Solving climate crisis will require a total transformation of global energy

Uh oh.
National Audubon Society Sues Bay Area Wind Turbines (Altamont Pass–a 40-year problem)
Guest Blogger
“Altamont Pass has been a black eye on the entire wind industry since its construction.”. . . .

 

Germany's self-inflicted energy crisis continues.

Germany Electricity Prices Soar To World Record Highs After Years Of Energy Policy Folly…Expensive, Unreliable
By P Gosselin on 9. February 2022

Share this...
Germany’s power supply, once mostly made up of a mixture of coal and nuclear power, used to be among the most stable and affordable in the world. Power outages were rare and grid interventions were infrequent.



German consumer electricity prices shot up to 36.19 euro-cents per kilowatt-hour while blackouts threaten.

Greens and socialists then tried electrical power engineering

But then in the 1990s environmental activists and politicians got involved, believing they could manage and design a grid and power supply that would be technically and environmentally superior than what the leading power generation and electrical engineers and experts themselves had in place.

Sun and wind were the way to go, the environmentalist Greens and SPD socialist’s declared. After all, the wind and sun don’t send electric bills and are “free for the taking”. This they somehow managed to convince the public. And so the greening of the grid began. . . .

 

This could become almost Darwinian.
As Germany’s Green Dream Becomes A Nightmare, Asia And Russia Power Ahead With Nuclear Power
By P Gosselin on 13. February 2022

Share this...
Asia goes nuclear while Europe goes bust
By Fred F. Mueller

During the past few decades, a quiet but all the more important divergence has begun to evolve between Asia und Europe: their respective attitudes towards climate change and nuclear energy. In their crusade against what they perceive as a looming climate catastrophe, most European nations are focusing on reducing carbon emissions. Among them, Germany has taken the lead. Its first step was to scrap its fleet of nuclear power stations. Moreover, coal-fired plants are being decommissioned one after another even before the nuclear decommissioning is completed. The ultimate goal is a net zero society exclusively powered by renewables, mainly solar and wind.

It’s a green’s dream that is slowly morphing into a nightmare for ordinary people.

Asian countries barrel ahead with nuclear power

In stark contrast, the far more pragmatic Asian countries have preferred instead to pay lip service and care about their people. Instead of fatally crippling their energy infrastructure, they are increasingly opting for nuclear power.

Clear leader Russia takes the lead

More and more nations have already installed or are on the brink of installing nuclear power stations. In this field, Russia has clearly taken the lead, followed by China, South Korea and Japan. These four nations have mastered and developed native nuclear technologies of their own and are now exporting them. Among them, two behemoths stand out: Russia as the clear world leader in the field of exporting nuclear power generating plants, and China, a rather new kid on the block but with a high potential to quickly evolve as another key player in this field. . . .

 

It already is. The countries that are seriously trying to eliminate fossil fuels are doing tremendous harm to their own economies and people, based on nothing but absurd nonscience. The countries trying to do without either fossil fuel or nuclear energy are committing suicide. How will the anti-CO2 hysteria mongers apologize when their stupidity and dishonesty have demolished whole economies and caused, at a minimum, millions of deaths?

 

All that free renewable energy turns out to be quite expensive.
Main Reason Behind Europe’s “Energy Price Explosion” Is Green Policy In Europe And Germany
By P Gosselin on 16. February 2022

Share this...
The major reason for Europe’s energy price explosion is green policy in Europe and Germany
By Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt
(Text translated/edited by P. Gosselin)

The media are now taking up the issue of exploding electricity and gas prices. It’s becoming increasingly obvious how dramatically the price increases are affecting private households, but above all small and medium-sized industry. Yet, when it comes to the reasons, one usually doesn’t get to the heart of the matter. The most significant price drivers are the European emission certificates, which have catapulted to over 90 €/tonne of CO2.

Prices have nearly tripled

The politically intended shortage and increase in the price of European CO2 certificates alone have doubled to tripled electricity prices since late 2020. At the current level of 93.8 €/tonne of CO2, the certificates burden lignite-based electricity with 9 €ct/kWh, hard coal-based electricity with 7 €ct/kWh and gas-based electricity by 4 €ct/kWh.

1100% in 5 years

By way of comparison, the price of electricity on the stock exchange has been around 4-5 €ct/kWh in recent years. In addition, there has been the rising price of gas, which had to meet the rising demand for electricity due to the closure of 20,000 MW of coal-fired power plants in Europe over the last 4 years and also became scarce. . . .

 

Huge coal contracts for India and, especially, China.
End of Coal? “In coming years, consumers should receive as much coal as they need”
Eric Worrall
According to Russia’s TASS news agency, China and Russia are negotiating a 100 million ton coal deal. This is in the wake of a 40 million ton coal deal with…

 

Coal is not going away.
Record Coal Demotes ‘Net Zero’
Guest Blogger
Climate optimists say: bring on the next 1.5°C and watch the energy-rich world adapt and prosper. . . .

 

The hype is the main thing.

“Green” Media Misrepresents World’s Energy Reality
ECONOMIC COSTS FEBRUARY 23, 2022
Fossil fuels are out. Coal is no longer king. The Middle East faces an oil crisis. These are typical headlines in the mainstream media.

Unreported is the hard reality of the world’s fossil-dependent developing economies. This story goes untold because media in the developed West seek to create a perception of an inevitable transition to energy markets free of hydrocarbons.

Whatever is behind the media’s ignorance — or neglect — of the proliferation of coal, oil and natural gas, it creates a false impression among the public that an energy sector free of fossil fuels is feasible. It is not. Fossil fuels are projected to be the largest primary source of energy for many decades. . . .

 

Wind power turns out to be a terrible investment.
FT: Siemens’ Wind Energy Losses Threaten the Future of the Company
Eric Worrall
Shareholder Fury: According to FT, the disastrous financial losses in Siemens’ wind power unit are a threat to the financial credibility of the entire company. . . .

 

Who'd a thunk it?

 

Offshore wind farms create problems.
Messing With The Environment “To Fight Climate Change”… Wind Farms Are Altering The North Sea
By P Gosselin on 26. February 2022

Share this...
Before their approval, largescale projects in Germany – almost without exception – have to be studied to determine their impacts on the surrounding environment. This step seems to be ignored for North Sea wind farms.

Hat-tip: Die kalte Sonne.

Wind farms are altering the North Sea


Atmospheric wakes extending from the bottom to the top of the picture [contains modified Copernicus Sentinel data (Sentinel 2A-MSI 29/03/2021), processed by ESA & Hereon/ Dr Martin Hieronymie]

A team of researchers led by Nils Christiansen from the Helmholtz Center Hereon has published a study on the impact of offshore wind farms on ocean dynamics. The focus was on weakening wind and the accompanying changes in the physical conditions of the affected North Sea areas.

Turbines sap energy out of the wind

Wind turbines pose obstacles to water and air. The effects are of great importance with regard to the planning of future offshore wind farms. The study appeared in the journal Frontiers in Marine Science. . . .

 

Coal power returning to Germany?
Fossils To The Rescue? Dismantling Of Huge Hamburg-Moorburg Coal Power Plant Halted
By P Gosselin on 5. March 2022

Share this...
Going into operation in 2015, and planned to operate until 2038, the Hamburg-Moorburg coal-fired power plant was one of the most modern and efficient in the world, but had to be taken off the grid again in 2021 due to Germany’s mad rush to green energies.

The 1,655 megawatt power plant was able to generate enough power equivalent to the needs of the entire city of Hamburg.



Swedish Vattenfall had announced earlier the decommissioning of Hamburg, Germany’s modern Moorburg CHP coal power plant after being in operation only 5 years. Now the dismantling has been put on hold. Image credit: Vattenfall Hamburg Moorburg

But now Blackout News reports that operator Vattenfall “has halted the dismantling of the coal-fired power plant for the time being due to the uncertain energy supply.”

The move leaves open the possibility of restarting Moorburg if gas supplies from Russia are cut off. . . .

 

To decommission a multi-billion-euro power plant after less than 1/3 of its design life to placate a small, self-appointed, but loud minority of hysterical, anti-scientific scaremongers would be a waste bordering on insanity.

 

Democrats have cornered themselves with their anti-energy initiatives. Meanwhile, hidden Russian funding of US anti-drilling and anti-fracking groups is being exposed.
House Democrats Cancel Looming Embarrassment With Oil Executives
Guest Blogger
Amid cries of “Putin Price Hikes,” the Biden Administration and congressional Democrats continue to obsess over the “climate crisis” and promote a rapid “transition” to “renewable” energy. . . .

 

A rare debate:
Epstein Vs. Dessler: Should America Rapidly Eliminate Fossil Fuel Use to Prevent Climate Catastrophe.
Charles Rotter
A debate at The Steamboat Institute Energy and Climate Summit, The Nexus of U.S. Energy Policy, Climate Science, Freedom and Prosperity featuring Alex Epstein, author of the New York Times…

 

The Law of Unintended Consequences never takes a holiday.
Green Fuel Folly: Forest Thinning (For Wood Pellet Production) Has A Profound Surface Warming Impact
By P Gosselin on 15. March 2022

Share this...
4 recent studies tell us that forest thinning for the production of wood pellets and clear cutting for wind parks are really dumb ideas.
Reforestation and afforestation (R&A) are among the most prominent ideas for the sequestration of CO2 and thus viewed by alarmists as a climate solution. But others doubt forests play much of a role.

Wood pellets mean double barrel warming

Another solution proposed for climate protection is to burn wood pellets instead of oil and natural gas for heating buildings. Wood pellets are viewed as renewable and thus are supposed to be brakes on climate change. But now recent studies suggest that burning wood pellets coming from harvested trees in forest thinning operations may instead be accelerating warming.

HAT-TIP: Die kalte Sonne here.

Cloud–albedo effects due to land–atmosphere interactions

In their study, “Cloud cooling effects of afforestation and reforestation at midlatitudes” the team of authors led by Sara Cerasoli carefully analyzed R&A at midlatitudes. Using both satellite data and atmospheric boundary-layer models, they show that by including cloud–albedo effects due to land–atmosphere interactions, the R&A cooling at midlatitudes becomes prevalent. . . .

 

Renewables can't get us to where we need to go.
No Amount Of Incremental Wind And Solar Power Can Ever Provide Energy Independence
March 15, 2022/ Francis Menton

• 
  Here’s the single most important function of this blog: Saying the things that are patently obvious but that just can’t be said these days in polite society. Yes, it’s The Emperor’s New Clothes every day here at Manhattan Contrarian.
  
  
• With war raging in Ukraine following Russia’s invasion, there is a renewed concern in many quarters for “energy independence.” Until recently, the sophisticated countries of Europe had thought the whole idea to be passé. They built large numbers of wind turbines and solar arrays, while simultaneously banning fracking for natural gas and shuttering electricity plants that used coal and even those that used no-carbon nuclear. Suddenly, at the very worst possible time, they found themselves completely dependent on Russian gas for heat and reliable electricity.
  
  
• In the U.S. it’s not nearly so bad (yet), but the combination of the Ukraine invasion with the Biden administration’s resumption of Obama’s war on fossil fuels has also left the U.S. vulnerable to an oil and gas price spike on world markets, whose supply side has been artificially reduced by government hostility to production of fossil fuels.
  
  
• So what’s the answer? If you are a member in good standing in American media/academia/environmentalist/Democratic Party society, the answer is obvious: Just build more wind turbines and solar arrays until you have enough.
  

READ MORE

 

Documenting idiocy.
More Confirmation Of The Infeasibility Of A Fully Wind/Solar/Storage Electricity System
March 21, 2022/ Francis Menton

• 
  Many recent posts on this blog have dealt with the theme of the infeasibility of a fully wind/solar/storage electricity system. Today I will deal with another study of the subject, this one from German authors Oliver Ruhnau and Staffan Qvist, titled “Storage requirements in a 100% renewable electricity system: Extreme events and inter-annual variability.” The Ruhnau/Qvist study does not have a date other than “2021,” although it appears to have come out toward the end of that year.
  
  
• Although Ruhnau and Qvist do not say it explicitly, my conclusion from their paper is that it is a further demonstration of the complete infeasibility — indeed the complete absurdity — of attempting in the short term to replace all fossil fuel electricity generation in a modern economy with only wind, solar and storage.
  
  
• The background of this issue is that large numbers of green activists, up to and including the current President of the United States, make regular statements indicating that they believe that fossil fuels can be eliminated from the modern economy by simply building sufficient capacity of wind and solar electricity generation. Such statements rarely consider or mention the necessity of energy storage, or the feasibility or cost of same.
  
  
• And yet any serious consideration of the intermittency of wind and solar inevitably leads to the conclusion that without dispatchable backup (fossil fuel or nuclear) they require vast amounts of energy storage to cover the periods of intermittency. Understanding the amount of storage required, its physical characteristics, and its cost, is completely essential to answering the question of whether a fully wind/solar/storage system is feasible.
  

READ MORE

 

Keep the noise down.
“Its a Disaster”: Aussie Noise Nuisance Court Defeat Panicking Renewable Energy Investors
Eric Worrall
According to the ABC, the recent court ruling that upheld a complaint by residents that wind turbines are a noise nuisance has sent “ripples of uncertainty” throughout the entire Renewable…

 

Stupidity is on the march.
Madness of Our Worship of Wind: Matt Ridley
Guest Blogger
The wind industry has already been fattened on subsidies of more than £6billion a year (paid for out of green levies on your electricity bills), it has privileged access to…

 

"Net zero" is climate action for dummies.

The People Promising Us "Net Zero" Have No Clue About The Energy Storage Problem
March 27, 2022/ Francis Menton

• 
  If you are even a semi-regular reader of this blog, you know about the energy storage problem that is inherent in the effort to eliminate dispatchable fossil fuels from the electricity generation system and replace them with wind and solar.
  
  
• As discussed here many times, other than with nuclear power, the storage problem is the critical issue that must be addressed if there is ever going to be “net zero” electricity generation, let alone a “net zero” economy based on all energy usage having been electrified. For a sample of my prior posts on this subject just in the last few months, go here, here and here.
  
  
• The problems of trying to provide enough storage to back up a fully wind and solar system without fossil fuels are so huge and so costly that you would think that everyone pushing the “net zero” agenda would be completely focused on these issues. And given that the issues are quite obvious, you would think that such people would be well down the curve with feasibility studies, cost studies, and demonstration projects to make their case on how their plans could be accomplished.
  
  
• Remarkably, that is not the case at all. Instead, if you read about the plans and proposals in various quarters for “net zero” in some short period of years, you quickly realize that the people pushing this agenda have no clue. No clue whatsoever.
  

READ MORE

 

Stupid is as stupid does.
Gas Rationing? Germany Paying a Horrible Price for Decades of Green Energy Insanity
Eric Worrall
As Germany braces for extreme economic and social hardship, it is worth reflecting on the misery the empty promises of green energy advocates have delivered. . . .

 

Chile's experience is a cautionary tale about the destructive power of so-called green energy.
Chile’s Economic Destruction is a Preview of what’s in Store for Biden’s America
ECONOMIC COSTS MARCH 30, 2022

 

NG is the next big thing in Africa.
Natural Gas for Africa: Ready, Set, Go!
Guest Blogger
Sorry EU, but energy imperialism needs to be demoted in the name of affordability, reliability, and self-determination. . . .

 

Fossil fuels will be primary power sources throughout the 21st century.
The Future Of Energy In The U.S.: Which Projection Do You Believe?
April 10, 2022/ Francis Menton

• 
  What will the production and consumption of energy look like in the United States in 2050? There are two very different answers to that question.
  
  
• On Side One are those who assert that we face a “climate crisis” that can only be addressed by the rapid forced suppression of the production and use of fossil fuels. Therefore, some combination of government coercion, investor pressure and voluntary institutional action will shortly drive coal, oil and natural gas from the energy marketplace, to be replaced by carbon-free “renewables.” And thus by 2050 we will have achieved the utopia of “net zero” carbon emissions.
  
  
• Those on Side Two think that the Side One vision is completely unrealistic fantasy. Simple arithmetic shows that without massive energy storage no amount of building of wind and solar generators can make much difference in fossil fuel use for electricity production; and adequate energy storage devices to fill the gap do not even exist as a technical matter, let alone at remotely reasonable cost. Result: no matter what the grandees say, fossil fuel production and use in 2050 will be as high or higher than they are now.
  
  
• Which Side do you think is right?
  

READ MORE