GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES

[Andrei Moutchkine + 828]

1 minute ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Actually I believe that is law in Israel(not joking).  Saves ~3% of their power bill every year.  Every residential building has multiple black tanks on the roof.  How you always know it is a picture of Israel when you see a picture of a city... black  tanks everywhere.

This does not work with high rise buildings. Neither does the obligatory individual family bomb shelter.

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,187]

4 minutes ago, Andrei Moutchkine said:

This does not work with high rise buildings. Neither does the obligatory individual family bomb shelter.

🙄https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=3KmMZPTa&id=D595D20233BB9CC2FA16A6DC018242AEFC967498&thid=OIP.3KmMZPTaUEdZYy7RbqpFMwHaEM&mediaurl=https%3a%2f%2fwww.greenprophet.com%2fwp-content%2fuploads%2f2009%2f08%2fsolar-water-heaters-on-roof_lbiRv_578411.jpg&cdnurl=https%3a%2f%2fth.bing.com%2fth%2fid%2fR.dca98c64f4da504759632ed16eaa4533%3frik%3dmHSW%2fK5CggHcpg%26pid%3dImgRaw%26r%3d0%26sres%3d1%26sresct%3d1%26srh%3d735%26srw%3d1300&exph=311&expw=550&q=jerusalem+picture+hot+water+tanks&simid=608009027002646030&FORM=IRPRST&ck=D24F1129068540FFBD37E26DCC453A9B&selectedIndex=0&idpp=overlayview&ajaxhist=0&ajaxserp=0

I think that link will work...

[Andrei Moutchkine + 828]

59 minutes ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

🙄https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=3KmMZPTa&id=D595D20233BB9CC2FA16A6DC018242AEFC967498&thid=OIP.3KmMZPTaUEdZYy7RbqpFMwHaEM&mediaurl=https%3a%2f%2fwww.greenprophet.com%2fwp-content%2fuploads%2f2009%2f08%2fsolar-water-heaters-on-roof_lbiRv_578411.jpg&cdnurl=https%3a%2f%2fth.bing.com%2fth%2fid%2fR.dca98c64f4da504759632ed16eaa4533%3frik%3dmHSW%2fK5CggHcpg%26pid%3dImgRaw%26r%3d0%26sres%3d1%26sresct%3d1%26srh%3d735%26srw%3d1300&exph=311&expw=550&q=jerusalem+picture+hot+water+tanks&simid=608009027002646030&FORM=IRPRST&ck=D24F1129068540FFBD37E26DCC453A9B&selectedIndex=0&idpp=overlayview&ajaxhist=0&ajaxserp=0

I think that link will work...

The Mexicans should do this too.

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,187]

5 hours ago, Andrei Moutchkine said:

The Mexicans should do this too.

Everyone who has sun and needs heating or AC should do this.  It pays back in ~10 years. 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,187]

Reason it does not happen?  Same reason I was not allowed to do it either...

Women

"looks" even though it is a flat panel just like a skylight.  I would understand if the tank was up there, but vast majority do not have the hot water tank up there as most of us have this thing called FREEZING weather.

[Ecocharger + 1,446]

13 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Well no, as Europe has given GARGANTUAN subsidies to the wind industry(as they should as they have no oil/gas/solar), same with China and its solar panel assembly while the USA has allowed these MASSIVELY subsidized products ENTRY into our country without massive tariffs. 

The problem, once again, is government policy.. or in the case of the USA, LACK of policy tied with bottom basement cost of NG which no one else has. 

You might notice, USA has the highest efficiency solar panels on the planet... just not mass production.  Also, wind sighting in USA was paused due to bird death strikes for decades and why I initially lost my job in said industry going on 2 decades ago now and I had to move on.  This is still a gargantuan problem in the USA.  Apparently either Europeans have no protected big birds already and therefore no bird deaths or do not care as they have to worry more about keeping the lights on.  In the USA we do not have the problem with the later but do have a big problem with the former with large birds everywhere it is windy other than a few select desert locations. 

Yes, one more reason West Texas and West Oklahoma have seen explosive growth in wind turbines in USA(40GW currently and climbing quickly with an average capacity factor of 44% and going up with all newer birds hitting an average of +50%)... NO BIRDS as it is effect a desert.  Likewise California's early wind turbine parks also did not have bird problems as they were in desert location.  Maybe no one gives a damn about sea birds in Europe so when they get smashed and fall in the water no one ever knows as most of Europe's early adopters of wind turbines are right next to water or in the water.  Just an FYI, Germany with a capacity of ~60GW(onshore+offshore), has CF of 38% in its OFFSHORE birds all under 5 years of age.  https://energynumbers.info/germanys-offshore-wind-capacity-factors

In otherwords, TX/OK with 40GW get roughly same power as Germany with 60GW of sunk cost

Who knew, LOCATION matters.  Government policy MATTERS.

You can SAY you wish to go wind/solar, does not make it a viable option just because you SAY it is so.  Pesky things like birds, tariffs, corruption allowing an effective dictatorial slave nation state to be able to import into your country tariff free.... MATTERS. 

Israel and Mexico have just banned wind turbine generators going forward because of bird deaths and other problems.

[Boat + 1,323]

2 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

Israel and Mexico have just banned wind turbine generators going forward because of bird deaths and other problems.

Biden is opening the Gulf to wind farms where Trump had banned them. Big oil still has tremendous power. That why flaring still happens. When electric cars are added like 10 million per year no one will care about oil. I bet the caring about birds disappears as well. Lol

[specinho + 457]

On 8/22/2022 at 11:16 AM, notsonice said:

If gas CO2 remains at 1 atmospheric pressure, we assume solubility happens only on the surface, yes?

 

NO, you have no idea what you are talking about.

 

think about how much CO2 you can put into water in a soda bottle..  pressure is greater than one atmo in the bottle and the amount of CO2 in solution is far greater than sea water....now think of at 100 atmos ....very deep water how much CO2 can be put into solution ......far greater amount than at 1 atmo

first the partial pressure that CO2 exerts at sea level is not 1 atmo......You can put more CO2 into water at a higher partial pressure (related to the 410 ppm) than existed in 1750 related to the 260 ppm....CO2 can dissplace the dissolved nitrogen and oxygen as the partial pressure of N2 decreases slightly as you increase the partial pressure of CO2.

Got it?????? if you do not go back to college and take some chemistry classes and surface chemistry classes and try to understand how gases interact with liquids

In addation amount of CO2 at sea level (at the surface) is not at saturation for CO2 meaning that CO2 keeps dissolving into sea water at the surface and at a rate of 1.6 times (415/260) today than it did 250 years ago. Soluble CO2 or CO2 dissolve in seawater then can speciate to Carbonic acid according to ..................... if you do not understand the following you are just babbling BS

 

In aqueous solution carbonic acid behaves as a dibasic acid. The Bjerrum plot shows typical equilibrium concentrations, in solution, in seawater, of carbon dioxide and the various species derived from it, as a function of pH.^[4][5] The acidification of natural waters is caused by the increasing concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, which is caused by the burning of increasing amounts of coal and hydrocarbons.^[6][7]

Expected change refers to predicted effect of continued ocean acidification.^[8] It has been estimated that the increase in dissolved carbon dioxide has caused the ocean's average surface pH to decrease by about 0.1 from pre-industrial levels.

The stability constants database contains 136 entries with values for the overall protonation constants, β₁ and β₂, of the carbonate ion. In the following expressions [H⁺] represents the concentration, at equilibrium, of the chemical species H⁺, etc.

The value of log β₁ decreases with increasing ionic strength, {\displaystyle {\ce {I}}}. At 25 °C:

{\displaystyle {\ce {CO3^{2-}{+ H+}<=> HCO3^-}}} : {\displaystyle \beta _{1}={\frac {[{\text{HCO}}_{3}^{-}]}{[{\text{H}}^{+}][{\text{CO}}_{3}^{2-}]}}}

{\displaystyle \log \beta _{1}=0.54I^{2}-0.96I+9.93} (selected data from SC-database)

The value of log β₂ also decreases with increasing ionic strength.

{\displaystyle {\ce {CO3^{2-}{+ 2H+}<=> H2CO3}}} : {\displaystyle \beta _{2}={\frac {[{\text{H}}_{2}{\text{CO}}_{3}]}{[{\text{H}}^{+}]^{2}[{\text{CO}}_{3}^{2-}]}}}

{\displaystyle \log \beta _{2}=-2.5I^{2}-0.043I+16.07}

At {\displaystyle {\ce {I}}}=0 and 25 °C the pK values of the stepwise dissociation constants are

pK₁ = logβ₂ - logβ₁ = 6.77.

pK₂ = logβ₁ = 9.93.

When pH = pK the two chemical species in equilibrium with each other have the same concentration.

Note 1: There are apparently conflicting values in the literature for pK_a. Pines et al. cite a value for "pK_app" of 6.35, consistent with the value 6.77, mentioned above.^[9] They also give a value for "pK_a" of 3.49 and state that

pK_a = pK_app − log K_D (eqn. 5)

where K_D=[CO₂]/[H₂CO₃]. (eqn. 3) The situation arises from the way that the dissociation constants are named and defined, which is clearly stated in the text of the Pines paper, but not in the abstract.

Note 2: The numbering of dissociation constants is the reverse of the numbering of the numbering of association constants, so pK₂ (dissociation)= log β₁ (association). The value of the stepwise constant for the equilibrium

{\displaystyle {\ce {HCO3- <=> CO3^{2-}{+ H+}}}}

is given by

pK₁(dissociation)₁ = log β₂ − log β₁ (association)

 

Me? I guess you mean yourself......

1. CO2 in a soda can vs CO2 in limitless sky.........? Try your pressure again. And the solubility.

2. ph reduced by 0.1 over few hundreds of years?

Joker........ >.<

3. Basic chemical bonds:

a) ionic

b) covalent

c) hydrogen

Formation of CO2 = covalent bond, sharing outermost electron pairs.

what formed is a stable structure of octet. No free electron circulating. No ability to release electron or receive in molecular form.

How does carbonic acid formed, Mr. deemed genius?

why doesn't snoopy get into the dog house as it is raining so heavily, right? Someone said it well....... " you will not be able to see it if it does"........ 

Why CO2 is still on the loose? "You will not be able to tax it if it does not, right?".......

 

[Ecocharger + 1,446]

Europe is now staggering under the self-inflicted economic disaster caused by the Green mania. The politicians have signed on to a weakly designed pseudo-science and abandoned any chance at realistic energy policies.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Power-Prices-Break-Records-As-Europes-Energy-Crisis-Persists.html

"Electricity prices across Europe are breaking record after record.

The slowing natural gas supply from Russia is fueling further upward price pressure.

Soaring energy prices are fueling inflation and adding a lot of burden on households and industries across Europe."

Edited August 26, 2022 by Ecocharger

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,187]

10 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

Israel and Mexico have just banned wind turbine generators going forward because of bird deaths and other problems.

Pretty easy to ban wind turbines in both countries when they have no wind and in both cases where there is slight wind(deserts) have no birds, but they do both have great solar, so they can make the pedantic "gesture" and pretend to do the "smart" thing, when in reality all they are doing is acknowledging reality.

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,552]

2 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

Europe is now staggering under the self-inflicted economic disaster caused by the Green mania. The politicians have signed on to a weakly designed pseudo-science and abandoned any chance at realistic energy policies.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Power-Prices-Break-Records-As-Europes-Energy-Crisis-Persists.html

"Electricity prices across Europe are breaking record after record.

The slowing natural gas supply from Russia is fueling further upward price pressure.

Soaring energy prices are fueling inflation and adding a lot of burden on households and industries across Europe."

British household energy bills to jump 80% to over $4,000 a year

LONDON, Aug 26 (Reuters) - British energy bills will jump 80% to an average of 3,549 pounds ($4,188) a year from October, the regulator said on Friday, plunging millions of households into fuel poverty and businesses into jeopardy unless the government steps in.

Reporting by Paul Sandle and Kylie MacLellan; editing by Kate Holton, Jason Neely and Toby Chopra

https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/british-energy-price-cap-rise-80-3549-pounds-year-2022-08-26/

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

1 hour ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

British household energy bills to jump 80% to over $4,000 a year

LONDON, Aug 26 (Reuters) - British energy bills will jump 80% to an average of 3,549 pounds ($4,188) a year from October, the regulator said on Friday, plunging millions of households into fuel poverty and businesses into jeopardy unless the government steps in.

Reporting by Paul Sandle and Kylie MacLellan; editing by Kate Holton, Jason Neely and Toby Chopra

https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/british-energy-price-cap-rise-80-3549-pounds-year-2022-08-26/

"another increase is likely in January as Russia's move to throttle European supplies drives wholesale gas prices to record highs." 

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,552]

2 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

"another increase is likely in January as Russia's move to throttle European supplies drives wholesale gas prices to record highs." 

Energy Crises In Germany and Texas Are Exposing The Folly of Renewable Energy |

The same is true in Texas. Between 2014 and 2020, about 6,200 megawatts of coal-fired capacity in Texas was retired, and despite rising electricity demand, the state has not added any new gas-fired generation over the past two decades. The result is that by the end of next year, the Texas grid could have more weather-dependent generation capacity than it has gas-fired capacity.

The punchline here is obvious: We could cover all of Texas and Germany with wind turbines, but we can't make the wind blow. Those two provinces are running short of electricity because they have made their electric grids too reliant on weather-dependent renewables.

If climate change means we are going to be facing more extreme weather—hotter summers, colder winters, or both—it is pure foolishness to make our electric grid dependent on the weather. And yet, that is exactly what is happening.

https://www.newsweek.com/energy-crises-germany-texas-are-exposing-folly-renewable-energy-opinion-1724084

[Boat + 1,323]

11 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

Europe is now staggering under the self-inflicted economic disaster caused by the Green mania. The politicians have signed on to a weakly designed pseudo-science and abandoned any chance at realistic energy policies.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Power-Prices-Break-Records-As-Europes-Energy-Crisis-Persists.html

"Electricity prices across Europe are breaking record after record.

The slowing natural gas supply from Russia is fueling further upward price pressure.

Soaring energy prices are fueling inflation and adding a lot of burden on households and industries across Europe."

4 hours ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

Energy Crises In Germany and Texas Are Exposing The Folly of Renewable Energy |

The same is true in Texas. Between 2014 and 2020, about 6,200 megawatts of coal-fired capacity in Texas was retired, and despite rising electricity demand, the state has not added any new gas-fired generation over the past two decades. The result is that by the end of next year, the Texas grid could have more weather-dependent generation capacity than it has gas-fired capacity.

The punchline here is obvious: We could cover all of Texas and Germany with wind turbines, but we can't make the wind blow. Those two provinces are running short of electricity because they have made their electric grids too reliant on weather-dependent renewables.

If climate change means we are going to be facing more extreme weather—hotter summers, colder winters, or both—it is pure foolishness to make our electric grid dependent on the weather. And yet, that is exactly what is happening.

https://www.newsweek.com/energy-crises-germany-texas-are-exposing-folly-renewable-energy-opinion-1724084

Yes, cutting nat gas due to war is a renewable problem. This is typical Russian thinking which gets them into wars to begin with. This nation buys stain glass churches glorifying war. Inexperienced Ukrainians seem to be able to hold off the Russian war machine with a few weapons. That’s probably renewables fault as well. Renewables just seem to mess up the world of Russians and Republicans alike. 

[Ron Wagner + 702]

On 8/24/2022 at 10:01 PM, Boat said:

So anybody done a study on the nat gas consumption of creating electricity vrs refining with nat gas. Oil Demand will start dropping soon if not already. Say per 5 million electric cars, how much nat gas demand from refining is saved vrs demand needed for electricity generated. 

The cost of building new electrical infrastructure and replacing old plus maintenance is rarely mentioned. It is much more affordable to maintain existing natural gas infrastructure. The case of the PG&E caused wildfires and bankruptcy is one example. Natural gas is responsible for most electrical generation and should remain a large part. It is obviously more dependable. Who ever heard of a natural gas shortage in North America?

[Ron Wagner + 702]

On 8/24/2022 at 2:44 AM, Rob Plant said:

I agree on the REE, I think thats obvious.

However you were complaining of cost and competitiveness and then saying USA shouldnt be buying from the countries that are cheapest and most competitive. Like I said you cant have it both ways unless the US ramps up on its renewable in country manufacture which I dont see, maybe because I'm not in country so I stand to be corrected on that. You didnt mention REE at all in your original post. If the USA mines its own minerals then it will be even less competitive than it is today IMHO.

If done well renewables can be as cheap if not cheaper than FF without any subsidies in many locations. It also gives that country more energy security which may not be a concern in the US but in many countries particularly at present its a very big deal indeed.

ESG is falling apart. China and Russia are falling apart. America may also, at the rate we are going. ESG does not consider the damage done to the environment by China and its Third World suppliers. True ESG needs to look at the big picture and include the needs of the American economy. 

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,552]

On 8/26/2022 at 9:38 PM, Boat said:

 

Never mind the 100's of conventional energy plant's  shut down by Europe, replaced by green ideology. Failing at level never seen before in the history of mankind.

And now the entire world pays for that design..implementation and malfeasance.

Edited August 28, 2022 by Eyes Wide Open

[turbguy + 1,535]

On 8/26/2022 at 5:54 PM, Eyes Wide Open said:

Energy Crises In Germany and Texas Are Exposing The Folly of Renewable Energy |

The same is true in Texas. Between 2014 and 2020, about 6,200 megawatts of coal-fired capacity in Texas was retired, and despite rising electricity demand, the state has not added any new gas-fired generation over the past two decades. The result is that by the end of next .

 

Huh??  No new gas-fired generation in Texas?  This Opinion writer should "do some research"...

https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights/latest-news-headlines/gas-generators-make-their-move-as-texas-redesigns-power-market-67787177

[Ron Wagner + 702]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-the-energy-transition-will-fail-11661547051?mod=hp_opin_pos_5#cxrecs_s

 

Why the Energy Transition Will Fail

New report highlights the staggering cost of green ‘delusions.’

 

By James Freeman

Follow

 

Aug. 26, 2022 4:50 pm ET

SAVE

PRINT

TEXT

874

Gov. Gavin Newsom (D., Calif.) at a Wednesday news conference.PHOTO: CAROLINE BREHMAN/SHUTTERSTOCK

Listen to article

Length(8 minutes)

Queue

Even if you’re never hit by a 7-ton blade falling from the night sky, alternative energy will fail you. Regardless of facts or feelings about the climate, there are reasons why wind and solar power are not replacing fossil fuels. Wind and solar are also no substitute for nuclear power.

See more...

The government of California can issue as many proclamations and prohibitions as it wants against gasoline-powered vehicles. No doubt the Biden administration will enjoy spending the ocean of tax dollars now earmarked for low-intensity energy sources. But reality will stubbornly remain.

In a new report due out next week from the Manhattan Institute, Mark Mills takes on the “dangerous delusion” of a global energy transition that eliminates the use of fossil fuels. Surveying energy markets and public policy around the world, Mr. Mills asks readers to “consider that years of hypertrophied rhetoric and trillions of dollars of spending and subsidies on a transition have not significantly changed the energy landscape.” He notes:

Civilization still depends on hydrocarbons for 84% of all energy, a mere two percentage points lower than two decades ago. Solar and wind technologies today supply barely 5% of global energy. Electric vehicles still offset less than 0.5% of world oil demand.

Mr. Mills then explains why the global appetite for energy is not heading south:

---

NEWSLETTER SIGN-UP

Best of the Web

James Freeman of the Journal editorial board comments on the news of the day.

Preview

 

 

 

 

Subscribed

 

 

 

---

One can begin with a reality that cannot be blinked away: energy is needed for everything that is fabricated, grown, operated, or moved... digital devices and hardware—the most complex products ever produced at scale—require, on average, about 1,000 times more energy to fabricate, pound for pound, than the products that dominated the 20th century... it takes nearly as much energy to make one smartphone as it does one refrigerator, even though the latter weighs 1,000 times more. The world produces nearly 10 times more smartphones a year than refrigerators. Thus, the global fabrication of smartphones now uses 15% as much energy as does the entire automotive industry, even though a car weighs 10,000 times more than a smartphone. The global Cloud, society’s newest and biggest infrastructure, uses twice as much electricity as the entire nation of Japan. And then, of course, there are all the other common, vital needs for energy, from heating and cooling homes to producing food and delivering freight.

Advocates of a carbon-free world underestimate not only how much energy the world already uses, but how much more energy the world will yet demand... In America, there are nearly as many vehicles as people, while in most of the world, fewer than 1 in 20 people have a car. More than 80% of the world population has yet to take a single flight.

He then proceeds to take on the argument that wind and solar power are now becoming competitive with fossil fuels:

 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

30 minutes ago, Ron Wagner said:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-the-energy-transition-will-fail-11661547051?mod=hp_opin_pos_5#cxrecs_s

 

Why the Energy Transition Will Fail

New report highlights the staggering cost of green ‘delusions.’

 

By James Freeman

Follow

 

Aug. 26, 2022 4:50 pm ET

 

SAVE

 

PRINT

TEXT

874

Gov. Gavin Newsom (D., Calif.) at a Wednesday news conference.PHOTO: CAROLINE BREHMAN/SHUTTERSTOCK

Listen to article

Length(8 minutes)

Queue

Even if you’re never hit by a 7-ton blade falling from the night sky, alternative energy will fail you. Regardless of facts or feelings about the climate, there are reasons why wind and solar power are not replacing fossil fuels. Wind and solar are also no substitute for nuclear power.

See more...

The government of California can issue as many proclamations and prohibitions as it wants against gasoline-powered vehicles. No doubt the Biden administration will enjoy spending the ocean of tax dollars now earmarked for low-intensity energy sources. But reality will stubbornly remain.

In a new report due out next week from the Manhattan Institute, Mark Mills takes on the “dangerous delusion” of a global energy transition that eliminates the use of fossil fuels. Surveying energy markets and public policy around the world, Mr. Mills asks readers to “consider that years of hypertrophied rhetoric and trillions of dollars of spending and subsidies on a transition have not significantly changed the energy landscape.” He notes:

Civilization still depends on hydrocarbons for 84% of all energy, a mere two percentage points lower than two decades ago. Solar and wind technologies today supply barely 5% of global energy. Electric vehicles still offset less than 0.5% of world oil demand.

Mr. Mills then explains why the global appetite for energy is not heading south:

---

NEWSLETTER SIGN-UP

Best of the Web

James Freeman of the Journal editorial board comments on the news of the day.

Preview

 

 

 

 

Subscribed

 

 

 

---

One can begin with a reality that cannot be blinked away: energy is needed for everything that is fabricated, grown, operated, or moved... digital devices and hardware—the most complex products ever produced at scale—require, on average, about 1,000 times more energy to fabricate, pound for pound, than the products that dominated the 20th century... it takes nearly as much energy to make one smartphone as it does one refrigerator, even though the latter weighs 1,000 times more. The world produces nearly 10 times more smartphones a year than refrigerators. Thus, the global fabrication of smartphones now uses 15% as much energy as does the entire automotive industry, even though a car weighs 10,000 times more than a smartphone. The global Cloud, society’s newest and biggest infrastructure, uses twice as much electricity as the entire nation of Japan. And then, of course, there are all the other common, vital needs for energy, from heating and cooling homes to producing food and delivering freight.

Advocates of a carbon-free world underestimate not only how much energy the world already uses, but how much more energy the world will yet demand... In America, there are nearly as many vehicles as people, while in most of the world, fewer than 1 in 20 people have a car. More than 80% of the world population has yet to take a single flight.

He then proceeds to take on the argument that wind and solar power are now becoming competitive with fossil fuels:

 

Global Renewable Energy Consumption Is Soaring

By Robert Rapier - Aug 27, 2022, 4:00 PM CDT

• Renewable energy consumption is growing at a blistering rate.
• Despite the largest decline in primary global energy consumption since World War II, global renewable energy consumption grew by 9.7% in 202.
• China is the world’s top consumer of renewable eDuring the early stages on the Covid-19 pandemic, the world’s energy consumption plunged. All major categories of energy production declined, except for one. Despite the largest decline in primary global energy consumption since World War II, global renewable energy consumption grew by 9.7% in 2020. That was remarkable given how significantly the pandemic impacted total energy demand.

During the early stages on the Covid-19 pandemic, the world’s energy consumption plunged. All major categories of energy production declined, except for one. Despite the largest decline in primary global energy consumption since World War II, global renewable energy consumption grew by 9.7% in 2020. That was remarkable given how significantly the pandemic impacted total energy demand.

Energy trends in all categories bounced back in 2021. But renewables once again led the pack. From 2020 to 2021, global renewable energy consumption grew by a whopping 15%.

 

Over the past decade, global renewable energy consumption has grown exponentially, at an average annual rate of 12.6%. Renewables were the only category of energy that grew globally at double digits over the year and the past decade.

For perspective, in 2010 the world consumed 10.5 exajoules of renewable energy. In 2021, that had reached 39.9 exajoules. The 5.1 exajoule increase in renewable consumption in 2021 was a record increase for one year, and it set a new all-time high for renewable energy consumption in a year.

Hydroelectricity, which the Review reports as a separate category is growing globally at a much slower rate than modern renewables like solar power. Global hydropower consumption in 2021 was 40.3 exajoules, which is still more than wind and solar. However, the 10-year average annual growth rate for hydropower is much lower at only 1.5%.

Globally, hydroelectricity represented 6.8% of the world’s primary energy consumption in 2021, just barely ahead of the 6.7% for modern renewables like wind and solar power. But modern renewables will finally overtake hydroelectricity in overall consumption this year.

Within the Renewable Power category, wind (49.0%) and solar (27.2%) accounted for most of the consumption. Although wind consumption maintains a healthy lead over solar consumption, the ten-year growth rate in solar power consumption continues to be more than double the growth rate of wind power.

China is the world’s top consumer of renewable energy. China’s growth rate over the past decade also vastly exceeds all other members of the Top 10. Cumulatively, the Top 10 consumers accounted for 75.9% of the world’s renewable energy consumption in 2021.

 

But here is the challenge the world faces. Against the backdrop of the 5.1 exajoule global increase in renewable energy consumption, global energy demand increased by 31.3 exajoules in 2021 — over six times as much. Based on the current trends it would take over a decade before renewable growth can match global energy demand growth.

One source of power that could help immensely as the world strives to reduce carbon emissions is nuclear power, the topic of the next article in this series.

[Ecocharger + 1,446]

On 8/26/2022 at 4:53 PM, Jay McKinsey said:

"another increase is likely in January as Russia's move to throttle European supplies drives wholesale gas prices to record highs." 

This is all about embracing a fallacious Green agenda. Self-inflicted pain. It looks ghastly.

[Ecocharger + 1,446]

7 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Global Renewable Energy Consumption Is Soaring

By Robert Rapier - Aug 27, 2022, 4:00 PM CDT

• Renewable energy consumption is growing at a blistering rate.
• Despite the largest decline in primary global energy consumption since World War II, global renewable energy consumption grew by 9.7% in 202.
• China is the world’s top consumer of renewable eDuring the early stages on the Covid-19 pandemic, the world’s energy consumption plunged. All major categories of energy production declined, except for one. Despite the largest decline in primary global energy consumption since World War II, global renewable energy consumption grew by 9.7% in 2020. That was remarkable given how significantly the pandemic impacted total energy demand.

During the early stages on the Covid-19 pandemic, the world’s energy consumption plunged. All major categories of energy production declined, except for one. Despite the largest decline in primary global energy consumption since World War II, global renewable energy consumption grew by 9.7% in 2020. That was remarkable given how significantly the pandemic impacted total energy demand.

Energy trends in all categories bounced back in 2021. But renewables once again led the pack. From 2020 to 2021, global renewable energy consumption grew by a whopping 15%.

 

Over the past decade, global renewable energy consumption has grown exponentially, at an average annual rate of 12.6%. Renewables were the only category of energy that grew globally at double digits over the year and the past decade.

For perspective, in 2010 the world consumed 10.5 exajoules of renewable energy. In 2021, that had reached 39.9 exajoules. The 5.1 exajoule increase in renewable consumption in 2021 was a record increase for one year, and it set a new all-time high for renewable energy consumption in a year.

Hydroelectricity, which the Review reports as a separate category is growing globally at a much slower rate than modern renewables like solar power. Global hydropower consumption in 2021 was 40.3 exajoules, which is still more than wind and solar. However, the 10-year average annual growth rate for hydropower is much lower at only 1.5%.

Globally, hydroelectricity represented 6.8% of the world’s primary energy consumption in 2021, just barely ahead of the 6.7% for modern renewables like wind and solar power. But modern renewables will finally overtake hydroelectricity in overall consumption this year.

Within the Renewable Power category, wind (49.0%) and solar (27.2%) accounted for most of the consumption. Although wind consumption maintains a healthy lead over solar consumption, the ten-year growth rate in solar power consumption continues to be more than double the growth rate of wind power.

China is the world’s top consumer of renewable energy. China’s growth rate over the past decade also vastly exceeds all other members of the Top 10. Cumulatively, the Top 10 consumers accounted for 75.9% of the world’s renewable energy consumption in 2021.

 

But here is the challenge the world faces. Against the backdrop of the 5.1 exajoule global increase in renewable energy consumption, global energy demand increased by 31.3 exajoules in 2021 — over six times as much. Based on the current trends it would take over a decade before renewable growth can match global energy demand growth.

One source of power that could help immensely as the world strives to reduce carbon emissions is nuclear power, the topic of the next article in this series.

Coal is again growing. Growth rates from a miniscule base tell us nothing.

"Civilization still depends on hydrocarbons for 84% of all energy, a mere two percentage points lower than two decades ago. Solar and wind technologies today supply barely 5% of global energy. Electric vehicles still offset less than 0.5% of world oil demand."

Edited August 28, 2022 by Ecocharger

[gkam44 + 26]

Once again, we have folk who want desperately for renewables to lose.  But we have felt the folly of relying on others for energy, and are building our own clean renewable systems.  And we can do it more easily then most are aware.  The cheapest power is now from utility-scale PV at between 1.5 and 2 cents/kWh.  My own household and both electric cars are powered primarily by the PV system on our roof.

 

[Ecocharger + 1,446]

49 minutes ago, gkam44 said:

Once again, we have folk who want desperately for renewables to lose.  But we have felt the folly of relying on others for energy, and are building our own clean renewable systems.  And we can do it more easily then most are aware.  The cheapest power is now from utility-scale PV at between 1.5 and 2 cents/kWh.  My own household and both electric cars are powered primarily by the PV system on our roof.

 

The realities are different, the fossil fuel base of the energy supply system is intractable and unavoidable  for the foreseeable future.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/The-Worlds-Energy-Problem-Is-Far-Worse-Than-Were-Being-Told.html

"A rough estimate of what the decline in energy supply might look like under the rapid shift to renewables proposed by politicians is shown in Figure 6.

Figure 6. Estimate by Gail Tverberg of World Energy Consumption from 1820 to 2050. Amounts for earliest years based on estimates in Vaclav Smil’s book Energy Transitions: History, Requirements and Prospectsand BP’s 2020 Statistical Review of World Energy for the years 1965 to 2019. Energy consumption for 2020 is estimated to be 5% below that for 2019. Energy for years after 2020 is assumed to fall by 6.6% per year, so that the amount reaches a level similar to renewables only by 2050. Amounts shown include more use of local energy products (wood and animal dung) than BP includes.

If a person understands the connection between energy consumption and the economy, such a rapid drop in energy supply looks like something that would likely be associated with economic collapse. The goal of politicians seems to be to keep citizens from understanding how awful the situation really is by reframing the story of the decline in energy supply as something politicians and economists have chosen to do, to try to prevent climate change for the sake of future generations.

The rich and powerful can see this change as a good thing if they themselves can profit from it. When there is not enough energy, the physics of the situation tends to lead to increasing wage and wealth disparities. Wealthy individuals see this outcome as a good thing: They can perhaps personally profit. For example, Bill Gates has amassed about 270,000 acres of farmland in the United States, including newly purchased farmland in North Dakota.

Furthermore, politicians see that they can have more control over populations if they can direct citizens in a way that will use less energy. For example, bank accounts can be linked to some type of social credit score. Politicians will explain that this is for people’s own good–to prevent the spread of disease or to prevent undesirables from using too much of the available resources.

One way of dramatically reducing energy consumption is by mandating shutdowns in an area, purportedly to prevent the spread of Covid-19, as China has been doing recently. Such shutdowns can be explained as being needed to stop the spread of disease. These shutdowns can also help hide other problems, such as not having enough fuels to prevent rolling blackouts of electricity."

Edited August 29, 2022 by Ecocharger

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,187]

2 hours ago, gkam44 said:

Once again, we have folk who want desperately for renewables to lose.  ...he cheapest power is now from utility-scale PV at between 1.5 and 2 cents/kWh.  My own household and both electric cars are powered primarily by the PV system on our roof.

Ah, another new forum member who can't look at a calendar or a map.  Now add in a 2 day battery for storms + reliability + degradation due to time, then you have the TRUE cost, until then you are a vampire on NG, Coal, Nuclear.  Until you add the cost of the batteries, you are a FRAUD.  And  this only works in supper sunny semi desert locations. 

Yes, my RV loads runs on solar in the summer, but not its propulsion and solar is useless in winter. 

That being said, anyone in the sun belts around the world who does NOT have solar... is an economic idiot at this point and this has been true for 5 years now.  Anywhere OUTSIDE these sun belt regions are NOT idiots for NOT having solar.  Why?  They can read a calandar, which YOU apparently cannot.  Winter is coming.

Solar/Wind, like NG, Oil, and Coal is geography based making winners/losers.  Pretending it is a panacea is moronic.