐year solar cycle signal in the Pacific region is investigated by idealized simulations using a coupled atmosphere‐ocean general circulation model. The model includes a detailed representation of the stratosphere and accounts for changes in stratospheric heating rates from prescribed time dependent variations of ozone and spectrally high resolved solar irradiance. Three transient simulations are performed spanning 21 solar cycles each. The simulations use slightly different ozone perturbations representing uncertainties of solar induced ozone variations. The model reproduces the main features of the 20th century observed solar response. A persistent mean sea level pressure response to solar forcing is found for the eastern North Pacific extending over North America. Moreover, there is evidence for a La Niña‐like response assigned to solar maximum conditions with below normal SSTs in the equatorial eastern Pacific, reduced equatorial precipitation, enhanced off‐equatorial precipita- tion and an El Niño‐like response a couple of years later, thus confirming the response to solar forcing at the surface seen in earlier studies. The amplitude of the solar signal in the Pacific region depends to a great extent on the choice of the centennial period averaged. Citation: Bal, S., S. Schimanke, T. Spangehl, and U. Cubasch (2011), On the robustness of the solar cycle signal in the Pacific region, Geophys. Res. Lett., 38, L14809, doi:10.1029/2011GL047964.1. Introduction[2] It has been suggested that large scale near surface climate variability during the 20th century is related to the 11‐year cycle of the sun [White and Tourree, 2003]. The quasi decadal oscillation (QDO) reveals similar spatial characteristics as the El Niño‐Southern Oscillation (ENSO) and is similarly governed by a delayed action oscillator mechanism in the tropical Pacific [White and Tourree, 2003; White et al., 2003]. While ENSO associated with 3‐to 7‐year period variability is an internally generated mode of the coupled ocean‐atmosphere system, model studies indicate that solar forcing is necessary to generate the QDO of 9‐to 13‐year period [White and Liu, 2008a]. Moreover, there is evidence for a phase lock between QDO, ENSO type vari- ability and the 11‐year solar cycle resulting in a distinct temporal evolution of the solar signal [White and Liu, 2008a, 2008b]. Based on observations spanning the period from the late 19th century to present, van Loon et al. [2004, 2007] find1Institut fu ̈ r Meteorologie, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany. 2Department of Physics, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India. 3Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute, Norrköping,Sweden.Copyright 2011 by the American Geophysical Union. 0094‐8276/11/2011GL047964a La Niña like response with lower sea surface temperatures (SST) in the eastern equatorial Pacific mainly for solar maximum peak years. Meehl et al. [2008] confirmed a pro- posed mechanism on the basis of ensemble experiments with two different ocean‐atmosphere general circulation models (AO‐GCM). The resulting ensemble mean response patterns are similar to the observations in the Pacific region but the amplitude is only about half the magnitude of the observed response. A possible explanation for this underestimation is the neglect of stratospheric forcing and coupling mechanisms [e.g., Shindell et al., 2006].[3] Coupledchemistry‐climatemodels(CCM)havesofar been able to simulate important features of the stratospheric solar signal [e.g., Marsh et al., 2007]. In a recent study Meehl et al. [2009] successfully reproduce the strength of the observed response in the tropical Pacific region when employing a CCM coupled to a deep ocean model. However, their simulation reveals some discrepancies with respect to the exact shape and temporal evolution of the response. As their conclusions solely rely on a single realization with only one model, important aspects that need to be addressed are the role of (i) internal variability and (ii) ozone related sen- sitivities for the simulated/observed signals. In the present study we assess the associated uncertainties based on an ensemble of idealized simulations performed with a strato- sphere resolving AO‐GCM.The whole global warming saga is a group think movement using fear and prejudice to sell more newspapers and buy more votes. When you see the true non-science motives behind the radical claims of media and alarmists then you understand the fudged data and wrong hypothesis about the climate and how it really works.Dr. Endenhofer reveals the real climate agenda of the UN and other lefty alarmists.As to global warming Mother Nature has let the sun go to sleep resulting in cooling temperatures and weather that is reminiscent of the Little Ice Age.Monday, 01 October 2018NASA Sees Climate Cooling Trend Thanks to Low Sun ActivityWritten by James MurphyThe climate alarmists just can’t catch a break. NASA is reporting that the sun is entering one of the deepest Solar Minima of the Space Age; and Earth’s atmosphere is responding in kind.So, start pumping out that CO2, everyone. We’re going to need all the greenhouse gases we can get.“We see a cooling trend,” said Martin Mlynczak of NASA’s Langley Research Center. “High above Earth’s surface, near the edge of space, our atmosphere is losing heat energy. If current trends continue, it could soon set a Space Age record for cold.”The new data is coming from NASA’s Sounding of the Atmosphere using Broadband Emission Radiometry or SABER instrument, which is onboard the space agency’s Thermosphere Ionosphere Mesosphere Energetics and Dynamics (TIMED) satellite. SABER monitors infrared radiation from carbon dioxide (CO2) and nitric oxide (NO), two substances that play a vital role in the energy output of our thermosphere, the very top level of our atmosphere.“The thermosphere always cools off during Solar Minimum. It’s one of the most important ways the solar cycle affects our planet,” said Mlynczak, who is the associate principal investigator for SABER.Who knew that that big yellow ball of light in the sky had such a big influence on our climate?There’s a bit of good news in all of this. When the thermosphere cools, it literally shrinks, therefore reducing aerodynamic drag on satellites in low Earth orbit. In effect, the shrinking thermosphere increases a satellite’s lifetime.But that appears to be where the good news ends, unless you prefer cold weather and increased space junk. “The bad news,” according to Dr. Tony Phillips, editor of SpaceWeather.com -- News and information about meteor showers, solar flares, auroras, and near-Earth asteroids, is: “It also delays the natural decay of space junk, resulting in a more cluttered environment around Earth.”Mlynczak and his colleagues have created the Thermosphere Climate Index (TCI), which measures how much NO is dumped from the Thermosphere into outer space. During Solar Maximum the TCI number is very high. At times of Solar Minimum, TCI is low.“Right now, (TCI) is very low indeed,” said Mlynczak. “SABER is currently measuring 33 billion Watts of infrared power from NO. That’s ten times smaller than we see during more active phases of the solar cycle."SABER has been in orbit for only 17 years, but Mlynczak and the scientists at NASA’s Langley Research Center have been able to recreate TCI measurements back to the 1940s. “SABER taught us how to do this by revealing how TCI depends on other variables such as geomagnetic activity and the sun’s UV output — things that have been measured for decades,” said Mlynczak.In fact, TCI numbers now, in the closing months of 2018, are very close to setting record lows since measurements began. “We’re not quite there yet,” Mlynczak reports. “but it could happen in a matter of months.”The new NASA findings are in line with studies released by UC-San Diego and Northumbria University in Great Britain last year, both of which predict a Grand Solar Minimum in coming decades due to low sunspot activity. Both studies predicted sun activity similar to the Maunder Minimum of the mid-17th to early 18th centuries, which coincided to a time known as the Little Ice Age, during which temperatures were much lower than those of today.If all of this seems as if NASA is contradicting itself, you’re right — sort of. After all, NASA also reported last week that Arctic sea ice was at its sixth lowest level since measuring began. Isn’t that a sure sign of global warming?All any of this “proves” is that we have, at best, a cursory understanding of Earth’s incredibly complex climate system. So when mainstream media and carbon-credit salesman Al Gore breathlessly warn you that we must do something about climate change, it’s all right to step back, take a deep breath, and realize that we don’t have the knowledge, skill or resources to have much effect on the Earth’s climate. God — and that big yellow ball of light in the sky — have much more impact on our climate than we ever could.COMMENTJames Matkin •The earth is actually cooling and NASA grudgingly begins to admit reality over the fiction of failed computer modelling by the iPCC. So much waste and damage from the futile attempt to reduce our Co2 emissions for a colder climate. The climate alarmists have ignored solar natural variability not because of the science but because of their left wing economic agenda. They have ignored leading science papers like the 400 page study THE NEGLECTED SUN Why the Sun Precludes Climate Catastrophe, by Professor Fritz Vahreholt and Dr. Sebastian Luning. This study demonstrates that "the critical cause of global temperature change has been, and continues to be, the sun's activity." As NASA admits the sun is in a cooling phase and the solar cycles make impossible "the catastrophic prospects put forward by the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the alarmist agenda dominant in contemporary Western politics."https://www.thenewamerican.com/t...Rise in temperatures and CO2 follow each other closely in climate changeby University of CopenhagenAn ice core from the deep drilling through the ice sheet at Law Dome in Antarctica.The greatest climate change the world has seen in the last 100,000 years was the transition from the ice age to the warm interglacial period. New research from the Niels Bohr Institute at the University of Copenhagen indicates that, contrary to previous opinion, the rise in temperature and the rise in the atmospheric CO2follow each other closely in terms of time. The results have been published in the scientific journal, Climate of the Past.In the warmer climate the atmospheric content of CO2is naturally higher. The gas CO2(carbon dioxide) is a green-house gas that absorbs heat radiation from the Earth and thus keeps the Earth warm. In the shift between ice ages and interglacial periods the atmospheric content of CO2helps to intensify the natural climate variations.It had previously been thought that as the temperature began to rise at the end of the ice age approximately 19,000 years ago, an increase in the amount of CO2in the atmosphere followed with a delay of up to 1,000 years."Our analyses of ice cores from the ice sheet in Antarctica shows that the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere follows the rise in Antarctic temperatures very closely and is staggered by a few hundred years at most," explains Sune Olander Rasmussen, Associate Professor and centre coordinator at the Centre for Ice and Climate at the Niels Bohr Institute at the University of CopenhagenCo2 has no effect on the climate as it follows rise in temperatures that is the result of solar cycles.No Empirical Evidence forCO2 Causing Global WarmingSome say historically, that increased CO2levels in the atmosphere have created periods of global warming throughout our history. They cite the Vostok, Antarctica ice core data (1) as proof of this seeFigure 1. However, the problem is that whoever came up with that analysis had thecause and effect reversed. If you look closely at the graph, it is obvious that global warming always comes first. At temperature (blue line) spike always comes before the CO2concentration (red line) spike. After a temperature spike from the sun, the oceans start to warm and eventually liberate more CO2 due to its reduced solubility in seawater at higher temperature. Another relevant question is, what other mechanism could possibly cause CO2 concentrations to increase other than a solar spike from the sun? Where else could the CO2come from, especially during those times before the industrial age?Figure 1. Vostok Antarctica Ice Core Data (420,000years Back from Present)Recent empirical data (2) show that atmospheric CO2concentrations have no discernible effect on global temperature, see Figure 2.The temperature plots shown are from two sources; the National Aeronauticsand Space Administration's (NASA) Microwave Sounding Unit (MSU) and the United Kingdom's (UK) Hadley Climate Research Unit. The CO2 plot is from the Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii.Figure 2. Earth temperature and CO2concentration 1998-2008While CO2levels increased some 20 ppmv over the past 10 years, global temperatures did not increase as predicted by the IPCC models - they fell! The earth's temperature from 1998 to 2008 dropped by 0.65 - 0.78 o C depending on which temperature set is chosen.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237135591_CFC_Destruction_of_Ozone_-_Major_Cause_of_Recent_Global_WarmingAfter record breaking temperatures, some cooler weather hits parts of EuropeBut the reprieve was not universal, with Germany measuring a record high temperature for June.Sun 5:36 PM 22,125 Views 8 CommentsShare11 Tweet EmailPeople watch the sunrise this morning on the mountain Brocken in Schiere, Germany,Image: Matthias Bein/dpa via APA WELCOME TEMPERATURE drop has hit western parts of Europe today bringing relief to areas that have sweltered through a widespread, deadly heatwave for almost a week.But the reprieve was not universal, with Germany measuring a record high temperature for June and Spanish firefighters battling three major blazes with the help of more than 700 soldiers and water bombing planes.In Rome, Pope Francis told pilgrims on Saint Peter’s Square:“I pray for those who have suffered the most from the heat in recent days; the sick, the elderly, those who work outside, on construction sites… let no one be abandoned or exploited.”Six days of intense heat fuelled huge blazes and spikes in pollution in many countries, and officially claimed four lives in France, two in Italy and another two in Spain.The victims included a 17-year-old harvest worker, a 33-year-old roofer and a 72-year-old homeless man.Today, in northern and western France, hot-weather warnings were lifted days after the country posted successive record temperatures as it sizzled alongside Italy, Spain and some central European nations.The mercury was predicted to drop by as much as 10 degrees Celsius in Paris today but to continue rising in central and eastern Germany and in Italy before rainstorms cool things down by Tuesday.On Sunday, a record 38.9 Celsius was measured in Bad Kreuznach in Rhineland-Palatinate state, according to data from the national weather service, wiping out the previous high of 38.6 degrees recorded Wednesday in two other towns.Following on from high temperatures of the last few days, things were a bit cooler across the country today. Some showers and moderate winds kep temperatures a bit lower.The week ahead is looking mostly dry with a mix of sunshine and cloudy spells, and temperatures ranging from 15 to 22 degrees in some areas.Runners collapseIn Frankfurt, Germany, the blazing heat took its toll on US athlete Sarah True, who had been leading the Ironman European championships but lost the race as she collapsed a kilometre before the finish line.The firefighter service in Hamburg reported that “many runners collapsed during a half-marathon which took place under a heat that reached 33 degrees. Twenty-four runners had to be brought to clinics for treatment”.Police used water cannons to help cool down the crowd at a summer street festival in Soemmerda in Thuringia state.In central Spain, temperatures close to 42 degrees hammered firefighting crews yesterday, notably near Almorox where at least 2,000 hectares (4,900 acres) have burnt while flames crept towards Madrid, forcing the evacuation of a village and 200 people from a campsite, emergency services said.Another major fire burned near Toledo, while in northeastern Catalonia, an inferno that had begun on Wednesday was being brought under control, regional authorities said.Four Spanish weather stations have reported June records from 38.8 Celsius to 41.9 Celsius.In France, fires razed about 600 hectares (1,480 acres) and dozens of houses in the southern Gard department.- © AFP 2019 with reporting from Cormac FitzgeraldShort URL·MY PUBLISHED COMMENTJim MatkinNo one living or dead has witnessed climate change if they are true to science, because climate change is only a statistic that measures weather over centuries or millennia. The statistic comes from weather, but it is not the weather hot or cold.“Climate change is any significant long-term change in the expected patterns of average weather of a region (or the whole Earth) over a significant period of time. W” .The alarmists media ignore science by portraying the recent heat wave in France as linked to climate change. This is impossible to know and in fact after a short 4 days France is now facing unusually colder weather for this time of year. The alarmists fooled again by ignoring the fact we are in the e ice cores from the two bores at Siple Dome (red) and Byrd Holocene warming of the inter-glaciation of the Quaternary Ice Age for the past 2.5 million years and temperatures are swinging from hot (Medieval Warming) to cold (Little Ice Ag) in a chaotic and random fashion. This is not global warming.https://www.thejournal.ie/heatwave-europe-3-4704121-Jun2019/#comment-8146603

Oh no, “According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there were close to 90,000 coal mining jobs in 2012, compared with 46,600 today. In the last decade, more than 300 coal-fired power plants have retired, eliminating coal-related jobs in the power sector.‘Donny did nothing. He showed his impotency, his complete inability to even keep the existing jobs safe in a nation wide display of just more broken promises.A more detailed account Follows from E & E NewsElectricity output from coal slumped to a 42-year low in 2019 and plummeted even deeper as the coronavirus pandemic swept across the country. Renewable sources like wind and solar now generate more power than Trump's favored fossil fuel. And utilities are planning to green their power plants instead of returning to the black rock.The coal industry's woes demonstrate the limits of Trump's ability to control sweeping changes in America's power sector. They come as the president hurtles toward a reelection fight that lacks an adversary he can easily blame for coal's downfall.Trump supporters and industry allies acknowledge that the president has been unable to fulfill his past promises to revive the coal community, but few show signs of abandoning him for what they describe as an unstoppable free fall. Most blame Obama and renewable subsidies for coal's troubles."It's a holocaust. There is no other way to describe it," said Fred Palmer, a former executive at Peabody Energy and a staunch Trump supporter who serves on the National Coal Council. "I've always fought the closing coal plant fight, but never in my wildest dreams did I think we'd get to where we are today."He added, "I am supporter of Donald Trump's, and I don't think what he has not done is something that precipitated this."Coal's stubborn descent comes in spite of Trump's success rolling back many of the environmental regulations implemented during the Obama years. EPA repealed the Clean Power Plan, Obama's proposal for cutting carbon dioxide emissions from power plants, and relaxed rules on mercury pollution.The Department of Energy unsuccessfully lobbied the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to subsidize struggling coal plants but succeeded in instigating rule changes that could benefit coal generators in the PJM Interconnection, America's largest wholesale power market. And the Interior Department ended a moratorium on new federal coal leases.The president's problem is that his actions did not have their intended effect.The 966,000 gigawatt-hours of electricity generated by coal plants in 2019 was the lowest amount since 1976, according to federal figures. Coal mines, where employment was largely stagnant over Trump's first three years, have shed 4,500 jobs since January.Utilities, meanwhile, have embraced decarbonization rather than coal. Two dozen power companies, including utility behemoths Duke Energy Corp. and Southern Co., have committed to achieving net-zero emissions by midcentury. Just as problematic for the coal industry: Not a single new coal plant is planned for construction.Administration officials defended the president's record. The Department of Energy has invested more than $1 billion in researching new coal plant designs with minimal emission. DOE has also promoted initiatives that would turn coal into products like carbon fiber, graphite and building materials, said Shaylyn Hynes, a DOE spokeswoman. She also noted that U.S. coal exports were 54% higher in 2019 than 2016 — though foreign sales slumped 20% last year and are projected to fall further in 2020."President Trump ended the Obama Administration's eight-year war on coal by eliminating the top down federal mandates that were destroying coal producing communities all over the nation, most importantly rolling back the Clean Power Plan," she wrote in an email.Coal's declineCoal has been undone in the United States by the convergence of technological, economic and political trends. In 2009, when Obama took office, coal generated 44% of America's electricity. The country's fleet of coal plants had a listed capacity of 314 gigawatts at the time. A power plant's capacity measures the maximum amount of electricity it can produce.Coal's fall under Obama was gradual at first. Some 4.5 GW of coal capacity retired between 2009 and 2011, according to U.S. Energy Information Administration data. But the groundwork for a wider shift had been laid.[+] More coal capacity has retired during President Trump's first 3 ½ years in office than during the last four years of the Obama administration. Claudine Hellmuth/E&E News (graph); Energy Information Administration and E&E News (data)Subsidies for renewables, a key part of the Obama administration's efforts to revive the economy during the Great Recession, helped spur a surge in wind and solar installations. The administration also pursued a series of air quality regulations on power plants. One rule, meant to limit mercury emissions, was particularly consequential, leading to a wave of retirements in 2012 and 2015 (Climatewire, April 20, 2017).Most of the coal plants retired in those days were old and small and had spent large periods of time idled, meaning actual coal generation did not fall sharply with their retirement (Climatewire, April 27, 2017). In fact, electrical output from coal plants actually increased in 2013.Yet as talk of a war on coal emerged in Washington, a larger threat to the fossil fuel was brewing in America's gas fields.Gas companies learned how to drill long, lateral wells and blast open shale formations to release an ocean of natural gas, which quickly flooded the market. The deluge came as energy efficiency improvements took hold, causing electricity demand to stagnate.The final straw was the rising amount of renewable generation — the first electricity to be dispatched in power markets because wind and solar have no fuel costs. Suddenly, fossil fuel plants needed to ramp up and down to adjust to the output of renewable facilities. Natural gas turbines are well suited to that task. Coal-powered steam turbines, which are designed to run around the clock, are less so.Ultimately, almost 48 GW of coal retired during Obama's eight years in office, with nearly 33 GW coming in his second term, according to an E&E News review of EIA data. Trump, by comparison, has seen 37 GW retire since he entered the White House in 2017. An additional 3.7 GW is slated to shut down over the next six months.Coal interests sought to tie much of the industry's struggles to the Obama days.America's Power, a trade group formerly known as the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, estimates that 44% of the U.S. coal fleet has retired or announced plans to do so since 2010. Subsidies for renewables have helped wind and solar displace coal generation, said ACCCE President and CEO Michelle Bloodworth."There are obviously a number of factors that play a role in coal retirements, but a significant number of those retirements can be traced back to EPA regulations finalized during the prior administration," she wrote in an email. "We have appreciated the Trump administration's work to develop sensible environmental policies that both protect human health and the environment while also providing enough flexibility to prevent needless retirements of additional coal-fired power plants that are necessary for reliable, resilient, and affordable electricity."Steve Cicala, a professor who studies power markets at the University of Chicago, reckons that coal has a more fundamental problem: Coal plants are more expensive to operate than their competitors. At the same time, he said, the low operating cost of gas and renewables has pushed wholesale electricity prices down, leaving coal even further out of the money.Cicala argued there is little the Trump administration could have done to reverse plant closures given the wider economic and technological trend in America's power markets. But he said the administration had made a mistake in attempting to fight for coal communities by bucking market signals."It's like trying to keep telegraph workers employed. Communications moved beyond the telegraph. There are other things we can do. We have a much better technology for satisfying the need for energy," Cicala said. "They could start thinking about helping the people who are defined by more than a specific dying occupation. They are people who want and need jobs. They have skills to do other things."Tweets vanish with coalThe coronavirus pandemic has only exacerbated existing trends, prompting a decrease in electricity demand and pushing more coal plants to the sidelines. EIA expects coal to account for 17% of America's electricity generation in 2020, down from 24% last year. The agency thinks coal generation will rebound to 20% in 2021.Even if coal output recovers slightly, America is fundamentally changed.The U.S. consumed more energy from renewables than coal in 2019 for the first time since 1885. EIA thinks renewables will continue to grab market share, accounting for 21% of America's power generation this year and 23% in 2021.Palmer, the former Peabody executive, expressed hope the president could turn the tide if he wins a second term in November. He believes Trump would be unencumbered by political factors like those that prompted the administration to drop consideration of a plan to use the government's emergency powers to compel coal plants to stay open (Greenwire, Oct. 16, 2018).The president also may have a bigger appetite for challenging the endangerment finding, a determination requiring EPA to regulate greenhouse gases as an air pollutant under the Clean Air Act, he said.Mike McKenna, an energy lobbyist who briefly led Trump's transition team for the Department of Energy and served five months in the White House Office of Legislative Affairs, was less sanguine. Like other administration allies, he put much of the blame for coal's predicament on state renewable portfolio standards and subsidies for wind and solar.But he conceded Trump bore some responsibility."I think a very small part of the problem was that the Administration, partially as a consequence of discounting the work of the transition, never really had a coherent plan for addressing the challenges," McKenna wrote in an email. "There were some regulatory efforts which made sense and were and are laudable, but they did not solve the underlying challenges."Asked what the Trump administration could do to reverse the trend, he replied: "At this point, not much. They need to start to think about mining communities."In the early days of his presidency, Trump frequently boasted of saving the industry on Twitter."It is finally happening for our great clean coal miners," he tweeted in November 2017, sharing a Fox News report showing that coal production had rebounded from the year prior.In May 2018, he wrote, "We have ended the war on coal, and will continue to work to promote American energy dominance."But as the president moves to adopt a more aggressive campaign posture, coal has been absent from his Twitter feed. The president has not tweeted about the industry for over a year now.His last one came in February 2019, when he urged officials at the Tennessee Valley Authority, a federal agency, to keep a major Kentucky coal plant open. They rebuffed the president and voted to close the plant (Greenwire, Feb. 14, 2019).”It’s just typical, typical of Donny’s inability to live up yo his many, many broken promises.