Extraordinary Costs Of Green Energy Creeping Slowly Into Public Awareness

Extraordinary Costs Of Green Energy Creeping Slowly Into Public Awareness
  • A key claim of the green energy movement has long been that the intermittent “renewables” — wind and solar — provide the cheapest form of energy. Therefore, the advocates say, just build enough wind turbines and solar panels, convert all use of energy to electricity, and sit back and enjoy a future of affordable energy without adverse environmental consequences.

  • Meanwhile a key theme at this blog has been exposing the incompetence and chicanery of the claims of low cost for electricity from wind and sun.

  • Although it may often seem as if nobody is listening, I reassure myself that when the full costs of wind and solar electricity eventually get exposed, the people will catch on and not allow themselves to be impoverished.

  • Over in Europe, it looks like enough of the costs have now gotten exposed to cause the beginning of a public awakening.

Read More

Update On Offshore Wind Projects Off The Mid-Atlantic And New England

Update On Offshore Wind Projects Off The Mid-Atlantic And New England
  • Offshore wind turbines — those are the magical solution to all our energy problems. The wind is clean and free. And way out in the ocean — where you can barely even see the towers — the wind blows steadily almost all the time. Just put up a few turbines to catch the breezes, and those evil fossil fuels will quickly be banished.

  • Anyway, that has been the talk for at least three decades. After 30 years of talk, the number of actual functioning wind turbines out in the Atlantic Ocean off the U.S. coast is now exactly seven: five off Block Island (part of Rhode Island), and two off Virginia. Those provide some tiny fraction of 1% of the electricity for the mid-Atlantic states and New England.

  • But the Biden Administration has much grander plans.

Read More

The New York City PreK-12 Education Budget: New York Times Versus Reality

  • If you wonder why people in New York City seem to have a terribly warped view of reality, look no farther than the New York Times. The Times is where all the seemingly well-educated and sophisticated upper income New Yorkers get their “news.”

  • Consider, for example, the question of education funding for PreK-12 schools. If you know anything about that subject, even if you don’t know any details, you know that the New York City public schools are far and away the most lavishly funded in the country. How they can spend so much money and fail to achieve even mediocre results for the students is a shame and a disgrace.

  • Of course, the New York Times has an entirely different take.

  • So let’s compare the New York Times’s view of New York City education funding with some reality.

Read More

It's Time To Build The Intermittent Renewable Plus Hydrogen Storage Demonstration Project!

It's Time To Build The Intermittent Renewable Plus Hydrogen Storage Demonstration Project!
  • My last post discussed a new Report out from the UK’s Royal Society in early September, with the title “Large-scale electricity storage.” The Report describes and models how the UK might build out a “net zero” electricity system for Great Britain. The proposed system would consist of generation entirely from wind and solar sources, with the intermittency backed up only from energy storage and without any use of fossil fuels.

  • In promoting that Great Britain should move toward a fully wind/solar/storage electricity system by 2050, the Royal Society is essentially advocating that every one of GB’s 65 million or so inhabitants shall be made guinea pigs for a system that may or may not work and whose unanticipated costs could be enormous. No responsible government would ever go down such a road.

  • There is an obvious alternative approach: Build a demonstration project to establish feasibility and cost.

Read More

A Semi-Competent Report On Energy Storage From Britain's Royal Society

A Semi-Competent Report On Energy Storage From Britain's Royal Society
  • If you want to power our modern economy on intermittent renewables (wind and solar), and also banish the use of power from fossil fuels and nuclear, then the only option remaining to make the grid work reliably is energy storage on a massive scale.

  • And then it turns out that energy storage on the scale needed is enormously costly — almost certainly so costly that it will in the end sink the entire “net zero” project.

  • Failure adequately to address the energy storage problem is the fatal defect of nearly all “net zero” plans that are out there.

  • For an example of a thoroughly incompetent treatment of this problem, you might look at New York’s so-called “Scoping Plan” for its mandated “net zero” transition. This Scoping Plan was issued quite recently in December 2022. As examples of its stunning incompetence, it almost entirely discusses the storage problem in the wrong units (watts versus watt-hours), and regularly posits the imminent emergence of magical “dispatchable emissions-free resources,” that have not yet been invented, to cover the gaps in wind and solar generation. The people who issued this Plan have no idea what they are doing, and are setting up New York for an energy catastrophe some time between now and 2030.

  • But now along comes a report from Royal Society addressing this energy storage problem in the context of Great Britain.

Read More

The Bidens: "Stone Cold Crooked" (10) -- How Do You Tell When A Payment To A Pol Is A Bribe?

  • A few days ago, on Friday September 22, the federal prosecutors in the Southern District of New York indicted the senior Senator from New Jersey, Robert Menendez, for bribery.

  • A full copy of the indictment can be found at this link at the New York Times. There is also a detailed summary of the charges in a Department of Justice press release here.

  • The Menendez indictment gives us the opportunity to look at the conduct of Menendez claimed to constitute “bribery” and compare it to some of the well-known conduct of President Biden.

  • Is there any significant difference here that makes one bribery and the other not?

Read More