I see you are making an effort to understand.

CtH: However this "cycle" has a duration of one year.

Yes but every year that progresses a little & it does so for 13000 years, then the Earths circle around the Sun is further away than it was 13000 years previously. The entire process takes 26000 years to get back to the minimum cycle. That bit doesn't have any effect on the heating or cooling of Earth. The elliptical Cycle around the Sun does.

EG; When the Earth in at the bottom of it's Elliptical Cycle & goes around the sun at that distance then the Earth is going through a hot phase When the Earth, 13000 years later, is at the Zenith of it's Cycle then it's further away & going through a cooling Cycle. The tilting that creates the seasons has little overall effect on that except that the winters will be even cooler & the Summers milder but still not as hot as they were 13000 years previously.

It's sort of hard to explain without a diagram.

In the mean time our Solar system also oscillates up & down through the centre plane of the Milky Way Galaxy. Our Solar system just passed the centre point last year. (End of the World, remember?) That also takes a total of 26000 years round trip.

Cobber, an answer to your inane question.

No power generation system for public consumption in Australia requires "lots of public money". Power companies are perfectly happy to finance their own power stations and sell to willing customers. No public money should ever again need to be put into electric power generation.

And I include in that all subsidies for any form of power generation. There should be none - ever.

Power would be much cheaper if governments withdrew from the field entirely.

As for reading your post, perhaps you could give me a hint as to the particular thing I've got wrong. I can't see it.

To the author.

These are indeed inconvenient truths.

Your information should be suppressed forthwidth.

Otherwise a whole generation of climate scientist Yes Men and global activist True Believers will be out of a Job or have to alter a New Age Ideology.

The rest of the universe certainly doesn't revolve around the Earth, but, like so many topics in science, it's an oversimplification to say that everything orbits around the Sun.
Technically, Earth Does Not Orbit Around the Sun
Posted by Ross Pomeroy August 5, 2014
The discovery that Earth revolves around the Sun was revolutionary. It fundamentally changed how we viewed the cosmos, as well as ourselves.
But the Earth does not revolve around the Sun. At least, not exactly. Time to get pedantic.
"Technically, what is going on is that the Earth, Sun and all the planets are orbiting around the center of mass of the solar system," writes Cathy Jordan, a Cornell University Ask an Astronomer contributor.
"The center of mass of our solar system very close to the Sun itself, but not exactly at the Sun's center."
Jan. 8, 2013: In the galactic scheme of things, the Sun is a remarkably constant star. While some stars exhibit dramatic pulsations, wildly yo-yoing in size and brightness, and sometimes even exploding, the luminosity of our own sun varies a measly 0.1% over the course of the 11-year solar cycle.
If the energy from the sun varies by only 0.1 percent during the 11-year solar cycle, could such a small variation drive major changes in weather patterns on Earth? Yes, say researchers from the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) who used more than a century of weather observations and three powerful computer models in their study. They found subtle connections between solar cycle, the stratosphere, and the tropical Pacific Ocean that work in sync to generate periodic weather patterns that affect much of the globe. Scientists say this will help in predicting the intensity of certain climate phenomena, such as the Indian monsoon and tropical Pacific rainfall, years in advance.

NASA and NOAA have officially announced that 2015 has been the warmest year for global temperature ever recorded. The expectation is that 2016 could set a new record or near record if the 1997 El Nino is taken into account.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/01/20/its-official-2015-smashed-2014s-global-temperature-record-it-wasnt-even-close/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_hotweather-1115am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

Another measure of significance is that Ocean temperatures are increasing. Oceans take up 70% of the Earths surface and hold a huge volume of water; hence, it takes much energy to warm them.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jan/18/world-oceans-warming-faster-rate-new-study-fossil-fuels?CMP=soc_567

That was a worse explanation then mine was 579.