The European Union’s Copernicus claims

Earth’s temperature was more than 1.5 degrees Celsius warmer than the preindustrial era in the 12 months ending January, the first time temperatures averaged over a yearlong period have breached this key threshold in international climate diplomacy.
[T]he average temperature from February 2023 to January 2024 was 1.52 degrees Celsius above the average temperature from 1850 to 1900, the period generally considered to be preindustrial by climate scientists. This January was 1.66 degrees warmer than the preindustrial average, making it the warmest January on record….

The Climate Funding Industry’s game is given away by that 1850 to 1900, the period generally considered to be preindustrial by climate scientists nonsense.

It’s a falsely and arbitrarily truncated period of before the beginning of industrialization. As such, Copernicus‘ claim is simply not true. Earth was warmer roughly 5,000 years ago, 6,000 years after the end of the last Ice Age—and a bit further before the industrial age.

Beyond that, there have been a number of epochs in Earth’s even earlier climate “preindustrial” record when our planet was very much warmer than it is today, with life being lush. Too, Earth remains today, those 11,000 years after that Ice Age, cooler than our planet’s geologic warming trendline.

Indeed, as telling as Copernicus‘ artificial baseline period, even more so that organization’s decision to ignore that larger context within which Earth seems to be warming today—warming just to get back up to the trendline.

An atmospheric CO2 removal technology is gaining interest.

In western Texas, a major carbon removal plant that is under construction also recently got a $550 million investment from BlackRock. Once it is up and running in 2025, the plant will use fan-like devices roughly the size of tennis courts to pull carbon from the air and bury it underground, a process known as direct-air capture.

To the extent that this is a good idea—and I’m not convinced that it is—such direct-air capture facilities would be better placed in targeted locations, rather than being randomly situated. And few places are more random than the wide-open spaces of West Texas. That location may be OK for a proof of concept run, but….

If this technology works at scale, the facilities would be better placed just downwind of gas-, oil-, and coal-fired power generation plants to capture CO2 emissions as they are emitted and before they get diffused throughout the atmosphere.

Also: rather than burying the captured CO2, better to freeze it and use the dry ice for shipping perishables, since shipping times will be much longer with the sailing ships and horse-drawn overland wagons that will be the core of our shipping industry after the Left’s war on fossil-fuels is over.

And then recapture that CO2 for recycling….