Overblown outlook III...

---

I noticed that it has been nearly 7 years since OOI and OOII but the problems haven't changed much: wind power is a little better off in the percentage of the world’s energy that it provides, i.e. to the nearest whole number, it isn't zero any more. However, even ex environmental 'zealots' (Michael Shellenberger is a Time Magazine 'Hero of the Environment' no less) understand "Why Renewables Can’t Save the Planet" [LINK to the article on Quillette].



"In order to produce significant amounts of electricity from weak energy flows, you just have to spread them over enormous areas. In other words, the trouble with renewables isn’t fundamentally technical—it’s natural." My emphasis; a veritable environmental disaster...



Earlier this year I happened across the image above; what interested me most was the massive imbalance in the European Union's nuclear power plants: France accounts for
45% of all of the EU's operational reactors.
The image isn't 100% up-to-date but things haven't changed much.



The France/Germany nuclear thing had grasped Michael's attention:

"I used to think that dealing with climate change was going to be expensive. But I could no longer believe this after looking at Germany and France.

Germany’s carbon emissions have been flat since 2009, despite an investment of $580 billion by 2025 in a renewables-heavy electrical grid, a 50 percent rise in electricity cost.

Meanwhile, France produces one-tenth the carbon emissions per unit of electricity as Germany and pays little more than half for its electricity. How? Through nuclear power.

Then, under pressure from Germany, France spent $33 billion on renewables, over the last decade. What was the result? A rise in the carbon intensity of its electricity supply, and higher electricity prices, too."

The whole article is a very interesting and balanced read, well worth the time...and the links he provides too.

Overblown outlook III...

---

I noticed that it has been nearly 7 years since OOI and OOII but the problems haven't changed much: wind power is a little better off in the percentage of the world’s energy that it provides, i.e. to the nearest whole number, it isn't zero any more. However, even ex environmental 'zealots' (Michael Shellenberger is a Time Magazine 'Hero of the Environment' no less) understand "Why Renewables Can’t Save the Planet" [LINK to the article on Quillette].

"In order to produce significant amounts of electricity from weak energy flows, you just have to spread them over enormous areas. In other words, the trouble with renewables isn’t fundamentally technical—it’s natural." My emphasis; a veritable environmental disaster...

Earlier this year I happened across the image above; what interested me most was the massive imbalance in the European Union's nuclear power plants: France accounts for 45% of all of the EU's operational reactors. The image isn't 100% up-to-date but things haven't changed much.

The France/Germany nuclear thing had grasped Michael's attention:

"I used to think that dealing with climate change was going to be expensive. But I could no longer believe this after looking at Germany and France. Germany’s carbon emissions have been flat since 2009, despite an investment of $580 billion by 2025 in a renewables-heavy electrical grid, a 50 percent rise in electricity cost. Meanwhile, France produces one-tenth the carbon emissions per unit of electricity as Germany and pays little more than half for its electricity. How? Through nuclear power. Then, under pressure from Germany, France spent $33 billion on renewables, over the last decade. What was the result? A rise in the carbon intensity of its electricity supply, and higher electricity prices, too."

The whole article is a very interesting and balanced read, well worth the time...and the links he provides too.

Ohm's ovoid offensive...

---

Hilarious and so true: James Delingpole (he of Watermelons fame amongst other things) in the DT on "The great wind terror: we name the guilty man"...go on, you knew didn't you? JD is talking about "the North London Marxist trustafarian ovoid who was, as Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, more responsible than any man or weird egg-creature alive for establishing the framework for Britain's disastrous wind policy." The very same; the one that is responsible for "One of the best-kept secrets of British politics" (well not so secret these days): the most expensive piece of legislation ever - by far - put through Parliament. Anyway, the Business Green website's article highlights 'Ed Miliband's blistering attack on the government's green record'; Ohm's comment below that article is quoted in JD's blog. Miliband now seeks to draw a clear green line between red and blue (and I don't man the current watered down blue with yellow). Would that be popular?

Ohm's ovoid offensive...

---

Hilarious and so true: James Delingpole (he of Watermelons fame amongst other things) in the DT on "The great wind terror: we name the guilty man"...go on, you knew didn't you? JD is talking about "the North London Marxist trustafarian ovoid who was, as Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, more responsible than any man or weird egg-creature alive for establishing the framework for Britain's disastrous wind policy." The very same; the one that is responsible for "One of the best-kept secrets of British politics" (well not so secret these days): the most expensive piece of legislation ever - by far - put through Parliament. Anyway, the Business Green website's article highlights 'Ed Miliband's blistering attack on the government's green record'; Ohm's comment below that article is quoted in JD's blog. Miliband now seeks to draw a clear green line between red and blue (and I don't man the current watered down blue with yellow). Would that be popular?

Orarian orison...

---

A short prayer for coastal dwellers wouldn't go amiss; it is not my intention to make fun of all the deaths (at least 102 people have been confirmed killed so far throughout the USA and Caribbean) or the multi-billion cost of the damage or the millions without power that Hurricane Sandy is doing as it passes on its way, but the image left (click for Wiki page) does look like our primary school attempts to draw wind blowing.

Orarian orison...

---

A short prayer for coastal dwellers wouldn't go amiss; it is not my intention to make fun of all the deaths (at least 102 people have been confirmed killed so far throughout the USA and Caribbean) or the multi-billion cost of the damage or the millions without power that Hurricane Sandy is doing as it passes on its way, but the image left (click for Wiki page) does look like our primary school attempts to draw wind blowing.

Overblown outlook II...

---

Sorry for the lack of posting. many issues that I could waffle on about but you don't want to hear my hot air...however today is Global Wind Day! (see what I did there?). Now, Global Wind Day is a worldwide event on 15th June and pushed by European Wind Energy Association (EWEA) and the Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC) and "is a day for discovering wind, its power and the possibilities it holds to change our world"; of course they're on about generating renewable energy (oops) rather than any appreciation of the real marvellous and terrifying power of Mother Nature. Brazilian Lars Grael (former sailor now politician) said...

"The pessimist complains about the wind, the optimist expects the wind to change, the realist adjusts the sails to the wind you have."

Update Saturday 16th: Interesting and timely 'defense' article HERE, completely demolished in the comments; also more info (and links) on problems with wind power HERE.

Overblown outlook II...

---

Sorry for the lack of posting. many issues that I could waffle on about but you don't want to hear my hot air...however today is Global Wind Day! (see what I did there?). Now, Global Wind Day is a worldwide event on 15th June and pushed by European Wind Energy Association (EWEA) and the Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC) and "is a day for discovering wind, its power and the possibilities it holds to change our world"; of course they're on about generating renewable energy (oops) rather than any appreciation of the real marvellous and terrifying power of Mother Nature. Brazilian Lars Grael (former sailor now politician) said...

"The pessimist complains about the wind, the optimist expects the wind to change, the realist adjusts the sails to the wind you have."

Update Saturday 16th: Interesting and timely 'defense' article HERE, completely demolished in the comments; also more info (and links) on problems with wind power HERE.

Overblown outlook...

---

Earlier this month Matt Ridley posted a withering article about "The beginning of the end of wind"; he writes - not for the first time - about the various negative points of wind energy and the turbine mania that has seized many governments. He highlights the fact that to "the nearest whole number, the percentage of the world’s energy that comes from wind turbines today is: zero"; in fact the energy from wind, solar and bio-fuels combined comes in at 1% (click on image to enlarge). In The Spectator, with the same article, he leads with the headline that the "government has finally seen through the wind-farm scam – but why did it take them so long?".



Anyway, thinking about that while I read more bad news: yesterday the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) sent out a press release: "Act now or face costly consequences". In their report they state that urban air pollution - 'premature deaths from ground-level ozone' - will be the top environmental cause of mortality worldwide by 2050 (more even than dirty water and lack of sanitation). perhaps we have the solution: Matt Ridley says that It would be a shame for the 3,500 or so wind turbines in Britain (with hundreds more under construction) to be dismantled of the and suggests the biggest one should remain  "for future generations to marvel at" as a  "monument to the folly of mankind." I have a better idea, thinking ahead to worsening air pollution, leave all the wind farms up but switch them to blow!

Overblown outlook...

---

Earlier this month Matt Ridley posted a withering article about "The beginning of the end of wind"; he writes - not for the first time - about the various negative points of wind energy and the turbine mania that has seized many governments. He highlights the fact that to "the nearest whole number, the percentage of the world’s energy that comes from wind turbines today is: zero"; in fact the energy from wind, solar and bio-fuels combined comes in at 1% (click on image to enlarge). In The Spectator, with the same article, he leads with the headline that the "government has finally seen through the wind-farm scam – but why did it take them so long?".

Anyway, thinking about that while I read more bad news: yesterday the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) sent out a press release: "Act now or face costly consequences". In their report they state that urban air pollution - 'premature deaths from ground-level ozone' - will be the top environmental cause of mortality worldwide by 2050 (more even than dirty water and lack of sanitation). perhaps we have the solution: Matt Ridley says that It would be a shame for the 3,500 or so wind turbines in Britain (with hundreds more under construction) to be dismantled of the and suggests the biggest one should remain  "for future generations to marvel at" as a  "monument to the folly of mankind." I have a better idea, thinking ahead to worsening air pollution, leave all the wind farms up but switch them to blow!