JM

GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES

Recommended Posts

(edited)

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.

world-energy-consumption-to-2050-with-ca 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 by Ecocharger
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

9c4b24cc1cb6bc910e517e0b1fcb0671acf8bbcbf69bbda0e5d723455374bfd7.jpg

 

More than 70% of pubs do not expect to survive winter as energy costs soar

Independent brewers and pub operators warn of ‘doomsday scenario’ unless government takes urgent action

Britain’s independent brewers have urged ministers to step in to save the sector, as research revealed more than 70% of pubs do not expect to survive the winter if nothing is done to ease energy costs.

Edited by Eyes Wide Open
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

52 minutes ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

 

Independent brewers and pub operators warn of ‘doomsday scenario’ unless government takes urgent action

Britain’s independent brewers have urged ministers to step in to save the sector, as research revealed more than 70% of pubs do not expect to survive the winter if nothing is done to ease energy costs.

They are just trying to get a subsidy; don't ask don't get.

The pubs will be fine as they have been for a very long time.

Eat crows bigly.

Edited by TailingsPond

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

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.

world-energy-consumption-to-2050-with-ca 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."

Lol, you really have no clue. You been trying those psychedelic mushrooms as relief for post traumatic stress disorder? 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 8/25/2022 at 6:43 PM, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Europe has given GARGANTUAN subsidies to the wind industry(as they should as they have no oil/gas/solar)

Have you never heard of Equinor and the North Sea?

Recent major projects there are Johan Sverdrup and Johan Castberg

I agree location and government policy are instrumental in an effective renewable energy policy, but then again effective government policy has to be robust in whatever you have legislation for or it doesnt work effectively.

Regarding wind turbine bird strikes.

"Merriman concludes that 1.17 million birds are killed by wind turbines in the US each year. This is a lot of birds, but it is only 0.016% of the estimated 7.2 billion birds that live in the US.31 Jan 2022"

https://www.energymonitor.ai/tech/renewables/weekly-data-how-many-birds-are-really-killed-by-wind-turbines#:~:text=Merriman concludes that 1.17 million,in the US each year.&text=This is a lot of,that live in the US.

How many birds do cats kill every year? Just in the United States, outdoor cats kill roughly 2.4 billion birds each year. This is the result of tens of millions of outdoor cats. Let’s take a closer look at the numbers.

https://petkeen.com/how-many-birds-do-cats-kill-statistics/

 

How many birds are killed by cars in the US?
 
Of the collision deaths of more than a billion birds annually, between 89,000,000 and 340,000,000 are killed by vehicle collisions on U.S. roads.

So IMHO wind turbines arent really a massive problem compared to cats and vehicle strikes.

Maybe US policy should ban cars and cats?

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2
  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 8/28/2022 at 2:30 AM, Ron Wagner said:

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. 

Hate to tell you this Ron but the world doesnt just revolve around the needs and wants of the US.

You can blame Kofi Annan and the UN for ESG

However ESG should be a good thing if universally adopted, obviously it isnt and never will be as there is a cost to it, so poorer countries will just not participate to the levels wealthier nations would like. Blaming China is frankly not going to get the baby washed (sorry UK expression), when you look at the most polluting countries per capita China's pollution is half of what it is in the US.

https://www.countryliving.com/uk/news/a37266476/most-polluting-countries-un-report/

Maybe stop finger pointing and get your own house in order first.

  • Like 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

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.

world-energy-consumption-to-2050-with-ca 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."

thanks for posting more BS. You are the King.

 

2019 Energy Consumtion was 583.9 exajoules......2020 it was 564.0.....now from your chart and the BS babble you posted it should have dropped another 6.6 percent  (Energy for years after 2020 is assumed to fall by 6.6% per year) reality 2021 consumption including renewables was 595.1 Exajoules ......

Your author should factor in 2020 was a pandemic year......Energy consumption for 2020 is estimated to be 5% below that for 2019.....

The author of your BS posting must live under a rock

 

from 2019 to 2021 an increase in energy consumption was 11.2 Exajoules....

and the increase in renewables (wind and solar) was .......drum rollllllllll.....

an increase of 11.0 Exajoules......from 2019 to 2021

2022 increase in renewables??????? another 10 Exajoules??????? we will see next year with the 2023 BP report

wow looks like renewables is the game that meets all new demand for energy

Fossil fuels (oil coal and nat gas combined) have peaked and have gone nowhere since 2014......flatttttttttttttttttt

I will let you look at BP's reports...enjoy Coal peaked in 2014.......Oil peaked in 2019..... 

PS 2022 looks like a bust for fossil fuels again with China in a bad recession..........

 

 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Boat said:

Lol, you really have no clue. You been trying those psychedelic mushrooms as relief for post traumatic stress disorder? 

Fossil fuels are 84% of the energy base, if you eliminate that amount of energy, the economy will collapse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

Hate to tell you this Ron but the world doesnt just revolve around the needs and wants of the US.

You can blame Kofi Annan and the UN for ESG

However ESG should be a good thing if universally adopted, obviously it isnt and never will be as there is a cost to it, so poorer countries will just not participate to the levels wealthier nations would like. Blaming China is frankly not going to get the baby washed (sorry UK expression), when you look at the most polluting countries per capita China's pollution is half of what it is in the US.

https://www.countryliving.com/uk/news/a37266476/most-polluting-countries-un-report/

Maybe stop finger pointing and get your own house in order first.

Per capita doesn't count, especially if you have billions of people in your country.

What matters is total responsibility per nation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ecocharger said:

Fossil fuels are 84% of the energy base, if you eliminate that amount of energy, the economy will collapse.

70% of that energy is lost to thermal output that renewables and EVs do not suffer from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, notsonice said:

thanks for posting more BS. You are the King.

 

2019 Energy Consumtion was 583.9 exajoules......2020 it was 564.0.....now from your chart and the BS babble you posted it should have dropped another 6.6 percent  (Energy for years after 2020 is assumed to fall by 6.6% per year) reality 2021 consumption including renewables was 595.1 Exajoules ......

Your author should factor in 2020 was a pandemic year......Energy consumption for 2020 is estimated to be 5% below that for 2019.....

The author of your BS posting must live under a rock

 

from 2019 to 2021 an increase in energy consumption was 11.2 Exajoules....

and the increase in renewables (wind and solar) was .......drum rollllllllll.....

an increase of 11.0 Exajoules......from 2019 to 2021

2022 increase in renewables??????? another 10 Exajoules??????? we will see next year with the 2023 BP report

wow looks like renewables is the game that meets all new demand for energy

Fossil fuels (oil coal and nat gas combined) have peaked and have gone nowhere since 2014......flatttttttttttttttttt

I will let you look at BP's reports...enjoy Coal peaked in 2014.......Oil peaked in 2019..... 

PS 2022 looks like a bust for fossil fuels again with China in a bad recession..........

 

 

You are some joker, 84% of energy is fossil fuels....eliminate that and you have economic collapse.

As long as you and others with your dreamscape continue advocating for renewables, fossil fuels will still be dominant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

4 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

70% of that energy is lost to thermal output that renewables and EVs do not suffer from.

What counts is that 84% of all energy needs is supplied by fossil fuels, and that number appears to be stable over many decades.

When the artificially induced climate panic fades, nothing will change going forward.

Edited by Ecocharger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Ecocharger said:

What counts is that 84% of all energy needs is supplied by fossil fuels, and that number appears to stable over many decades.

No, what counts is how much actual work is done by each energy source. Fossil fuels are terribly inefficient. It takes a lot more btu's of fossil fuel to drive down the road than it does btu's of renewable electricity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

7 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

No, what counts is how much actual work is done by each energy source. Fossil fuels are terribly inefficient. It takes a lot more btu's of fossil fuel to drive down the road than it does btu's of renewable electricity.

Let's not talk about efficiency, Jay, that cuts both ways. The amount of fossil fuel required to allow renewable energy to function is huge.

"Driving down the road" is a tunnel vision remark from a poster who specializes in tunnel vision thinking.

Edited by Ecocharger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

6 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Let's not talk about efficiency, Jay, that cuts both ways. The amount of fossil fuel required to allow renewable energy to function is huge.

"Driving down the road" is a tunnel vision remark.

The amount of fossil fuel required for fossil energy to function is huge. The amount of fossil fuel required by the world reduces every day because of increasing renewables. Meanwhile, the inefficiency of fossil fuel remains the same.

Edited by Jay McKinsey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

The amount of fossil fuel required for fossil energy to function is huge. The amount of fossil fuel required by the world reduces every day because of increasing renewables. Meanwhile, the inefficiency of fossil fuel remains the same.

None of which is relevant to the point I made above, which is that fossil fuels have been 84% of the energy base for many decades and will probably continue at that level going forward.

Again, you are restricted by a bad case of tunnel vision, the worst I have ever witnessed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ecocharger said:

Per capita doesn't count, especially if you have billions of people in your country.

What matters is total responsibility per nation.

Yes and my point to Ron was exactly that!

Stop bitching about other countries and sort your own pollution out first before pointing the finger at others!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

Have you never heard of

Regarding wind turbine bird strikes.

"Merriman concludes that 1.17 million birds are killed by wind turbines in the US each year. This is a lot of birds, but it is only 0.016% of the estimated 7.2 billion birds that live in the US.31 Jan 2022"

https://www.energymonitor.ai/tech/renewables/weekly-data-how-many-birds-are-really-killed-by-wind-turbines#:~:text=Merriman concludes that 1.17 million,in the US each year.&text=This is a lot of,that live in the US.

 

🙄  Right... Types of birds cats and cars kill is the same as wind turbines..........

Your strawman small birds, cats and cars kill never even FLY as high as most modern wind turbines......

It is the LARGE, semi rare, top of food pyramid soaring birds which are the problem and you know it. 

Stop being a deliberate idiot.... Unless of course this is your actual natural state... party on then...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

Hate to tell you this Ron but the world doesnt just revolve around the needs and wants of the US.

You can blame Kofi Annan and the UN for ESG

However ESG should be a good thing if universally adopted, obviously it isnt and never will be as there is a cost to it, so poorer countries will just not participate to the levels wealthier nations would like. Blaming China is frankly not going to get the baby washed (sorry UK expression), when you look at the most polluting countries per capita China's pollution is half of what it is in the US.

https://www.countryliving.com/uk/news/a37266476/most-polluting-countries-un-report/

Maybe stop finger pointing and get your own house in order first.

China and the entire Third World will be using many times more energy than we will and our population has grown substantially over the years. No, I am realistic. You are part of the problem that has put Europe into the sad situation it is in now. Look ahead to all the world using far more energy. That will be occurring rapidly. Wind and solar are not ready to meet the requirements. All of the above are necessary. ESG is a bad idea. The free markets are requisite to meeting the needs of the world.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, notsonice said:

thanks for posting more BS. You are the King.

 

2019 Energy Consumtion was 583.9 exajoules......2020 it was 564.0.....now from your chart and the BS babble you posted it should have dropped another 6.6 percent  (Energy for years after 2020 is assumed to fall by 6.6% per year) reality 2021 consumption including renewables was 595.1 Exajoules ......

Your author should factor in 2020 was a pandemic year......Energy consumption for 2020 is estimated to be 5% below that for 2019.....

The author of your BS posting must live under a rock

 

from 2019 to 2021 an increase in energy consumption was 11.2 Exajoules....

and the increase in renewables (wind and solar) was .......drum rollllllllll.....

an increase of 11.0 Exajoules......from 2019 to 2021

2022 increase in renewables??????? another 10 Exajoules??????? we will see next year with the 2023 BP report

wow looks like renewables is the game that meets all new demand for energy

Fossil fuels (oil coal and nat gas combined) have peaked and have gone nowhere since 2014......flatttttttttttttttttt

I will let you look at BP's reports...enjoy Coal peaked in 2014.......Oil peaked in 2019..... 

PS 2022 looks like a bust for fossil fuels again with China in a bad recession..........

 

 

New oil and gas finds are numerous all over the world. They are far more meaningful than the growth of wind and solar. Wind and solar combined equal about 5% of total energy. It has taken a long time to get to that small amount. Now the costs to build more are even higher. The Russian oil and gas is filtering into the world gradually but it will eventually reduce prices worldwide. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

14 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

🙄  Right... Types of birds cats and cars kill is the same as wind turbines..........

Your strawman small birds, cats and cars kill never even FLY as high as most modern wind turbines......

It is the LARGE, semi rare, top of food pyramid soaring birds which are the problem and you know it. 

Stop being a deliberate idiot.... Unless of course this is your actual natural state... party on then...

 

 

Oh I see when you say "birds" you just mean specific types, why didnt you say so in the first place?

FFS are you seriously telling me that your top of the food chain predatory birds are under threat of extinction because of wind turbines then you really are a moron.

Most predatory birds kill their prey on the ground or very close to it and eat their prey on the ground not at 500ft

How many dead predatory birds do you see squashed on the roads??? Way more than any wind turbine is ever going to hit. Theyre attracted to other "road kill" and then get killed themselves. The numbers are staggeringly higher with vehicle strikes.

"Many birds of prey, including hawks and falcons, practice mantling after a kill. While they are feeding on the ground, particularly in open fields, rocky ground, or similar areas with less shelter or cover to provide natural concealment, the birds are more exposed."

Why dont you think before you type? Or maybe you cant?

 

Edited by Rob Plant
  • Upvote 1
  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Ron Wagner said:

New oil and gas finds are numerous all over the world. They are far more meaningful than the growth of wind and solar. Wind and solar combined equal about 5% of total energy. It has taken a long time to get to that small amount. Now the costs to build more are even higher. The Russian oil and gas is filtering into the world gradually but it will eventually reduce prices worldwide. 

Wind and solar combined equal about 5% of total energy.????

where to you get your numbers from??? parrot the King of BS is not a very smart move.....

2014 2 percent ......2016   3%..........2019 it was 5% .....2021 it is 7%   2022??? 8 percent of total energy production plus and growing exponentially....... 2030???? 20  plus no problem.....2040??? wind and solar plus storage??? 40 percent???? Offshore wind is now in high gear along with solar.....How many new solar factories being opened or just starting to crank out??? add in nuclear and hydro........ We can wait and see..... and 2050??? I will be around,  please check in here in a few years and tell me how meaning less renewables are. Love that the US just passed legislation to put renewables in high gear.......US wind and solar in 2022.......20 percent of Electric production from less than 10 percent just 5 years ago

 

Fossil Fuels have peaked and are now heading for declines due to demand destruction.....

Solar and Wind with storage is cheaper now than Oil , Coal and Nat Gas...........

 

and you can thank the greedy  Putins of the world along with the assholes in Saudi Arabia for the high energy prices and inflation. 

 

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

5 hours ago, notsonice said:

Wind and solar combined equal about 5% of total energy.????

where to you get your numbers from??? parrot the King of BS is not a very smart move.....

2014 2 percent ......2016   3%..........2019 it was 5% .....2021 it is 7%   2022??? 8 percent of total energy production plus and growing exponentially....... 2030???? 20  plus no problem.....2040??? wind and solar plus storage??? 40 percent???? Offshore wind is now in high gear along with solar.....How many new solar factories being opened or just starting to crank out??? add in nuclear and hydro........ We can wait and see..... and 2050??? I will be around,  please check in here in a few years and tell me how meaning less renewables are. Love that the US just passed legislation to put renewables in high gear.......US wind and solar in 2022.......20 percent of Electric production from less than 10 percent just 5 years ago

 

Fossil Fuels have peaked and are now heading for declines due to demand destruction.....

Solar and Wind with storage is cheaper now than Oil , Coal and Nat Gas...........

 

and you can thank the greedy  Putins of the world along with the assholes in Saudi Arabia for the high energy prices and inflation. 

 

 

Fossil fuels stable at 84-85% for decades past and decades going forward.

With Britain ramping up fossil fuels in response to the current energy crisis (caused by Green fanatics) fossil fuels have a bright future.

People are not so stupid as to swallow the fallacious climate science being spewed out by paid hacks.

Edited by Ecocharger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

There is one small voice of rationality in energy policy being voiced today, which gives hope that the wild fanaticism causing the current energy crisis in Europe will be shoveled out with the garbage.

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/UK-Conservative-Candidate-Promises-North-Sea-Oil-Drilling-Boom.html

"...plans for dishing out more than 100 North Sea oil and gas drilling licenses reportedly put forward by Liz Truss, the Conservative politician vying to be the UK’s next prime minister. 

Truss is one of the two Tories, alongside Rishi Sunak, still in the race to become the UK’s new prime minister to succeed Boris Johnson. The winner is expected to be announced on September 5. 

If Truss wins the race, she is expected to issue as many as 130 new licenses for drilling for oil and gas in the North Sea, The Times reported on Tuesday. 

 

Responding to the report, the UK’s leading offshore industry body, OEUK, said yesterday that “the UK and Europe must now think carefully about prioritising reliable and responsible energy producers to deliver cleaner, secure energy.” 

“New oil and gas licenses and investment here means the UK and Europe is less likely to have to scramble for international supplies or return to using other fossil fuels, with all the implications that would have for cost, emissions, and national security,” OEUK Sustainability Director Mike Tholen said. "

Edited by Ecocharger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.