Bulk Battery Storage of Wind Power a Myth

Shock news.

Though even if it were possible, imagine how many new mines would be needed to be dug to extract the toxic components needed to make all them batteries.

That said, the Greens and the global warming faith would naturally turn a blind eye to the mining and toxic waste, just as they turn a blind eye to the catastrophic bird and bat slaughter wreaked by windmills, as well the devastating health effects infrasound has on people’s lives and on the animals that inhabit wind farm zones.

STOP THESE THINGS

mythbusters2

In the fall-out over South Australia’s wind powered economic and social calamity, the line has been repeatedly spun about fixing the mess with ‘rapidly improving battery storage technology’.

It is little more than a ‘smoke and mirrors’ pitch by the wind industry, its parasites and spruikers, designed to deflect attention from the fact that wind power is meaningless as a power source, abandoned centuries ago for very obvious reasons – eg, SA’s wind power output during July:

SA Jul 16

Even if storing Terawatt/hours of electricity produced by these things – when it wasn’t needed, in order to deliver it when it might be – was technically possible the cost of the power delivered would be astronomical, as this little Mythbusting analysis makes plain.

The Holy Grail of Battery Storage
Energy Matters
Roger Andrews
18 August 2016

A recent Telegraph article claims that storage battery technology is now advancing so fast that “we…

View original post 782 more words

Advertisements

Another Flannery Fail: Geothermal Power Plant Project Scrapped

Tim Flannery.

No other comment needed.

Other than to mention that despite his myriad of alarmist dud-predictions resulting in costly, failed unreliable (green) energy solutions – geothermal, failed windmills, $12 billion of mothballed desal plants, to name a few, the Government funded ABC continues to default to him as their resident climate expert!?

The groupthink, warmist activists over at the ABC, never once questioning or holding him to account for his litany of green failures and dud-predictions, costing taxpayers literally billions upon billions of dollars.

But once again, the worst Flannery and his climate change alarmist cronies can ever be accused of, for failed alarmist predictions resulting in massive taxpayer-dollar waste, is an excess of virtue, in order to “Save the planet”.

Disgraceful.

PA Pundits - International

Bolt New 01By Andrew Bolt ~

Another green energy fail:

A potential energy source in Australia is set to remain untapped, with a geothermal power project in the far north of South Australia now closed.

Energy company Geodynamics closed and remediated the sites of several test wells and generation plants in the Cooper Basin after deciding they were not financially viable.

Professor Tim Flannery (Former Australian Climate Change Commissioner)Professor Tim Flannery (Former Australian Climate Change Commissioner)

So who spruiked it? Climate catastrophist Tim Flannery:

There are hot rocks in South Australia that potentially have enough embedded energy in them to run Australia’s economy for the best part of a century. They are not being fully exploited yet but the technology to extract that energy and turn it into electricity is relatively straightforward….

But we’ve totally ignored the technologies that really, I think, have a lot of potential to do the job very cost effectively such as geothermal and solar…

View original post 282 more words


Claim: Countries which favour Nuclear Power are Not Making Enough Effort to Install Renewables

“Unless you are lucky enough to have the right geography for large scale hydro, nuclear is the only proven low carbon means of producing reliable biddable baseload power.

To argue that countries which have a strong commitment to nuclear power are not “doing their bit” to reduce CO2 emissions in my opinion is total lunacy.”

Couldn’t agree more.

Watts Up With That?

University of Sussex Campus, Arts building. University of Sussex Campus, Arts building. CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=37878

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

University of Sussex and Vienna School of International Studies are concerned that countries with policies which favour nuclear power aren’t making enough effort to reduce CO2 emissions by installing solar power and wind turbines.

University of Sussex Press Release;

Pro-nuclear countries making slower progress on climate targets

With Hinkley Point deal hanging in the balance, study casts fresh doubts over future of nuclear energy in Europe

A strong national commitment to nuclear energy goes hand in hand with weak performance on climate change targets, researchers at the University of Sussex and the Vienna School of International Studies have found.

A new study of European countries, published in the journal Climate Policy, shows that the most progress towards reducing carbon emissions and increasing renewable energy sources – as set out in the EU’s 2020 Strategy…

View original post 897 more words