Posted Sat 13 Apr 2024 at 6:30amSaturday 13 Apr 2024 at 6:30am, updated Sat 13 Apr 2024 at 6:58am
In short: The first LNG import terminal in Australia is nearing completion at Port Kembla, near Wollongong.
Squadron Energy says the gas brought in will be enough to supply most of the needs of NSW and Victoria.
What’s next? Squadron is negotiating to secure supply contracts with energy companies.
Australia’s first liquefied natural gas (LNG) import terminal is almost built, but it remains unclear who will be buying its gas.
…
The Twiggy Forrest-backed company claims the gas imported can supply almost all of Victoria’s forecast gas needs and 70 per cent of the requirements of New South Wales.
“I don’t think we could be at a better time in the market than right where we are,” said Squadron Energy CEO Rob Wheals.
“The facility is now 90 per cent complete and the market is facing critical gas shortages over the next couple of years.”
…
AEMO said the east coast could see shortages as soon as next year if there is a particularly cold winter causing a spike in peak demand.
Obviously fracking Australia’s substantial shale gas fields or setting up coalfield gas projects would have eliminated the need to build a gas import terminal, but Andrew “Twiggy” Forest has long been a critic of domestic Australian fossil fuel production, and has repeatedly helped to convince politicians to block domestic energy projects.
“If they don’t believe the science, they can fuck off:” Forrest backs coal and gas ban
Iron ore billionaire Andrew Forrest has called on leaders of all political stripes to get serious about climate action, or get out of the way, in a feisty exchange over the Greens’ new bid to block new fossil fuel projects in Australia.
…
In the mainstream media, the general hot take is that this move has essentially put a bomb under Labor’s entire carbon reduction mechanism plan, in a classic example of letting the perfect get in the way of the good.
Does Twiggy agree?
In a word, no.
“People who do not understand the grave risk of climate change should not be in any position of influence,” Forrest said.
“We’re on a climate edge here, and I want every legislator, not just in the Greens, not just in Labor, not just in Liberal or in the [Nationals], every legislator in the world to bring themselves up to speed with the science.
“If they don’t believe the science then they can just fuck off. Right? They should be nowhere near having any responsibility, whatsoever,” he said.
“Every legislator in the world should bring themselves up to speed on the science and act accordingly.”
This new gas import terminal comes just in time for all that extra gas drilling and export capacity Abu Dhabi announced at the last climate conference.
I’m sure Twiggy had our best interests at heart, when he campaigned to shut down domestic energy production while building a new import terminal.
After all, it would be a shame if all that additional capacity Abu Dhabi announced at the last climate conference was duplicated by new capacity in Australia.
Doubling up on capacity would create the risk of oversupply and a global fossil fuel energy price drop, which could in turn reduce household bills and delay the green energy transition.
We should all really thank Twiggy for ensuring energy continuity, by providing a gas import terminal just when supplies are getting tight thanks to all the domestic energy projects regulators have vetoed in recent years.
You came here for truths and straight talk, so, here’s a doozy.”
Standing on stage at the National Press Club — being beamed live into offices and lounge rooms across the country — one of Australia’s top energy bosses was preparing to say what few in the industry will acknowledge publicly.
Jeff Dimery — CEO of Alinta Energy — looked up from his notes on the lectern and delivered the promised doozy to the audience.
“Australians will have to pay more for energy in future,” he says.
“We need to be honest about that.“
…
Yes, renewables are the “lowest cost, new form of generation”.
But building the wind and solar farms at the scale required to replace coal, together with the batteries needed to store the power, and the new network of transmission lines to distribute that power to consumers will involve tens of billions of dollars’ worth of investment.
This is a big change from previous claims that renewables would bring down near term prices.
Electricity prices predicted to fall as renewable supply increases, gas price falls
Posted Mon 21 Dec 2020 at 5:32am
Key points:
Electricity prices are expected to fall by 9 per cent over the next three years
More renewable energy production is behind the fall
Power prices in Canberra are predicted to buck the trend
Household electricity bills are expected to fall by 9 per cent over the next three years as more renewable generation joins the grid.
A new report by the Australian Energy Market Commission (AEMC) predicts all states in the National Electricity Market — NSW, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia and Tasmania — will have lower energy prices in 2023.
The residential electricity price trends report 2020, published by the advisory body today, projects the ACT will have a slight rise in electricity prices over the next three years.
…
The report says the main reason for the drop is lower gas prices and the introduction of new sources of energy generation like solar and wind.
It also says network costs and environmental costs are falling, too, although they contribute less to the overall reduction.
It is not just the ABC. The AEMO, the industry body tasked with regulating the East Coast Australian energy grid, has also frequently added to the confusion about the true cost of renewables;
Renewables push NEM electricity prices down to historical levels
23/10/2023
AEMO’s latest Quarterly Energy Dynamics report shows that wholesale electricity prices averaged $63 per megawatt hour (MWh) in the September quarter, down 41% from the June quarter ($108/MWh) and 71% ($216/MWh) from Q3 2022.
By region, South Australia recorded the highest average quarterly price at $92/MWh, followed by New South Wales ($81/MWh), Queensland ($65/MWh), Victoria ($49/MWh) and Tasmania ($29/MWh).
Total electricity supply by fuel type saw renewables (wind, grid-scale and rooftop solar, hydro and other sources) contribute 38.9% of total supply, up 4.6%, while black coal’s share fell 3.4%, primarily due to the Liddell Power station closure, and gas fell 2.3%. Brown coal’s market share increased 1%, mainly due to fewer unplanned outages.
AEMO Executive General Manager Reform Delivery, Violette Mouchaileh, said that the growing influence of renewables in the NEM was apparent in the warmer September quarter as prices returned to historical levels.
“Record renewable generation output helped push down average wholesale electricity prices by more than two-thirds, double the occurrence of zero or negative wholesale prices (19%) and reduce total emissions by 11% compared to the previous September quarter,” Ms Mouchaileh said.
“Renewables also supplied a record 70% of total energy used over a half-hour period, with rooftop solar contributing 39%, again highlighting the likely benefit from coordinating rooftop solar and home batteries.
There is no excuse for this confusing messaging about prices. Renewables were always going to be expensive. It was up to the industry oversight body to keep people informed. Does leaving out the bit about how much renewables cost seem like a reasonable effort to keep people informed?
According to the AEMO “Who we are” page, “… AEMO provides the detailed, independent planning, forecasting and modelling information and advice that drives effective and strategic decision-making, regulatory changes and investment. …”. Do articles like the fluff piece above, which somehow fails to mention that any renewable driven cost reduction is temporary, that someone has to pay for all the green infrastructure, does any of this seem like the AEMO is adequately discharging its duty to provide independent advice?
$383 billion is just under $15,000 for every man, woman and child in Australia, or $39,000 for every working person in Australia, just to pay for initial construction. All those extra transmission lines and renewable systems will have to be maintained, at a cost of billions of dollars every year in addition to the cost of maintaining existing infrastructure.
Australia’s peak demand was 31GW in 2023-24, serviced by a capacity of 55GW. According to Wikipedia, the capital cost of building new coal capacity is US $4,074 / Kw to around $1,201 / Kw for gas.
Isn’t climate change supposed to create superstorms and violent weather? If say a big hail storm comes along and wrecks a vast acreage of solar panels, as happened last year in Nebraska, well that will have to be paid for as well.
What are the alternatives to renewables?
Underinvestment in Australia’s energy infrastructure has left most of it in a decrepit state. Lets assume for a moment we have to replace it all.
55GW x 1000000 (convert to Kw) x $4074 = US $224 billion to completely replace all of Australia’s coal capacity with coal. Multiply by 1.54 to get Australian dollars, and you have $345 billion – well short of the $383 billion Energy CEO Jeff Dimery estimated for renewables. If the coal plants use brown coal, which has zero value except as fuel to be shovelled into an adjacent generator, that is a saving of $38 billion in capital costs, + the system does not incur higher transmission line maintenance charges, and a massive cost every time. We save at least $38 billion, and since coal is dispatchable, we wouldn’t have to panic every time the wind dies.
And of course there is the very real risk the $383 billion costing is a massive underestimate. A lot of rather arbitrary assumptions go into calculating such numbers, such as the battery capacity required to accomodate renewable intermittency. Extreme excursions from normal weather conditions such as season long wind droughts over large geographical regions occur often enough to be a problem.
Even when the power doesn’t completely fail, economically damaging spikes in electricity prices can devastate the finances of energy intensive businesses. No energy intensive business can afford $5000 / MWh on a regular basis.
Green energy is a bottomless money pit, always was, always will be. It is time for politicians to be honest with voters, and put a stop this colossal waste of taxpayer resources, before they burn even more money for no benefit.
Australia’s carbon credits system a failure on global scale, study finds
Researchers find carbon offsets approach, which is supposed to regenerate scrubby outback forests, was not reducing emissions as promised
Adam Morton Climate and environment editor Wed 27 Mar 2024 09.21 AEDT
Australia’s main carbon offsets method is a failure on a global scale and doing little if anything to help address the climate crisis, according to a major new study.
Research by 11 academics found the most popular technique used to create offsets in Australia, known as “human-induced regeneration” and pledged to regenerate scrubby outback forests, had mostly not improved tree cover as promised between about 2015 and 2022.
The peer-reviewed study, published in the nature journal Communications Earth & Environment, analysed 182 projects in arid and semi-desert areas and found forest cover had either barely grown or gone backwards in nearly 80%.
The academics said it meant these projects were therefore not reducing emissions as promised, and polluting companies that bought offsets created through these projects were often not reducing their impact on the climate as they claimed.
…
The climate change minister, Chris Bowen told the ABC’s RN Breakfast on Wednesday that a review of the carbon credit scheme that he commissioned from Ian Chubb, a former Australian chief scientist, had backed the integrity of the system.
Australian human-induced native forest regeneration carbon offset projects have limited impact on changes in woody vegetation cover and carbon removals
Carbon offsets are a widely used climate policy instrument that can reduce mitigation costs and generate important environmental and social co-benefits. However, they can increase emissions if they lack integrity. We analysed the performance of one of the world’s largest nature-based offset types: human-induced regeneration projects under Australia’s carbon offset scheme. The projects are supposed to involve the human-induced regeneration of permanent even-aged native forests through changes in land management. We analysed 182 projects and found limited evidence of regeneration in credited areas. Changes in woody vegetation cover within the areas that have been credited also largely mirror changes in adjacent comparison areas, outside the projects, suggesting the observable changes are predominantly attributable to factors other than the project activities. The results add to the growing literature highlighting the practical limitations of offsets and the potential for offset schemes to credit abatement that is non-existent, non-additional and potentially impermanent.Read more: https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-024-01313-x
Chris Bowen isn't having any of Uhlmann's 'wind doesn't always blow' rhetoric.
"the rain doesn't always fall either, but we manage to store the water – we can store the renewable energy if we have the investment"#auspolpic.twitter.com/LjJkEr3zJy
Note: The picture at the top of the article is not as far as I know a carbon offset vegetation regeneration site, just a photogenic example of how dry and harsh the Aussie outback can be.
In the desert of Afif, west of Riyadh, it snowed unexpectedly, both citizens and tourists were shocked.
The significant drop in temperatures was expected with strong north-westerly winds making it even colder. Last year (2023), parts of Saudi Arabia saw its first snowfall in 100 years.
Bolstered by the increasing snowfall in recent years (and despite the “devastating effects of climate change”), Saudi Arabia is working to improve its mountain tourism with its own ski resort to be built by 2026.
Freezing Australia
This past week, the Australian continent saw temperature anomalies of up to 28°C below the multi-decadal norm, affecting large regions:
The exceptional cold in the far north has contributed to Arctic sea ice extent to be above the average for the period 2011-2020, and is rapidly approaching the average for the period 2001-2010.
Obviously the Arctic is surprising the experts, who warned that sea ice there was supposedly in rapid decline.
Unusual, record-breaking cold in India
Intense cold persists in Indian cities like Bhubaneswar, Cuttack, Puri, Chandbali, Paradeep and Baripada, which are experiencing record-breaking low temperatures. On Wednesday, many places in the eastern state of Odisha experienced the coldest March days ever. In Bhubaneswar, a maximum temperature of only 19.2 °C was recorded yesterday, breaking the previous record of 24.3 °C by a whopping 5°C!
In northern India, snow from the north is bringing down temperatures in the lower latitudes in central and southern India. In many cities, including the eastern metropolitan cities of Bhubaneswar, Cuttack, Puri, Chandbali, Paradeep and Baripada, record low March temperatures were recorded, beating benchmarks from the 1970s and beyond.
Record low in New Zealand
In the southern hemisphere, where summer has come to an end, the temperature in Whanganui, New Zealand dropped to 4°C on Wednesday morning, the second lowest March temperature in the town’s history. The lowest March low of all time was recorded on March 28, 1985 (solar minimum of the 21st cycle) at 2.5 °C.
New lows recorded in Australia
A severe cold snap has hit southeastern Australia. In the mountains of New South Wales, there was frost in the Perisher Valley with temperatures as low as -5.7°C. This is only 1.4°C above the national record for the month of March. Thredbo recorded -4.4°C. Cooma also recorded an impressive -1.9°C.
In Mt. Hotham, Victoria, the national record was missed by just 1.2°C, at -3.1°C. Monthly records also fell in Omeo, Victoria: on Thursday morning, the temperature of -0.7°C was a whole 1°C below the previous record (2021).
And in Cleve, South Australia, the temperature of 6.8 °C also exceeded the old record by 1 °C (yet to be confirmed).
Temperature in Antarctica plummets to near -68°C
On March 21, the seasonal minimum at Concordia dropped to -67.7°C, from -67.4°C on March 20. Antarctica is cooling, the data is clear…
The CEC says there are two key messages from the campaign: “Nuclear is a distraction”, and “Don’t risk Australia’s Future.”
The campaign is already appearing in more than 2,200 locations in city building lifts and lobbies in Sydney and Melbourne, and on animated digital billboards in airport lounges at Canberra, Sydney and Melbourne Airport.
…
The campaign by the CEC follows an intense push by the federal Coalition, amplified and often widely supported in mainstream media, to bring a halt to the rollout of large scale renewables, and keep coal fired power stations open until some sort of nuclear option becomes available.
…
It is becoming increasingly clear that the nuclear push is designed to bring the rollout of renewables to a halt – not just temporarily, but for good.
The Coalition’s chief advisors admit that nuclear, which apart from its extremely high costs, is inflexible and has poor ramping rates, to respond in changes of demand or supply, is effectively not comparable with a grid supplied larger by wind and solar, which needs fast and flexible capacity to support it.
In effect, because the grid is morphing from a system built around centralised “baseload” principles to a more distributed system based around wind, solar and flexibility, the two technologies – nuclear and renewables – are effectively incompatible.
I agree with the Clean Energy Council that the Australian opposition plan to build nuclear on decommissioned coal sites is not the best solution – though given 25+ years of failure to make renewables useful, their advocacy for more green energy is absurd.
Nuclear might be affordable in the long run, but financing high up-front costs is not something financially stretched energy consumers could easily absorb. Building low cost brown coal plants or refurbishing old plants would be a much better strategy for lowering end user energy prices.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m a fan of nuclear, and there are plenty of remote sites in Australia where nuclear would be the cheaper option. But ignoring our vast remaining reserves of brown coal does not make economic sense.
Brown coal does not have value as a saleable commodity, because unlike black coal, brown coal cannot be transported economically. Brown coal has lower energy density than black coal, and when stored for transport has a distressing tendency to spontaneously combust. Brown coal’s only value comes from digging it up then immediately shovelling it into an adjacent coal power plant.
Having said this, it is hilarious that an economically challenged opposition plan for dispatchable zero carbon nuclear energy is enough to crash actual investment in green energy.
Investments in renewable energy plants showed an “alarming” slowdown in 2023, with financial approvals for new solar farms shrinking more than a third while no new windfarms won backing, the Clean Energy Council said in its annual report.
…
“There were no new financial commitments to utility-scale wind projects in 2023 (compared to six in 2022) – a disheartening situation that needs to be addressed,” the council said. The seven new solar projects with 912 megawatts of capacity last year was down from the 1.5GW in 10 solar farms in 2022.
On a rolling 12-month average, investment in the December quarter sank to the lowest level since the council began gathering data in 2017, dipping below $1bn.
…
Slow approvals, though, including in states such as New South Wales, mean the decade-end target of supplying 82% of electricity by renewables will be challenging, Green Energy Markets said in a recent report.
…
By comparison, grid solar was 18% higher than in January-February 2023, while wind generation was up 5%. Rooftop solar output increased 10%.
I have a friend in sunny Queensland, the same latitude as Miami, who has invested in a state of the art rooftop solar / battery combination. His rooftop solar is good for keeping the refrigerators and freezers running, running the lights and keeping the TV and computers working, but it doesn’t generate enough power to run home cooling or heating.
Of course, some power is better than no power.
This political and leadership failure is sending a dreadful signal to what remains of Australian jobs and industry. If they invest in their own generation capacity, they risk getting slapped with a carbon tax. But the grid is rapidly deteriorating towards third world levels of reliability. Option “C”, pack up and relocate their factory and facilities to somewhere with sane energy policy, must be an increasingly attractive proposition.
Imagine if the CIA and FBI were disinvited from the US National Security Council, and replaced by the head of the EPA. Because this is the grotesque level of government incompetence Aussies are enduring.
Climate Change Department chief replaces heads of ASIO and ASIS on National Security Committee of Cabinet
Australia’s most senior climate change bureaucrat will have a seat at the National Security Committee after the Albanese government dumped the intelligence chiefs from a permanent spot on the premier security body.
The Climate Change Department Secretary is a new regular attendee to the National Security Committee of Cabinet, while our top intelligence chiefs have been removed as permanent members.
Sky News Australia can reveal that Climate Change Department Secretary David Fredericks has attended the premiere national security body, despite ASIO and ASIS directors-general no longer being automatic members.
Climate Change Minister Chris Bowen and the Labor Government declined to respond to questions about how often and why Mr Fredericks attends the National Security Committee of Cabinet.
A spokesman for the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet said it does not comment on national security matters.
Did the spy chiefs try to tell the Prime Minister that Australia has problems other than climate change? We can only speculate what led to this absurdity.
PUBLISHED: 12:25 AEDT, 12 March 2024 | UPDATED: 20:48 AEDT, 12 March 2024
Greens leader Adam Bandt has come under fire for racking up an expenses bill of almost $1million a year, including hundreds of thousands on printing and two private jet flights.
The anti-fossil fuel campaigner also claimed $12,000 on a taxpayer-provided vehicle and petrol allowance plus $29,000 on government COMCAR trips and taxis, according to figures from the Department of Finance.
Despite his party’s core policy of cutting C02 emissions Mr Bandt used two private jets during the 2022 election campaign, landing tax payers with the $23,000 bill.
According to Curtin University academic Dr Diana Bogueva, “it is not too late for Gen Z to make a difference fighting for a sustainable future.” – but they mostly aren’t engaging.
Gen Z’s climate anxiety is real and needs action — for everyone’s wellbeing
05 MAR 2024 | Samuel Jeremic
…
Published in Sustainable Earth Reviews, the study surveyed Australian university students belonging to Generation Z (people born between 1995 and 2010) and found climate change was their number one environmental concern.
More than 80 per cent reported being ‘concerned’ or ‘very concerned’ about climate change, with many revealing they felt anxious over the issue.
…
Dr Bogueva stressed it wasn’t solely Gen Z’s responsibility to solve climate change — a problem they didn’t create — but taking meaningful action can help alleviate an individual’s feelings of anxiety and powerlessness.
“This can include finding out how they can be part of the solution in their personal lives, whether it’s choosing a career which has an impact or adjusting the products or food they consume,” she said.
“While the challenges of climate change can be scary it is not too late for Gen Z to make a difference fighting for a sustainable future.”
Despite scientific evidence about the imminent threat of climate change, people and governments around the world are slow in taking sufficient action. Against these bleak outlooks, Generation Z (Gen Z) born 1995–2010 will inherit the consequences of prolonged inaction. This research delves into the climate change concerns of Australia’s university Gen Z. A representative survey of 446 Australian university students conducted between September 2021 and April 2022 revealed that climate change is the top environmental concern for Gen Z with 81% of these young people being significantly concerned and many experiencing serious climate anxiety. Despite this pervasive concern, 65% of Australia’s university Gen Z is not engaged in traditional climate activism; however, these young people are using technology to voice their concerns. As the future decision-makers of the world, it is crucial for Gen Z to accelerate climate action in all of its forms, including engaging with scientific knowledge and other generations to shape policies and safeguard a liveable planet for all.Read more: https://sustainableearthreviews.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s42055-024-00075-w
The survey authors explain respondents are self selecting, and may not be a representative sample.
Even so, my first impression was that “climate indoctrination has clearly malfunctioned”.
For decades far too many schools have pumped kids full of climate propaganda and end of world messages, only to see their army of climate activists melt away like ice cubes in a glass of Tequila on a hot summer day.
The study authors seem concerned about the lack of engagement, though their focus appears to be the mental health of the climate worriers – “… Moreover, there is a pressing need to develop effective strategies aimed at assisting individuals, especially the youth, in channelling their climate-related fears in a positive direction, including through their employment and career choices. …”
Are GenZ climate worriers just expressing climate concern to fit in, but don’t actually care? Has despair overwhelmed their will to act?
Does sharing tweets or snap chatting their climate concern, and “lifestyle changes” like using the recycling bin count as climate action in their minds?
Are all but the most committed GenZ climate worriers just lazy?
Future generations will wonder at the failure of education which led to this mass hysteria, yet rendered hysterics mostly unable or unwilling to actually do anything to address their fear.
Hundreds of sites across most of the Great Barrier Reef are turning white from heat stress in the fifth mass coral bleaching event in eight years.
Aerial surveys over two-thirds of the reef have confirmed ‘widespread’ bleaching, the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority said on Friday.
Climate change is the biggest threat to tropical reefs worldwide, and coral bleaching is caused by heat stress.
It’s not always fatal but corals are likely to die if temperatures remain higher than normal for too long.
Reef Authority chief scientist Roger Beeden said bleaching had been recorded at 300 sites from Cape Melville north of Cooktown to just north of Bundaberg.
‘The results are consistent with what we have seen with above average sea surface temperatures across the marine park for an extended period of time,’ Dr Beeden said.
It was only a year ago that Australia’s leading reef expert, Dr Peter Ridd, reported that coral cover was at record highs:
London, 8 February – A new paper published by the Global Warming Policy Foundation refutes alarmist claims about the state of the world’s coral reefs.
According to the author, eminent reef scientist Peter Ridd, the official data show no signs of any long-term trends in reef health. Indeed, the best records – for Australia’s Great Barrier Reef – suggest that coral cover is at record highs.
Dr Ridd said:
“The public are constantly told that reefs are being irreparably damaged by global warming, but bleaching events, about which there is so much doom-mongering, are simply corals’ natural response to changes in the environment. They are an extraordinarily adaptable lifeform, and bleaching events are almost always followed by rapid recovery.”
Dr Ridd suggests that rather than being seen as under threat from climate change, corals should actually be recognised as one of the organisms least likely to suffer harm in a warming world.
“Corals get energy from a symbiotic relationship with various species of algae. When environmental conditions change, they can rapidly switch to a different species that is better suited to the new conditions. This shapeshifting means that most setbacks they suffer will be short-lived.”
Dr Ridd says that the real risks to reefs come from overfishing and pollution.
The GWPF invited responses to this paper from authors likely to dissent from its conclusions. None of the authors who were contacted accepted this invitation.
As Peter Ridd’s report noted, it only in the last two or three decades that the GBR has really been systematically surveyed. Yet there is plenty of evidence that similar bleaching events have frequently occurred in the past, particularly during El Nino events. They were just never observed.
Whereas it was natural to assume that coral reefs would die off after bleaching, Ridd shows that they actually recover very quickly. Bleaching, far from being fatal, is actually a remarkable adaptive response to changing temperature, because having expelled the microscopic algae, which gives it its colour as well as energy, it reabsorbs another strain of algae which thrives in warmer water. The opposite happens when the seas cool.
Ridd concluded:
The Mail report includes this comment, which exposes the thing as a scam:
Australia’s emissions of CO2 are just 1% of the world’s, so calling on the Federal Government to reduce emissions will make no difference whatsoever to the reef. Instead they are using the reef as an excuse to force through their left wing political agenda.
Share this:
Global warming, climate change, all these things are just a dream come true for politicians. I deal with evidence and not with frightening computer models because the seeker after truth does not put his faith in any consensus. The road to the truth is long and hard, but this is the road we must follow. People who describe the unprecedented comfort and ease of modern life as a climate disaster, in my opinion have no idea what a real problem is.
We use cookies to personalise content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyse our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our social media, advertising and analytics partners. View more
Cookies settings
Accept
Privacy & Cookie policy
Privacy & Cookies policy
Cookies list
Cookie name
Active
Wer wir sind
Textvorschlag: Die Adresse unserer Website ist: https://climate-science.press.
Kommentare
Textvorschlag: Wenn Besucher Kommentare auf der Website schreiben, sammeln wir die Daten, die im Kommentar-Formular angezeigt werden, außerdem die IP-Adresse des Besuchers und den User-Agent-String (damit wird der Browser identifiziert), um die Erkennung von Spam zu unterstützen.
Aus deiner E-Mail-Adresse kann eine anonymisierte Zeichenfolge erstellt (auch Hash genannt) und dem Gravatar-Dienst übergeben werden, um zu prüfen, ob du diesen benutzt. Die Datenschutzerklärung des Gravatar-Dienstes findest du hier: https://automattic.com/privacy/. Nachdem dein Kommentar freigegeben wurde, ist dein Profilbild öffentlich im Kontext deines Kommentars sichtbar.
Medien
Textvorschlag: Wenn du ein registrierter Benutzer bist und Fotos auf diese Website lädst, solltest du vermeiden, Fotos mit einem EXIF-GPS-Standort hochzuladen. Besucher dieser Website könnten Fotos, die auf dieser Website gespeichert sind, herunterladen und deren Standort-Informationen extrahieren.
Cookies
Textvorschlag: Wenn du einen Kommentar auf unserer Website schreibst, kann das eine Einwilligung sein, deinen Namen, E-Mail-Adresse und Website in Cookies zu speichern. Dies ist eine Komfortfunktion, damit du nicht, wenn du einen weiteren Kommentar schreibst, all diese Daten erneut eingeben musst. Diese Cookies werden ein Jahr lang gespeichert.
Falls du ein Konto hast und dich auf dieser Website anmeldest, werden wir ein temporäres Cookie setzen, um festzustellen, ob dein Browser Cookies akzeptiert. Dieses Cookie enthält keine personenbezogenen Daten und wird verworfen, wenn du deinen Browser schließt.
Wenn du dich anmeldest, werden wir einige Cookies einrichten, um deine Anmeldeinformationen und Anzeigeoptionen zu speichern. Anmelde-Cookies verfallen nach zwei Tagen und Cookies für die Anzeigeoptionen nach einem Jahr. Falls du bei der Anmeldung „Angemeldet bleiben“ auswählst, wird deine Anmeldung zwei Wochen lang aufrechterhalten. Mit der Abmeldung aus deinem Konto werden die Anmelde-Cookies gelöscht.
Wenn du einen Artikel bearbeitest oder veröffentlichst, wird ein zusätzlicher Cookie in deinem Browser gespeichert. Dieser Cookie enthält keine personenbezogenen Daten und verweist nur auf die Beitrags-ID des Artikels, den du gerade bearbeitet hast. Der Cookie verfällt nach einem Tag.
Eingebettete Inhalte von anderen Websites
Textvorschlag: Beiträge auf dieser Website können eingebettete Inhalte beinhalten (z. B. Videos, Bilder, Beiträge etc.). Eingebettete Inhalte von anderen Websites verhalten sich exakt so, als ob der Besucher die andere Website besucht hätte.
Diese Websites können Daten über dich sammeln, Cookies benutzen, zusätzliche Tracking-Dienste von Dritten einbetten und deine Interaktion mit diesem eingebetteten Inhalt aufzeichnen, inklusive deiner Interaktion mit dem eingebetteten Inhalt, falls du ein Konto hast und auf dieser Website angemeldet bist.
Mit wem wir deine Daten teilen
Textvorschlag: Wenn du eine Zurücksetzung des Passworts beantragst, wird deine IP-Adresse in der E-Mail zur Zurücksetzung enthalten sein.
Wie lange wir deine Daten speichern
Textvorschlag: Wenn du einen Kommentar schreibst, wird dieser inklusive Metadaten zeitlich unbegrenzt gespeichert. Auf diese Art können wir Folgekommentare automatisch erkennen und freigeben, anstatt sie in einer Moderations-Warteschlange festzuhalten.
Für Benutzer, die sich auf unserer Website registrieren, speichern wir zusätzlich die persönlichen Informationen, die sie in ihren Benutzerprofilen angeben. Alle Benutzer können jederzeit ihre persönlichen Informationen einsehen, verändern oder löschen (der Benutzername kann nicht verändert werden). Administratoren der Website können diese Informationen ebenfalls einsehen und verändern.
Welche Rechte du an deinen Daten hast
Textvorschlag: Wenn du ein Konto auf dieser Website besitzt oder Kommentare geschrieben hast, kannst du einen Export deiner personenbezogenen Daten bei uns anfordern, inklusive aller Daten, die du uns mitgeteilt hast. Darüber hinaus kannst du die Löschung aller personenbezogenen Daten, die wir von dir gespeichert haben, anfordern. Dies umfasst nicht die Daten, die wir aufgrund administrativer, rechtlicher oder sicherheitsrelevanter Notwendigkeiten aufbewahren müssen.
Wohin deine Daten gesendet werden
Textvorschlag: Besucher-Kommentare könnten von einem automatisierten Dienst zur Spam-Erkennung untersucht werden.
