Posted on 12/05/2021 4:37:49 AM PST by MtnClimber
Somewhere a couple of decades or so ago, the rich parts of the world embarked on a program of replacing energy from fossil fuels (coal, oil, natural gas) with energy from intermittent “renewables” (mainly wind and solar). In trendy academic, journalistic, and otherwise progressive circles, the idea took hold that this was the way to “save the planet.” This program was undertaken without any detailed engineering study of how or whether it might actually work, or how much it might cost to fully implement. In the trendy circles, there took hold a blind faith in the complete ability of the government, by dispensing taxpayer funds, to order up whatever innovation might be needed to move us forward to this energy utopia.
The latest UN-orchestrated effort to implement the renewable energy program, known as COP 26, has just broken up. To read the verbiage emanating from the affair, all is on track, if a bit slower than one might have hoped.
But I have long predicted that this program would come to an end when (absent some miraculous innovation that nobody has yet conceived) the usage of the renewables got to a sufficient level that their costs and unworkability could not be covered up any longer. Until very recently the pressure of elite groupthink has been able to maintain a united front of lip service to the cause. But consider a few developments from the past few weeks, just since the end of COP 26:
Japan
Japan tends to keep its head down in international affairs, and at COP 26 signed on to the happy talk group communiqués without raising any particular issues. But there is no getting around that Japan has the third largest economy in the world — after the U.S. and China, and larger than any European country — so its actions in energy policy are inherently significant. Also, Japan has relatively little energy production of its own, is heavily dependent on imports, has harsh winters, and has a growing Chinese military and economic threat right on its doorstep. Is Japan really going to trust its fate to intermittent wind and solar energy?
On December 1 Bloomberg reported: “Japan Is Backing Oil and Gas Even After COP26 Climate Talks.” It seems that this rather significant country may be seriously re-thinking the move away from fossil fuels. Excerpt:
Government officials have been quietly urging trading houses, refiners and utilities to slow down their move away from fossil fuels, and even encouraging new investments in oil-and-gas projects, according to people within the Japanese government and industry, who requested anonymity as the talks are private.
What is motivating Japan to break from the world groupthink? According to the Bloomberg piece, the main motivator is security of energy supply — which wind and solar obviously cannot provide:
The officials are concerned about the long-term supply of traditional fuels as the world doubles down on renewable energy, the people said. The import-dependent nation wants to avoid a potential shortage of fuel this winter, as well as during future cold spells, after a deficit last year sparked fears of nationwide blackouts. . . . Japan’s Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry declined to comment directly on whether it is encouraging industries to boost investment in upstream energy supply, and instead pointed to a strategic energy plan approved by Prime Minister Fumio Kishida’s cabinet on October 22. That plan says “no compromise is acceptable to ensure energy security, and it is the obligation of a nation to continue securing necessary resources.”
(Emphasis added.). Well, if “no compromise is acceptable” on “energy security,” that pretty much rules out principal reliance on wind and solar for powering the Japanese economy, at least until some magical new inventions come along.
United States
In the U.S., Republicans have only very gradually caught on to the idea that fossil fuel restrictions in the name of “climate” are becoming a political liability for the Democrats. Up to now, there have been some politicians willing to speak out in opposition to such restrictions, but little in the way of concrete steps taken in opposition. Meanwhile, the Biden administration continues to move forward with initiatives at the SEC, Treasury Department and Federal Reserve to pressure banks and other financial institutions to reduce their participation in the fossil fuel industries.
So this is a big development: On November 22, a coalition of state treasurers sent a letter to large financial institutions threatening to end relationships, including the deposit of state and pension funds, with institutions that cut off financing for the coal, oil and natural gas industries. National Review reports in a November 22 piece headlined “Fifteen States Respond to ‘Woke Capitalism,’ Threaten to Cut Off Banks That Refuse to Service Coal, Oil Industries.” Excerpt:
A coalition of financial officers from 15 states sent a letter to the U.S. banking industry on Monday warning they plan to take “collective action” against banks that adopt corporate policies to cut off financing for the coal, oil, and natural gas industries. . . . The letter puts the financial institutions that have “adopted policies aimed at diminishing a large portion of our states’ revenue” on notice, saying the banks have “a major conflict of interest against holding, maintaining, or managing those funds.”
According to the NR piece, the state treasurers signing on to the letter include those from West Virginia, Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Louisiana, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming, Alabama, Texas and Kentucky. Recipients of the letter included JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Citigroup, and Goldman Sachs. Between the states’ own accounts and their pension funds, the amounts at issue would be well into the multiple hundreds of billions of dollars, if not approaching a trillion.
Meanwhile, over in Europe . . .
Another Bloomberg piece, this one from November 28, describes the sense of impending doom hanging over Europe with the combination of low natural gas supplies, price spikes, and complete inability to coax more production out of proliferating and essentially useless wind and solar generators. The headline is “Europe’s energy crisis is about to get worse as winter arrives.” Excerpt:
The situation is already so dire this early in the winter season because of a blistering rally in natural gas prices. Stores of the fuel, used to heat homes and to generate electricity, are lower than usual and are being depleted quickly. Analysts have warned that gas stores could drop to zero this winter if cold weather boosts demand. Rolling blackouts are a possibility, warned Jeremy Weir, chief executive officer of Trafigura Group, a Swiss commodity trading house on Nov. 16.
And then there’s this comment:
“If the weather gets cold in Europe there’s not going to be an easy supply solution, it’s going to need a demand solution,” said Adam Lewis, partner at trading house Hartree Partners LP.
I think that a “demand solution” means some combination of either blackouts or intentionally cutting people off and, I guess, leaving them to freeze. The “supply solution” mentioned by Lewis would be allowing fracking in the extensive shale formations underlying Western Europe. Such fracking is currently banned. Even if those bans were lifted today, it would be way too late for this winter.
Predicting the date when the Europeans will wake up to their ridiculous energy folly is a lot like predicting the date of the demise of the regimes in North Korea or Venezuela. You know that it has to happen eventually, but this can go on for a long time. But enough blackouts and heat cutoffs could turn things around fairly quickly.
It’s all a fantasy pipe dream that is a couple hundred years before being remotely close to achievement.
Most of the “supporters/advocates” of alternative energy do not themselves use alternative energy.
Many in reality own multiple energy suck mansions and fly around in private jets.
Which suggest that the “supporters/advocates” don’t really believe in what they say?
Does Nancy or chuck,at the very least, own an electric vehicle?
Does team biden have a fleet
of EVs? He wants us to all have one?
I’ve seen at least one engineer wish that all engineering students would have to take a project class, where you have to build and compete a vehicle using only parts from a set box of things (that everyone gets), that included a solar panel. That way, he said, all such students would gain an appreciation for just how weak a power source they were, how long it takes to collect useful energy, and how difficult it is to win a competition when that’s what you have to depend upon.
I’m sure if you ask old creepy Joe he’ll tell you he’s got one, or had one. He don’t know. He can’t even tell you who keeps crapping in his pants every day.
The only reason it isn’t working is because all these governments and thier employee’s don’t really believe in it. When the First State or Country MANDATES all Travel For ALL Government be conducted strictly with Non Carbon Emitting transportation, they can then show the whole World the wonders of Green Energy
Denmark, the world's most wind-intensive nation, with more than 6,000 turbines generating 19% of its electricity, has yet to close a single fossil-fuel plant.
It requires 50% more coal-generated electricity to cover wind power's unpredictability, and pollution and carbon dioxide emissions have risen (by 36% in 2006 alone).
Flemming Nissen, the head of development at West Danish generating company ELSAM (one of Denmark's largest energy utilities) tells us that "wind turbines do not reduce carbon dioxide emissions."
The German experience is no different. Der Spiegel reports that "Germany's CO2 emissions haven't been reduced by even a single gram," and additional coal-and gas-fired plants have been constructed to ensure reliable delivery.
That’s where genuine “conspiracy theorists” start in your scenario.
I’m not convinced, but their arguments are something along the lines that there is no intention to building an electrical grid capable of supplying current demand.
They are “transitioning” to or preparing for a so iety with a whole lot less people, i.e. for whatever or however reasons, there will be a lot of dead people very, very soon. Therefore there will be no need for the level of infrastructure we have now. Again these are not my opinions, but the paranoid can’t help but notice these things. And there is a certain elegance to the scheme.
My Grandfather worked in a coal mine when he was 12.
Why would I be involved in supporting child labor?
Why would anyone for that matter?
“when that’s what you have to depend upon.”
I’ve learned this lesson. I used a 500 watt lithium power pack to run just a refrigerator while camping this summer. Yes, it works, but only if you have enough reserve juice to get through the cloudy days, and you remember to set out your panels... Every. Day.
The novelty of getting power from sunlight is technically fascinating, but it’s anything but fast.
Biggest lesson I learned was the awareness of all the little things we use electricity for. When your choices come down to watching TV or keeping the lights on, you quickly wake up to how good it is to have reliable and almost endless power.
Call it a conspiracy theory, but as Sowell points out, it is wishful thinking to believe that EVERYONE will get brought into the Brave New World.
As we see now, it’s not very hard to ostracize a good portion of the population who don’t respond as they wish.
We may think we can keep living our lives as normal while this ‘progress’ takes place around us. They will do everything to make sure we don’t.
The question is how will they seek to solve the shortages: free up the markets or more oppressive government regulation? My guess is the latter.
I burned a wood stove for 17 years.
About 2 cords a year.
I installed a Harman pellet fireplace insert when we moved to a new/old 1972 house here in NH.
It is so much easier.
I buy 10-22 bags at a time, usually at Lowe’s.
The pellets come from a mill right here in NH.
I clean it once a week with a HEPA filter ash vacuum.
I still have a masonry fireplace in the den we burn a couple days a year.
I have 12 acres. So I generate firewood every year just from trees that need to be cut down or break. A lot more than I can ever burn. So, now when I generate a pick up truck full I sell it on Facebook for $100 cash
A large fully charged cell phone stores about 1/4th of a penny's worth of electricity in its battery. Let's see some commitment from the city slickers to go 100% solar just for that tiny use. Many portable power banks now have solar panels built in (along with wall plug ins for real charging), so they can try that. The truth is, going 100% solar for even a very tiny power use is a major inconvenience and expense.
That would spark problems. Due to blending and air quality regulations, raise the price by a couple of dollars a gallon. Inflation in production costs dontcha know.
there is no such a thing as a fossil fuel
It is not nice, but I wish the Europe a very cold winter.
That may return them to sanity.
In the US, sanity returns when Brandon is retired.
That is a cowardly statement. You lack the courage to eliminate the problem and rationalize temporary mitigatopn
Problems, insurmountable harsh problems, will bring very great harm to the left wing enemies.
Problems they can’t solve will destroy the left. Destruction is the only, that is the only way to save Americal
Actually, school buses that have runs under 2 hours or so are one of the few things running on electricity that makes sense.
Proven technology from the early 1900s, using Edison batteries, that get better with age, so never have to be replaced and don't use rare earth materials.
In the early 1900s a lot of local transport vehicles were electric.
That moves the pollution out of cities, and saves fuel for the rest of us who travel longer distances.
Let’s stop calling them fossil fuels, shall we? That’s a phony leftist coinage.
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.