“One year old, US climate law is already turbocharging clean energy technology”

it’s not the preaching confronting us now, but the reality, you are only deflecting with as I mentioned character assassination, it is irrelevant to the topic

 

Nope. "Preaching" is the correct description. It's whipping up belief that we're proceeding on the correct path and success is assured. Similar to messages delivered every Sunday morning in scores of churches and meeting hall.

 

Well it was a comment on post 9. Go back and read the thread.

 

"Proven projects" such as . . .

 

You demonstrate a Turing test failure not grasping that the REPEAT project was referenced in post #1 as funding a cited writer named Jenkins. My post had not a [expletive] thing to do with IRAs and tax credits. You are now on my ignore list.

 

That will solve the problem, so as the Chinese do, whole the climate goes to hell

 

How is this program “micromanaging every aspect of human existence?”

 

Once again, this has nothing to do with the Inflation Reduction Act

 

Read the source review, it is all there

 

As the one discussed in the topic post

 

Nor did my response to your post having anything to do with IRA’s or tax cuts, and seeing you haven’t bought a whole lot to this thread, I ain’t missing anything by you ignoring mine

 

Not even close.

 

It was the Manchin Infrastructure bill at best. Joey didn't get what he wanted. He got what he was forced to settle for.

 

“One year old, US climate law is already turbocharging clean energy technology”

I would say that if there is turbocharging it results from government spending. So that means it does more harm than good.

 

The right would much rather poke at Hunter, scraping the bottom of the scandal barrel in their pathetic efforts to dirty the president.

 

Please explain the graph. What do System and LCOE mean?

 

How do you get "the government's going to micromanage every aspect of human existence" from promoting and funding clean energy?

 

LOL! That sounds like you're a mom. I can relate.

 

How charming. How about in NJ, since they already glow in the dark in Elizabeth....

 

Good politics requires compromise, a word that seems absent from the right's vocabulary.

 

Lol.... like the left does?

 

The post to which I replied stated as much. Biden's Inflation Reduction Act did not include everything he wanted. He had to compromise, both with the GOP and the far left contingent among Democrats. Those far left folks didn't get everything they wanted, either. Very few Republicans voted Yes. They refused to compromise, even after the bill was scaled way back.

 

That word doesn't even apply when it comes to what Democrats want for gun control.

There is zero compromise there. All they want is more and more laws and limits placed on people's rights and the people get absolutely nothing in return except the further erosion of their second amendment rights

 

Cheerleading can't change the facts.
Dominion Hides Huge Offshore Wind Cost Risk
Guest Blogger
Dominion Energy says the cost of its monster project will not go up. Apparently, there is not even a risk of it going up. This preposterous claim is worth exploring. . . .

The financial magazine “Barrons” has done some work on this crisis situation. Here is a telling quote from a recent article:

“But behind the scenes, the news about wind power is more sobering. Financially, the industry is teetering, with a parade of companies planning to renegotiate or pull out of contracts, jeopardizing plans for projects that were expected to provide electricity for millions of homes. Inflation is erasing profits, causing some of the largest energy firms in the world to back away. “Returns on offshore wind are becoming more and more challenged,” Shell CEO Wael Sawan told Barron’s last month, just days after a Shell joint venture said it would pull out of a power contract in Massachusetts. Shell won’t build renewable projects that can’t earn initial returns of 6% to 8%, he said.

At least eight multinational companies in three states have quietly started to back out of wind contracts or ask to renegotiate deals in ways that will pass more costs to consumers. Beyond Shell (ticker: SHEL), they include BP (BP), Denmark’s Orsted(DNNGY), Norway’s Equinor (EQNR), Spain’s Iberdrola (IBDRY), Portugal’s Energias de Portugal (EDPFY), and France’s Engie (ENGIY) and state-owned Electricite de France. The projects those companies are building will collectively cost tens of billions of dollars to construct and connect to the grid. The cost problems they’re facing make offshore wind a dicey investment proposition today, with the potential for substantial write-downs ahead.”

https://www.barrons.com/articles/offshore-wind-power-energy-costs-24a9b387

 

The Real World Costs Of Backing Up Weather-Dependent Electricity Generation With Battery Storage
August 08, 2023/ Francis Menton

• 
  A recurring question at this blog has been, how do the world’s politicians plan to provide reliable electricity without fossil fuels? Country after country, and state after state, have announced grand plans for what they call “Net Zero” electricity generation, universally accompanied by schemes for massive build-outs of wind and solar generation facilities. But what is the strategy for the calm nights, or for the sometimes long periods at the coldest times of the winter when both wind and sun produce near zero electricity for days or even weeks on end?
  
  
• When pressed, the answer given is generally “batteries” or “storage.” That answer might appear plausible before you start to think about it quantitatively. To introduce some quantitative thinking into the situation, last December I had a Report published by the Global Warming Policy Foundation titled “The Energy Storage Conundrum.”
  
  
• That Report discussed several calculations of how much energy storage would be required to get various jurisdictions through a year with only wind and/or solar generation and only batteries for back-up, with fossil fuels excluded from the mix. The number are truly breathtaking: for California and Germany, approximately 25,000 GWh of storage to make it through a year; for the continental U.S., approximately 233,000 GWh of storage to make it through a year. At a wildly optimistic assumption of $100/kWh for storage, this would price out at $2.5 trillion for California or Germany, $23.3 trillion for the U.S. — equal or greater than the entire GDP of the jurisdiction. At more realistic assumptions of $300 - 500/kWh for battery storage, you would be looking at 3 to 5 times GDP for one round of batteries, which would then need replacement every few years.
  
  
• But even these numbers wildly understate the real world costs of storage that would be needed. Here’s why.
  

READ MORE