Solar, Wind, and the Future of Human Civilization
Frequent commenter MarcoPolo writes: The solar and wind industries are both heavily dependent of government and consumer subsidies. When those subsidies are modified or withdrawn the industries suffer massive constrictions. Solar and wind employment is a little like a gold rush. Booms always look statistically spectacular at first, because they start from a low base. ( 1+1= 2 a 100% increase!). You remind me of one of those spruikers for the California gold rush!
Let me begin by thanking you for teaching me a new word: spruiker. Apparently, it’s used predominantly in Australia (Americans would say “huckster”), but it’s good to know anyway.
I would say that the development of solar and wind is still in the stage where some people can and will accept your position. Five or ten years from now, I think it’s going to be totally untenable, but I suppose it carries a certain level of credibility here and now.
Yes, there is some level of hype attached to renewables, though I’m not sure that’s a bad thing. Optimism is always a good strategy, especially when the fate of civilization is at stake.
You’ve mentioned subsidies for solar and wind literally dozens of times over the years. If you believe that subsidizing new technology in a strategic industry (energy) is a bad idea, you’re in a very slim minority. The key here, IMO, is knowing when to cut them out. The oil industry, the most profitable enterprise in the history of humankind, has been receiving subsidies for 90 years, and some people, including me, think it’s time to end that practice.
Same for corn ethanol. Conducting an experiment that fails isn’t a disgrace. Continuing to dump money into it, however, is shameful in the extreme.
Sadly, at age 62, I won’t be on Earth long enough to see where the world energy picture goes. One thing’s for sure, the energy scene 50 years from now will bear very little resemblance to what it looks like today. Here are three main possibilities:
• Advanced nuclear comes to fruition, solves the carbon emissions problem, and makes energy extremely inexpensive, perhaps too cheap to meter.
• Some combination of renewable energy, efficiency solutions/smart cities, electric transportation, energy storage, and high voltage transmission leaves us with only a bit of natural gas for peak load support and back-up.
• Our civilization experiences one or more catastrophes in the interim that make all this irrelevant. Runaway climate change, nuclear war, and world fascism come immediately to mind.
Decent and responsible people everywhere are totally fine on either of the first two, while they are doing everything in their power to prevent the third.
@Craig
LOL. Yes, both you at 62 and me at 68 won’t be around to see how the energy future settles in for perpetuity globally for sure, but in the interim both of us seem interested in doing our bit to influence others who will still be around and making important decisions, but that is where our similarity ends it seems. We are both coming at the subject from different angles. How about I explain how I interpret your angle without pulling any punches, and you in response do the same about my angle?
Your views are not merely innocuous private thought bubbles, you are laying out your heart felt views and beliefs in your “global renewable energy ONLY edict for all peoples” and with extreme passion, conviction and prejudice as well; in print via global media, and pushed out for all global citizens to read and reflect on, and hopefully (for your own and your many supporters anyway) embrace wholeheartedly and make happen through some zombie logic; then report back dutifully, “thanks for your great advice Craig – we have done what you said and its now our community energy policy”.
Reflecting on the hypocrisy surrounding the privileged energy circumstances that allows you to churn out his “global renewable energy ONLY “misinformation relentlessly for the reading benefit of all those living in energy starved circumstances (about 5/8 ths of the global population); how about your computer, plugged into a power circuit, coming from a main electrical switchboard, connected to mains grid power via a 63 amp circuit breaker – but this 63 amp availability is not from renewable energy sources, because that would be impossible and unsustainable. Is this hypocrisy on steroids?
Ideological misguided support of technological policies (individual, community, state, national) espousing high penetration of renewable energy generation technologies ONLY (if implemented widely) would condemn the world population to a life of energy starvation, and all of the catastrophic knock on effects chaos and misery that would come from that. Community advancement in the modern era, beyond even the most primitive circumstances is impossible without high reliability access for all people and businesses to low cost abundant clean energy.
Nothing meaningful (beyond that which exists in nature) can exist, be created or even be contemplated by a child, adult, community or nation deprived of high reliability access to low cost abundant clean energy.
Craig you seem both indifferent and incapable of extending your vision beyond what you can see in your immediate locale in real time. These are not the attributes of a leader or a visionary commentator on anything whatsoever.
We should always be mindful of the essential pre-cursors for the industrialisation and development /advancement of modern era societies globally, the foremost being “high reliability access to abundant and low cost clean energy” to enable all people to fulfil their aspirations for advancing their families lives, businesses, communities and nations.
Craig please recalibrate your thoughts on all this stuff, you are pushing your cart towards a cliff.
Lawrence Coomber
“Craig, please recalibrate your thoughts on all this stuff…” LOL. In the first place, I can’t really understand what all your verbosity-for-its-own-sake means, and even if I could, I would no more change my thinking on these matters at your behest than I would cut off my arm.
If you unsubscribed, btw, a) I wouldn’t blame you, and b) you wouldn’t be the first. I lose ~10 readers/week, sometimes more when I challenge the legitimacy of the Trump presidency. I’m more than fine with that; I couldn’t care less what you or anyone else else thinks of my positions on energy and sustainability.
As I suggested earlier, you may want to leave the daily attack dog stuff to your older (and smarter) brother (MarcoPolo).
Craig,
Your reply to Lawrence reveals how frustrated, angry and thin-skinned you’ve become.
I’m sure Lawrence had no wish to offend you, his main concern seems a desire for you to reassess some of your priorities with changing circumstance, engage in more discussion, and less Olympian pronouncements.
I’m not sure you really mean “I couldn’t care less what you or anyone else else thinks of my positions on energy and sustainability “. If so that’s a bit sad.
Advocates who are no longer willing to listen and learn are liable to become in the words of MacBeth,
…a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
Like you, Lawrence would describe himself as a dedicated environmentalist, work “at the coal face” of clean energy in a developing nations.
For that he should be respected. As a highly qualified engineer, I’m sure he could earn far more money and a more comfortable life in Australia.
He is, to a certain extent, practicing in reality what you preach, but only write about.
Like all of us, Lawrence only wants to help you be more effective.
I’m astonished by your admission you lose ” 10 readers per week, sometimes more when I challenge the legitimacy of the Trump presidency”.
I wouldn’t have expected many Trump supporters to read your forum, and even less to become so offended ! (I suppose your attacks are a little unrelenting, partisan, and very biased).
But what’s the point in alienating moderate readers? What’s the point in impotently preaching only to an ever decreasing small, ineffective Choir of ‘true believers’ ?
Martin Luther King Jnr achieved his great victory by understanding and engaging with his enemies, in this way he allayed their fears and animosity. As his enemies grew to know him, they grew ashamed of themselves and their fears.
His victory was he ended with as many white supporters and coloured. His was a victory for all. he liberated Coloured and White alike.
Malcolm X and other extremists, just deepened the hatred until all moderates, Coloured and Whites grew afraid and communication ceased, and violence continued unabated.
I think that’s what Lawrence intends to convey. (you have to forgive Lawrence, he’s ex-Navy, they tend to be very blunt, no-nonsense, practical individuals! 🙂
Ha! So he IS your little (not as bright) brother! I knew it all the time. 🙂
Seriously, you’re right. I could be more like MLK or Jesus or the Quakers and try to get better at loving my enemies. I have friends who tell me this, to the letter
The problem is that, to be completely honest, I suck at this. I don’t countenance evil very well. Destroying the planet for profit? Upending the lives of 800K people who have done nothing wrong and contributed greatly to the U.S. society, simply to jack up your political base of racists? Sorry. It’s evil. I can’t even think of a way to engage with it other than to call it out for what it is.
Craig,
In some ways I share your concern, but I remain more open minded.
I read with amazement to now very elderly cold war spy fiction writer, and former spy, John Le Carre calling President Trump a fascist based on his recent threatened rescission of the Obama Presidential order relating to DACA.
Now the President’s action maybe considered heartless, but it’s certainly not “fascist” !
Consider;
The President’s position is that the Executive branch does have the power to circumvent or usurp the Constitutional authority of the legislature to create law through legislation.
President Trump states his position is that such issue can only be resolved by Congress and as President seeks to hand back what he considers an abuse of the power of the Executive to Congress. (And by implication, the American people).
Rightly or wrongly, and removing all the emotion, the one thing no fascist would ever do is reduce the power of the leader in favour of Constitutional legislative process !
I think his methods are tactless and even cruel, proving a point at the cost so much anxiety is excessive. But there is truth in his assertion that Congress could resolve the issue tomorrow, by simply passing DACA into law (which he’s promised to sign).
The failure of Congress (including democrats) says something about the hypocrisy of the legislators.
I realize you hate the President, but even you must see the merit in some of his more thoughtful policies.
Craig,
Let me state once again, I’m not opposed to governments using subsidies, incentives and tax credits to promote economic activity or help the adoption of new technology.
1) Like you, I believe this assistance should be carefully monitored and not become a crutch for failed enterprises or exploited as a method of draining the public purse for ideological or political purposes.
2) The oil industry hasn’t received any meaningful subsidies for many years, despite being the largest US tax payer, and the largest contributor to US economic activity.
3) Again like you, I believe the decision to produce Ethanol from surplus American corn production made absolute sense during the fuel crises in 1974-77.
Unfortunately, it’s grown like Frankenstein’s Monster to become a hugely expensive, politically sensitive, environmental and economic disaster, should serve as a lesson careful, transparent and objective, monitoring of all subsidies, mandates and other incentives for new, and existing, energy generation.
That’s just good planning !
4)Like you, I agree the best bet for carbon emission free energy is advanced nuclear. Advanced nuclear, especially miniaturized plants, can also solve the huge cost, waste and vulnerability of transmission infrastructure.
5)Regrettably, the math just doesn’t work for renewable energy, not even with natural gas to create base load power. Renewable, isn’t really renewable when every 25 years you have to replace the infrastructure at great environmental cost.
The argument against Wind and Solar is fairly simple. Why spend huge amounts of public money creating an inherently flawed industry that can never achieve it’s aspirations ?
Wouldn’t the taxpayer be better investing the same funding on removing environmental defects in existing technologies which can can at least guarantee to achieve 100% power supply ?
Like many objective people, I’m beginning to believe we need re-think our objectives, without all the hype, ideology, politics, etc, and start to re-evaluate where our energy and tax dollars should be spent.
This would mean supporters of various technologies would t reappraise the negatives and positives of the various technologies on offer. Simply comparing the advantages of one technology against the disadvantages of another is doomed to produce another corn-ethanol situation.
But it doesn’t have to be an either/or situation ! What’s needed is realistic and objective appraisal.
6) Unlike you, I don’t give much credence to doomsday, chicken little scenarios. Like you, I’m worried what sort of world my children and grand children will inherit.
(Oh, by the way. ” spruiker ” doesn’t have the same connotation of dishonesty as the American term “Huckster”. A spruiker, is just an over-enthusiastic salesman or advocate.
Some years ago I was described by a journalist in a Newsweek article covering a Conference of Pacific Island Nations as a “Taiwanese Apologist” and a ” Taiwanese independence Spruiker” !
Obviously young journalists lack a basic knowledge as I might be an supporter of the Republic of China (ROC), which needs no ‘apology’ but my blue eyes should indicate I’m not Taiwanese!) “.
Continuing on my American Odyssey. I have two more day in Columbus Ohio . I’m really impressed by the level of urban renewal, especially my Hotel suite located in the historic LeVeque Tower.
I’m not so impressed by the often strange, unpractical, and sometimes absurdly bizarre Clean(er) Coal technologies and proposals advanced by hopeful inventors.
Even the most rational and practical seem complicated and economically dubious, and frankly a little desperate.
It would seem American’s lag behind their European, Indian and Asian counterparts. this is unusual as the US is usually the home of inventive innovation.
Soon I leave for Cleveland, where I hope to visit the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, then on to the Kentucky coal fields.
In Columbus I met a group of young students in a bar. They were discussing the issue of removing statues of historic figures like Robert E Lee. I was intrigued by one of the more radical female students who demanded the City of Columbus should remove all statues to the Italian explorer, and change the name of the City itself.
Her intense outrage and indignation at living in a city named after a rapist, mass murderer and slaver seemed to embarrass her friends and despite being a very attractive person other ways, she found herself isolated as the subject changed.
I was so intrigued by this unusual opinion of Columbus, I asked her to tell me why she was so passionate, since she seemed the epitome of a typical blonde blue eyed, American beauty with perfect teeth, and waited for the explosion !
Once she calmed down, I learned she was studying history and law, and over the next few hours I learned a lot about contemporary life for young people in Columbus while she guided me to visit several more alternate sort of bars and clubs. All very interesting.
Even more interesting , my new friend called the next day and invited me to the Moritz College of Law at Ohio State University and attend a debate at one of the many University Societies and Clubs.(Americans are so friendly in comparison to Brits).
Intrigued by witnessing the inter-reaction of 21 year old Uni-grad student with a coal mining community, I invited my new friend to come with me to visit the good citizens of Freemont, about two hours from Columbus.
On the drive, listening to radio CD102.5, she drew my attention to something I hadn’t noticed. Nearly all American coal miners and coal mining communities are predominately peopled by Americans of European background.
Part of the richness of this trip has been the mixture of cultures and interaction of peoples from different backgrounds.
@Craig @Marcopolo
I realise that my contributions on 2greenenergy for a while now have lost their way and been “off topic” being more focused on personal criticism of Craig rather than the more pressing GHG and Energy Technology issues facing us all, and for that I apologise.
Being a professional in the RE industry as a product and system designer, manufacturer, and installer, producing meaningful outcomes for people and working in many places, is a most rewarding profession and jobs like mine cannot be fairly classified as work.
So with that level of engagement with RE for so long, why do I seem to be a protagonist against Craig’s musings on RE policies for god’s sake, in some 2greenenergy blog posts?
Well nothing is further from the truth; RE is my industry; I am fully engaged with the sector and take it seriously. I am even a pro-bono guest lecturer for many years in between RE projects, to middle school students and guess what my lecture series is about? yes correct, clean energy technologies of the future (including RE).
And this very point might underscore the reasons for our petty differences Craig, I understand and visualise the very important practical place that RE technologies can and will have in the global energy future going forward. It will necessarily amount to a small footprint overall, but it will be an enduring one in all of those niche places and applications, and it will prevail above all other available technologies perfectly. I work in some of these niche places.
Marcopolo might introduce a new term to you that describes this concept Craig to add to last week’s term spruiker. This term is “horses for courses” and it dovetails perfectly into the future of RE technologies globally.
On the other hand you take an entirely different view and elevate RE technologies to stratospheric heights in the global overall energy generation future. So that means there is little room for middle ground for us both on this important subject obviously.
But from now on Craig, I promise to get back “on topic” and make better quality contributions to your blog.
Definitely don’t erase me from your list of commentators then eh.
@Marco
Unfortunately we won’t cross paths in the US this month mate; I start 4 weeks work on 12th October in California and later that month at an SAE EV Battery Engineers Seminar at Troy Illinois. You mentioned Kentucky; my last visit there was to Hodgensville in 2014, Abraham Lincoln’s birthplace. As it turns out, Abraham and I have a couple of important things in common, we both love renewable energy and we were both born on 12th February (different years though). LOL
Lawrence Coomber
@Craig
You said:-
“Advanced nuclear comes to fruition, solves the carbon emissions problem, and makes energy extremely inexpensive, perhaps too cheap to meter.”
Congratulations.
I think your statement very elegantly describes the “future global energy imperative” that I coined long ago and has aggravated you for 2+ years now:
“reliable, abundant, clean, safe, low cost, energy dense power for all people and businesses”
Lawrence Coomber
The Australian renewable energy technologies industry has just been reminded this week in stark terms, a very inconvenient truth it seems:
CLEAN ENERGY SHORTFALLS
A report by Brett Thompson | September 8, 2017
Just what Australian clean energy target (CET) would hit the mark and curb electricity generation emissions is a question that energy market analyst RepuTex is grappling with. Their modelling suggests a minimum Clean Energy Target of 28 per cent would reduce national emissions by 44 Mt of CO2 in 2030, just an 8 per cent cut on 2005 emissions levels, leaving a shortfall of 119 Mt to meet Australia’s 2030 target.
This bleak finding was among the key messages delivered by RepuTex which has analysed a series of target scenarios for the CET and the impact on the generation sector and all sectors of the Australian economy through to 2030.
Clearly a 28 per cent CET trajectory falls far short of the necessary mark as it would take decades to phase out electricity emissions – up to 2095 or 2101. Far later than a target of net-zero emissions prior to 2050 under the Paris Agreement, RepuTex says.
https://www.solar.org.au/industry-news/clean-energy-shortfalls/
—
RepuTex is Australia’s leading provider of research, pricing and advisory services for the Australian energy and environmental markets, and is highly regarded throughout all sectors of the energy industry.
It might prompt a question: is it likely that this same bleak finding translates beyond Australian shores in other renewable energy focussed nations?
Definitely a report for the Australian energy policy makers to ponder one would think.
Lawrence Coomber
Lawrence ,
I ‘m afraid the silence your receive to your well researched query, will be deafening!
Solar and Wind fans are completely imperious to any negative analysis, not matter how well researched or logical.
The support is a matter of faith, any doubts are silenced by wild distortions or doomsday predictions.
Marcopolo
LOL
Yes of course I am very familiar with what you refer to as the deafening “Silent Response” treatment from individuals and groups with nothing more than an ideological and dogmatic connection only with critical issues such as:
– Urgent practical policy initiatives and strategies by all nations that collectively advance global GHG emissions reduction to insignificant levels; and
– Guaranteed reliable, sustainable, abundant, clean, safe, low cost, energy dense power generation for all people and businesses.
But I prefer another term for “silent response”: “Silent Capitulation”. With a capital “C”.
You see Marcopolo; history teaches us that when it comes to all things really, and in particular scientific centric matters “ideology only” engaged individuals and groups lack the professional qualifications; mental rigour; and indefatigable conviction, to participate meaningfully in important complex debates. These individuals and groups embrace “quick short sighted fantasy fixes” rather than sustainable enduring solutions benefiting all people.
Their individual and collective professional weaknesses are quickly exposed, and when under pressure they will either jump ship, defect and change teams, or simply fade away.
A case in point is the near hysterical global renewable energy debate over the last 10 years, which has elevated this troublesome social phenomena to new heights. Opportunistic behavior rather than socially responsible and focused behavior comes to mind.
But I sense a turn-around is gathering momentum quickly and everywhere. I see it on the ground every day in my professional activities – worldwide.
Lawrence Coomber
Lawrence,
With great reluctance, and deep regret, I’m afraid I must agree with your conclusion.
It seems these ideologues are really not interested in any clean technology, or any environmental progress that doesn’t conform to an impractical and obsolete political agenda.
On my current ‘odyssey I feel I’ve entered a different world, or at least a different America and a different era. I read and watch reports in the major media about events occurring around me, and I’m amazed at how little they any resemblance to reality.
I’m here in the forgotten America, in townships lampooned for racism and ignorance, sneered at by west and East coast progressive liberals who are more concerned about the plight of distant foreigners, and illegal migrants, than the desperate plight of their fellow countrymen.
I can understand Craig’s seemingly hypocritical position. As a West coast leftist, he and his fellow travelers have a deep antipathy to the older, darker, industrialized America.
The shallowness of their thinking is reflected in how they fail to perceive how interconnected and complexity of all technology.
They refuse to accept the dependence of the Wind Turbine industry on fossil fuel, or how pollutant the solar industry may become.
These people see technology and politics in terms of black and white. President Trump must be evil, even when he’s doing what the advocate.
The President must be in the pay of the Russians because he’s securing Lithuanian independence, depute the fury from Russian institutions !
It’s this refusal to accept reality, that’s hurt the progress of cleaner technology.
I’m sure you’d enjoy my very Australian style of odyssey throughout the forgotten US. I enjoy visiting bars and VFW halls, clubs, as well as service organizations lunches and diners, universities etc. I’m seeking the widest possible cross section of opinion.
I’m grateful to have recruited the company of a young American friend to broaden my knowledge of the perspective of younger female folk who may not feel relaxed with a person of my age and gender (not that I’ve noticed).
Take care, I say Hi to honest Abe for you, when I visit Hodgensville. (I will also meet with Congressman Brett Gunthrie (R) who represents the district in Washington DC )
Hello, dear creditor (investor)!
I, Valery Andrus, am the author of new fundamental Neutron Sciences and the developer of new technologies in the electric power industry on their basis (http://neutronscience.com.ua/publication/), and I also am owner of 50% of the ownership of BSA Ltd.
BSA Ltd – this is scientific-industrial production of technologies and equipment for fuel-free electricity industry that is at the stage of starting the manufacture of reactors and power plants.
At this stage (A-stage of startup), I need $ 60,000,000 to make full-scale commercial samples of an electric reactor based on a chain reaction of 50 MW, and fuel-free electric power station of 10 kW.
The cost of one electric reactor based on a chain reaction with thermal capacity 50 MW × 60 pcs. = 3000 MW is from $ 600,000,000. It is destined to replace a 3000 MW nuclear reactor with a cost from $ 1,000,000,000 (the number of nuclear reactors in the world is about 500). The electric reactor does not use nuclear fuel.
In addition, electric reactor of 50 MW is intended to replace steam boilers at TPPs and city boiler houses.
The size of the world market is $ 20,000,000,000,000.
The value of 1% of the share of ownership of BSA Ltd is $ 40,000,000 (it is possible to bargain).
The share of ownership of 1% will yield an annual income of $ 10,000,000 to $ 100,000,000.
If the form of financing is a loan, what are your conditions?
I send you information about me:
Full Name: Valery Andrus
Birth date: 31.01.1950
Gender: Male
Marital Status: Married
Necessary amount of funds: $ 60 000 000 (for business development)
Home Address: 22/80 Pinter Str., Donetsk, Ukraine, 83120
Mobile phone number: +38(050)179-11-31 (interpreter)
Email: valeriy.andrus@gmail.com
Occupation: Scientific Director of BSA Ltd
The bank account is opened in the name of my nearest relative – my daughter Irina Andrus (she is my “fast legs” for servicing bank payments).
PLEASE PAY IN USD:
WITH PERSONAL ACCOUNT OF BENEFICIARY:
INTERMEDIARY:
SWIFT CODE: CHAS US 33
JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A.
270 Park Avenue, Floor 48, New York, N.Y., 10017-2014 USA
ACCOUNT WITH INSTITUTION
464651053
PJSC “CREDIT AGRICOLE BANK”
42/4, Pushkinska St., Kyiv, Ukraine, 01004
SWIFT CODE: AGRIUAUK
BENEFICIARY:
26200501745082
Andrus Irina
6/73, Polyarna St., Kyiv, Ukraine, 04201
Contact information:
Contact Name
Valery Andrus
Mail
valeriy.andrus@gmail.com
valeriy.andrus@mail.ru
Website
http://neutronscience.com.ua
https://youtu.be/TPaCohzDRBU
Sincerely, V. Andrus
Dear Valery,
We’d love to contribute, but we’re just waiting for our money back from Prince Ibogo Lumbala of Nigeria. His latest email assures us of at least that amount deposited in our bank accountant any day soon !
Don’t be so hasty Marcopolo, I know a guy, who knows another guy, who has a cousin who owns one of these ‘electric reactors based on a chain reaction’ and he reckons they are “game changers”. And that’s good enough for me!
Lawrence Coomber
Hi Lawrence,
Holy Toledo ! I didn’t realize you had that sort of ‘inside’ information, count me in !