WIND FARMS NEED MASSIVE SUBSIDIES TO EXIST
NEED FOSSIL FUELS FOR MANUFACTURE-TRANSPORT-INSTALLATION-MAINTENANCE
The fact that oil is a “finite” material is not a problem. Every material is finite. Life is all about taking the theoretically finite but practically limitless materials in nature and creatively turning them into useful resources. The fossil fuel industry does it, renewable actually, the unreliable energy industry doesn’t.
Installation Of Turbine
“it is commonly assumed that green house gas and energy can be solved by switching from fossil fuel sources of energy to renewables”. “However, little attention has been given to exploring the limits of renewable energy”
Unfortunately, people working on renewable energy tend not to throw critical light on the difficulties and limits”. “They typically make enthusiastic claims regarding the potential of their specific technologies”……… ……..quote by Alex Epstein.
Solar and wind technology, after 50 years of subsidies, produces less than 1 percent of the world’s energy—and, because the sun and wind provide only intermittent energy, continue to require fossil fuel backups. The issue of
intermittency from solar and wind means that is difficult to get reliable power from either as it is weather dependent – which, particularly in Ireland is unpredictable. This creates a need for energy storage (which is currently not efficient enough to be cost effective) or needs traditional fossil fuels or nuclear power to supplement.
220 Tonnes of coal to manufacture turbine
“As you look at the jagged and woefully insufficient bursts of electricity from solar and wind, remember this: some reliable source of energy needed to do the heavy lifting. In the case of Germany, much of that energy is coal. As Germany has paid tens of billions of dollars to subsidize solar panels and windmills, fossil fuel capacity, especially coal, has not been shut down—it has increased. Why? Because Germans need more energy, and they cannot rely on the renewables.” (Alex Epstein)
The global warming authorities had warned policy makers that wind energy would be an extraordinarily expensive and inefficient way of reducing CO2 emissions. They require a huge commitment of investment to a technology that is not very green, in the sense of saving emissions, and it was entirely probable that annual savings on emissions could be negative when all contingencies are considered
Power Storage
Energy Minister Taylor said large-scale renewables projects would not receive any further government support. “The clean energy industry has assured us that the cost of renewables is now competitive with alternatives so we would expect investment to continue in the absence of subsidies,” “An industry that is now competitive shouldn’t require additional subsidies. Nearly 70 per cent of Australia’s electricity was from coal-fired power this year, compared with 22.6 per cent from renewables.
7 Comments
Why are these climate fanatics not protesting outside the Chinese Embassy if they are really serious about this climate change silliness? Is it be because we need China to manufacture solar panels and wind turbines and we don’t wish to offend them? Recently the same idiots were lining up and abusing mining delegates at the entrance to a conference here in Melbourne, knocking them to the ground and spitting on them.
Australia is rapidly approaching the point – and had already reached it in the case of South Australia – where the mass uptake of battery storage was necessary to match the number of renewables, particularly rooftop solar, and the exit of coal.
It might not be possible if they haven’t achieved it by now…that is the problem.
I’ve said all along that the most likely way AGW theory will be junked is when new politicians take decision-making power. They will have NO previous form or association with AGW policies that will have cost billions, have no reputation to lose and so will be able to act objectively.
We know that spending and CO2 levels will continue to grow. My question is, how will the spenders reconcile with rising CO2 levels with the lack of catastrophic climate change? Can they claim they saved the world and that we should ignore the CO2 levels?
The cost of a removing a single modern wind turbine is about $200,000.
With more than 200,000 wind turbines spinning around the world, decommissioning costs are estimated at around $40 billion.
In Texas, there are approximately 12,000 turbines operational. Decommissioning these turbines could cost the State as much as $2.4 billion.
The UN, to whom we are paying Millions, have already declared what their intentions are:
UN official Figueres admitted that the Global Warming conspiracy set by the U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, of which she is the executive secretary, that the goal of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity, but to destroy capitalism. She said very casually: “This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution.” She even restated that goal ensuring it was not a mistake: “This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model for the first time in human history.”
Have you noticed all the water bottles at climate meetings and conferences like Paris or Madrid etc.. Did you know that the energy used in the production and use of plastic bottles is equivalent to filling each bottle one-quarter full with oil. (Oil affects global warming by producing high quantities of greenhouse gases when it’s burned.) Then there is about a third of these plastic bottles being dumped in our oceans and waterways.