LIFE In A Fossil-Fuel-Free Utopia

before_after_fossil_fuels.png

ANOTHER must read Paul Driessen masterpiece.

Worth an intro with a few notable comments from posting at WUWT

“Loved reading this, pure common sense and reality. Thank you for posting the truth! These enviro-nutters are dangerous.” (John on August 13, 2017 at 10:08 am)

*

“I have to agree, an excellent article. Too bad it won’t get to those who need to read it. Too bad they wouldn’t read it even if it were available to them.” (Rhoda R on August 13, 2017 at 10:21 am)

*

“Our cargo cult’s easy access to…everything

Notice there’s only two types worried about global warming…

The ones that get paid..
…and the ones in affluent societies that have the leisure time to think about it

Global warming it a product of affluent societies” (Latitude on August 13, 2017 at 10:36 am)

*

The belief that Gorebal Warming is an existential threat, requiring urgent action is the product of a dumbed-down education system.

The belief that fossil fuels and nuclear power can be replaced by “renewable energy” is the product of a “participation trophy” society.

The belief that the world can painlessly transition away from fossil fuels is the product of an affluent society.

It’s a combination of STEM ignorance, a sense of entitlement and affluence.” (David Middleton on August 13, 2017 at 10:57 am

*

Why don’t they advertise a hunter-gatherer lifestyle?” (Curious George on August 13, 2017 at 1:10 pm)

 

•••

Foreword via Anthony Watts @ WUWT:

The drumbeat for a fossil-fuel-free energy utopia continues. But few have pondered how we will supposedly generate 25 billion megawatts of total current global electricity demand using just renewable energy: wind turbines, for instance. For starters, we’re talking about some 830 million gigantic 500-foot-tall turbines – requiring a land area of some 12.5 billion acres. That’s more than twice the size of North America, all the way through Central America.

But where it really gets interesting is what life would actually be like in a totally renewable electricity world. Think back to Colonial Williamsburg – the good old days. The way they really were. Not the make-believe, idyllic version of history they teach in school these days. Read on, to take a journey to the nirvana of the “stabilized climate” future.

*

Life in fossil-fuel-free utopia

Life without oil, natural gas and coal would most likely be nasty, brutish, and short

Via CFACT

Al Gore’s new movie, a New York Times article on the final Obama Era “manmade climate disaster” report, and a piece saying wrathful people 12 years from now will hang hundreds of “climate deniers” are a tiny sample of Climate Hysteria and Anti-Trump Resistance rising to a crescendo. If we don’t end our evil fossil-fuel-burning lifestyles and go 100% renewable Right Now, we are doomed, they rail.

Maybe it’s our educational system, our cargo cult’s easy access to food and technology far from farms, mines, and factories, or the end-of-days propaganda constantly pounded into our heads. Whatever the reason, far too many people have a pitiful grasp of reality: natural climate fluctuations throughout Earth history; the intricate, often fragile sources of things we take for granted; and what life would really be like in the utopian fossil-fuel-free future they dream of. Let’s take a short journey into that idyllic realm.

Suppose we generate just the 25 billion megawatt-hours (MWh) of today’s total global electricity consumption using wind turbines. (That’s not total energy consumption, and it doesn’t include what we’d need to charge a billion electric vehicles.) We’d need more than 830 million gigantic 3-MW turbines!

Spacing them at just 15 acres per turbine would require 12.5 billion acres! That’s twice the land area of North America! All those whirling blades would virtually exterminate raptors, other birds, and bats. Rodent and insect populations would soar. Add in transmission lines, solar panels, and biofuel plantations to meet the rest of the world’s energy demands – and the mostly illegal tree cutting for firewood to heat poor families’ homes – and huge swaths of our remaining forest and grassland habitats would disappear.

The renewable future assumes these “eco-friendly alternatives” would provide reliable, affordable energy 24/7/365, even during windless, sunless weeks and cold, dry growing seasons. They never will, of course. That means we will have electricity and fuels when nature cooperates, instead of when we need it.

With backup power plants gone, constantly on-and-off electricity will make it impossible to operate assembly lines, use the internet, do an MRI or surgery, enjoy favorite TV shows, or even cook dinner. Refrigerators and freezers would conk out for hours or days at a time. Medicines and foods would spoil.

Petrochemical feed stocks would be gone – so we wouldn’t have paints, plastics, synthetic fibers, or pharmaceuticals, except what can be obtained at great expense from weather-dependent biodiesel. Kiss your cotton-polyester-lycra leggings and yoga pants good-bye.

But of course all that is really not likely to happen. It would actually be far worse.

First of all, there wouldn’t even be any wind turbines or solar panels. Without fossil fuels – or far more nuclear and hydroelectric plants, which rabid environmentalists also despise – we couldn’t mine the needed ores, process and smelt them, build and operate foundries, factories, refineries, or cement kilns, or manufacture and assemble turbines and panels. We couldn’t even make machinery to put in factories.

Wind turbines, solar panels, and solar thermal installations cannot produce consistently high enough heat to smelt ores and forge metals. They cannot generate power on a reliable enough basis to operate facilities that make modern technologies possible. They cannot provide the power required to manufacture turbines, panels, batteries or transmission lines – much less power civilization.

My grandmother used to tell me, “The only good thing about the good old days is that they’re gone.” Well, they’d be back, as the USA is de-carbonized, de-industrialized, and de-developed.

Ponder America and Europe before coal fueled the modern industrial age. Recall what we were able to do back then, what lives were like, how long people lived. Visit Colonial Williamsburg and Claude Moore Colonial Farm in Virginia, or similar places in your state. Explore rural Africa and India.

Imagine living that way, every day: pulling water from wells, working the fields with your hoe and ox-pulled plow, spinning cotton thread and weaving on looms, relying on whatever metal tools your local blacksmith shop can produce. When the sun goes down, your lives will largely shut down.

Think back to amazing construction projects of ancient Egypt, Greece, or Rome – or even 18th century London, Paris, or New York. Ponder how they were built, how many people it took, how they obtained and moved the raw materials. Imagine being part of those wondrous enterprises, from sunup to sundown.

The good news is that there will be millions of new jobs. The bad news is that they’d involve mostly backbreaking labor with picks and shovels, for a buck an hour. Low-skill, low-productivity jobs just don’t pay all that well. Maybe to create even more jobs, the government will issue spoons, instead of shovels.

That will be your life, not reading, watching TV and YouTube, or playing video games. Heck, there won’t even be any televisions or cell phones. Drugs and alcohol will be much harder to come by, too. (No more opioid crisis.) Water wheels and wind mills will be back in fashion. All-natural power, not all the time.

There’ll be no paved streets – unless armies of low-skill workers pound rocks into gravel, mine and grind limestone, shale, bauxite, and sand for cement, and make charcoal for lime kilns. Homes will revert to what can be built with preindustrial technologies, with no central heat and definitely no AC.

Ah, but you folks promoting the idyllic renewable energy future will still be the ruling elites. You’ll get to live better than the rest of us, enjoy lives of reading and leisure, telling us commoners how we must live. Don’t bet on it. Don’t even bet on having the stamina to read after a long day with your shovel or spoon.

As society and especially big urban areas collapse into chaos, it will be survival of the fittest. And that group likely won’t include too many Handgun Control and Gun Free Zone devotees.

But at least your climate will be stable and serene – or so you suppose. You won’t have any more extreme weather events. Sea levels will stay right where they are today: 400 feet higher than when a warming planet melted the last mile-thick glaciers that covered half the Northern Hemisphere 12,000 years ago.

At least it will be stable and serene until those solar, cosmic ray, ocean currents, and other pesky, powerful natural forces decide to mess around with Planet Earth again.

Of course, many countries won’t be as stupid as the self-righteous utopian nations. They will still use fossil fuels, plus nuclear and hydroelectric, and watch while you roll backward toward the “good old days.” Those that don’t swoop in to conquer and plunder may even send us food, clothing, and monetary aid (most of which will end up with ruling elites and their families, friends, cronies, and private armies).

So how about this as a better option?

Stop obsessing over “dangerous manmade climate change.” Focus on what really threatens our planet and its people: North Korea, Iran, Islamist terrorism – and rampant poverty, disease, malnutrition, and early death among the billions who still do not have access to electricity and the living standards it brings.

Worry less about manmade climate cataclysms – and more about cataclysms caused by policies promoted in the name of controlling Earth’s climate, when they really end up controlling our lives.

Don’t force-feed us with today’s substandard, subsidized, pseudo-sustainable, pseudo-renewable energy systems. When better, more efficient, more practical energy technologies are developed, they will replace fossil fuels. Until then, we would be crazy to go down the primrose path to renewable energy utopia.

About the Author: Paul Driessen

Paul Driessen

Paul Driessen is senior policy advisor for CFACT and author of Cracking Big Green and Eco-Imperialism: Green Power – Black Death.

Related :

•••

CLIMATE CHANGE sense and reason via Paul Driessen :

MUST read Driessen :

MORE excellent Driessen :

 


DIESEL – Keeping South Australia’s Lights On Til The Next Election!

SA Green Energy.jpeg

South Australia’s green utopia – burning 80,000 litres of diesel every hour, everyday to cover up its renewables debacle!

 

WHAT do you do when you submit to the deep-green climate faith, blow up all your baseload coal-fired power stations, disconnect from the National grid and become reliant on intermittent, weather-dependent, unreliable green energy – wind and solar?

YOU buy $360 million worth of diesel generators and hope that burning 80,000 litres of petrochemicals every hour, everyday will prevent summer blackouts ahead of your next state election.

THOSE blackouts, which occur when the total demand for electricity exceeds supply, occurred three times last summer.

BUT, aren’t petrochemicals, like diesel, the same “dirty” fossil fuels that climate catastrophists scarify us for indulging in, claiming that their use will fry the planet? #LeaveItInTheGround, #BigOilShill, #DivestFossilFuels – a few of the propagandised euphemisms bandied around by eco-activists.

SO, that question again – what’s the point of the billion dollar, taxpayer funded, unreliable energy (wind and solar) experiment?

FOR the Jay Weatherill’s of the planet, one could only assume that it’s a moral blend of “Save the Planet” virtue, mixed with “Save the Planet” virtue. It certainly has nothing to do with sense or reason, or being “green”…

Generators the Weatherill government is buying to prevent blackouts this summer ahead of the March state election will use 80,000 litres of diesel an hour.

The fleet of generators, currently being shipped from Europe to South Australia, have been used for temporary generation around the world. But those behind the South Australian energy security project, costing taxpayers more than $300 million, yesterday could not say if the generators had ever been used as part of a permanent solution.

In a major revision to his $550m go-it-alone energy plan, Premier Jay Weatherill last week announced nine “state-of-the-art” gen­erators providing up to 276 megawatts would be purchased to provide back-up power for the next two summers.

Weatherill’s 80,000 litres of diesel an hour solution to SA energy crisis | The Australian

*

BATTERY BLUES

AS part of the government’s $550 million go-it-alone energy plan, the Premier, along with Tesla’s subsidy-sucking vampire Elon Musk, announced in July that Tesla would build a $200 million 100MW giant battery pack to store energy for when the wind don’t blow or when the sun don’t shine…

BUT, this week, in a blow to Jay Weatherill’s “bromance” with Mr Musk, the US tech billionaire’s Tesla has slammed the South Australian government’s planned energy security target and warned it is not representative of the state’s leadership on renewable energy.

ANALYSIS of Tesla’s (toxic) battery pack by Paul Homewood estimates that it “could have enough battery storage to replace wind power for a whole minute, should the wind stop.”

Other analysts suggest that the battery is still only big enough to keep a town of just 13,000 homes going for 24 hours!

IS Elon hedging his grandiose claim of Tesla saving South Australia from complete energy meltdown? Sounds a lot like it. Ouch.

*

BIG GOVERNMENT

JUST as socialist central planning failed miserably before it was replaced by free market economies, green central planning will have to be discarded before South Australia will be able to see a return to energy security and erase its name from the unenviable title of having the “highest power prices in the world.

UNTIL big government backs off, taxpayers will continue to pay billions of dollars more for fake fixes to a fake catastrophe.

“My sympathies to all the South Australians who didn’t vote for this.” Jo Nova.

Climatism concurs, Jo!

•••

H/t to Miranda Devine

SA Power Crisis Related :

See Also :


IT’S OFFICIAL : South Australia Has The World’s Highest Power Prices!

SA Highest Power Prices In World 2017

CONGRATULATION’s Jay Weatherill !

YOUR mad global warming policies and ruinously juvenile obsession with green power have rewarded South Australia with the World’s most expensive power prices, helping to destroy your economy and hurt the poor.

Bravo.

SA has the world’s highest power prices, Carbon and Energy Markets director Bruce Mountain says — so get off the grid

ESCAPING the electricity grid by pairing solar panels and new battery technology is the best way for SA households to escape the world’s most expensive power prices, a top expert says.

 

Carbon and Energy Markets director Bruce Mountain revealed in June that he was working on a study that found SA was passing Denmark as the most expensive place in the world to keep the lights on.

He has now published the results, which conclude SA’s prices are three times that recorded in the US and about 50 per cent higher than the UK.

SA has the world’s highest power prices, Carbon and Energy Markets director Bruce Mountain says — so get off the grid | Adelaide Now

 

THE solution? “Escape the electricity grid by pairing solar panels and new battery technology…” ! That’s all good and well for those who can afford the luxury of solar panels and their (toxic) battery backup systems.

And, what for businesses and heavy industry – the one’s that still remain? Use Elon “Taxpayer subsidy-sucking vampire” Musk’s $200 million giant battery pack that could have enough battery storage to replace wind power for a whole minute (maybe 2), should the wind stop?

Aren’t solar panels, batteries and windmills the entire reason behind SA’s energy debacle, anyway?

green-energy-isnt-free-cartoon.jpg

Like the old sailors say, “The wind is free, but everything else costs money”.

THERE’s always the DIY options that are being fitted by SA businesses and households living in fear of routine load shedding, mass blackouts and “the world’s highest power prices” :

  • Adelaide oval are examining a diesel and gas co-generation option. “If the stadium went black it would be a nightmare,” chief executive Andrew Daniels said. “Plus, can you imagine the damage it would do to the state’s reputation?” Think that ship’s sailed Mr Daniels!
  • Coopers Brewery has its own power supply via gas, and was unaffected by the September 28 blackout that devastated industry.
  • “South Australian businesses and households have been scrambling to secure their own back-up supply since two blackouts hit the state in little more than two months. One of the largest sellers of industrial diesel generators, Genpower Australia, has seen a 50 per cent spike in sales and service calls in the past three months. Families had been willing to pay $11,000 up front for a diesel generator back-up while one regional supermarket on Yorke Peninsula, 160km west of Adelaide, bought a $35,000 generator last week to ensure its freezers stayed on, the company said.” Shift to DIY power at Adelaide Oval | The Australian

BUT, aren’t these “industrial diesel generators” and LPG solutions simply going back to “dirty” fossil fuels – the same (cheap, reliable, efficient) hydrocarbons that freak out the Green faith?!

SO, what’s the point of the whole billion dollar, taxpayer funded, unreliable energy (wind and solar) experiment? For the Jay Weatherill’s of the planet, one could assume it’s a moral blend of “Save the Planet” virtue, mixed with “Save the Planet” virtue.

There certainly is no sense, reason or cost benefit analysis when you enlist in the Green faith.

BECAUSE, consider also, that as more solar and wind generators come online, as Jay has planned, the demand will rise for more backup power from “dirty” fossil fuel plants to fill the gaps and keep the grid stable when the wind doesn’t blow or the wind don’t shine. The result – adding even more CO2 emissions to the atmosphere. Not a good result if (plant food) CO2 is your ideological enemy.

See Germany’s failed green experiment as a classic case in point: Energiewende | Search Results | Climatism

BUT here is the ultimate craziness. All the money, all the wrecking of views, all the lost jobs through higher electricity prices and all the blackouts – all the pain for nothing. The effect on global temperatures so incredibly small, nobody would notice.

It gets worse…

Neighbouring State, Victoria, whose Socialist Left government is also obsessed with green energy and the climate faith has closed Hazelwood coal-fired power station, which did not merely supply Victoria with a quarter of its power but also helped bail out South Australia.

Come the hot Australian summer in a few months time, this situation is going to spiral way, way out of control. Bookmark it.

•••

MORE on SA’s Insane Global Warming Policy-Inflicted Energy Crisis :

 

See Also :


THE Appalling Delusion of 100 Percent “Unreliables” Exposed

“THE Appalling Delusion of 100 Percent “Unreliables”, Exposed…

IT GETS way worse: Adding More Solar And Wind Power ‘Doubles’ CO2 Emissions https://climatism.wordpress.com/2016/11/27/adding-more-solar-and-wind-power-doubles-co2-emissions/

STOP THESE THINGS

And you will find grid-scale battery storage just over there.

For STT followers Robert Bryce needs no introduction. Here he is exposing the delusional belief that whole nations can be entirely powered by sunshine and breezes.

The Appalling Delusion of 100 Percent Renewables, Exposed
National Review
Robert Bryce
24 June 2017

The National Academy of Science refutes Mark Jacobson’s dream that our economy can run exclusively on ‘green’ energy..

The idea that the U.S. economy can be run solely with renewable energy — a claim that leftist politicians, environmentalists, and climate activists have endlessly promoted — has always been a fool’s errand. And on Monday, the National Academy of Sciences published a blockbuster paper by an all-star group of American scientists that says exactly that.

The paper, by Chris Clack, formerly with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the University of Colorado Boulder, and 20 other top scientists…

View original post 1,221 more words


WIND TURBINES Are Neither Clean Nor Green And They Provide Zero Global Energy

GettyImages-103570612.jpg

SCIENCE WRITER and best-selling author Matt Ridley discusses Wind Power in a must read piece out of the Speccie…

13 May 2017

9:00 AM

The Global Wind Energy Council recently released its latest report, excitedly boasting that ‘the proliferation of wind energy into the global power market continues at a furious pace, after it was revealed that more than 54 gigawatts of clean renewable wind power was installed across the global market last year’.

You may have got the impression from announcements like that, and from the obligatory pictures of wind turbines in any BBC story or airport advert about energy, that wind power is making a big contribution to world energy today. You would be wrong. Its contribution is still, after decades — nay centuries — of development, trivial to the point of irrelevance.

Here’s a quiz; no conferring. To the nearest whole number, what percentage of the world’s energy consumption was supplied by wind power in 2014, the last year for which there are reliable figures? Was it 20 per cent, 10 per cent or 5 per cent? None of the above: it was 0 per cent. That is to say, to the nearest whole number, there is still no wind power on Earth.


Matt Ridley and climate change campaigner Leo Murray debate the future of wind power:

https://embeds.audioboom.com/posts/5906048-made-in-windsor-how-the-royal-family-became-britain-s-biggest-reality-tv-show/embed/v4?eid=AQAAANNRE1mAHloA

Even put together, wind and photovoltaic solar are supplying less than 1 per cent of global energy demand. From the International Energy Agency’s 2016 Key Renewables Trends, we can see that wind provided 0.46 per cent of global energy consumption in 2014, and solar and tide combined provided 0.35 per cent. Remember this is total energy, not just electricity, which is less than a fifth of all final energy, the rest being the solid, gaseous, and liquid fuels that do the heavy lifting for heat, transport and industry.

Such numbers are not hard to find, but they don’t figure prominently in reports on energy derived from the unreliables lobby (solar and wind). Their trick is to hide behind the statement that close to 14 per cent of the world’s energy is renewable, with the implication that this is wind and solar. In fact the vast majority — three quarters — is biomass (mainly wood), and a very large part of that is ‘traditional biomass’; sticks and logs and dung burned by the poor in their homes to cook with. Those people need that energy, but they pay a big price in health problems caused by smoke inhalation.

Even in rich countries playing with subsidised wind and solar, a huge slug of their renewable energy comes from wood and hydro, the reliable renewables. Meanwhile, world energy demand has been growing at about 2 per cent a year for nearly 40 years. Between 2013 and 2014, again using International Energy Agency data, it grew by just under 2,000 terawatt-hours.

If wind turbines were to supply all of that growth but no more, how many would need to be built each year? The answer is nearly 350,000, since a two-megawatt turbine can produce about 0.005 terawatt-hours per annum. That’s one-and-a-half times as many as have been built in the world since governments started pouring consumer funds into this so-called industry in the early 2000s.

At a density of, very roughly, 50 acres per megawatt, typical for wind farms, that many turbines would require a land area greater than the British Isles, including Ireland. Every year. If we kept this up for 50 years, we would have covered every square mile of a land area the size of Russia with wind farms. Remember, this would be just to fulfil the new demand for energy, not to displace the vast existing supply of energy from fossil fuels, which currently supply 80 per cent of global energy needs.

Do not take refuge in the idea that wind turbines could become more efficient. There is a limit to how much energy you can extract from a moving fluid, the Betz limit, and wind turbines are already close to it. Their effectiveness (the load factor, to use the engineering term) is determined by the wind that is available, and that varies at its own sweet will from second to second, day to day, year to year.

As machines, wind turbines are pretty good already; the problem is the wind resource itself, and we cannot change that. It’s a fluctuating stream of low–density energy. Mankind stopped using it for mission-critical transport and mechanical power long ago, for sound reasons. It’s just not very good.

As for resource consumption and environmental impacts, the direct effects of wind turbines — killing birds and bats, sinking concrete foundations deep into wild lands — is bad enough. But out of sight and out of mind is the dirty pollution generated in Inner Mongolia by the mining of rare-earth metals for the magnets in the turbines. This generates toxic and radioactive waste on an epic scale, which is why the phrase ‘clean energy’ is such a sick joke and ministers should be ashamed every time it passes their lips.

It gets worse. Wind turbines, apart from the fibreglass blades, are made mostly of steel, with concrete bases. They need about 200 times as much material per unit of capacity as a modern combined cycle gas turbine. Steel is made with coal, not just to provide the heat for smelting ore, but to supply the carbon in the alloy. Cement is also often made using coal. The machinery of ‘clean’ renewables is the output of the fossil fuel economy, and largely the coal economy.

A two-megawatt wind turbine weighs about 250 tonnes, including the tower, nacelle, rotor and blades. Globally, it takes about half a tonne of coal to make a tonne of steel. Add another 25 tonnes of coal for making the cement and you’re talking 150 tonnes of coal per turbine. Now if we are to build 350,000 wind turbines a year (or a smaller number of bigger ones), just to keep up with increasing energy demand, that will require 50 million tonnes of coal a year. That’s about half the EU’s hard coal–mining output.

Forgive me if you have heard this before, but I have a commercial interest in coal. Now it appears that the black stuff also gives me a commercial interest in ‘clean’, green wind power.

The point of running through these numbers is to demonstrate that it is utterly futile, on a priori grounds, even to think that wind power can make any significant contribution to world energy supply, let alone to emissions reductions, without ruining the planet. As the late David MacKay pointed out years back, the arithmetic is against such unreliable renewables.

The truth is, if you want to power civilisation with fewer greenhouse gas emissions, then you should focus on shifting power generation, heat and transport to natural gas, the economically recoverable reserves of which — thanks to horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing — are much more abundant than we dreamed they ever could be. It is also the lowest-emitting of the fossil fuels, so the emissions intensity of our wealth creation can actually fall while our wealth continues to increase. Good.

And let’s put some of that burgeoning wealth in nuclear, fission and fusion, so that it can take over from gas in the second half of this century. That is an engineerable, clean future. Everything else is a political displacement activity, one that is actually counterproductive as a climate policy and, worst of all, shamefully robs the poor to make the rich even richer.

•••

Related :

 


POLITICIANS Mad With Global Warming Theory Are Destroying The Economy And Hurting The Poor

Fuel Poverty.jpeg

via The Herald Sun

Politicians mad with global warming theory are destroying our economy and hurting the poor.

They have driven cheap coal-fired power out of business and made electricity a luxury the very poor cannot afford this winter – and all this sacrifice will make zero difference to the climate:

Australia is entering the “realm of third world countries” with residential power disconnections rising by as much as 140 per cent in six years and the average household paying more than double what it did a decade ago to keep the lights on.

Australian Energy Regulator figures reveal almost 60,000 households are on electricity hardship payments and another 151,862 customers are on electricity payment plans.

Oz Disconnected

Escalating consumers’ pain, electricity prices increased up to 20 per cent last weekend and Victoria yesterday introduced emissions restrictions that would prevent even the cleanest coal-fired power.

Oz Bill Pain

Energy bill pain: surge in cut-offs – The Australian

This is one of the greatest disgraces of public policy. What makes it worse is that some of the politicians responsible have known that the global warming scare is wildly exaggerated and most know that dismantling our coal-fired power stations actually makes no difference anyway.

This is close to criminal.

•••

MEANWHILE

WHILST the regressive, green pandering, unreliable-energy-obsessed Australian government blows up its last remaining coal-fired power stations, the rest of the sane/smart World secures its real-energy future with a massive ramping up of cheap, efficient and reliable baseload coal-fired power technology…

Via the NYT

1,600 new coal-fired power plants are planned or under construction in 62 countries.

Coal fired power staions NYT.png

When China halted plans for more than 100 new coal-fired power plants this year, even as President Trump vowed to “bring back coal” in America, the contrast seemed to confirm Beijing’s new role as a leader in the fight against climate change.

But new data on the world’s biggest developers of coal-fired power plants paints a very different picture: China’s energy companies will make up nearly half of the new coal generation expected to go online in the next decade.

These Chinese corporations are building or planning to build more than 700 new coal plants at home and around the world, some in countries that today burn little or no coal, according to tallies compiled by Urgewald, an environmental group based in Berlin. Many of the plants are in China, but by capacity, roughly a fifth of these new coal power stations are in other countries.

Over all, 1,600 coal plants are planned or under construction in 62 countries, according to Urgewald’s tally, which uses data from the Global Coal Plant Tracker portal. The new plants would expand the world’s coal-fired power capacity by 43 percent.

Time to Wake-Up Australia…

All that pain, for ABSOLUTELY NO CLIMATE GAIN!

nps-west-coal-bunker-and-tower-demolition.gif

South Australia Demolished their last coal plant April this year: NPS West Coal Bunker and Tower Demolition.

•••

Australia Fuel Poverty (RET) Related :


THE Twisted Irony of Deep-Green Energy Policy (RET)

Plastic Granulating SA Closes.jpg

 

SOUTH Australia will this weekend overtake Denmark with the highest electricity prices in the world.

The South Australian Labor government’s mad rush into renewable unreliable energy, particularly wind power … has helped generate a surge in South Australian electricity prices.

South Australian businesses face wholesale electricity prices of between $87 and $90 per megawatt hour, compared with $37-$41 in Victoria and $43-$48 in New South Wales.

In South Australia, wholesale prices are regularly spiking to the market-allowed maximum of $14,000 per megawatt hour. In July 2016, South Australia’s wholesale price spiked above $13,000 per megawatt hour 32 times! Reliance on weather-dependent wind and solar power is responsible for these absurd prices.

SA already gets more than 40 per cent of its power from intermittent renewable sources, mostly wind.

That is a nation-leading level, which energy experts say has contributed to higher prices and statewide blackouts by undermining baseload power like the “blown-up” Port Augusta coal plant.

ARTIFICIAL MARKET DISTORTION (“RET”)

WIND and SOLAR projects are primarily funded through subsidies — Renewable Energy Certificates.

The Federal Government’s Renewable Energy Target is currently 23.5% green power by 2020.

SA is already easily ahead of the national target, and likely to be for some time.

The subsidy is imposed by the Federal Government, but paid for by power retailers. This forced cost of green power eventually paid for by power users.

Because wind farms make money from these subsidies, they can afford to underbid coal and gas into the wholesale electricity market.

To be financially viable, wind and solar generally require prices for their power that are higher than what other existing power generators receive.

For a while, they helped stimulate competition and put downward pressure on prices in a not-particularly-competitive (aka artificially distorted) market.

Things have started changing rapidly in the past year. This abundance of cheap wind (in a market sense) has helped contribute to the closure of a coal-fired power station and the partial mothballing of a gas plant.

The state now survives on wind, solar, gas, diesel (and perhaps even an offshore Turkish “power ship” if the SA grid destabilises further, especially with the closure of neighbouring Victoria’s “Hazlewood” coal-fired power station which supplied 25% of SA’s baseload power via a giant extension cord).

UNRELIABLE ENERGY = WORLD RECORD POWER BILLS

THE PROBLEM is, the wind doesn’t always blow and the sun doesn’t always shine. The high peaks in South Australia’s energy usage don’t always match up with a large chunk of its increasingly intermittent supply.

If the demand for electricity is low – on a public holiday, say – while the wind is blowing and the sun is shining, the price of electricity in South Australia will be low. Conventional generators will make losses, while the market losses of the renewable generators will be (artificially) covered by their sale of Generation Certificates.

If the demand for electricity is high – a heat wave on a working day, say – and it is a still, overcast day, the price of electricity in South Australia will soar, because it will be mostly produced by high-cost, back-up, peaking generators.

The high price of electricity in South Australia is eating away at our economic competitiveness. The probability that we will become, sometime in the distant future, a “low carbon electricity powerhouse” looks extremely low.

Greg Sheridan puts it brilliantly about windfarm-obsessed South Australia:

South Australia, truly the Athens of the south. SA shows that, like Greece, economic misfortune will not drive it to good policy. A state with chronic unemployment, disinvestment and deindustrialisation is determined to have the most expensive and unreliable source of power in Australia, if not the Western world, providing maximum disincentive to any investment other than a socialist enterprise backed by the Australian taxpayer. This is what you get from modern centre-left governments — identity politics, green gestures, economic failure.

THE FALLOUT

NO BUSINESS, big or small, has been spared SA’s skyrocketing power prices.

But, perhaps the most symbolic case of a South Australian business shutting its doors due to soaring electricity costs is that of the very green, ethical, eco-friendly, planet saving recycling business “Plastics Granulating Services (PGS)”, based in Kilburn in Adelaide’s inner-north.

Screen Shot 2017-06-29 at , June 29, 7.27.55 PM.png

South Australia’s sky-high electricity prices have forced an Adelaide plastics recycling business to shut its doors, costing 35 workers their jobs, its managing director says.

Plastics Granulating Services (PGS), based in Kilburn in Adelaide’s inner-north, said it had seen its monthly power bills increase from $80,000 to $180,000 over the past 18 months.

Managing director Stephen Scherer said the high cost of power had crippled his business of 38 years and plans for expansion, and had led to his company being placed in liquidation.

“It’s where the cash went out of the business, and without the cash, we couldn’t service what we needed to service,” he said.

“We process about 10,000 tonnes of plastic waste [and] that’s now currently turned off, so South Australia won’t be recycling 10,000 tonnes [of plastic],” he said.

“To scope 10,000 tonnes for you, 10,000 tonnes is 15 per cent of the Australian market [of low-grade recycled plastic] … so Australia has lost 15 per cent of its supply.

SA plastics recycling business closes due to $100k hike in power bills – ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

38 YEARS of hard work over. 35 workers out of a job and 10,000 tonnes of plastic that will now not be recycled, thanks to SA’s mad obsession with windmills, solar panels and their associated economy-wrecking policies.

It is astonishing that a Government should deliberately create such an expensive and unreliable power supply – destroying the cheap and reliable one it had – without even being able to explain just how much difference any of this would make to the world’s temperatures.

This is ideology gone mad. How often must it be said that what South Australian Governments have done to their power system at such vast expense MAKES NO DIFFERENCE TO GLOBAL WARMING ANYWAY.

The brutal closure of PGS – yet more evidence of virtue-signalling global warming climate change policies causing far more damage, right now, than any slight warming could ever do by 2100.

•••

SA Fuel Poverty Related :

Climatism SA Hot Links :