She’s a frigging genius, I tell ya.
Posted on 05/09/2023 6:40:05 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Senate Budget Committee Chairman Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) cites “the climate crisis” at almost every opportunity. President Biden calls it a greater threat than nuclear war. They and their allies champion “carbon-free” electricity generation by 2035 and nearly fossil-fuel-free energy by 2050.
Achieving “net zero” carbon dioxide emissions will be painless, they assure us. Costs will be so low you’ll need a magnifying glass to see them. Governments merely have to enact mandates, provide subsidies, and the transformation to “clean” energy will just happen. Almost like in a fairy tale.
Here in the real world, however, we would need literally millions of weather-dependent wind turbines, billions of equally unreliable solar panels, millions of half-ton battery modules for vehicles, billions more modules to back up intermittent electricity generation, millions of transformers, and tens of thousands of miles of new transmission lines.
All these technologies must be manufactured from metals, minerals, and petroleum extracted from the Earth, via mining on scales unprecedented in human history.
The dollar costs alone -- just for a U.S. transformation -- are almost incomprehensible.
Science and policy analyst David Wojick calculated that just the batteries needed to back up wind and solar electricity generation in a “net zero” USA would cost $23-trillion -- America’s entire 2021 gross domestic product (GDP) -- and probably many times that.
Energy and technology consultant Thomas Tanton found that battery backup to replace current U.S. fossil fuel electricity -- and convert vehicles, furnaces, water heaters, and stoves to electricity -- would cost at least $29 trillion in initial outlays.
Trillions more would be needed to cover financing, repairs, maintenance, replacements, burying broken and worn-out non-recyclable equipment, and building systems strong enough to survive hurricanes.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
None of these estimates includes the costs of turbines, panels, transmission lines or transformers.
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ‘NET ZERO’..........................
Net Zero on a carbon based planet is Insanity
Sorta like NO SUCH THING as “trans gender”. Follow the science. 👍
Liberals are traitors, evil, and MORONS...
“Net Zero” would have NO effect on the climate. The whole thing is a fantasy.
She’s a frigging genius, I tell ya.
Marxists morons like Greta would never comprehend this information.
Who or WHAT exactly is crossing our border in droves?
Just a theory, people.
It’s not about the climate and saving mother earth. It’s about control. The WEF and world governments want us to digress back to before industrial and modern societies. The only electricity will be in the elites enclaves and government seats. The rest of us can just freeze in the winter and die of heat stroke in the summer.
Net Zero = Green Energy = Perpetual Motion = Unicorns........................
Imagine if one of those battery farms ever caught on fire.
> Marxists morons like Greta would never comprehend this information. <
I reluctantly give younger folks like Greta Thunberg a bit of a break. And that’s because they are being told only one side of the story, over and over again.
The evil ones are the puppet-masters who deliberately squash all debate on the issue. No one is permitted to prevent an opposing view, or question the data.
Al Gore is in that evil group. But so are many scientists. They know that science thrives only when “facts” constantly challenged. Yet they either stay silent, or worse, help with the fraud. Gotta keep that grant money coming in.
LOL. Some years back, while hosting our young grandsons for a few days, we had a power outage one morning. The boys realized that the lights would not work, but could not understand why they had to do without TV for a while.
...unless you're referring to Biden's brain power
Since lithium battery fires can burn intensely for a long period of time, maybe those runaway battery fires could help generate more electricity (albeit with toxic smoke pouring into the air).
Humans are not EVOLVING. They are DEVOLVING into ignorant jackasses.
Close all colleges and universities. Graduates of them are incompetent morons.
The dinosaurs lived in a “net zero” environment. How did they make out? The Maya empire lived in a “net zero” environment. How did they make out? There are many many more civilizations that lived in “net zero” environments. How did they make out? But Noah made it through a “net zero” environment. Maybe Senate Budget Committee Chairman Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) is our Noah?
1. "Net zero" is a fantasy. Moving, converting, consuming, and/or storing energy in any fashion has some form of pollution. Claiming so-called "green" energy has zero pollution is a bigger lie than if an Ole Miss fan bragged on defense.
2. Amen to sky high costs to achieve 100% independence from "fossil" fuels. At my home I have 80% of the power produced from solar in our all-electric home, including charging our EV which we do most of our driving in. I stopped at 80% because that's when I run into the law of diminishing returns. Going beyond that is too cost prohibitive. And that's with mine and my wife's energy consumption being very well defined and not varying much (except for seasonal differences). Basically, we're a best case situation for it largely because we're creatures of habit and we don't work outside the home anymore (our power consumption used to be low in the middle of the day when we both were in an office until about 5:30 PM when we'd both come home and turn on many appliances to catch up on chores -- after the sun went down). Even with our easy to plan for energy consumption habits we have now, I can only imagine how much more it would cost to make us 100% energy independent (no grid power, no buying gas for my ICE pickup because I'd replace it with some non-existent EV pickup that in some fantasy world actually had decent range while towing).
Or on the flip side, I wouldn't know where to begin to make my entire state even just 80% dependent on solar like we are --- there is simply way too much variability in people's lives outside homes. From a grocery store having bursts of energy needs to handle many shoppers when they get off work, to emergency rooms at random times handling many crisis at once, to motels in Alabama being crowded when Florida residents flee a hurricane, etc. There's simply no way to engineer a feasible solution where only "green" energy handles all of those variations of energy consumption while at the same time the "green" energy itself varies with the weather. You'd need an expensive solution to handle burst demand with low energy input, that's way too expensive for the times energy demand is low at normal times during good energy input.
And even if it could be done, it'd only be a matter of time before the Dims figure out an excuse to ban it. Look at how they've done natural gas and nuclear over the years. Think about how far ahead our power production would be if the Dims didn't have a love/hate relationship with nuclear for the past 50 years; if they would have just embraced nuclear and stuck with it. Or look at how in the Obama years they pushed "clean burning" natural gas as the alternative both in homes and even in power plant production (while shuttering coal plants) -- only for those same Dims to now claim natural gas is killing us all. There's no pleasing them so don't even bother trying.
That's exactly what they'll do with what they now call "green" energy. If it was ever successfully utilized on a massive scale they'd figure out an excuse to ban it or limit its supply like they do other energy sources.
Couple that with Legal Weed and process accelerates. Seems that every state that has Legal Weed the MORON population is increasing.
Correlation, maybe?????
Net Zero people = the Flat Earth people
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.