Recipe for Clean Energy: Add a Little Chile
Chile just announced that it has joined a great number of other countries that are phasing coal out of their grid-mix. Their huge solar farm out in a desert provides the “cheapest unsubsidized energy ever, anywhere, by any technology.” Add in wind, geothermal, and hydro, and you have Chile at 40% renewables today, and 60% by 2035.
I find it impossible to look at videos like these and not be at least a little peeved that the United States, the richest country in the history of humankind, can’t make a similar decision and lead the world towards a clean energy future.
Craig,
I’ve noticed in recent years you’ve become a parrot for rambling Facebook propaganda from ‘heroes’ like Bernie Saunders, as a substitution for research, analysis and debate.
There’s a vast difference between the aspirations of small semi-industrialized nations like Chile, forced by a lack of domestic fossil fuel resources to import energy, and large heavily industrialized nations with abundant fossil resources whose energy requirements are very different.
Like most leftist advocates, your claims are vague,impractical, “symbolic”, and mostly inconsistent with reality.
What ol’ Bernie doesn’t mention is Chilean renewable figures were boosted when the nation allowed two of the most intensive intensive energy industries to relocate offshore.
This isn’t reducing pollutant emissions, just moving them elsewhere ! Chile now imports cement from, among other nations, China. Subsidized cement from the Peoples Republic comes with a hidden agenda, as it always the price of seemingly beneficial trade deals with the hungry dragon.
Bernie Saunders, and the “Leave it in the Ground” crowd always exhibit faulty logic when advocating environmental solutions.
If the ambition is to reduce emissions, then two possible remedies exist.
1)Leave it in the ground. Unfortunately, this approach is impossible without causing economic chaos and human suffering from mass de-industrialization.
This approach also requires pretending inadequate renewable fuel technology can magically fulfill the energy needs of increasingly industrialized planet.
2) Recognize that “Emissions’ are the problem, and deploy new technology to reduce and recycle the harmful emissions of coal and fossil fuel plants.
The technology to achieve this ambition already exists and is developing very rapidly, creating new wealth and spreading ‘Clean technology’ to other industries, further reducing undesirable emissions.
———————-
The two approaches stand in stark contrast and yet both have the same ambition.
The major difference is whileone is possible and can be demonstrated with verifiable, practical outcomes, while the other relies on ideology, deceit, serving only a political agenda.
Even in Chile where renewable power has a tremendous advantage over imported fossil fuel sources, new coal plants have met most of the added electricity demand caused by Chile’s fast growing economy (more than 50% over the last decade).
Installed Coal capacity has doubled since 2010 and currently provides 22% of the total capacity. In any given year, Chile’s coal plants produce about 40% of the country’s total electricity generation.
Yet the government has determined the growth of Coal energy must be phased out. To mat shortfalls, Chile will rely on LPG imports to help reduce rapidly rising power costs(30% in five years).
What’s really worrying, is nowhere in any future planning, anywhere in the world, is the problem of what to do with obsolete solar panels in 20 years.
These panels are almost impossible to adequately recycle and the dirty little secret,(always ignored), is the environmental cost created by disposal of this toxic waste.
By 2038, it’s estimated the world will need to dispose of more than 130 million tons of toxic waste each year from solar panels. (Even more when wind turbines are added).
Currently, the world generates about 400 million tonnes of toxic waste per year, and safely disposes of about 10% ! By 2038, most ‘land fills’ will be full. Unless new technology can be found, in 2038 disposal of another 130+ million tons will be overwhelming and so costly these aging solar panels will just become toxic relics unable to genrate power, but too costly to maintain or replace.
The cost of recycling or disposal is never mentioned or calculated when building solar power installations. The few dissenting voices of caution are ignored in the fever of fashionable, but irresponsible, political ideology.
In contract it’s possible to build coal fired power generators which are not only carbon neutral, but can actually reduce the impact caused by other industries rendering these hi-tech plant environmentally positive.
Isn’t it worth discussing ? Or is it just easier to parrot the jargon of ol’ Bernie ?