Sobering view of Net-Zero by 2050
- Article Countries: Canada
- Article Year: 2021
- Publisher: veteranweb.asn.au
Mark P. Mills, economics21.org: Not satisfied with the mere claim that solar and wind are reaching parity with the costs of conventional energy technologies, green enthusiasts are upping the ante claiming that by “2030, the cost [of solar] could be so near to zero it will effectively be free.” But no amount of research or torturing of reality, however, will lead to that result. Both physics and history offer instructive lessons. That scenario has played out in Germany and Britain, both far further down the green path, leading to radically higher electricity prices there — 200% to 300% higher than in America.
Eric Jelinski has engineering degrees in three disciplines, teaches nuclear engineering curriculum at the University of Toronto, had a full career with the nuclear power industry in Canada and was President of Environmentalists for Nuclear - Canada. In this short essay, he outlines a few simple steps to make large improvements in energy programs for North America. So simple, but national leaders haven't implemented them so far.
Rob Jeffrey, Independent Economic Risk Consultant: South Africa is now (2018) in a recession, the fact is that South Africa does not have the financial resources to revitalise itself. The country suffers from a low savings rate and the government has no money to undertake the task of renewal and development itself. The only means to forge ahead is to make the country attractive to both domestic and foreign investment. Yet there are wild calls for expropriation without compensation, nationalisation of various industries, including one of the most damaging of the lot nationalising the SA reserve bank or using it as a pot of gold. These calls if they are implemented or gather in strength will drive South Africa into an economic death spiral similar to Zimbabwe and Venezuela.
One of South Africa’s key electricity technology energy advisors is a German renewable energy expert and supplier of German wind turbine equipment. Unbelievable. That highlights the desperate situation South African energy is in. German national energy programs based on wind and solar are only one natural crisis away from being in a disastrous situation.
Rob Jeffrey, Independent Economic Risk Consultant: The three major objectives of the country are poverty alleviation, reducing inequality and raising standards of living. These objectives can only be achieved by maintaining a high rate of economic growth, thereby reducing levels of unemployment and raising the standard of living. Electricity is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for economic growth. The necessary condition for sustainable economic growth is that there is a stable and secure supply of electricity at the lowest effective economic cost when delivered to the user. The sufficient condition requires that economic, social and political conditions must be put in place to foster and encourage domestic and foreign investment, thereby creating demand for productive and economically efficient industries.
Andrew Bolt, Herald Sun and Anthony Watts: South Australia's wind farms fail again, grinding out just 2 per cent power when the wind's die in a heatwave. Result: blackouts to 40,000 homes as the temperature soars above 40 degrees. And lives put in danger by this green madness.
John Droz is the publisher of "Energy and Environmental Newsletter." Once you’ve grasped the magnitude of the problems with wind, solar, biofuels, etc., you’ll understand why the Russians have put so much effort into promoting US energy policies that are completely nonsensical — to anyone but them. The ONLY solution is to change our energy policies to be Science-based — starting with dumping the absurd “All of the Above” slogan, and replacing it with “All of the Sensible” as a national energy mantra.
James Conca, scientist in the field of earth and environmental sciences. Contributor to Forbes: Stanford University Professor Mark Jacobson is the prophet of a religion that claims the world can be fueled by 100% renewable energy. But other scientists better not question him or he’ll excommunicate you. And by excommunicate, I mean sue in court. Jacobson filed a $10 million libel suit in Washington, D.C. Superior Court against another scientist, Dr. Christopher Clack, who dared to criticize him.
John Droz is the publisher of "Energy and Environmental Newsletter." Although there has been a lot of press coverage about foreign interference in our political process, they are actually attacking us in a much more effective way, with very little attention being paid to it. An indisputable fact is that our society (our health, our economy, our national security, etc.) is 100% dependent on plentiful, reliable, affordable energy. There is significant evidence that our country’s enemies are purposefully subverting our energy sector in a variety of ways.
John Shanahan, civil engineer, President of Environmentalists for Nuclear - USA: This is a simple, short comparison of wind, solar, fossil fuels and nuclear power. Two have extremely low energy density, require lots of materials, maintenance and tremendous volume of new parts every 20 to 30 years. They are also variable to non-existent sometimes and cause havoc with electrical energy grids for modern society. The other two are high to very high energy density and require much less land. The 2009 - 2017 White House, its Science Advisor, John Holdren, and Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton are strong proponents of wind and solar energy, want significant reductions in use of fossil fuels and did little to promote nuclear power for the future. Most of the rest of the elected officials in the White House and Congress from the mid 1970s through 2018 have done little to develop a national energy plan. There are programs for assisting Americans with health care and retirement, but no national energy plan, except to use what is the cheapest or what is popular with voters today.
Frank Dreves started the website sundays-for-landschaft.de to provide photo graphic evidence of the terrible things that wind turbines do and the problems they will cause in the long term for modern economies in Europe and North America. The Extreme Greens are as bad for Canada, the United States and Germany as the seizure of the German government in the 1930s.
Friedrich Wagner: Germany decided to go nuclear-free by 2022. A CO2-emission-free electricity supply system based on intermittent sources, such as wind and solar - or photovoltaic (PV) - power could replace nuclear power. Intermittent sources are, by definition, unsteady. Therefore, a back-up system capable of providing power at a level of 89% of peak load would be needed. This requires creating an oversised power system to produce large amounts of surplus energy. A day storage to handle surplus is ineffective because of the day-night correlation of surplus power in the winter.
Viv Forbes, Executive Director of The Saltbush Club, Australia: The media loves disaster stories – floods, cyclones, heat waves, droughts and fires - each one “the worst Evaaaah” (evaah since the last one). Each report of catastrophe is usually followed by a religious chant about “man-made global warming”. Pretending we can change global climate by waging a war on carbon dioxide is foolish and dangerous nonsense. When cyclones, floods, droughts and bushfires strike we need disaster-proof helipads, rail links, roads, bridges, water and electricity supply.
David MacKay, Professor of Physics, University of Cambridge: How can we power a modern lifestyle without fossil fuels? Individual actions saving 10% here and 40% there will not get us off fossil fuels. To eliminate fossil fuel use, we will surely also need to increase the amount of energy we get from non-fossil-fuel sources. Even if we imagine strong efficiency measures and smart technology switches, halving our energy consumption from 125 kWh per day per person to 60 kWh per day, we should not kid ourselves about the scale of the energy challenge which would remain. If Britain and the United States were to "get off" fossil fuels, what would the effect be on Earth's climate? Most of the rest of the world can not afford to "get off" fossil fuels or do not have the right governments, economies, education systems, industrial capacity to do so.
Christopher Booker: The UK may soon face major blackouts due to the impending closure of 14 nuclear and coal-fired power stations which currently supply nearly 40 per cent of our peak electricity needs. This disaster would be unique in Europe, because of the blindness of successive governments’ energy policy. But it now seems that Germany may get there before the UK following its government’s decision, in the wake of Fukushima, to shut eight of its 17 nuclear power plants immediately, with the rest to follow.
John Droz, physicist. Publisher of "Energy and Environmental Newsletter." Editor of http://wiseenergy.org/. The proponents of Climate Change insist that we are facing an imminent threat to our very existence. To prevent this catastrophe they assert that we must make immediate, consequential changes — particularly regarding our energy policies. The primary solution advocated by the major Climate Change advocates is wind energy. The climactic question is: If we accept the Climate Change contention and spend Trillions of dollars to assiduously implement their wind energy solution, will the existential threat be extinguished in the short time-table they say we have? "Greenpeace and others protesting CO2 and global warming, based on a mere BELIEF, like any other religion, is as laughable (if it weren't for their willful and unlawful disruption of honest TAX-PAYING citizens' lives) as demanding the government 'do something' about the length of daylight, or the force of gravity, or the composition of Jupiter.
1. Since the 1920’s, trends in extreme weather events show neither higher frequency nor higher severity.
2. The average global temperature over the last 100+ years has risen by only 0.9 degrees centigrade.
3. The oceans are not rising any faster than they have been for at least the last 300 years
4. Whatever the capacity for CO2 to trap heat, that impact diminishes on a logarithmic scale, because the infrared wavelengths (heat) that CO2 absorbs is essentially at saturation levels already.
5. The world consumes about 100 million barrels of crude each and every day, and this consumption has been steadily rising since we first discovered it and learned how to use it.
6. Water vapour is not only a far better absorber of infrared (heat) but it is generally present at atmospheric concentrations several magnitudes higher than that of CO2 at typical summer temperatures.
7. The only ‘indication’ of future catastrophic temperatures are the results of computer models.
Diego Ortiz, writer for the BBC: He describes "ten simple changes to help save the planet." Most people understand that the world is much better off with fossil fuels than without them. There are some who absolutely want to get rid of fossil fuels. They (from Rome and Potsdam to Hollywood and Sacramento) say that the world can be saved with a few simple changes. For the sake of people everywhere, lets hope that clearer, smarter heads will prevail.