Lars Schernikau and William Smith in The Unpopular Truth About Electricity and the Future of Energy have reinforced the message about the cost-effectiveness of hydrocarbons compared with the unreliables (wind and solar).
with their work on the
Developing an index for the Full Cost of Energy, they use the Energy Return on Investment to conclude that the so-called renewables are a net drain on the energy balance of the industrialized world.
Indicative numbers for the eROI are 70 for nuclear power, so for coal and in the order of 5 for the unreliables. 5 is approximately the cut-off figure between systems that are sustainable and systems that are not efficient enough to survive independently. These figures are controversial and they will be fine-tuned but the tendency is clear.
A state like South Australia or country where the energy supply is moving towards domination by wind and solar will eventually suffer from energy starvation and it will have to depend on more efficient sources of power, at home or abroad. South Australia imports coal power practically every night, despite burning gas, and Australia depends on coal power in China to make the energy intensive components of our imported wind turbines and solar panels.
They "the wind and solar based “energy transition” can only reduce global net energy efficiencies because it requires more complex energy systems and increase storage conversion and transmission losses."
Looking forward they see no future for the net zero program due to the energy efficiency problem and other shortcomings including the short lifetime of the equipment and the astronomical demand for minerals.
It seems that the time has come to talk about an exit strategy from the net zero by wind and solar path because it is not going to happen. It just remains to be seen how many more trillions are spent making power more expensive and less reliable before the penny drops.
If we could just convince the EPA to withdraw its declaration labeling CO2 a carbon pollutant, we return to sanity. Anyone with a high school class in biology knows that CO2 is plant food (via photosynthesis) and life on earth would be impossible without it.
Alex, I’ve read your books and am a paid subscriber to your Substack. I really appreciate all you do. Thank you for putting in all the effort to inform the misinformed and uninformed. Keep up the great work! Dave Walker Forsyth, GA
Lars Schernikau and William Smith in The Unpopular Truth About Electricity and the Future of Energy have reinforced the message about the cost-effectiveness of hydrocarbons compared with the unreliables (wind and solar).
with their work on the
Developing an index for the Full Cost of Energy, they use the Energy Return on Investment to conclude that the so-called renewables are a net drain on the energy balance of the industrialized world.
Indicative numbers for the eROI are 70 for nuclear power, so for coal and in the order of 5 for the unreliables. 5 is approximately the cut-off figure between systems that are sustainable and systems that are not efficient enough to survive independently. These figures are controversial and they will be fine-tuned but the tendency is clear.
A state like South Australia or country where the energy supply is moving towards domination by wind and solar will eventually suffer from energy starvation and it will have to depend on more efficient sources of power, at home or abroad. South Australia imports coal power practically every night, despite burning gas, and Australia depends on coal power in China to make the energy intensive components of our imported wind turbines and solar panels.
They "the wind and solar based “energy transition” can only reduce global net energy efficiencies because it requires more complex energy systems and increase storage conversion and transmission losses."
Looking forward they see no future for the net zero program due to the energy efficiency problem and other shortcomings including the short lifetime of the equipment and the astronomical demand for minerals.
It seems that the time has come to talk about an exit strategy from the net zero by wind and solar path because it is not going to happen. It just remains to be seen how many more trillions are spent making power more expensive and less reliable before the penny drops.
Wind and solar are proven disasters.
If we could just convince the EPA to withdraw its declaration labeling CO2 a carbon pollutant, we return to sanity. Anyone with a high school class in biology knows that CO2 is plant food (via photosynthesis) and life on earth would be impossible without it.
Thank you for your comments. Inspiring.
Richard Tradewell
Laguna Hills, CA
tradewellrichard1@gmail.com
Alex, I’ve read your books and am a paid subscriber to your Substack. I really appreciate all you do. Thank you for putting in all the effort to inform the misinformed and uninformed. Keep up the great work! Dave Walker Forsyth, GA