A report by Mark Mills called the The “Energy Transition” Delusion came out in August with some killer statistics. Despite the rampant glorious uptake of sparkling renewables, wind and solar provide less than 5% of the total global energy demand while the hated hydrocarbons still provide 84%. And that energy demand is growing relentlessly and with no end in sight.
Global economies are facing a potential energy shock—the third such shock of the past half century. Energy costs and security have returned to center stage, as has the realization that the world remains deeply dependent on reliable supplies of petroleum, natural gas, and coal.
It’s a hi-tech energy blackhole
As James Freeman at the Wall Street Journal, noted, some of the most game-changing statistics in the report are about mobile phones. Our need for gadgets, phones and the internet means we need more energy than ever:
Historically, the energy costs of manufacturing a product roughly tracked the weight of the thing produced. A refrigerator weighs about 200 times more than a hair dryer and takes nearly 100 times more energy to fabricate. But it takes nearly as much energy to make one smartphone as it does one refrigerator, even though the latter weighs 1,000 times more. The world produces nearly 10 times more smartphones a year than refrigerators. Thus, the global fabrication of smartphones now uses 15% as much energy as does the entire automotive industry, even though a car weighs 10,000 times more than a smartphone. The global Cloud, society’s newest and biggest infrastructure, uses twice as much electricity as the entire nation of Japan.
Most of the world doesn’t own a car (yet)
Advocates of a carbon-free world underestimate not only how much energy the world already uses, but how much more energy the world will yet demand. There are more people, more wealth, and more kinds of technologies and services than existed when President John F. Kennedy faced the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, and 60 years later, global energy consumption has risen more than 300%. In the future, there will be yet more innovations and more people, many of whom will be more prosperous and want what others already have, from better medical care to cars and vacations. In America, there are nearly as many vehicles as people, while in most of the world, fewer than 1 in 20 people have a car. More than 80% of the world population has yet to take a single flight.[25] Drug manufacturing is far more energy-intensive than fabricating cars or aircraft, and hospitals use 250% more energy per square foot than commercial buildings.
No matter the will to get pink-batts in the roof, the global numbers are colossal, and only at the start of the exponential curve.
As I graphed in June — the world is using more fossil fuels than ever
The energy transition has no chance of keeping up with the growing global energy demand, let alone pushing out fossil fuels:
https://ourworldindata.org/energy-mix
h/t to Rafe Champion, Paul Miskelly, Jim Simpson, Neville, Dave B.
REFERENCES
Manhattan Institute, Mark Mills
The Energy Transition Delusion [PDF]
Photo: Mbrickn Qualcomm QSC6055 BNSM523 on LG VN251S
Truly amazing stats , there is no way brainwashed greensters are going to give up their phone .
360
I would love to see the weight of coal to produce a smartphone.Greta and co would blanch seeing the amount of hydrocarbons needed to produce the glowing screens/
310
Just take the cost of the most common model at a particular price point and work out how much coal that would buy at the price of coal when it was made. If you are buying a USD1000 phone then it will have around 8 tonne of coal equivalent embodied in its manufacture at last year’s price.
Everything in modern society comes back to energy it embodies. Even the profits of the billionaires gets recycled into luxury items that embody massive amounts of energy. Feeding and educating the humans who design and build the stuff requires energy.
Who can dispute that it took 8 tonne of coal equivalent to produce a higher end smart phone in 2021. Literally no one has adequate grasp of any supply chain to work it out.
Coal price has doubled in the past 12 months so there is huge price pressure coming. Some of the elements in the supply chain were built with coal 10, maybe 20 years ago. Even some Chinese power stations are now 20 years old. Some draglines digging coal in Queensland are now 40 years old. Can you imagine the coal mine phoning up the local wind farm and asking them to crank up power because the machine is about to start up.
250
The irony of all of the rhetoric from the gullible climate religion poseurs is that they are the mob decrying colonial tyranny against brown skin coloured peoples and at the same time championing an even worse colonial tyranny against brown skin coloured peoples in the name of “Save the Planet” based on irrelevant trace gases which benefit life !
I simply cannot believe this latest example of “Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds”.
How can people be so gullible, righteous and totally self indulgent, yet completely ruthless in what they will impose on others in their religious bigotry ?
520
“Global demand for Gigawatts is insatiable” but Bill Gates/WEF and Eugenics are not the answer.
190
What happens when a blip on your social credit score turns off access to the cloud?
Is bitcoin going to get binned because it’s too dear to operate? Who gets the cash when that decision is made?
If phones are energy intensive to make, then why are people allowed to have them? And why does everything operate by an app?
I can’t wait for this brave new world to hit the ones voting for it. Imagine the governments of the world trying to access all their data, only to find that the cloud is off line this month, or at least until the clouds pass.
270
That much is easy to answer … there is no cash.
Every person who wants to cash out their Bitcoin, must find a buyer willing to put equal amount to cash in.
170
Bitcoin’s strength is that it is independent of governments, perfect for criminal activity, tax avoidance. Otherwise it’s long term value is irrelevant in a world wide game of pass the parcel. It’s useless for serious trading. But as long as it keeps moving around the ring without huge change in value, no one cares. People avoiding 50%-90% taxes would be quite happy. It’s why casinos exist, to launder huge sums. Barely profitable public retail gambling is just a cover for the real purpose. Black market money has to be laundered.
The people hoarding bitcoin however are in for a nasty surprise as the whole thing could implode at any time, like shares. Real currency though can always be exchanged for retail goods in the country of origin with a demonstrable value, the replacement for gold, all the world’s trade. There is no such fall back position for bit coin. It’s very short term. Long term value is irrelevant.
The real concern for bitcoin mining should be that the energy required is more than the total consumption of many of the world’s countries, but no one comments? A single bit coin can take 1.5Mwhr to make, 2 months electricity for a household. And the world consumption is 115Twhr, 0.55% of world production or about the size of Sweden. Australia’s entire electricity consumption is around 200Twhr.
So why isn’t bit coin mining banned by the people against CO2. If the total increase in world energy is about 10% in the last year, 5% of that has been bitcoin mining and it is all powered by fossil fuels, like everything else. But the big money people need to launder, so nothing is said.
190
Thanks again Jo for trying to keep us informed about this REAL ENERGY data and the rapid increase of the more prosperous global population.
BTW in 1962 the global pop was a little over 3 billion and today is over 7.9 bn and will nudge 8 bn in a few months time.
The idea that we can cater for the increasing pop and still transition to TOXIC, POLLUTING S & W is delusional nonsense. But our clueless MSM, pollies and so called scientists etc continue to lie to the people and expect us to BELIEVE in their new RELIGION.
In Australia we’re about to waste many more tens of billions $ on this lunacy and of course a guaranteed ZERO change to the weather or climate by 2040 or 2100.
Everyone should watch the Mark Mills video and try to understand his very sobering message.
220
In my workplace there are several TV screen- the owners dictate that these are switched on to ABC News channel and occasionally the commercial news.
Having not watched any TV news for years (or bought a newspaper for a similar period) and being unable to completely avoid seeing these screens, the sheer lack of functioning neurones inside the talking heads of the presenters (as well as the interview subjects) is a revelation. The MSM really is a repository for the walking dead- the same could be said about the bulk of those inhabiting the public service and universities (apologies to any thinkers from these professions who may be reading).
260
Amazing isnt it how much time academics can find to get their heads on the media. The endless queue of academics with bad hair constantly ringing alarm bells about assorted topics has most tuned out I think.
100
40
Nuclear facilities can take the electrical load and save some of the carbon-based products for other purposes.
Had solar and wind been abandoned 10 years ago, and the money spent on nuclear those facilities would be coming online now.
The climate won’t care, but less wealth would be squandered.
310
With mass production, the cost is a good indicator of the total energy involved in making something and getting it to end use.
Some badges command a higher premium as well as latest developments that have to give the designer a return on development costs, which also involves a lot of energy before anything comes off the product line.
71
Meanwhile demented Biden and the treasonous DEMs are trying hard to wreck the US economy ASAP.
Biden has tried to get OPEC to ramp up oil production, but instead they’ve REDUCED output. So now the clueless Biden + DEMs are raiding their strategic oil reserves to make a difference for next months half term elections.
Let’s hope the voters have the brains to vote against these treasonous donkeys and hopefully limit the damage until the 2024 elections.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/10/11/biden-energy-policies-cost-100-billion-a-year-reports-just-the-new/
140
Shows you how fragile an apparently strong economy is. Who would have thought Biden could cause so much damage in so short a time?
80
America now has $30 trillion of debt and rising rapidly, If it should stop being a reserve currency, which China and Russa intend, it will become the most impoverished nation on the planet
00
Started with Obama.Trump broke in and stopped the moves dead in their tracks for 4 years. That’s why the Dems, media, Big Business and oligarchs of America attacked him so viciously. It’s the reason Hilary lost the plot and its the reason the same groups are desperate to stop the Republicans in the mid terms gaining control of either House. Dems will also be called to account.
If the progress the people behind Biden have made in smashing the US economy for their political pursuits gets stopped again by the Republicans controlling government, especially if they win the Presidency again in two years, then it’s all up for the Democrats for many years. If the people get their cheap energy systems back again, with lowered COL that comes with it, there is no chance they will ever go back to self destruction in discarding fossil fuels regardless of whatever fear campaign the Dems dream up next.
The Dems must be considering how to feasibly destroy existing fuel lines in the USA in attempting to prevent or delay such a reversal without bringing armageddon down on their own heads.
100
“Look into my eyes (little girl), Im going to end fossil fuels, I promise you.”
80
Can any scientist extrapolate that chart to 2050 and demonstrate how net zero can be achieved without destroying civilisation as we know it?
160
Here’s the global population data for 1962 and you’ll note that today the global URBAN population percentage has almost doubled compared to 1950.
But we’re supposed to be facing an EXISTENTIAL CLIMATE THREAT amid all of this booming population increase + much higher wealth and Health?
IOW the entire deceptive message is easily seen as just more BS and FRA-D and yet they still BELIEVE?
Again why can’t these donkeys understand very simple KINDY sums?
https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/world-population-by-year/
60
Simple. They are victim to extremely effective propaganda. Our side tries to use objectivity. The former wins, every time.
110
The Teals all love their electric cars which need huge amounts of fossil fuel to produce at economic level. Steel needs coal, and as we see so do electronics. Ditto across all of modern life.
There are two directions here.
1. Continue the current disasterous anti science anti people agenda of the teals and we will end up with only a few elites driving cars, having phones etc – just like the 3rd World. Life expectancy, already dropping due to poisonous vaxxes, will fall off a cliff as health care and many trappings of modern life will just be too expensive.
2. Admit that we have been continuously lied to on climate, covid and a host of other areas, remove the liars, and move forward into a bright future of abundance and prosperity.
This is the stark reality. When will Australians seize the opportunity to repudiate the completely false narrative that paralyses our country?
220
It’s not just steel, but the production of every metal. And so many other things like fertilizer and CO2 itself, much needed in many industries. All come from gas which is being plundered because it has lower CO2 per kw than coal. There is just no logic in the madness to ‘reduce’ CO2 when that is just insane, impossible,unscientific.
No one seems to know any chemistry. It’s all about planetary scale equilibrium between the oceans and the sky over which we have no control at all.
We don’t worry about running out of oxygen. Or Nitrogen. The levels are roughly constant but we have no control over them, but we simultaneously worry that we somehow control CO2 levels in the air? That’s nutty. It is by far the most soluble common gas, which is why most of it is floating around in the ocean ready to come out. Every scientist knows this but the IPCC argues that ‘fossil fuel’ CO2 is somehow insoluble. But everyone knows how soluble CO2 is. It’s in our drinks. It’s in our lungs. It’s the one sure sign of life.
Why does anyone believe CO2 can be controlled? But then people think trees are made of dirt. But rock trees which would not burn. And many now believe that CO2 is pollution instead of the entire source of life itself on planet earth. In fact we do not have enough CO2 to feed ourselves!
CO2 is at near historic record low levels and all life ceases at about 0.02%. In a world where we fear a tiny +1.5C average temperature increase over a long 150 years which has had no noticeable effect people are now going to freeze to death to avoid another terrible life threatening 1.5C? Where’s the logic in that?
If the world heated +1.5C tomorrow and we did not have thermometers, no one would notice.
371
You’re right TdeF. Respiring creatures including man require that minimal level of CO2 to drive their respiratory centres for breathing and we aren’t far above it right now. This blog recently had work showing there has been a steady decline of [CO2]atm from 2000ppm over the last 150m years. How come this little gem hasn’t been used to put a real fear campaign to the people re that real jeopardy we face (even if it takes another xmillion years to happen :)). Seems a bit daft to be trying to accelerate our own definite demise by working our pants off to lower CO2 much further!
60
This is what I wish was discussed more. To what effect is a warmer world? Personally I think it would have very little effect. Even larger increases than 1.5 or 2 degrees, how about 4 or 5?
This idea of ecological collapse or too fast a change for species evolution – which the fear is all based on – is I believe an infantile assumption but is stated as undisputed fact in the first paragraph of Climate Change 101.
100
It might melt the ice and raise the sea levels, inundating the beach-side homes of the wealthy.
Therefore the peasants must be sacrificed.
20
The increase in CO2 is supposed to be man made but CO2 growth is a straight line. CO2 is not scaling with population which had gone up x10.
Why is it that anyone believes in man made CO2 driven Global warming when at the very least there is no warming, no sea level rise, no evidence at all? Especially no value in many trillions of dollars spent on absurd windmills.
251
We made children take the jab for school. We make them read Pascoe’s nonsense. We show them an inconvenient truth.
I complained and donated 3 copies of ‘The great global warming swindle’ to the school that showed Gore’s lies to 6 of my grandchildren. I asked students to try and borrow a copy from the library and the school does not have any????. I loan a copy with a suggestion that they check the information expressed in both videos, in retrospect, and consider what is more correct.
They learn about propaganda.
How much energy will the world need, should be mandatory viewing in schools for teachers and students.
Lives revolve around smart phones and that will alert the minds of even the brain dead.
221
Yes, I believe so. Smart phones are worshipped by Gen Z, so it’s a real soft spot for attack. My interaction with them is even if you point out their energy consuming lifestyle, they simply believe all their stuff can be made by windmills, and they’re never challenged on it, in fact that is what their mindless teachers tell them.
70
” Vee haff vays of making you use less energy ” bwahahaha [evil laugh].
70
No we don’t. They will just turn it off.
Perversely the US bombing of the Nordstream pipeline will exacerbate the energy crisis, breaking the will of German politicians to obey the EU and achieve the exact opposite effect.
It’s the Americans who will be blamed for the terrible death toll to come, frozen, starved peoples across Eastern Europe. All part of the Democrats continuing cold war with Russia.
What more will the shadowy figures behind puppet Joe Biden do to prevent losing the election in three weeks? The war in Ukraine and the coming winter and starving people will all be blamed on Angry Joe Biden.
111
Ah the war in Ukraine. Surprising what you can blame on that. In the news announcement that I heard about Alinta CEO advising that electricity prices would rise by 35% next year, guess what, one of the reasons was the war in Ukraine. How that could possibly have any influence on Australian energy prices is beyond me. What was NOT mentioned as a reason for price increases was the destruction of coal fired power stations. Funny that.
240
It’s a most convenient war isn’t it?
70
Yes, the US may be blamed for such an outcome even though the Germans thought Trump funny for warning them they were placing their own futures in the hands of Putin. That didn’t work out so well.
However, the dependency of the world on fossil fuels could never have been painted made more starkly if such an outcome occurs. The people of all the Western nations that cop this problem this northern winter will never ever agree to be starved of cheap fossil fuel energy again. At the least they will demand a proven and more acceptable energy replacement system that would satisfy all their energy requirements, as per fossil fuels, before they will ever consider changing again.
50
Michael Shellenberger has hammered the US govt on the continued increase of imported Chinese solar panels.
He recently told Congress and the Sydney CPAC conference that the AOC donkey looked very uncomfortable when he challenged them on this slave labor issue.
This is a good link and again points out that the treasonous Biden + DEMs couldn’t care less about the SLAVE LABOUR used to make these panels.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11277583/Uighur-slaves-make-Chinas-solar-panels-environmentalist-Michael-Shellenberger-claims.html
100
Considering that the average service life of a standard refrigerator is 13 years compared with 2 years for a smart phone, the energy cost of owning a smartphone must be about 5 times than of a refrigerator.
200
That’s a very good point Leo G and very accurate for some of the people I know.
But I’m too mean and usually only change when I start to run into trouble. And ditto for my computer as well.
100
Agreed, but I would not say mean. I prefer honouring the memory of my Scots Ancestry.
70
The UN projections for global population by 2050 are 9.8 bn and 11.2 bn by 2100.
How does anyone BELIEVE that idiocy like their TOXIC S & W can cover an increase of these extra billions and STILL MAKE UP ( or CATCH UP) FOR the 84% of FOSSIL FUELS already INCLUDED IN TODAY’s ENERGY GENERATION?
I can’t dumb this down any further, but perhaps someone else can explain it?
https://www.un.org/en/desa/world-population-projected-reach-98-billion-2050-and-112-billion-2100
60
Yet one of the surest ways to reduce populations is to raise people out of poverty. Every developed country has declining birth rates, well below population replacement levels.
Whats the commom denominator in all developed countries, ( formerly ) reliable energy
100
And the quickest way to raise people out of poverty and reduce the birth rate is cheap abundant electricity.
I have been saying this to people over and over for what feels like forever but they just don’t seem to get it.
The current education system has a lot to do with it. Children are simply not taught to think for themselves anymore.
110
AGAIN the tiny King Island energy meter proves that TOXIC S & W are a clueless disaster and will never replace fossil fuels.
The battery is flat most of the time and solar is pathetic most of the time. Diesel is the only dispatchable, reliable power they can count on 24/7.
Big surprise NOT.
https://www.hydro.com.au/clean-energy/hybrid-energy-solutions/success-stories/king-island
70
And there will never be a campaign to reduce the number of smartphones because that is the tool used to control the masses.
60
That video from Mark Mills/Prager is as good as any I have seen as snapshots about major problems. Hard to argue against its brutal reality.
But will the right people ever see it? Our Australian Energy minister needs to see it. Will he? How can we help him to view it? This is a decades old difficulty, the selective censorship of needed information. Any ideas? Geoff S
60
You’re all pessimist’s. All you need Is a couple of solar panels, a windmill & a team of sturdy unicorns ridden by fairies ( the bottom of the garden type ) This team led by the best energy minister the world has seen will save us all!
Never fear Chris is here!!
80
We all saw how well he performed in a previous role.
30
I always base my comments on well known facts 😂😂
30
In fact, ALL his previous roles. Rolling disasters, one and all.
10
KOS is promoting a petition for a treaty to end fossil fuel use. Hilarious.
https://actionnetwork.org/forms/sign-the-petition-the-us-must-commit-to-a-fossil-fuel-non-proliferation-treaty-phasing-out-fossil-fuels?source=2022FossilFuelTreaty_DK&redirect=https%3A%2F%2Fsecure.actblue.com%2Fdonate%2Fdkllclimate2022%3Frefcode%3D20221006SWFossilFuelTreaty&link_id=0&can_id=d691d51f56d4a7aa5d464c23b29c8c9a&email_referrer=email_1697689&email_subject=sign-the-petition-the-us-must-commit-to-a-fossil-fuel-non-proliferation-treaty-phasing-out-fossil-fuels&refcodeEmailReferrer=email_1697689
How and when will this bubble burst?
70
By no means until there is an effective treaty to end woke corporatism.
40
Hopefully it will end this northern winter!
70
One would think so. Doesn’t look like it though at this stage. You must always remember these people run on ideology, not reason and rationality. The public run on propaganda of their masters and dissidents are ridiculed as luddites.
My fear is this European winter will not be cold or low energy enough. If people scrape through without their fingers going blue, their belief we can run on wind may be further confirmed.
20
Here AGAIN is Dr Roger Pielke jnr’s 2019 study where he tries to educate us on the mind boggling shift required to change the global and USA economies to net zero by 2050.
Needless to say that nothing has changed by 2022 and in fact the changeover from today is much more difficult than it was 3 years ago.
Again big surprise NOT.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/rogerpielke/2019/09/30/net-zero-carbon-dioxide-emissions-by-2050-requires-a-new-nuclear-power-plant-every-day/?sh=6a121d4135f7
50
Never mind the numbers Neville, its all about the vibe.
50
Speaking of smartphones, has anyone ever calculated how much power is used in all the cell towers dotted around the countryside.
40
I would recommend buying up a few blankets similar to ones the American 1st nations ( can’t say I’m not woke ) used for communicating with smoke signals.
I fear for all our modern devices, after all they carry non narrative messages in direct contradiction to censorship.
30
Here is a nice round number. Every year, the atmosphere cycles a million times more mass in water than the total current mass of humans.
That is a lot of the most deadly greenhouse gas.
80
I don’t know how they do it, but it is estimated 505,000 cubic kilometers of rain fall each year. As a cubic metre weighs a ton and so a cubic kilometer is a thousand million tons, this is 505,000,000 Million tons. Weight of people, 8 billion by 60kg or 480 billion kg or 480 million tons.
So I concur that world rain is a million times that of the weight of all humans. However exchange also includes the 1% humidity in the air, so it could be much higher.
And as total human CO2 output is estimated at 33 billion tons, that’s about 4 tons per person. But that is still only 33/505,000 of the weight of water which falls as rain. Our CO2 output is truly insignificant in relation to the gas exchange which is part of the rain.
My additional point though is that the falling rain absorbs the highly soluble CO2 and oxygen and takes them into the oceans which cover half the planet, CO2 being 30x as soluble as oxygen. But the IPCC argue that it take 80 years for even half CO2 to enter the oceans. As far as I can tell, the IPCC just made the figure up. There is no science behind this extraordinary figure which is the entire basis of the man made CO2 argument.
Otherwise there is no way there is much man made CO2 in the air. It all gets washed away. Of all of the CO2 in the air, only a tiny directly measurable 3% of that is from fossil fuel.
What I cannot understand is that there is no science at all behind the war on carbon dioxide. Just trillions and trillions of dollars to control world climates. Why would anyone make up a crazy story like this? Or did I just answer the question?
120
A cubic kilometer of water is 1000 x 1000 x 1000 tonnes. I think you missed a 1000 in your sums.
40
Yes, thanks, cubic is not square. All fixed now.
11
By Who?
10
OMG Rick, why did no one suggest rain-energy? That must be like a Quadrillion Watts of free renewable energy falling from the sky… (enough to power a hundred homes! Did someone say “maths”?)
PS: TdeF — could cloud-seeding decarbonise the world — Will the extra rain wash out more CO2 than the plane makes?
I need a grant.
130
According to the new science, TdF, you are wrong. Abandonment of the scientific method means no proof above opinion is required, and that is what the bulk of humankind now accepts as truth and fact.
20
That 80 year IPCC figure is also disputed by radioactive emissions into the atmosphere following all the atomic testing in the 1950’s. I cant remember right now, but following the atomic tests a radioactive form of “C” was emitted into the atmosphere. “Experts” predicted that those levels would stay in the atmosphere for many decades. (maybe even longer ) But what actually happened was it quickly dissipated in under 10 years. Which indicated that C recycling in the atmosphere is a on a very quick rotation and so by default CO2 as well. It was a story told by Tony Heller as I recall.
40
Here are some figures.
The higher the energy consumption, the higher the standard of living and the longer the life expectancy.
Also, it is simply not possible to provide the required amounts of energy inexpensively, or at all, with solar, wind and Big Batteries no matter how many installations you have.
https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2013/11/everyone-in-world-needs-at-least-4000.html
SEE LINK FOR REST
40
So if the excess death rate in the western world is 10% above the mean, (some say a lot higher). Does that infer that the average life expectancy is also dropping? If so, when will we see our energy consumption dropping so that we land back on the curve?
Then again, the way the prices are going, the consumption will fall, and then the life expectancy, (due to cold in winter, etc). Will this place another blip on the life expectancy of the western nations?
It strikes me as odd that the governments of the world can see the commodity prices rising yet their only solution is to reduce their tax take, and even then it’s only for a couple of months near the elections, (temporary reduction in the petrol and diesel excise in Oz as an example).
I’d like to see an honest* review of the price drivers. If it’s lack of reliable energy generators, then own up to it and fix it. Lower demand or raise supply. If they find that it’s caused by having too few W&S and batteries, then do the cost benefits analysis and release the data. We all need to see the costs before committing to the destruction of our grid(s).
*honest and government…. I should know better.
60
Regret to inform you that you will not get an
“honest review of the price drivers.”
The cost of energy from solar and wind is not scalable. That is, the more that is taken the higher the rate.
Consider, the land area needed is large so the last margin of land is more valuable than earlier plots, and so much of energy resources go into the unreliable generators that there is positive feedback to increased costs, Besides, there is the problem of there being no economical storage of energy, so the value of energy when it is not wanted, and the value of energy when wanted but there is none available, leads to intangible answers.
00
I watched the video. The fallacy in the argument is obvious. There is no intention that the future will be like the present. This guy has NOT factored in The Great Reset. He has not factored in – “You will own nothing and like it”? For the past couple of years the elites at the World Economic Forum have been warning you loud and clear over and over again … You will own nothing … There is going to be a Great Reset … and everyone just pretends that they are just fooling around. Why do you not believe them? Why do pepole not take them at their word? Have a look at whats happening in the USA, Europe and Britain The WEF told you what they were going to do – and now they are doing it. How come people are surprised? Are you all in denial?
If you want to know what the future is going to be like – just listen to them seriously.
Here’s what you can do to second guess the future – Work out how much energy can be practically generated by renewables – Work out how much is required for the replacement of existing stock every twenty years – Work out how much is going to be needed to keep the billionaire elites in Davos in the manner to which they have become accustomed – and then what ever is left over is what will be divided up between us… as long as the elites approve it, and you have a high enough social credit score to be part of the game. If you want a good analog for the future – take a close look at North Korea. That’s the model they are working on.
Cheers
111
Well said Alistair.
They are not even attempting to hide what they’re doing, they are brazen enough to tell us upfront, but nobody is listening.
60
Agree 100% – is it possible that western people will awaken to this dystopian plan for their (our) collective futures and do something to try to avoid it? The signs to date suggest “no.”
50
The rolling blackouts need to start before the dills will understand what it all means.
20
The engineered Energy Starvation policies of the Left are designed to reduce the standard of living of non-Elites.
61
There is no real need for an energy shortage.
Scientists and engineers solved the energy supply and distribution problem well over a century ago.
We theoretically have access to almost unlimited cheap, reliable energy through coal, gas, nuclear and real hydro (not SH2).
The fact that there is an energy shortage is not because it’s not possible to produce inexpensive, reliable energy, but because producers are not allowed to due to government policy, which ultimately comes down to directions from the Leftist Elites and their harvesting of subsidies from the poor for their solar, wind and Big Battery subsidy harvesting schemes.
110
If Australia must have “Nut Zero”, at least make it a useful, reliable and inexpensive form of energy generation in the form of nuclear, noting that there are no further sites for large scale real hydro in Australia.
51
For those that advocate the unreliables combined with Big Batteries, here is an analysis for the USA exploring how much storage would be needed.
The answer is an infeasibly large amount and a physical impossibility.
These numbers are easy to demonstrate. They are within the realm of understanding of a primary school (US=elementary) school student so even a politician or a Leftist ought to be capable of understanding.
https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2011/11/pump-up-the-storage/
31
I notice no Leftists complaining about:
1) Child slaves digging up cobalt for batteries in the Congo.
2) Uyghur slaves building solar panels in China.
71
Just Stop Oil are doing their part to reduce energy. They are protesting and blocking roads in London. I think they tag team with Extinction Rebellion.
40
I like Just Stop Oil, because they could easily be defeated, or their minds changed. How? Easy, grant them their wish. Immediately!
Make them grow food without diesel. Real quantities, including wheat etc, not just an organic garden bed with a nutrient starved kale plant. No composting either, that releases co2. The work will be such a burden they will be begging you to use your diesel tractor within 3 weeks. Nothing like hard work to wake the ideological mind.
These fools simply do not understand, you stop oil, you starve.
60
There is a lot of talk in the media and on the web about the coming ‘great reset’ as if it is inevitable.
The implication is that all the ‘green’ influenced policies of western governments will continue to be embraced by the populace and we will end up with solar/wind/batteries supplying energy to the world even if it means giving up some quality of life.
To make such a change it has been shown by many authoritative analyses it is completely impractical to do so and would require more scarce minerals, resources (and funds) than is realistically available.
Moreover, as such a change gets underway it will become quite clear to the populace that it is very costly and painful and that it will only get worse.
A very real tipping point will come (not the tipping point the left expects) when the populace has had enough and rebels in many different ways, and not just in the ballot box.
I suggest that the ‘reset’ will be the abandonment of such policies and a rejection of the politicians involved and a complete collapse of the left driven movement.
Do you really think that people in modern society will willingly give up their modern homes, appliances, A/C, cars, phones, computers, etc. without a fight?
Just look at any city and its population, infrastructure, roads, water supply, electricity grid, services and communications networks. To change all this is a massive task – to get submissive agreement from its occupants is orders of magnitude more difficult, if not impossible.
And that’s only one city. Multiply that by millions to encompass the entire western world.
IT JUST AIN’T GONNA HAPPEN!
40
I hope you are right. The only way to meet the net zero targets is to get rid of 80% or more of the population. It is quite likely that is the plan of the Great Reset.
40
Goodness! That graph showing the world’s increasing fossil fuel use allows me to understand why Guy MacPherson is terminally depressed. Anyone watch his youtube channel Nature Bats Last? He is convinced it’s all over for the world. His take is so extreme I find it funny. It’s a toss between Guy and Paul Beckwith as to who is the craziest.
I did note that Guy recently took a fossil fuel flight to NZ and enjoyed a powered boat ride up some remote wild river. Though he has accepted the fate of the earth so it’s probably the big party philosophy for Guy, or perhaps he still has a small sense of reality and proportion left in his badly deteriorated mind.
60
He’s probably one of those w***k**s who buys carbon offsets to justify his fossil fuel usage.
30
And thinks that’s all he has to do.
Those jet boats are powered by a dirty great big block Chev or a 4 barrel 351 Cleveland engine.
20
[…] Global demand for Gigawatts is insatiable: To make one smartphone takes almost as much energy as a f… […]
00
[…] graph Mark Mills recently used in the Energy Transition Delusion (above), was adapted from the […]
00
[…] A very interesting analysis of the embedded energy associated with various products. […]
10