Can Solar & Wind Fix Everything (e.g., Climate Change) with a battery break-through?
- Thread starter svetz
- Start date
Will “Green New Deal” Failures Elect Trump?
Robert Bibbo, self-described environmental energy analyst and observer, lamented a while back on the growing popularity of Trump relative to President Biden. He stated:
Bibbo then brought in some historical analysis:
There is a bit of a civil war with some climate alarmists warning to go slow for political reasons. But doesn’t Bibbo know that the climate is in crisis and the emergency is HERE? Biden, Kerry, and Gore said it. The United Nations said it. Scientist Andrew Dessler said it….
But maybe climate politics is about more that just ‘saving the planet’. Maybe it is about money and power, the Climate Industrial Complex, bleeding prosperity but at a pace that the subjects do not rebel.
I responded:
Joseph Toomey added:
No response from Bibbo, but I think he is on to something that will fully germinate in November.
Lets not lose focus on Lazard - the bankster cartel that the shills love to quote
Ms. Medlicott’s piece was so appalling that I was unable just to let it pass. On the other hand, to be honest, Ms. Medlicott is a relatively small fish in the climate advocacy game. Are the larger fish any more honest?
Among the big players in this game, one that stands out is the investment bank Lazard. As an investment bank, Lazard makes its money — in its case quite big money — by causing deals to happen between investors and project developers. Investment banks often promote themselves by issuing reports on conditions for investment in various economic sectors. In Lazard’s case, back around 2008, they decided to become the gurus of green energy investing by issuing annual reports on what they call the Levelized Cost of Energy, or LCOE. They have continued to issue the LCOE reports annually since then, so I’m gathering that this must be quite a lucrative business. Here is a link for the most recent Lazard LCOE Report, which came out earlier this year in April 2023.
The Lazard LCOE Reports are famous for their repeated conclusion that wind turbines and solar panels have become the cheapest sources for generation of electricity. When you read someone in climate advocacy journalism reciting that talking point, most often the source of the point is one of these Lazard reports. In a post back in March 2019, title “Why Do Renewable Energy Sources Need Government Subsidies?,” I put together a sample list of half a dozen outlets citing Lazard LCOE studies for the proposition that wind and solar are the cheapest source of electricity. Those sources included, for example, the Financial Times, CBS News, Australia’s governmental research arm CSIRO, Axios, Think Progress, and others.
For the first decade or so of its LCOE reports, Lazard calculated the cost of energy from wind and solar without including any cost at all for the backup or storage needed to turn those sources into a fully-functioning 24/7/365 electrical grid. But somewhere in there Lazard starting adding to its reports some additional pages on what they call the Levelized Cost of Storage, or LCOS. Remarkably, after adding in the cost of storage, Lazard still seems to be coming to the conclusion that wind and solar generation are usually cheaper than generation from fossil fuels, or at the very least they are competitive. Could this possibly be right?
The Lazard 2023 LCOE Report is presented almost entirely in the form of charts and graphs. There is very little text, and you will struggle to try to figure out what assumptions underlie the conclusions. (From the website Watt-Logic, commenting on the 2023 Lazard LCOE report, and particularly on Lazard’s calculation of the cost of “firming” intermittent renewable generation with storage: “It’s actually quite hard to work out what’s going on here.”; from Andy May at Watts Up With That, December 11, “[T]hey bury critical details in the fine print and do not define their terms.”)
With that introduction, here is the key chart from the 2023 Lazard LCOE Report giving figures for cost of wind and solar power with “firming,” supposedly compared to the cost of generating electricity from natural gas “CT” or natural gas “combined cycle.”
By all means take your time to try to digest all of that. If you go to the Lazard Report for assistance, you will not find any useful text beyond what is there in the footnotes at the bottom of the chart. I read the chart as putting the “levelized cost” of “firming” intermittent wind and solar generation at as little as $23/MWh in the Midwest, up to a maximum of $98/MWh in California. Add this cost of “firming” to the “unsubsidized” cost of wind and solar generation, and you get a total for “firmed” power from wind and solar that is mostly within the range (and often toward the lower end) of costs for generation from combined cycle natural gas plants, and at most toward the low end of the range of costs for generation from natural gas “peaker” plants. In other words, while wind and solar are not proven to always be “the cheapest” after including the costs of “firming,” they are generally toward the cheaper end of the range of costs from natural gas generation, and certainly not out of the range of affordability.
But wait a minute. Where did they get these costs of “firming”? These costs appear ridiculously low compared to amounts that I find in my December 2022 energy storage Report. Study those fine print footnotes all you want, and I do not think you are going to find the answer. Can we find anything anywhere else in this Lazard document to help us understand the difference?
After spending some time trying to figure this out, the best I come up with is this chart from page 17 of the Lazard LCOE Report:
This appears to be the set of assumptions they apply for how energy storage will be used to “firm” the intermittent wind and solar generation. Let’s pluck a few key numbers out of this chart:
Now, consider the question of whether cost figures in the Lazard Report are the result of rank incompetence versus intentional deception. Could the people at Lazard who produce all these fancy and complex charts and graphs really not know that 4 hour duration batteries cycling once per day are not going to come close to solving the intermittency problems of wind and solar generation? Or do they really know that, and they are just hoping to sell a few hundreds of billions of dollars worth of wind turbines and solar panels before the stupid politicians and investors figure out the scam?
Climate Advocacy: Incompetence Versus Intentional Fraud — Lazard Edition
My last post, on December 14, asked readers, when considering climate advocacy journalism and reports promoting wind- or solar-generated energy, to ask themselves whether the author is merely incompetent versus perhaps committing intentional fraud. The post focused on a particular piece that had been published in November in euronews.green, byline Lauren Crosby Medlicott. In that piece, Ms. Medlicott had egregiously cherrypicked some operating data from the Spanish El Hierro Island wind/storage electricity system to make it appear that that system is a success, when in fact it is a disastrous failure. Could this really have been mere incompetence on her part, or was Ms. Medlicott intentionally seeking to deceive her readers?Ms. Medlicott’s piece was so appalling that I was unable just to let it pass. On the other hand, to be honest, Ms. Medlicott is a relatively small fish in the climate advocacy game. Are the larger fish any more honest?
Among the big players in this game, one that stands out is the investment bank Lazard. As an investment bank, Lazard makes its money — in its case quite big money — by causing deals to happen between investors and project developers. Investment banks often promote themselves by issuing reports on conditions for investment in various economic sectors. In Lazard’s case, back around 2008, they decided to become the gurus of green energy investing by issuing annual reports on what they call the Levelized Cost of Energy, or LCOE. They have continued to issue the LCOE reports annually since then, so I’m gathering that this must be quite a lucrative business. Here is a link for the most recent Lazard LCOE Report, which came out earlier this year in April 2023.
The Lazard LCOE Reports are famous for their repeated conclusion that wind turbines and solar panels have become the cheapest sources for generation of electricity. When you read someone in climate advocacy journalism reciting that talking point, most often the source of the point is one of these Lazard reports. In a post back in March 2019, title “Why Do Renewable Energy Sources Need Government Subsidies?,” I put together a sample list of half a dozen outlets citing Lazard LCOE studies for the proposition that wind and solar are the cheapest source of electricity. Those sources included, for example, the Financial Times, CBS News, Australia’s governmental research arm CSIRO, Axios, Think Progress, and others.
For the first decade or so of its LCOE reports, Lazard calculated the cost of energy from wind and solar without including any cost at all for the backup or storage needed to turn those sources into a fully-functioning 24/7/365 electrical grid. But somewhere in there Lazard starting adding to its reports some additional pages on what they call the Levelized Cost of Storage, or LCOS. Remarkably, after adding in the cost of storage, Lazard still seems to be coming to the conclusion that wind and solar generation are usually cheaper than generation from fossil fuels, or at the very least they are competitive. Could this possibly be right?
The Lazard 2023 LCOE Report is presented almost entirely in the form of charts and graphs. There is very little text, and you will struggle to try to figure out what assumptions underlie the conclusions. (From the website Watt-Logic, commenting on the 2023 Lazard LCOE report, and particularly on Lazard’s calculation of the cost of “firming” intermittent renewable generation with storage: “It’s actually quite hard to work out what’s going on here.”; from Andy May at Watts Up With That, December 11, “[T]hey bury critical details in the fine print and do not define their terms.”)
With that introduction, here is the key chart from the 2023 Lazard LCOE Report giving figures for cost of wind and solar power with “firming,” supposedly compared to the cost of generating electricity from natural gas “CT” or natural gas “combined cycle.”
By all means take your time to try to digest all of that. If you go to the Lazard Report for assistance, you will not find any useful text beyond what is there in the footnotes at the bottom of the chart. I read the chart as putting the “levelized cost” of “firming” intermittent wind and solar generation at as little as $23/MWh in the Midwest, up to a maximum of $98/MWh in California. Add this cost of “firming” to the “unsubsidized” cost of wind and solar generation, and you get a total for “firmed” power from wind and solar that is mostly within the range (and often toward the lower end) of costs for generation from combined cycle natural gas plants, and at most toward the low end of the range of costs for generation from natural gas “peaker” plants. In other words, while wind and solar are not proven to always be “the cheapest” after including the costs of “firming,” they are generally toward the cheaper end of the range of costs from natural gas generation, and certainly not out of the range of affordability.
But wait a minute. Where did they get these costs of “firming”? These costs appear ridiculously low compared to amounts that I find in my December 2022 energy storage Report. Study those fine print footnotes all you want, and I do not think you are going to find the answer. Can we find anything anywhere else in this Lazard document to help us understand the difference?
After spending some time trying to figure this out, the best I come up with is this chart from page 17 of the Lazard LCOE Report:
This appears to be the set of assumptions they apply for how energy storage will be used to “firm” the intermittent wind and solar generation. Let’s pluck a few key numbers out of this chart:
- In the column headed “Storage Duration (Hours),” we find a minimum of 1 and a maximum of 4. Four hours of duration just happens to be the norm for the capability of today’s most cost-effective battery storage technology, lithium ion batteries. Unfortunately, the studies that I feature in my energy storage Report calculate that the number of hours duration of storage needed to fully “firm” a system using only wind and solar generation would be at least one month (720 hours), and potentially two to three months (1440 to 2160 hours). Lazard would seem to be off by a factor of somewhere between 180 and 540 of what would be needed.
- Then there is a column headed “90% DOD Cycles/Day.” In each case the entry is “1.” I interpret this to mean that whatever battery we are dealing with here is assumed to have one full charge/discharge cycle per day. The next column tells us they are assuming 350 days per year, so therefore they are assuming that the batteries cycle 350 times per year. So the batteries can spread their costs over 350 cycles per year, or 7000 cycles in 20 years. Unfortunately, as shown in my energy storage Report, due to seasonal patterns of the wind and sun, much of the battery storage capacity needed to “firm” a wind/solar generation system will only go through one full charge and discharge cycle per year. Thus, for this part of the storage capacity, Lazard would appear to be understating the cost of the storage by a factor of 350.
Now, consider the question of whether cost figures in the Lazard Report are the result of rank incompetence versus intentional deception. Could the people at Lazard who produce all these fancy and complex charts and graphs really not know that 4 hour duration batteries cycling once per day are not going to come close to solving the intermittency problems of wind and solar generation? Or do they really know that, and they are just hoping to sell a few hundreds of billions of dollars worth of wind turbines and solar panels before the stupid politicians and investors figure out the scam?
B-ManFX4
Solar Enthusiast
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2022
- Messages
- 152
As far as solar and wind being cheaper than fossil fuels, that is a load of horse manure. Take away the federal subsidies and then compute the real costs.
There is a HUGE gap between how much power the USA needs vs what renewables can produce. Get rid of the environmental whackos that have totally screwed up the processes of building nuclear plants and the answer is easy-peazy.
The US consumes over 4.25 TRILLION kWh of electricity per year. Renewables, all together, produced only 21.5% of that power. That is the huge gap I am referring to.
Source: https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained...y-in-the-us-generation-capacity-and-sales.php
B-ManFX4
Solar Enthusiast
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2022
- Messages
- 152
It started with outfitting my RV for boondocking. Once I started playing with Victron gear I was hooked. The first time I witnessed the solar panels on the RV throwing 40 amps into the battery I started thinking about the house. Power outages are not especially frequent but I work from home so when they happen they are a pain.
I've read where solar panels are going to increase in cost due to tariffs and such. I also see how the current administration is absolutely destroying my purchasing power on a daily basis so I figured why not jump in now? I didn't think going off-grid was even remotely possible when I started but now I know better.
svetz
Works in theory! Practice? That's something else
Arnold: "Climate change dialogue” is not going to work
Hawaii to decarbonize its transportation system by 2045
Climate Survey
Opinion: There are other graphs available too, the years are cut off for space, but it's from 2008 to to 2023. I thought these two were of interest specific interest. In the left, it's pretty clear your average American has bought into the idea that there isn't scientific consensus, which frankly is pretty shocking. There have been numerous studies over many years and no surprise that each shows there is concensus. The "signed letters" you see from deniers/skeptics of 1000s of "scientists" disagreeing are fraudulent (e.g., signatures are from people that don't conduct research in the field or are knowledgeable in the field) when presented as anything other than opinion. The other point of interest in the right graph is that most people think they won't personally be harmed by global warming.
UN Climate Change Survey
The UN came out with a new survey recently too, no surprise that numbers of believers are up there too.
Will it impact the Elections?
Opinion: Some say yes, some say no. My non-scientific poll of asking some local republicans that believe in climate change says no. Even though most were disparaging regarding Trump and believe climate change is an urgent problem, they dislike Biden so passionately they'd still rather vote for Trump.
If you check Lazard's, you'll see the numbers don't include any subsidies. Solar & Wind have been cheaper for years, it's only last year that energy storage prices fell enough where fossil fuels could be economically replaced. So, not only feasible... but it's happening.
Hawaii to decarbonize its transportation system by 2045
Climate Survey
Belief | Risk |
UN Climate Change Survey
The UN came out with a new survey recently too, no surprise that numbers of believers are up there too.
Will it impact the Elections?
Opinion: Some say yes, some say no. My non-scientific poll of asking some local republicans that believe in climate change says no. Even though most were disparaging regarding Trump and believe climate change is an urgent problem, they dislike Biden so passionately they'd still rather vote for Trump.
| Percentage of Scientists that recognize Climate Change is real It depends on the year, the study you cite, and who gets included in the study. What Energy experts say:
| 
Studies on number of scientists that support the climate change theory. |
- How we know Climate Change is not a hoax or wrong
- How we know Climate Change is Man-Made
- How The Greenhouse Gas Effect Works (with atmospheric layers)
- How Climate Change Became Politicized
- 200 climate myths With Explanations as to why they're wrong
So, from technically impossible to economically improbable?
If you check Lazard's, you'll see the numbers don't include any subsidies. Solar & Wind have been cheaper for years, it's only last year that energy storage prices fell enough where fossil fuels could be economically replaced. So, not only feasible... but it's happening.
Last edited:
I think these solar cells have been in works for 8 years or more … baby sheeet …. Notice how the video guy now knocks old cell designs. ‘Junk
Salesman. Old bad new good now”. Betcha he gets those new panels for free plus he gets advertising fee. Betcha? Crazy.
Think Svetz likey him.
This is same guy on youtube that thinks $3000 for window heat pump system retro fit in NYC. Meanwhile NYC thinks Midea u shaped window heat pump should cost no more then $3000. The Midea responds with change redesign of ~$360 unit at costco …..12,000 btu ac turning it into $3000 unit converted to heat pump with valve. Redesigned. $3000???? Wow.
NYC residents will get a hand out from USA tax payer and hand these out like candy at holloweiner. Golly gee whiz.
Bob B
Emperor Of Solar
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2019
- Messages
- 9,185
Wait .... Isn't this the kind of crap we have been told was all a conspiracy theory and definitely wasn't happening .... Seems like it HAS been happening for at least 4 years ..... and, there may be unintended consequences.
Under present-day conditions, we find MCB in the remote mid-latitudes or proximate subtropics reduces the relative risk of dangerous summer heat exposure by 55% and 16%, respectively. However, the same interventions under mid-century warming minimally reduce or even increase heat stress in the Western United States and across the world. This loss of efficacy may arise from a state-dependent response of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation to both anthropogenic warming and regional MCB. Our result demonstrates a risk in assuming that interventions effective under certain conditions will remain effective as the climate continues to change.
www.nature.com
Under present-day conditions, we find MCB in the remote mid-latitudes or proximate subtropics reduces the relative risk of dangerous summer heat exposure by 55% and 16%, respectively. However, the same interventions under mid-century warming minimally reduce or even increase heat stress in the Western United States and across the world. This loss of efficacy may arise from a state-dependent response of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation to both anthropogenic warming and regional MCB. Our result demonstrates a risk in assuming that interventions effective under certain conditions will remain effective as the climate continues to change.
Diminished efficacy of regional marine cloud brightening in a warmer world - Nature Climate Change
Regional marine cloud brightening (MCB) has been proposed as a form of geoengineering. Here the authors show that a regional MCB aiming to reduce warming in the Western United States under today’s conditions would be less efficient under warmer conditions and would exaggerate warming in other...
www.nature.com
Last edited:
Checkthisout
Solar Wizard
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2021
- Messages
- 5,056
Wait .... Isn't this the kind of crap we have been told was all a conspiracy theory and definitely wasn't happening .... Seems like it HAS been happening for at least 4 years ..... and, there may be unintended consequences.
Under present-day conditions, we find MCB in the remote mid-latitudes or proximate subtropics reduces the relative risk of dangerous summer heat exposure by 55% and 16%, respectively. However, the same interventions under mid-century warming minimally reduce or even increase heat stress in the Western United States and across the world. This loss of efficacy may arise from a state-dependent response of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation to both anthropogenic warming and regional MCB. Our result demonstrates a risk in assuming that interventions effective under certain conditions will remain effective as the climate continues to change.
Diminished efficacy of regional marine cloud brightening in a warmer world - Nature Climate Change
Regional marine cloud brightening (MCB) has been proposed as a form of geoengineering. Here the authors show that a regional MCB aiming to reduce warming in the Western United States under today’s conditions would be less efficient under warmer conditions and would exaggerate warming in other...
Bob, these people know better than us. It has nothing to do with government money or power.
They really want to save humanity even though there are too many of us.
Bob B
Emperor Of Solar
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2019
- Messages
- 9,185
Checkthisout
Solar Wizard
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2021
- Messages
- 5,056
Next thing you know we will be having weather wars ....or maybe already are?
They're trying to blame our illegal alien problem on climate change.
These people have no shame.
svetz
Works in theory! Practice? That's something else
Heat waves and deaths from heat continue to dominate the news cycle, stay cool everyone!
Heat wave threatens southern US corn crops
Help Keep Animals Cool and Safe as Temperatures Rise
Thinking a greener future is costly? The fingerprints of climate change are already all over this budget
After 100s die, Merkel says Germany needs better climate policy
More than 1 million affected by famine in Madagascar drought
India pledges net zero by 2070
3 die in record rainfall and flooding in Japan
Climate change is already making your bills more expensive
Hurricane Winds Can Destroy Solar Panels, But Developers Are Working to Fortify Them
You left off an important bit:
A few pounds here or there of SO2 that has a half-life of 24 hours just isn't the same as the gigatons of CO2 that doesn't break down easily (has to be captured in someway, e.g., photosynthesis, giving it a half-life greater than a century). The GHGs are the true geoengineering we've inadvertently been doing for over a century. That's what we should all be urgently worried about.
The university was using salt for Marine cloud brightening (MCB) rather than SO2. Or, more specifically, they were spraying seawater into the air as a fine mist. Something that happens naturally to some extent because of wave action. So, not scary until you ask an egg-head what he's doing and he says "geo-engineering experiments." Given a percentage of seawater has radioactive potassium, the egghead could have tacked on "and measuring radioactive fallout". You can image how the public would react ; -)
Overall I see these experiments as a good thing since we need more basic data into aerosols. Hopefully we never have to use them, but I like the idea we at least know what we're doing if we ever do need them (plus it'll be useful information for when we get around to terraforming other planets ; -).
A little humor to lighten the day...
Heat wave threatens southern US corn crops
Help Keep Animals Cool and Safe as Temperatures Rise
Thinking a greener future is costly? The fingerprints of climate change are already all over this budget
After 100s die, Merkel says Germany needs better climate policy
More than 1 million affected by famine in Madagascar drought
India pledges net zero by 2070
3 die in record rainfall and flooding in Japan
Climate change is already making your bills more expensive
Hurricane Winds Can Destroy Solar Panels, But Developers Are Working to Fortify Them
I reported the city shut down the University's tests a few posts back, so it was happening. There are many other geo-engineering experiments underway and also private groups (aka idiots) shooting crap via rockets or balloons into the atmosphere all the time which is unfortunate as they don't synchronize with others which can make it hard to know what effect (if any) it's having and possibly throw off other's research.
You left off an important bit:
That is the city stopped the experiment because it's called geo-engineering and they were afraid. Not because it was found to be harmful. No one complains about ski resorts doing snow blowing which is 100s of times the scale. We only stopped industry from pumping megatons of SO2 into the atmosphere fairly recently because of a thing called acid rain. So, nothing to get to freaked about IMO.
A few pounds here or there of SO2 that has a half-life of 24 hours just isn't the same as the gigatons of CO2 that doesn't break down easily (has to be captured in someway, e.g., photosynthesis, giving it a half-life greater than a century). The GHGs are the true geoengineering we've inadvertently been doing for over a century. That's what we should all be urgently worried about.
The university was using salt for Marine cloud brightening (MCB) rather than SO2. Or, more specifically, they were spraying seawater into the air as a fine mist. Something that happens naturally to some extent because of wave action. So, not scary until you ask an egg-head what he's doing and he says "geo-engineering experiments." Given a percentage of seawater has radioactive potassium, the egghead could have tacked on "and measuring radioactive fallout". You can image how the public would react ; -)
Overall I see these experiments as a good thing since we need more basic data into aerosols. Hopefully we never have to use them, but I like the idea we at least know what we're doing if we ever do need them (plus it'll be useful information for when we get around to terraforming other planets ; -).
Checkthisout
Solar Wizard
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2021
- Messages
- 5,056
It's obvious you don't know what the term half life means
Her increased body mass is out putting excessive btu…she should self terminate and save the planet.
Maybe eat another gummi bear and pop - become plant food to absorb the co2.
Ac/dc thunder thighs.
Checkthisout
Solar Wizard
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2021
- Messages
- 5,056
The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants.
– Albert Camus
Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
– C.S. Lewis
Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth.
– Albert Einstein
– Albert Camus
Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
– C.S. Lewis
Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth.
– Albert Einstein
If there is one thing that became perfectly clear during my time in the dump truck, it is this: The world runs on diesel. So every time I see a semi hauling a wind turbine, the following considerations come to mind: How many blades have been transported for how many windmills in how many areas? How much petroleum, or coal, or nuclear power, was utilized in the construction of said blades? How many gallons of diesel fuel were used to excavate the ground to run power lines from the rural areas where the wind turbines are located?
For what genuine purpose are wind turbines planted? Who benefits? And how much maintenance will the turbines, subjected to the elements, require over time? What is the net payoff?
Certainly, wind power, or solar, or electric vehicles, for that matter, are not currently self-sustaining. Instead, these are now subsidized by false narratives, and tax-payer funds, all in the service of Anthropological Climate Change®, which is an epic lie.
Last fall, in a previous article under the paragraph heading “The electric school bus acid test…”, I described the electric school bus “sales pitch” being made to schools. Consequently, earlier this month, I spoke to the transportation supervisor of our local school system and asked if he planned to order any electric vehicles this summer. Fortunately, he said “no”. He added that the superintendent was like-minded because of some information the supervisor had previously shared. The supervisor said he had contacted the local utilities and was informed their power plant did not have the capacity to power a fleet of electric buses during peak usage. Of course, peak usage occurs during the school year in a cold climate.
For what genuine purpose are wind turbines planted? Who benefits? And how much maintenance will the turbines, subjected to the elements, require over time? What is the net payoff?
Certainly, wind power, or solar, or electric vehicles, for that matter, are not currently self-sustaining. Instead, these are now subsidized by false narratives, and tax-payer funds, all in the service of Anthropological Climate Change®, which is an epic lie.
Last fall, in a previous article under the paragraph heading “The electric school bus acid test…”, I described the electric school bus “sales pitch” being made to schools. Consequently, earlier this month, I spoke to the transportation supervisor of our local school system and asked if he planned to order any electric vehicles this summer. Fortunately, he said “no”. He added that the superintendent was like-minded because of some information the supervisor had previously shared. The supervisor said he had contacted the local utilities and was informed their power plant did not have the capacity to power a fleet of electric buses during peak usage. Of course, peak usage occurs during the school year in a cold climate.
To be sure, narratives are so powerful because people believe them. Folks then act on their beliefs and sh*t happens. This is why the global propaganda models remain ever-fluid and universal: Problems are magnified via deception. As a result, the reasoning of “authorities” seems quite noble to virtue-signaling ignoramuses eager to embrace the lies. Tyranny ensues.
The War on Terror. The War on Invisible Viruses. The Wars against Foreign Aggressors. The War against Racism. The War against Sexism. The War against the Patriarchy. The War on the Weather.
Evidently, therefore, a correction is now required on my part: The world runs on diesel and bullsh*t. Except diesel is being phased out by climitards who Stand With Ukraine®.
Relativism, undeniably, trends in modernity. And Orwell was right:
Also like Orwell’s “1984”: The world’s global societal power structure is stratified into concentric rings of power. The Inner Party functions to continuously preserve and enrich itself; as the Outer Party (i.e. those following orders) and the Proles are utilized and cannibalized when necessary. The circles of power have become increasingly interconnected in modernity; and technology allows the Inner Party to launch policies that are enforced by the Outer Party and unto the Proles.
This process is also called “history”.
The Outer Party depends upon the Inner Party for survival and it always remains a difficult challenge to convince the Proles of something they can’t, or won’t, see.
As a result, history unwinds in inevitable, cyclical waves. Yet, the Inner Party has survived for generations – even before the establishment of the Federal Reserve in 1913 and its unleashing of the modern Fractional Reserve Banking monster.
Slavery is rooted in economics; and so the Inner Party uses debt to implement and expand its various wars. The rich get richer as the poor suffer, starve, and die.
While driving the other day, I listened to an “expert” on AM radio discussing the vast increase of carbon in Earth’s atmosphere and the conclusion was this: “Climate Change is real!”
The radio voice seemed very confident in its conclusions and, by implication, it was ready to do everything necessary to stop what it perceived as a genuine threat. Always the same dialectics, again and again.
What’s wrong with carbon, again?
Is America having seizures? Or postmortem convulsions?
At this point in time, I am convinced it’s the latter.
While in communication with a retired retarded professor, she expressed exasperation at those who still plan to vote for Trump. After all, he was convicted by a jury of his peers and is now a convicted felon.
In response, and from memory, I typed out a meme I saw on the internet: “He lived over 70 years without a criminal record. But when he ran for president he was charged with over 90 crimes! How can you explain that?”
Silence. But… oops! Did you notice what I did there? Did you see how the Inner Party’s phony dialectics had me defending the proud promoter of Operation Warp Speed®?
Behind the proliferating Kayfabe FUBAR, however, the Inner Party works tirelessly toward the establishment of their New World Order by 2030: A high-tech prison camp ruled by “stakeholders”.
When it was revealed that U.S. Senate ratification was required for the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Pandemic “Treaty”, it was, instead, transitioned into an “agreement”. Except that strategy went down in flames, too, at the WHO’s 77th World Health Assembly. In response, Team Biden, China, and other unelected WHO totalitarians stealthily passed new International Health Regulations (IHR) behind closed doors. This was done on June 1, 2024 in Geneva, Switzerland. The Ethiopian Communist, and WHO Director, Tedros Ghebreyesus, violated the IHR’s Article 55.2 eligibility requirements and with less than the required quorum of member states voting. This power grab was completely illegal and unlawfully elevated the WHO “from a global advisory-only body to an international enforcer of its mandates.”
So we all better get the word out, before it’s too late. Especially now that it’s another election year so flu season is almost here.
Politics is the religion of Marxists as well as all those who seek to establish any sort of earthly “utopia”. But, to the Luciferians, Freemasons, and the friends of Jeffrey Epstein, politics is merely the means to their ends; and, in their view, communism has proven to be an efficient means to eventually control and depopulate political enemies and uncooperative Proles.
World War III is a War on the Petrodollar and it serves as just another means to facilitate the collapse of the West. Accordingly, the high-speed daily saturation of arbitrary polemics has made it near impossible to discern, distill, and dispute what is occurring around the globe – which is, also, surely, part of the plan
The Inner Party was always long on communism; this is why U.S. manufacturing was gutted on behalf of China, and why the American economy has been Cloward & Pivened as corporate, political, and religious institutions have undergone Wokeification. The Inner Party’s desired NWO is an economic, political, and faith-based multi-polar dystopia; but, as I’ve stated before, any ideology, whatsoever, could be used as the “faith” to control the material and online realms: Fascism, Communism, Islam, Freemasonry, Luciferianism, Outer Space Aliens, or a witch’s brew of any, or all, of these to be administered as technocratic totalitarianism.
If Trump wins the 2024 U.S. Presidential Election he will surely embrace a new global order blended into separate (multi-national) economic regions.
Or maybe Trump will be imprisoned or killed before the election, thus, igniting the ever-simmering rage of American Patriots.
Toward whatever outcome, however, the fists of anti-democratic revolutions are forming, Left and Right.
The Inner Party has been successful, once again, in its efforts to distract and divide. This is so it can rule over fractious factions of enemies. It’s a king’s strategy that has been applied continuously throughout history.
Even so, the memes march forward. They gather like torches in the dark.
The War on Terror. The War on Invisible Viruses. The Wars against Foreign Aggressors. The War against Racism. The War against Sexism. The War against the Patriarchy. The War on the Weather.
Evidently, therefore, a correction is now required on my part: The world runs on diesel and bullsh*t. Except diesel is being phased out by climitards who Stand With Ukraine®.
Relativism, undeniably, trends in modernity. And Orwell was right:
So whether by Marxism or any other form of secular utopianism: The goals are always out with the “old” and in with the “new”. Order out of chaos. Dissolve and coagulate.
Also like Orwell’s “1984”: The world’s global societal power structure is stratified into concentric rings of power. The Inner Party functions to continuously preserve and enrich itself; as the Outer Party (i.e. those following orders) and the Proles are utilized and cannibalized when necessary. The circles of power have become increasingly interconnected in modernity; and technology allows the Inner Party to launch policies that are enforced by the Outer Party and unto the Proles.
This process is also called “history”.
The Outer Party depends upon the Inner Party for survival and it always remains a difficult challenge to convince the Proles of something they can’t, or won’t, see.
As a result, history unwinds in inevitable, cyclical waves. Yet, the Inner Party has survived for generations – even before the establishment of the Federal Reserve in 1913 and its unleashing of the modern Fractional Reserve Banking monster.
Slavery is rooted in economics; and so the Inner Party uses debt to implement and expand its various wars. The rich get richer as the poor suffer, starve, and die.
While driving the other day, I listened to an “expert” on AM radio discussing the vast increase of carbon in Earth’s atmosphere and the conclusion was this: “Climate Change is real!”
The radio voice seemed very confident in its conclusions and, by implication, it was ready to do everything necessary to stop what it perceived as a genuine threat. Always the same dialectics, again and again.
What’s wrong with carbon, again?
Is America having seizures? Or postmortem convulsions?
At this point in time, I am convinced it’s the latter.
While in communication with a retired retarded professor, she expressed exasperation at those who still plan to vote for Trump. After all, he was convicted by a jury of his peers and is now a convicted felon.
In response, and from memory, I typed out a meme I saw on the internet: “He lived over 70 years without a criminal record. But when he ran for president he was charged with over 90 crimes! How can you explain that?”
Silence. But… oops! Did you notice what I did there? Did you see how the Inner Party’s phony dialectics had me defending the proud promoter of Operation Warp Speed®?
Behind the proliferating Kayfabe FUBAR, however, the Inner Party works tirelessly toward the establishment of their New World Order by 2030: A high-tech prison camp ruled by “stakeholders”.
When it was revealed that U.S. Senate ratification was required for the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Pandemic “Treaty”, it was, instead, transitioned into an “agreement”. Except that strategy went down in flames, too, at the WHO’s 77th World Health Assembly. In response, Team Biden, China, and other unelected WHO totalitarians stealthily passed new International Health Regulations (IHR) behind closed doors. This was done on June 1, 2024 in Geneva, Switzerland. The Ethiopian Communist, and WHO Director, Tedros Ghebreyesus, violated the IHR’s Article 55.2 eligibility requirements and with less than the required quorum of member states voting. This power grab was completely illegal and unlawfully elevated the WHO “from a global advisory-only body to an international enforcer of its mandates.”
So we all better get the word out, before it’s too late. Especially now that it’s another election year so flu season is almost here.
Politics is the religion of Marxists as well as all those who seek to establish any sort of earthly “utopia”. But, to the Luciferians, Freemasons, and the friends of Jeffrey Epstein, politics is merely the means to their ends; and, in their view, communism has proven to be an efficient means to eventually control and depopulate political enemies and uncooperative Proles.
World War III is a War on the Petrodollar and it serves as just another means to facilitate the collapse of the West. Accordingly, the high-speed daily saturation of arbitrary polemics has made it near impossible to discern, distill, and dispute what is occurring around the globe – which is, also, surely, part of the plan
The Inner Party was always long on communism; this is why U.S. manufacturing was gutted on behalf of China, and why the American economy has been Cloward & Pivened as corporate, political, and religious institutions have undergone Wokeification. The Inner Party’s desired NWO is an economic, political, and faith-based multi-polar dystopia; but, as I’ve stated before, any ideology, whatsoever, could be used as the “faith” to control the material and online realms: Fascism, Communism, Islam, Freemasonry, Luciferianism, Outer Space Aliens, or a witch’s brew of any, or all, of these to be administered as technocratic totalitarianism.
If Trump wins the 2024 U.S. Presidential Election he will surely embrace a new global order blended into separate (multi-national) economic regions.
Or maybe Trump will be imprisoned or killed before the election, thus, igniting the ever-simmering rage of American Patriots.
Toward whatever outcome, however, the fists of anti-democratic revolutions are forming, Left and Right.
The Inner Party has been successful, once again, in its efforts to distract and divide. This is so it can rule over fractious factions of enemies. It’s a king’s strategy that has been applied continuously throughout history.
Even so, the memes march forward. They gather like torches in the dark.
svetz
Works in theory! Practice? That's something else
| Opinion: I was expecting the latter half of 2024 and 2025 to "cool back" towards 1.34°C (we briefly peaked over 1.5°C) as most of it was caused by El Nino, but there are some rumblings in might not go back all the way down, time will tell. I suspect it depends on hurricane activity. There's still a lot of dust over the Atlantic (see image right), so no hurricanes have been forming (hurricanes are bad in most ways, but good in that they move a large quantity of heat upwards). |  |
Matt Kean named new chair of Climate Change Authority
World breaks 1,400 temperature records
Spain is running out of water
Brazil has been hit by floods
Our Roots Chicago will plant thousands of trees on first day of summer
WEST runs for six minutes
Opinion: Exotic materials aren't going to cut it for non-stop operation...it just delays the inevitability on uncontrolled chaos. But +15% ain't bad.
Japan meteorologists unite to highlight climate change in daily weather reports
Climate Shift Index
Opinion: Interesting website, for a day or multiday average it determines the impact from climate change for your area. Left click to drag the map, mouse wheel to zoom, right button to position. I'm always dubious of relating any instance of weather to climate change, but according to this prediction the Northeast heatwave shouldn't be as bad today. Georgia and South Carolina on the other hand....
| What the CA grid looks like The graph is interactive on their web site, although it's only 4/19. Looks like they still need more ESS (which on the graph is both hydro and batteries). I thought that all of the nuclear was out of CA, but from the graph is looks like something is still running. Interesting that they draw on the batteries at 6AM as they turn down the fuel consumption. Will Californians soon get rid of the their TOU and have cheap rates? While I'm optimistic at heart, I doubt it. Investors are in it for a buck, and happy to use the crisis to make money. I suspect until they get taken to court the old "peaker induced" rates that caused the TOUs will stay in place. I wonder if @GXMnow will have his system paid back by then? ; -) |  |
svetz
Works in theory! Practice? That's something else
As was mentioned in post #6,553, those are the costs without subsidies. Restating your opinion without addressing the facts that prove it to be wrong don't really advance the conversation. Show me how Lazard's is wrong and we can talk.
While I agree nuclear is viable, there simply isn't enough Uranium for the current technology to sustains us (again it was in post #6,553 with a reference). Again, just restating an opinion without addressing facts doesn't advance the topic. Not to say there aren't a ton of promising new nuclear technologies that could work, there are and they can... but can they also have a low LCOE?
Ah! I see what you mean now. You might be interested in this article as it gives an idea as to how rapidly the U.S. is moving towards renewables:
With 3 trillion kWh to go, if we're deploying 200 billion kWh per year, every five years we have a trillion kWh, so in 15 years (not including Dunkelflaute or ESS needs) at the anticipated 2025 rate we'd be fully electrified. So, seems like we can meet our 2050 commitments in regards to electrification and the gap has a wide safety margin. But, obviously, if deployment continues to grow each year by some percentage (which it should given lower LCOEs) then we'd reach the goal sooner.
Not that I think it'll happen quite that quickly...there's a lot of $ in anything being built today and investors, who believe like you that it's not going away (or at least as quickly as it is), will want to see a return. There's also political chicanery, e.g., Florida just made it easier to build pipelines in the state and made it harder to build renewables.
Last edited:
Similar threads
