‘Green Energy’ Madness : $3.8 Trillion Spent on UNreliables to Reduce Global Fossil Fuel Consumption by One PercentPosted: October 30, 2022
“Renewable energy technologies simply won’t work;
we need a fundamentally different approach.”
– Top Google engineers
“Suggesting that renewables will let us phase rapidly off fossil fuels
in the United States, China, India, or the world as a whole
is almost the equivalent of believing in the Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy.
– James Hansen
(Former NASA-climate chief)
“It is so easy to be wrong
—and to persist in being wrong—
when the costs of being wrong are paid by others.
– Thomas Sowell
If there was ever a better (scientific) advertisement for the uselessness of UNreliables (wind and solar) then it is this.
According to economist Jeff Currie of Goldman Sachs, over the past decade, nearly four-thousand-billion-dollars of taxpayer money has been spent on windmills and mirrors to reduce fossil fuel energy consumption by 1 percent from 82 to 81 percent of overall global energy consumption.
How many more pristine landscapes, wildlife, and taxpayer bank accounts need to be decimated to realise the fanciful “NetZero2050” target, or even a 10% “transition” toward industrial wind and solar?
The mind boggles.
CNBC Squawk Box:
Economist Jeff Currie of Goldman Sachs (Global Head of Commodities Research in the Global Investment Research Division):
“Here’s a stat for you, as of January of this year. At the end of last year, overall, fossil fuels represented 81 percent of overall energy consumption. Ten years ago, they were at 82. So though, all of that investment in renewables, you’re talking about 3.8 trillion, let me repeat that $3.8 trillion of investment in renewables moved fossil fuel consumption from 82 to 81 percent, of the overall energy consumption. But you know, given the recent events and what’s happened with the loss of gas and replacing it with coal, that number is likely above 82.” … The net of it is clearly we haven’t made any progress.”
Logical commentary from CBDAKOTA:
It is hard to get your head around the fact that $3.8 trillion has been spent with so little results. A lot of that money has been going to Crony Capitalists through subsidies and tax forgiveness.
That they have not made any progress replacing fossil fuels is understandable and that it is unlikely that wind and solar ever will. Their lack of dispatchability will forever prevent wind and solar from being the main source of power. Long term, nuclear power will have to be the main source of power with wind and solar playing second fiddle.
An HTMR-100 cannot melt down. If the worst possible event were to occur, the reactor will just shut itself down. If all cooling stops, the reactor will heat up a bit for 24 hours and then over the next 4 to 5 days will just cool down with no incident. That is ‘walk away safe’.
Nuclear power is the future of mankind. The world’s electricity insecurity experienced since 2020 has shown the way forward with great clarity.
Furthermore, nuclear is the only known efficient, reliable, safe, continuous and truly ‘green’ energy technology:
- Zero CO2 emissions (if you believe that invisible, odourless trace gas, and plant food CO₂ is destroying the planet).
- Zero particulate (smog) pollution.
- The least land-intensive energy technology for both plant exposure and the mining required for key resource uranium.
- ~60 year lifespan compared with an average lifespan of 15-25 years for windmills and mirrors.
A win, win for both the environment and for humanity.
There’s no such thing as a
free green lunch
See also :
- IF CO2’s Your Poison, Renewable Energy Is No Antidote | Climatism
- Dead eagle found in the wind farm
- Vindkraft: – Fant død ørn ved vindkraftverk (Video of Irene Høvik who discovered the dead eagle on the wind farm in Norway)
Green-Energy-Fail related :
‘Climate Crisis’ related :
- EPJ Scientific Study : There Is No ‘Climate Crisis’ | Climatism
- Peer-Reviewed Study: No Positive Trends In Extreme Weather Found | Climatism
“When will common sense and good science prevail,
and what happens if does not do so fairly soon?”
– Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh.
“You see gigantic wind turbines appearing all over the country,
but there is very little about the practical value of these monstrosities.”
– Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh.
THE great Rowan Dean of Sky News “Outsiders” fame, details an extraordinary letter sent from Prince Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh, to author and geologist Ian Plimer back in 2018.
Via Spectator Australia :
Prince Philip was a climate change sceptic. In correspondence to Spectator Australia contributor and author Ian Plimer back in 2018, the Duke of Edinburgh not only compliments Professor Plimer on his most recent book, The Climate Change Delusion, but also praises his previous book ‘Heaven and Earth’, which similarly questioned the ‘missing science’ behind the global warming scam.
Furthermore, in the letter which Ian has kindly provided to The Spectator Australia, the late Prince — who was never one to mince his words — described the wind turbines now blotting the landscapes globally as ‘monstrosities’.
Here is the letter from Windsor castle, dated 29 April 2018:
What a great question. As we can see, Prince Philip, a Patron of the Royal Geographical Society admired the work and writing of geologist Ian Plimer. In fact, the Prince attempted to invite Professor Plimer to London to address the Royal Society of Artists (RSA) on the topic of climate change. That invitation was later rescinded by the mandarins at the Palace, as was documented by James Delingpole in the UK Telegraph at the time. As Delingpole wrote:
Here’s part of the embarrassed kiss-off Prof Plimer received from the RSA’s chief executive:
I am afraid I am writing to you with some disappointing news regarding the Prince Philip Annual Lecture on 5 May.
As you well know, the debate around climate change has recently become highly politically charged, both globally and especially in your home country. Equally, as I am sure you are aware, members of the Royal Family need to be scrupulous in avoiding any appearance of advocating or supporting a particular political stance. The RSA’s charitable status also requires us to maintain absolute political independence in our programme of events and research events.
After discussion with Buckingham Palace, it is therefore with great regret that we must withdraw your invitation to give this year’s PrincePhilip Lecture. The Duke of Edinburgh is personally disappointed as he read your book with great interest and was looking forward to hearing you speak, but I know that you will recognise that the now highly controversial debate surrounding this issue would make it inevitable that he was seen to be taking a particular position.
What is extraordinary about that letter is that as well as confirming the Prince’s admiration for the Professor, it points out that the Royal Family should have nothing to do with the politics of climate change. Yet today, a decade on, both future monarchs Prince Charles and Prince William, the former in particular in advocating the Great Reset and embracing Greta Thunberg, and the latter in his fondness for Sir David Attenborough, are in climate politics up to their eyeballs.
Prince Philip, now that he’s finally in his grave, will surely spend a great deal of the years ahead spinning in it.
(Climatism links and bolds, added)
Must Watch Outsiders :
- NO GLOBAL WARMING : Global Temperature Now 0.01 Degrees Below Average | Climatism
- SURPRISE, SURPRISE! Global Lockdown Every Two Years Needed To Meet Paris CO₂ Goals | Climatism
- WHERE Are Greta Thunberg And David Attenborough Now? | Climatism
- TEAM GRETA Admits Climate Change Has Nothing To Do With The Environment | Climatism