“The data is further evidence that dilute and unreliable sources of energy like solar and wind cannot replace coal and other fossil fuels and will not lead to significant reductions in carbon emissions.”
AND, as a result of the reckless and ruinous “Save The Planet” pursuit of weather-dependent, intermittent, costly, symbolic, novelty sources of non-energy – wind and solar…
“Coal grew one percent in 2017 — its first growth since 2013…”
The point, if there was one, of throwing hundreds of $billions in subsidies at wind and solar was to slash emissions of carbon dioxide gas. Taxpayers and power consumers who are on the receiving end of the bill for all this environmental piety would, after almost 20 years, be entitled to ask just how much bang they’re getting for their buck?
The short answer is: not much.
STT leaves the battle over carbon dioxide gas to others.
Our view is pretty simple: if a naturally occurring beneficial trace gas, essential for all life on earth, really is killing the planet, then there is only one available solution. And that’s nuclear power.
In 2018, if a climate alarmist is still waging war on CO2 (although he’ll call it ‘carbon’) and not talking about nuclear power, you know you’re dealing with a deluded crank.
One character who’s still pretty fired up…
View original post 620 more words
“AT present, the combined subsidies to wind and solar exceed $4 billion a year, and the number of permanent jobs generated is completely trivial; the instant the subsidies go, so do the jobs briefly ‘created’: Cut the Subsidies and ‘Green’ Jobs Instantly Vanish: 80,000 German Solar Workers Sacked.
“The reason that we’re still talking about this nonsense is all political.
And the reason that it’s political is because there’s money in it. Serious money.
Being able to sell a product with no inherent value, takes audacity; but it can be done.
Here’s how: …”
The hundreds of $billions paid in subsidies to intermittent wind and solar constitute the largest wealth transfer in economic history.
In Australia, the Federal Government’s Large-Scale RET gouges $60 billion from power consumers over the life of the scam, and redirects it to such worthy outfits as AGL and our favourite whipping boys, Infigen. In the history of the Commonwealth, no other single industry subsidy scheme comes anywhere near it in value.
When motor manufacturers, General Motors Holden and Toyota put their hands out for a measly $500 million to maintain their Australian operations, then PM, Tony Abbott told them would “not chase them down the road waving a blank cheque at them“.
A mere half $billion would have saved something like 20 or 30,000 jobs across the sector.
At present, the combined subsidies to wind and solar exceed $4 billion a year, and the number of…
View original post 1,948 more words
“And with an environment like that, we have some of the highest power prices in the world. It would be like the Eskimos having some of the most expensive ice per kilo bag at the service station, ridiculous. Like the Saudis having the world’s most expensive petrol, ridiculous. And here we are in Australia. Well, you know the story…”
Power prices matter: and they matter most to society’s poorest and most vulnerable.
In less than a dozen years, Australia went from enjoying the cheapest power in the world, to suffering the world’s most expensive.
In the last three years power prices have risen at double-digit rates: 20 to 24% last year and 13 to 20% the previous year in those states chasing renewable energy Nirvana: Subsidised Wind & Solar Driving Out-of-Control Power Prices: Business Hit With 24% Hike
It’s not just the $4 billion a year in subsidies and grants to wind and solar that are sending power prices through the roof – the subsidies in the form of Renewable Energy Certificates are added directly to retail power bills: Ticket to Oblivion: Australia’s $60bn Wind & Solar Subsidy Gravy Train Rolls Until 2031
The chaotic and intermittent delivery of wind and solar wreaks havoc to the orderly marketing of…
View original post 2,355 more words
By Andrew Bolt ~
This move to green energy is costing a bomb without lessening reliance on coal:
Wind and solar account for just six percent of total electricity globally, despite decades of subsidies. The growth of fossil fuels were enough to wipe out any emissions reductions from wind and solar, which grew 17 percent and 35 percent, respectively.
According to Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF), public and private actors spent $1.1 trillion on solar and over $900 billion on wind between 2007 and 2016…. To put this roughly $2 trillion in investment in solar and wind during the past 10 years in perspective, it represents an amount of similar magnitude to the global investment in nuclear over the past 54 years, which totals about $1.8 trillion.
Turns out the green movement also played itself. Hysterical scaremongering over the Fukushima emergency had a number of nuclear plants closed, especially…
View original post 480 more words
Britain’s gone nine days with almost no wind generation, and forecasts show the calm conditions persisting for another two weeks.
The wind drought has pushed up day-ahead power prices to the highest level for the time of year for at least a decade. Apart from a surge expected around June 14, wind levels are forecast to stay low for the next fortnight, according to The Weather Company.
“People would’ve started worrying about brownouts,” Elchin Mammadov, analyst at Bloomberg Intelligence said. “This shows that relying on wind, solar and batteries to supply the majority of our power is reckless for energy security.”
On Wednesday, wind generated about 4.3 percent of the U.K.’s electricity. Coal output has dropped near zero. Gas and nuclear have picked up the slack with 54 percent and 25 percent respectively, according to data from National Grid Plc.
The weather can be fickle and the government has to make sure that there is enough back up generation for times when the wind isn’t blowing. Greg Clark, secretary of state for business energy and industrial strategy announced Monday that the U.K. will take the next step toward agreeing to help Hitachi Ltd. finance a new nuclear reactor.
THE wind blowing everywhere but the UK! LOL…
UNRLIABLES – insanity on stilts.
UPDATE – Energy Poverty Australia
DEVASTATING read exposing the blatant fraud and utter uselessness of weather AND fossil-fuel dependent wind ‘power’….
* There has been zero scientific empirical proof provided by the wind industry to support their claims of consequential CO2 reduction.
* The claim that wind energy is “green” or “environmentally friendly” is laugh-out-loud hilarious – except for the fact that the reality is not funny at all. Consider just one part of a turbine, the generator, which uses considerable rare earth elements (2000± pounds per MW).
* The mining and processing of these metals has horrific environmental consequences that are unacknowledged and ignored by the wind industry and its environmental surrogates. For instance, just the rare earths of a typical 100 MW wind project would generate approximately:
1. 20,000 square meters of destroyed vegetation,
2. 2 million pounds of CO2,
3. 6 million cubic meters of toxic air pollution,
4. 29 million gallons of poisoned water,
5. 600 million pounds of highly contaminated tailing sands, and
6. 280,000 pounds of radioactive waste. (See this, and this, and this.)
It doesn’t take a genius to work out that wind power is the greatest economic and environmental fraud of all time. All it takes is a little cognitive power and a sense of inquiry.
Once people work out that they’ve been conned, they never turn back.
In our travels we’ve met plenty who’ve started out in favour of wind power and turned against it; we’ve never found an example of the reverse.
STT dishes up the facts on a daily basis, much to the annoyance of the wind cult. Anyone looking for a solid set of reasons as to why wind power can never work, need look no further than this cracking little list put together by John Droz.
Twenty-One Bad Things About Wind Energy — and Three Reasons Why
22 March 2018
Trying to pin down the arguments of wind promoters is a bit like…
View original post 3,317 more words