solar

Mike Conley and Tim Maloney: This is an excellent detailed, easy to follow analysis of Stanford University Professor of Civil Engineering, Mark Jacobson's claim that the world can acquire all the electrical energy it needs from wind turbines and solar panels. In short, Jacobson's claim is not achievable and a waste of money and time. What are the most important roles of the sun? 1) Heat the planet to livable conditions, 2) Evaporate ocean water, 3) Cause plants to grow and be the basis of the food chain, 4) Cause wind to bring the evaporated ocean water over the land and drop it as rain and snow. Electricity from wind and solar besides being unreliable and unpredictable is extremely dilute. As the authors clearly point out, replacing worn out solar panels on Jacobson's grand scheme would require tremendous amounts of replacement parts every day and the Earth doesn't have easy access to all these materials. The authors point the way with nuclear. Good reading for everyone.

Willis Eschenbach reports on a solar mirror - tower electric generating plant in Nevada that causes serious problems for birds and water usage. This was initially posted on:the website: Watts Up With That - wwwsupwiththat.com.

David Wojick, Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow, CFACT, Washington, D.C., Ph.D. Philosophy of Science and Mathematical Logic, B.Sc. Civil Engineering: I doubt the average customer will be excited about coughing up a billion dollars just so the greens can feel good by forcing use of solar energy. But the utility loves it because, as a regulated monopoly, the more money they spend the more guaranteed profit they make. I can see their stock price and executive salaries going up as a result. Simply put, this is battery trickery.

Andrew Follett, energy and science reporter for The Daily Caller: Solar panels create 300 times more toxic waste per unit of electricity generated than nuclear power plants. They use heavy metals, including lead, chromium and cadmium, which can harm the environment. The hazards of nuclear waste are well known and can be planned for. But very little has been done to mitigate solar waste issues.

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.

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.

Paul Driessen, Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow, CFACT: In a world where we are supposed to ban nuclear (and most hydroelectric) power, the very notion of eliminating the 80% of all global energy that comes from oil, natural gas and coal – replacing it with wind, solar and biofuel power – is fundamentally absurd. Now the focus is on climate change. Every EV sale will help prevent assumed and asserted man-made temperature, climate and weather disasters, we’re told – even if their total sales represented less than 1% of all U.S. car and light truck sales in 2016 (Tesla sold 47,184 of the 17,557,955 vehicles sold nationwide last year), and plug-in EVs account for barely 0.15% of 1.4 billion vehicles on the road worldwide.

Michael Shellenberger, Founder - President of Environmental Progress: Rep. Ocasio-Cortez said, "The world is gonna end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change." Then, yesterday, she proposed a “transition from” nuclear power, America’s largest source of emissions-free energy. How does she avoid the cognitive dissonance created by holding two radically opposed views? The Socialist revolutions of the last century all over again.

No other type of industrial power generator has such a low capacity factor because of its inherent technical limitations and the nature of its power source. Nuclear plants, even with outages for maintenance, have capacity factors in excess of 90 percent; their national average approaches that level. (

The low capacity factor for wind energy has enormous implications. Without considering any other variables, simple arithmetic shows that over 2000- 2.0 MW wind turbines, each with a generous capacity factor of 30 percent and spread over hundreds of miles, would be necessary to equal the output of one 1600 MW coal plant situated on a few acres.

Environmentalists who demand dependable power generation at minimum environmental risk should take care about what they wish for, more aware that, with Rube Goldberg machines, the desired outcome is unlikely to 24 be achieved. Subsidies given to industrial wind technology divert resources that could otherwise support effective measures, while uninformed rhetoric on its behalf distracts from the discourseóand political action-- necessary for achieving more enlightened policy.

Norman Rogers, Physicist. Contributor to American Thinker, Board Member: CO2 Coalition, National Association of Scholars, Policy Advisor: Heartland Institute, Member: American Geophysical Union, American Meteorological Society: What we have is an alliance among hysterical environmental groups, profit-making solar developers, and politicians eager to make important friends. The environmental groups need a stream of impending catastrophes for which they propose impracticable or crackpot solutions. That's how they excite interest and stay in business. The Sierra Club and other groups are against all energy sources except wind and solar and some niche energy sources.

Many states and the utilities they regulate are talking about replacing their coal and gas fired generators with solar and wind power.

Given the high intermittency of wind and solar the idea of running on solar and wind turns out to be an extremely costly prospect. It is all about reliability. Electricity must be there when we need it.

The president finally admits we need more oil refineries but lies about supply

Biden killed a major oil refinery expansion on May 14, just five weeks ago, and killed a one million acre oil and gas lease proposed for Alaska on May 12. Some might dismiss Biden’s refusal to open up one million acres in Alaska, but Biden has yet to hold a single onshore lease sale and delayed multiple oil and gas lease sales a second time last week.

Raphael Telis, research physicist at BNL and CERN: One of the most widespread myths is that wind and solar power sources are inexhaustible because the wind will always blow and the sun will always shine. This statement assumes that all that is needed for energy is wind and sunshine, which isn’t the case. Wind and sunshine don't equal wind power and solar power. The transformation into renewable energy requires minerals, metals and fossil fuels, which are non-renewable resources. Thus, wind turbines and solar panels are largely made from non-renewable resources. Take a note: "renewable energy" isn't a technical or scientific term but a marketing term.

Jay Lehr, Ph.D. Science Contributor, CFACT: Why is wind power and solar power, not making significant gains in providing a substantial amount of renewable electricity? The US has utilized, in its energy mix, about eight percent of wind and two percent solar for more than a decade. The reason it is not growing requires an understanding of the fundamental elements, of an electrical grid.

Michael Shellenberger, Founder - President of Environmental Progress: This is an excellent review of wind and solar energy. It doesn't work. Michael and his science advisor, James Hansen are determined to stop use of fossil fuels because of their convictions that they are causing catastrophic anthropogenic global warming. John Shanahan points out that this website has hundreds of articles on wind, solar and man-made global warming. Based on these articles, he concludes that the world needs fossil fuels far more than any possible problems with global warming they cause. The problems with stopping use of fossil fuels are tremendous, existential. Extreme environmental and man-made climate change alarmists are determined to save the world with their solutions. They are not the best persons to help the world. China is doing a far better job of helping millions out of poverty by using fossil fuels than extreme environmentalists like the Sierra Club, the Natural Resources Defense Council or James Hansen are doing by forcing stopping use of fossil fuels.

John Shanahan, President of Environmentalists for Nuclear - USA: This is a summary of articles about wind and solar technologies without discussion of subsidies posted on this website. It includes comparisons with fossil fuels and nuclear.