Basis for energy transition fails: solar panel owner now has to pay a hefty levy, up to 46 euros per month.

 
From one of our correspondents.

The Dutch energy supplier Vandebron will charge a monthly fee to customers with solar panels. It will be a variable rate that will be between 10 and 20 euros for most owners of solar panels. Vandebron says that this is necessary to distribute the energy transition more fairly. De Volkskrant reports that other suppliers will follow suit.

The distribution of costs is starting to be skewed.
Vandebron states that this is a fixed cost item that is included in the energy bill each month. This is calculated on the basis of the annual consumption and specifically the number of kWh that customers feed back to the provider each year.

Vandebron:

'On sunny days, much more green electricity is generated than we need in our homes at that moment. The surplus solar energy is fed back into the grid so that others can use it. But feed-in costs energy suppliers money. They pay imbalance and profiling costs to the grid operator for the feed-in of energy. And now that more and more is being delivered back, these costs are going up further and further.'

The first 5kWh that customers feed back cost nothing, but customers who feed in between 5 and 1000kWh annually start paying. They pay 4 euros per month. That amount then increases per 1000kWh to a maximum of 46 euros per month for people who feed in more than 5000kWh.

https://www.climategate.nl/2023/08/grondslag-energietransitie-faalt-zonnepaneel-eigenaar-moet-nu-forse-heffing-betalen-tot-46-euro-per-maand/

Climate Lawfare: A Well-Funded Trojan Horse For Upending Democracies
by Tilak Doshi  2 hours ago 

In an astonishing verdict, Europe’s highest human rights court ruled on April 9 that countries must better protect their citizens from “the consequences of climate change.” [emphasis, links added]

In the landmark ruling, setting a legal precedent across 46 member states of the Council of Europe, the court sided with a group of women called KlimaSeniorinnen or “Senior Women for Climate Protection.”


The elderly Swiss ladies claimed that their lives were endangered by heat waves caused by “climate change.”

In the court’s judgment, there is no uncertainty that heat waves are induced — as “scientific knowledge” supposedly makes clear — by fossil fuel use in modern industrial civilization.

https://climatechangedispatch.com/climate-lawfare-a-well-funded-trojan-horse-for-upending-democracies/

No, AXIOS, the Dubai “Rain Bomb” Has No Ties to Climate Change
 
By
Anthony Watts
April 19, 2024
 

An article written by Andrew Freedman, titled “Dubai’s record-shattering “rain bomb” has clear climate change ties,” published April 17th, in the online news website AXIOS makes the claim that record rainfall received in one day in the city of Dubai United Arab Emirates (UAE), has a clear connection to climate change. This is false. Not only is AXIOS conflating weather events with long term climate change, other evidence suggests this was little more than a rare weather event, which has happened before according to weather history for the area, and weak city drainage infrastructure was unable to handle the excess water.

The article notes the heavy rainfall and poor drainage stating:

At least two years’ worth of rain, or about 6.26 inches, fell in just 24 hours, qualifying as what have come to be known colloquially as “rain bombs” for their ultra-heavy totals in such short periods of time.
This amount of rainfall in a single day would cause problems even in more temperate locations, let alone Dubai, a desert city with poor drainage.

https://climaterealism.com/2024/04/no-axios-the-dubai-rain-bomb-has-no-ties-to-climate-change/

Latest Global Temp. Anomaly (March '24: +0.95°C)
Unnecessary Net Zero, Part II: A Demonstration with Global Carbon Project Data
April 23rd, 2024 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.

Some commenters on my previous blog post, Net Zero CO2 Emissions: A Damaging and Totally Unnecessary Goal, were dubious of my claim that nature will continue to remove CO2 from the atmosphere at about the same rate even if anthropogenic emissions decrease…or even if they were suddenly eliminated.

Rather than appeal to the simple CO2 budget model I created for that blog post, let’s look at the published data from the 123 (!) authors the IPCC relies upon to provide their best estimate of CO2 flows in and out of the atmosphere, the Global Carbon Project team. I created the following chart from their data spreadsheet available here. Updated yearly, the 2023 report shows that their best estimate of the net removal of CO2 from the atmosphere by land and ocean processes has increased along with the rise in atmospheric CO2. This plot is from their yearly estimates, 1850-2022.

https://www.drroyspencer.com/2024/04/unnecessary-net-zero-part-ii-a-demonstration-with-global-carbon-project-data/