Posted on 12/29/2020 4:50:51 AM PST by karpov
One of the Biden administration's key pledges is to have a "100 percent clean energy economy" and reach net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. A study released by Princeton researchers last week analyzed several scenarios detailing the herculean efforts required to achieve that goal.
A prominent takeaway is the massive amount of land it would take to reimagine energy production and distribution nationally, including figuring out where to site a multitude of new solar arrays and wind turbines and constructing thousands of miles of transmission lines. "The current power grid took 150 years to build," one of the study researchers said. "Now, to get to net-zero emissions by 2050, we have to build that amount of transmission again in the next 15 years and then build that much more again in the 15 years after that. It's a huge amount of change."
The study underscores the environmental tradeoffs that are not always obvious in campaign promises about green energy. For one thing, achieving President-elect Joe Biden's vision would mean choosing between being beholden to China for most of the minerals necessary to make technologies like solar panels and rechargeable batteries or mining the raw materials ourselves. For another, huge photovoltaic installations and wind farms have direct impacts that, while different from those made by fossil fuel development, have their own environmental consequences. The public appetite for such infrastructure can change dramatically when the calculus changes from the abstract "renewables for the nation" to the tangible "wind turbines or solar farms in view of my backyard."
Policy makers should be upfront about these costs of transitioning from oil and gas to modern renewables, both for the country and individual American households.
(Excerpt) Read more at reason.com ...
Imagine all the people screaming “not in my backyard.”
All based on a theory
So we are to be a merchant/info/agriculture society. All the industrial/mineral/mining muscle of the economy will be gone. Can you speak Mandarin? You should....
California has been experiencing rolling blackouts already. When we convert all the vehicles to electric it will be glorious.
Yes. Trade off prosperity for depression.
Note to the rest of the nation: Take a real good look at NYS and consider us a preview of coming attractions.
You can’t say you weren’t warned.
The Dems have always been big fans of unilateral disarmament.
“Tradeoffs”? Libertarian economists can’t seem to use words that drive the point home. This is going to turn our economy into a wasteland.
California is already a huge buyer of electricity from out of state sources.
Here’s 2013-17. ~89megawatts annually.
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=38912
How’m I gonna charge up my Tesla without power supplied thru the electric companies?
The new Gulags and re-education camps included for this will eliminate the complaints.
With awesome projects like this:
As far as I know it ain’t on line yet. Years end is quickly approaching. But hey, someone made some money on it.
“One of the Biden administration’s key pledges is to have a “100 percent clean energy economy” and reach net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. “
Why 2050? Why not 2030? Or 2025?
“Why 2050? Why not 2030? Or 2025?”
Forgot to add, can we see the timeline in how Biden came up with this date?
We can start by stopping shipments of food to the blue states.
Let them grow their own. Same with fuel shipments.
Look at California’s experience with moving toward renewable energy. Already there are large scale blackouts as the fickle windmills and solar plants cannot meet peak demands. Add to the electric demand fleets of electric vehicles which will need constant recharging. Imagine a large scale blackout not only disrupting the economy depending on electric power, but also bringing transportation to a halt.
In Calif they are banning nat gas for new construction.
Of course then comes forced conversion of existing buildings to electric heat and appliances, or forced economic conversion by making gas super expensive.
This is gonna be expensive and painful.
It isn’t possible to achieve what they propose without America reverting to a 19-th Century lifestyle.
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.