The mainstream media miss - or ignore - the fact that it has been unusually cold in many places in both hemispheres. Alternating heat and cold suggests that there is unrest in the air, with greater temperature fluctuations and associated more severe weather.
This is an opinion piece. The author is responsible for the views expressed in the article.
The IPCC climate panel, the Swedish SMHI and others warn of a warmer climate. They say it will bring more extreme weather such as stronger winds and more rain and drought.
The implication is that whatever happens, it will be due to a warmer climate.
But they forget – or ignore or don’t know – that a warmer climate means smaller temperature differences and therefore smaller and weaker winds.
This is because winds are moving air masses. Warm air rises. Higher up, it cools. Cold air sinks and fills in from the sides as warm air rises. This creates constantly changing winds.
The greater the temperature differences, the more and stronger the wind. This is exactly what is happening now.
The mainstream media miss – or ignore – the fact that it has been unusually cold in many places in both hemispheres. Alternating heat and cold suggests turmoil in the air with larger temperature swings.
Satellites record that the global atmosphere has been cooling rapidly in recent years. Colder atmosphere shrinks. Then jet streams get more crowded and start to meander.
They let in warm air from the south and cold air from the north – and vice versa in the southern hemisphere. This is exactly what is happening now.
More extreme weather therefore indicates a colder rather than a warmer climate. But for now, it is not climate but weather. Climate can be said to be the long-term conditions for weather.
They do not look so promising with reduced solar wind and increased cosmic radiation. Then more clouds and precipitation will form with a cooling effect.
It’s slow, of course. But it is happening now.
Tege Tornvall
TNT is truly independent!
We don’t have a billionaire owner, and our unique reader-funded model keeps us free from political or corporate influence. This means we can fearlessly report the facts and shine a light on the misdeeds of those in power.
Consider a donation to keep our independent journalism running…
A nearly three-year legal process concluded this week when all activists from Restore Wetlands (Återställ Våtmarker) were acquitted for blocking the E4 motorway in August 2022, which in addition to causing long traffic jams also delayed an ambulance on an emergency call.
According to Sweden’s Supreme Court (Högsta domstolen), the road blockade was not comparable to the threats against vital societal interests required by law for a conviction of sabotage, and therefore acquitted all participants in the climate alarmist group’s action. The Supreme Court particularly emphasized the importance of freedom of demonstration and freedom of expression in a ruling that will serve as guidance for how civil disobedience should be punished, which in practice opens the door for more motorway blockades.
– The legal situation has been unclear regarding what constitutes a serious disruption or obstruction in these cases. It’s good that we now have clear guidance from the Supreme Court on how prosecutions for sabotage should be assessed in the future, says Chief Prosecutor Katarina Johansson Welin in the Supreme Court’s press release.
The group itself describes its action as an “act of love”.
– Victory! Today we celebrate that the sabotage charge has been shot down for the last time. In my heart, I have always known that I acted exactly right. To sit peacefully and openly on a motorway and demand that emissions decrease is among the strongest acts of love for our children and for life that you can do, and we did exactly that, says one of those acquitted in the climate group’s press release.
That fewer children are born in Sweden is only good for the environment, argues Green Party (Miljöpartiet) politician Lennart Olsen. Children and young people also cost more than older people, who can still work at higher ages if the pension age is raised, he adds.
Olsen writes in a debate article in the Bonnier publication Dagens Nyheter that people should view positively the fact that Swedes are not reproducing themselves.
“What’s needed here is a reversed perspective, where lower birth rates and eventually decreasing population should be welcomed to reduce the exploitation of the earth’s ecosystems“.
The Green Party member believes that the Swedish government’s investigation aimed at proposing measures to raise the very low birth rates in Sweden is “misguided”. He argues that the state can save money from fewer children being born.
“For the state’s and municipal sector’s economy, children and young people are a much greater expense than the elderly. This is because virtually all people between 0 and 20 years old cost a lot of money in the form of preschool, school, higher education, parental insurance, child allowance and more“, Olsen explains his thesis and argues that older people also won’t need as much pension if the retirement age is raised further.
Above all, the Green Party economist sees the possibility that fewer Swedish children will lead to a better climate in the long term.
“The positive effects of such a development can then also take effect and lead to reduced pressure on the earth’s ecosystems“, writes Olsen.
Olsen represents a so-called neo-Malthusian line, an ideological movement that strives for reduced population and strongly influences the climate alarmist movement.
Despite promises of groundbreaking climate solutions, Swiss carbon dioxide giant Climeworks’ facility in Iceland has not only captured far less than promised – it has also emitted more carbon dioxide than it has absorbed.
Critics say the whole operation is deeply deceptive and one of many examples of scam projects created to profit from the alleged climate crisis.
Climeworks, a Swiss company that markets itself as a pioneer in direct carbon capture (DAC), has failed to achieve its targets in Iceland despite significant investment and media attention.
According to data from the verification company Puro.Earth and the company’s own annual reports, Climeworks has only captured around 2,400 tons of CO₂ in Iceland since 2021 – far below the promised capacity ceiling of 12,000 tons. In addition, the company’s own emissions from its operations have exceeded its capture: in 2023 alone, Climeworks emitted 1,700 tons of CO₂, significantly more than its total capture.
Climeworks’ first facility, Orca, was unveiled in 2021 with a capacity of 4,000 tons of CO₂ per year. In reality, it has never even reached half that target. The larger Mammoth facility, which could capture 36,000 tons annually, has only managed to collect 105 tons after ten months of operation.
According to CEO Jan Wurzbacher, Mammoth requires 5,000–6,000 kWh per ton of CO₂ captured – a process described as extremely inefficient. To offset Iceland’s total emissions (12.4 million tons in 2024), 72 terawatt hours of energy would be needed – four times the country’s annual electricity production.
Professor: “A scam”
Climeworks’ Icelandic subsidiary has negative equity of ISK 3.6 billion (€25 million) and is entirely dependent on funding from its parent company. The value of the Orca machine has also been written down by €1.25 million due to underperformance.
Despite this, the company has sold future carbon credits equivalent to one-third of Mammoth’s planned capacity for the next 25 years – even though over 21,000 private subscribers who have paid in advance risk having to wait decades for their certificates.
Mark Z. Jacobson, professor of environmental science at Stanford University, calls the entire DAC industry a big scam and fraud.
– Direct capture is a scam, carbon capture is a scam, blue hydrogen is a scam, and electrofuel is a scam. These are all scam technologies that do nothing for the climate or air pollution.
“Semi-magical technology”
Michael de Podesta, a British pensioner who paid ISK 135,000 (€940) for 2.2 tons of CO₂ capture, expresses similar concerns in his blog, and after looking into the company more closely, he believes he has probably been scammed.
“This has all the hallmarks of a scam. There are undoubtedly a lot of highly paid people traveling the world to sell their services to large corporations to remove carbon credits in the future. They are using a semi-magical technology that doesn’t work as well as expected (better known as Orca) but will work perfectly in a larger version (Mammoth)”.
“I am urged to convince my friends to join the project. The answers are scarce and full of PR chatter. Climeworks’ operations look like a scam and talk like one. But is it a scam? I don’t know. I think it could work, but the company’s answers are so opaque that it’s hard to say”, he continues.
He will not know for sure until 2027 whether Climeworks has actually captured the 2.2 tons of carbon dioxide he has paid for.
Millions from the US
It is also worth noting that the company has received or been promised around $800 million in public subsidies, including $625 million from the US Department of Energy and $5 million from Switzerland. Despite this, the cost per ton of CO₂ captured remains at $1,000 – ten times higher than the original target.
Due to the failures of DAC, Climeworks has now instead begun to focus on “enhanced weathering”, a highly controversial method in which crushed rock is bound with CO₂. However, researchers believe that this is a sign of desperation to fulfill credits that have already been sold.
In summary, critics point out that Climeworks’ operations have been characterized by exaggerated promises, technical shortcomings, and financial irresponsibility since its inception. Despite being ranked as one of the world’s leading green tech companies by Time Magazine, its contribution to climate action is described as marginal at best – and at worst as directly counterproductive and harmful.
Montage. Photo: Horkins/iStock, Elima Mwinyipembe/Government Offices of Sweden
According to Romina Pourmokhtari, Minister for Climate and Environment, municipalities will not be able to charge land and property owners "any amount".
A new report suggests that Swedish property owners may be required to finance municipalities’ “climate adaptation measures”, with costs potentially reaching tens of thousands of EUR.
The proposal, which has been submitted to Climate and Environment Minister Romina Pourmokhtari (L), gives municipalities the right to, for example, build flood defenses to protect “matters of public interest” – and then charge property owners who are considered to benefit from the measure.
The investigator Johan Hjalmarsson himself points out that the term “public interest” is deliberately broad and vaguely worded.
– It could be buildings such as municipal buildings and schools, but it doesn’t have to be. There will need to be a municipal connection, but it doesn’t have to be a municipal facility, he told state television.
However, for the fee to apply, there must be a “significant risk” of damage from a specific natural event, and this risk must be eliminated by the measure. A property owner’s total fee may not exceed 10 percent of the market value of the property.
“Cannot charge whatever fees they want”
Liberal Climate and Environment Minister Romina Pourmokhtari claims that the proposal is about dealing with the direct consequences of the alleged climate crisis:
– In the same way that we have great respect and a strong desire to defend property rights in Sweden, with property rights come not only freedoms but also obligations. This is an example of the real consequences of climate change. Not in the future, but today, and that must be taken into account, she asserts.
She further promises that municipalities “cannot charge whatever fees they want”.
– Whether the government will implement this or not is something we cannot say today, she continues, describing the proposals as “interesting”.
Not all coastlines can be protected
The report also proposes that the state take responsibility for protecting certain coastlines from flooding through physical barriers, and Hjalmarsson admits that this will require prioritizing and choosing what to protect and which communities to leave exposed to the elements.
– But this is not something that will change overnight; the costs can be spread out over many years.
He argues that the need is urgent and that he has “met many municipalities that see the need for a decision from the state now”.
Maximum temperatures in nursing homes
The report also highlights the need to introduce maximum temperatures in premises for particularly vulnerable groups, such as the elderly.
– Heat waves are already a major problem for the elderly in our society. So I think it’s very important that these issues are brought to light and that we discuss what we can do, says Pourmokhtari.
For municipalities, this could mean a requirement to install air conditioning in nursing homes.
– If requirements are the way forward, this is something the government will need to look at. But action will be needed, and too little is being done today, adds the minister.
The investigator’s report will now be prepared by the Government Offices and sent out for consultation in accordance with standard procedures.
