Green Energy - Not Here, Not There, Not Anywhere?

EV’s and solar panels are very cool they say, they save the planet they say, everyone needs them they say …BUT what ever you do, DON’T Touch my mountain, my ocean, my river. Get the the stuff just don’t get it around here… or There… OR Anywhere?

8 Likes

Green Energy is cool… :wink:

Same place, 1,640 feet beneath the surface of the Pacific Ocean in a pristine area, in 2035:

:zipper_mouth_face:

6 Likes

I spent my career on oceans, rivers, bays, sounds… Untapped resource, and I am not just talking oil, but health. I would bet my life’s savings that the cure for every disease known to mankind lies beneath the waves, in the animals and fauna not yet studied. Cancers and every deadly disease or illness you can list. Instead we shoot spaceships to the moon to step on a rock and mutter a few words? God gave us resources, right here, to use, and we have yet to scratch the surface of the hidden secrets of the one which covers three-quarters of the earth’s surface.

13 Likes

My new best friend. :point_up_2:

5 Likes

my thoughts too :+1:

5 Likes

As someone who has worked on a lot of “green” energy projects, I can say that green energy is not nearly as green as many would like to think.

But there is a place for it when done right and done in the right places. Oil is just going to keep getting more and more expensive if we don’t find ways to diversify our energy production. It may be happening sooner rather than later when Iran retaliates for their embassy being attacked.

We need to evolve our energy production but too rapidly shifting away from oil and gas to a solar, wind and lithium based energy system is going to cause more problems than it solves.

14 Likes

My feelings exactly, We are being PUSHED into Inferior Untested arena’s by people that don’t care if your $65,000 EV Car fails in (2) years! and we need to RECYCLE these Miracle Batteries, Solar Panels, Flaming wind Turbines when they FAIL (often Catastrophically!)
You can’t just MANDATE your way into the future and say Buh Bye to Oil, Gas
when you only have a handful of charging stations in each city and an antiquated Electric Grid!
Hasn’t anyone in .gov played ‘Jenga’? You can’t Build an Industry on sand it will topple over.
How stupid (or evil) are these people? Apparently Ve…

5 Likes

Dumb? Like a Fox? There’s huge amounts of money in there, they all want to get their poop stained fingers on as much of it as they can before the Energizer Bunny runs out of juice.

3 Likes

There’s MAKING MONEY and then there’s EVIL
(Mike, I KNOW they WANT IT ALL)
and for us to have NONE!
Mother Earth is a remarkable Planet
But she can’t keep sustaining a quality of life for us
if we keep poisoning her. She will survive, We won’t.
Using Children to MINE the crap for those Batteries
Leaks already @ disposable sites, ALREADY!
Our already shiitty roads turned to dust and potholes
and grooves by these twice heavy cars? More tires die faster,
Solar Panels die in a Hail storm?
I mean c’mon we’re better than this…

4 Likes

You gotta start somewhere. Gas cars got 5 mpg a long time ago, now they get 30, 40 even 50mpg. If long ago, someone said we couldn’t use gas cars until they got 20mpg, we would never have gas cars. Solar panels are getting better and cheaper every year, so are wind turbines, car batteries and soon whole house batteries will be half the weight and twice the energy storage, lasting for +10,000 charges. They have much safer nuclear power plant designs they should start building as well.

The truth and the real cost. Just ask Texas. :face_with_raised_eyebrow:


New York Post
](MSN)

Follow

112.4K Followers

Trillions in taxpayer subsidies haven’t made wind and solar power cheaper or better for Americans

Opinion by Bjorn Lomborg

• 2h • 3 min read

[image]

Despite us constantly being told that solar and wind are now the cheapest forms of electricity, governments around the world needed to spend $1.8 trillion on the green transition last year.

“Wind and solar are already significantly cheaper than coal and oil” is how President Biden conveniently justifies spending hundreds of billions of dollars on green subsidies.

Indeed, arguing that wind and solar are the cheapest is a meme employed by green lobbyists, activists and politicians around the world.

Fullscreen button

Joe Biden walks past solar panels while touring the Plymouth Area Renewable Energy Initiative in Plymouth, New Hampshire, on June 4, 2019. REUTERS

Joe Biden walks past solar panels while touring the Plymouth Area Renewable Energy Initiative in Plymouth, New Hampshire, on June 4, 2019. REUTERS© Provided by New York Post

Unfortunately, as the huge subsidies show, the claim is wildly deceptive.

Wind and solar energy only produce power when the sun is shining or the wind is blowing. The rest of the time, their electricity is infinitely expensive and a backup system is needed.

This is why global electricity remains almost two-thirds reliant on fossil fuels — and why we, on current trends, are an entire century away from eliminating fossil fuels from electricity generation.

It is often reported that large, emerging industrial powers like China, India, Indonesia and Bangladesh are getting more power from solar and wind. But these countries get much more additional power from coal.

Last year, China got more additional power from coal than it did from solar and wind. India got three times as much, while Bangladesh got 13 times more coal electricity than it did from green energy sources, and Indonesia an astonishing 90 times more.

If solar and wind really were cheaper, why would these countries miss out? Because reliability matters.

Fullscreen button

Workers inspecting solar panels on a rooftop of a power plant in Fuzhou, southern China’s Fujian province. AFP via Getty Images

Workers inspecting solar panels on a rooftop of a power plant in Fuzhou, southern China’s Fujian province. AFP via Getty Images© Provided by New York Post

The typical way to measure the cost of solar simply ignores its unreliability. The same is true for wind energy.

Biden’s Energy Information Administration puts solar at 3.6¢ per kilowatt hour, just ahead of natural gas at 3.8¢. But if you reasonably include the cost of reliability, the real costs explode — one peer-reviewed study shows an increase of 11 to 42 times, making solar by far the most expensive source of electricity, followed by wind.

The enormous additional cost comes from the need for storage. Electricity is required even when the sun is not shining and the wind is not blowing, yet our battery capacity is woefully inadequate.

Research shows that every winter, when solar contributes very little, Germany has a “wind drought” of five days when wind turbines also deliver almost nothing. That suggests batteries will be needed for a minimum of 120 hours — although the actual need will be much longer since droughts sometimes last much longer and recur before storage can be filled.

A new study looking at the United States shows that to achieve 100% solar or wind electricity with sufficient backup, the US would need to be able to store almost three months’ worth of annual electricity. It currently has seven minutes of battery storage.

Just to pay for the batteries would cost the US five times its current GDP. And it would have to repurchase the batteries when they expire after just 15 years.

Fullscreen button

Workers do checks on battery storage pods at Orsted’s Eleven Mile Solar Center lithium-ion battery storage energy facility on Thursday, Feb. 29, 2024, in Coolidge, Ariz. AP

Workers do checks on battery storage pods at Orsted’s Eleven Mile Solar Center lithium-ion battery storage energy facility on Thursday, Feb. 29, 2024, in Coolidge, Ariz. AP© Provided by New York Post

Globally, the cost just to have sufficient batteries would run to 10 times the global GDP, with a new bill every 15 years.

The second reason the claim is false is that it leaves out the cost of recycling spent wind turbine blades and exhausted solar panels. Already today, one small town in Texas is overflowing with thousands of enormous blades that cannot be recycled.

In poor countries across Africa, solar panels and their batteries are already being dumped, leaking toxic chemicals into the soil and water supplies. Because of lifetimes lasting just a few decades, and pressure from the climate lobby for an enormous ramp-up in use, this will only get much worse.

One study shows that this trash cost alone doubles the true cost of solar.

If solar and wind really were cheaper, they would replace fossil fuels without the need for a grand push from politicians and the industry.

If we want to fix climate change, we instead must invest a lot more in low-CO₂ energy research and development. Only a significant boost in research and development can bring about the technological breakthroughs that are needed — in reducing trash, in improving battery storage and efficiency, but also in other technologies like modular nuclear — that will make low-CO₂ energy sources truly cheaper than fossil fuels.

Until then, claims that fossil fuels are already outcompeted are just wishful thinking.

Bjorn Lomborg is president of the Copenhagen Consensus and visiting fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. His latest books include “False Alarm” and “Best Things First.”

2 Likes

I agree that electric cars will continue to develop, and will have a long lasting place in the transportation infrastructure. Like you said, the technology will improve as it did with internal combustion engines.

It just can’t be forced, and it can’t be forced on us. The technology, including the support infrastructure, isn’t even close to ready. Let it grow organically and by market forces, not by government decree.

The market demand for better fuel milage and horsepower gave us the great internal combustion cars we have today, not government decree. Government decree took us from the wonderful cars of the 60’s to the awful garbage of the 70’s. Market demand drove the real innovation in the automotive industry, as it always does.

4 Likes

Ruh Roe, I’m holding out for a Jetson Flying Car (JFC)

----Rastro102

5 Likes

It certainty doesn’t make sense to buy our energy from communists and the supporters of terrorism, to help them further THEIR agendas, or is that just me being a stupid, freedom loving American?

5 Likes

Sir Ron, You are never stupid.

Just one question my Brother?

Why, are we even in this position of being DEPENDANT on Foreign Energies when we HAD and Always HAD our own?

Yet Bunker Biden dismantled it all
Just like the Border Initiatives
Just like our Foreign Policies with our Enemies.
How did he SELL OFF our own Oil reserves and REFUSES to refill our stores?
(Just ask Californians how $7.29 a Gallon feels.

It’s all Criminal and EVIL…

4 Likes

Deep sea strip mining is a horrible idea.

The ocean produces around 50% of the oxygen we breathe,…

What happens to ANY ecosystem on land when we open up a strip mine?

And now they want to do that to literally the LUNGS of the world?

Let alone the damage to food supplies that are harvested from the ocean?

Just don’t.

We will be responsible for triggering the largest mass extinction in earth’s history.

5 Likes

I was thinking about the underwater methane bubbles. Stir them babies up and things can get rather hot in a rapid manner.

3 Likes

But if we stop eating meat, we will be offsetting that methane by there being less cow farts! :crazy_face:

5 Likes

All logical reasons lead back to Barry.

5 Likes

and by eating more vegetables, we will be the ones producing more methane. :rofl: I guess the globalists are right, we need to reduce our population, cut down all the trees, stop eating, heating our homes and just die. :face_with_raised_eyebrow:

3 Likes