Biden’s Energy Plans Are Expensive—and Dangerous

Reposted from PJ Media

BY BRIAN LEYLAND AND TOM HARRIS 

Joe Biden wants the electric grid of the United States to be powered solely by energy sources that do not emit carbon dioxide by 2035. In the Unity Task Force plan that the former vice-president released with Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), the commitment is made that:

Within five years, we will install 500 million solar panels, including eight million solar roofs and community solar energy systems, and 60,000 made-in-America wind turbines.

Overhauling the entire electric grid, which some call the world’s largest machine, and converting much of it to wind and solar power, is not just a momentous task. It is both dangerous and unbelievably expensive. The only reason Biden has been able to get away with such a preposterous plan is that many people actually believe that wind and solar power are cheaper than fossil fuel-powered generation. They conclude that a transition to a system supplied by wind and solar power will reduce consumer costs. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Instead of blindly accepting the Biden/Sanders energy fantasy, the public should ask the obvious question: “If wind and solar are so cheap, then why do they still need direct and indirect subsidies?”

The fact is that they are not cheap at all once all the costs that they impose on the power system are taken into account. Let’s examine this more closely.

Wind and solar power are intermittent and unpredictable and must be backed up by existing or new power stations or storage facilities that can rapidly change output to compensate for the fluctuating supplies from wind and solar power. That usually means natural gas back-up stations. Even environmental activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. told the 2010 annual conference of the Colorado Oil and Gas Association:

For all of these big utility scale power plants, whether it’s wind or solar, everybody is looking at gas as the supplementary fuel. The plants that we’re building, the wind plants and the solar plants are [supported by] gas plants.

Other problems are the need for inertia (flywheel effect) that is required to stabilize the system frequency and for voltage support to stop the lights going dim. Both of these are provided by conventional generators but not by wind and solar power.

For various reasons, 1,000 kilowatts (kW) of wind or solar power seldom produces more than 800 kW. On average, wind produces about one-third of its theoretical energy output (measured in kilowatt-hours – kWh) and solar power less than one-sixth. As a result, much more installed capacity plus energy storage facilities are needed to match the output of a conventional 1,000 kW station. It is the cost of this extra capacity and energy storage that kills the economics of wind and solar power.

One way of establishing the real cost of wind and solar power is to compare the cost of supplying all the electricity needed by a system with no connections to other power systems. Let’s consider the cost of supplying all the electricity needed by a power system with a peak demand of 4,000 megawatts (MW) and an energy demand of 19,000 gigawatt-hours (GWh), which is typical of most power systems.

We start by assuming that five days of storage would be needed to cover a series of cloudy days in winter or five days of little wind. So, we need to calculate the costs associated with storage by batteries or by hydro-pumped storage (in which excess power is used to pump water into a reservoir which then drains through hydraulic turbines producing electricity when the primary system lacks sufficient power to supply the grid). One then discovers that the solar power option would need 16,000 MW of solar capacity + 9,000 MW of battery capacity and the all-in cost would be 38 US¢/kWh. The wind power option would need 7,000 MW of wind and 2,250 MW of storage capacity to give a final cost of 34¢/kWh.

For comparison, the typical North American cost for combined-cycle natural gas generation is 5¢/kWh.

The solar option would occupy about 650 square miles of land and the wind option would occupy over 1,600 square miles. The environmental effects cannot be ignored. In many countries, the pumped storage option is likely to be opposed by environmentalists and it may not be feasible anyway because of the lack of sites that can accommodate two large storage lakes a short distance apart with one several hundred meters above the other.

The reality is that Biden’s ambitions for large-scale, low-cost solar or wind power cannot possibly be achieved by 2035, or even 2050, because of the huge numbers of wind turbines and solar farms and new transmission capacity that would be needed, and the very high cost and the associated technical and environmental problems. At the moment, and after the expenditure of billions of dollars in subsidies, solar and wind power provide only 8% of U.S. electricity.

If governments persist, the inevitable result will be skyrocketing prices and regular blackouts. Hospitals, industry, and commerce would need to install hundreds of diesel generators to maintain operations.

The assumptions made to derive the real cost of supplying 4,000 MW of demand from wind or solar power are as follows:

  • A 1,000 watt (W) solar cell has an average output of about 150 W, so 16,000 MW of solar power is needed to supply all the energy required by the 4,000 MW load and to compensate for the 25% losses in the energy storage system.
  • As a 1,000 W solar cell seldom produces more than 800 W, the effective maximum output of 16,000 MW of solar is 13,000 MW.
  • As the load on the power system can only absorb 4,000 MW, the storage system must be able to absorb the remaining 9,000 MW.

The storage capacity has to be able to provide 264 GWh needed in wintertime when there are likely to be five days of cloudy weather and the solar output is negligible. At the current $US200/kWh this amounts to over $US 50 billion. By way of comparison, the largest battery in the world at Hornsdale in Australia can store 130 MWh. Two thousand of them would be needed to store the 264,000 MWh needed for a reliable supply to the 4,000 MW load. This battery capacity is equivalent to all the batteries in all the electric cars in the world.

The conclusion is that about 25,000 MW of solar plus storage capacity is needed to supply the 4,000 MW demand! If batteries are used to provide five days of storage, the total cost is in the region of $70 billion, which explains the very high cost of providing a reliable supply from solar power.

Wind power that has an average output of 35% of its installed capacity is better but does not lead to a large reduction in price because the battery cost dominates.

Solar power with hydro-pumped storage is less expensive—an overall cost of 23¢/kWh, but still almost five-times the cost in the U.S. for combined-cycle natural gas generation. But hydro-pumped storage is impractical in most areas for the reason cited above.

From a greenhouse gas point of view, wind and solar power are horribly expensive. Carbon dioxide emissions are currently valued at about $30/tonne while calculations show that the carbon dioxide avoided by policy focused on wind and solar power would cost more than $1,400 per tonne.

When all the options are examined, the conclusion is that the best way to eliminate emissions of carbon dioxide from power generation is safe and reliable nuclear power supplemented by a relatively small amount of pumped storage. So, at least Biden’s support for nuclear and hydropower makes sense. But don’t expect ant-nuclear activists in the extreme left of the Democratic Party to allow this to happen.

The power disaster unfolding in California gives a good preview of what is in store for America as a whole if Biden succeeds in his goal of sweeping away fossil fuel-generated power and replacing it with wind and solar. Power outages are now commonplace in the Golden State, which suffered its first rolling blackouts in nearly 20 years last summer. Indeed, with 4,297 power outages between 2008 and 2017, California led the nation in this category (Texas was a distant second with 1,603).

Governor Newsom admitted that there was not enough wind power to compensate for the drop in solar power due to cloud cover and nightfall. The Los Angeles Times reported:

… gas-burning power plants that can fire up when the sun isn’t shining or the wind isn’t blowing have been shutting down in recent years, and California has largely failed to replace them …

The result is that California has fallen thousands of megawatts behind its needs.

Joe Biden said in his climate change plan:

Getting to a 100% clean energy economy is not only an obligation, it’s an opportunity. We should fully adopt a clean energy future, not just for all of us today, but for our children and grandchildren, so their tomorrow is healthier, safer, and more just.

If Biden actually does what he tells us he plans to do, life will be dismal indeed for our children and grandchildren. It will be a highly unjust future in which all those except the wealthy will lack the energy to be healthy and safe and will simply be left freezing in the dark.

The technical report and data to support our computations are available on the website of the senior author of this article at http://www.bryanleyland.co.nz/cost-of-wind-and-solar-power.html

________________________

Bryan Leyland MSc, DistFEngNZ, FIMechE, FIEE (rtd), MRSNZ, is a Power Systems engineer with more than 60 years’ experience in New Zealand and overseas. Tom Harris, M. Eng, is executive director of the Ottawa, Canada-based International Climate Science Coalition.

5 15 votes
Article Rating
130 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
MarkW
Reply to  mwhite
December 20, 2020 6:24 am

The goal of the modern “environmental” movement has always been a drastic reduction in the size of the human population, as much as 90%.
Having peons die because they can’t afford to heat their homes, is just part of the plan.

Ron Long
Reply to  MarkW
December 20, 2020 7:00 am

Yea, MarkW, and now China is limiting building and house temperatures to 3 C, in the Winter! What a mess!

MarkW
Reply to  Ron Long
December 20, 2020 10:55 am

China is bad enough that we don’t need to exaggerate what they are doing. China has banned heating until the outdoor temperatures get down to 3C.

ResourceGuy
Reply to  Ron Long
December 21, 2020 9:57 am

China power cutbacks are happening now because of action against Aussie coal…..

Power Cuts Hit Regions (china.org.cn)

Gary Pearse
Reply to  MarkW
December 20, 2020 1:03 pm

MarkW, l’m sure the “use” of pandemics to trim the population down is crossing the minds of more than a few of the totality folk, without research on vaccines being permitted next time.

Peta of Newark
Reply to  mwhite
December 20, 2020 6:36 am

Even worse is coming….
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/09/17/smart-meters-could-used-turn-heating-vehicle-chargers-plans/

If *that* isn’t an admission that renewable aren’t up to task – what is it?

Boris. Calling Boris. hello hello, is anybody there?
Kick that bimbo out and Do WTF You Were Elected To Do!

jorgekafkazar
Reply to  Peta of Newark
December 20, 2020 3:21 pm

Any lingering delusion that the UK has a multi-party system should die on Boris’s doorstep. Just remember how many MPs voted against the Climate Act. That’s the true indicator of how much opposition there is.

griff
Reply to  mwhite
December 20, 2020 7:17 am

but that’s due to loss of income, not increased cost of renewables, isn’t it?

Reply to  griff
December 20, 2020 9:26 am

Both, no question, you should know that.

RockyRoad
Reply to  griff
December 20, 2020 9:45 am

If I weren’t retired, I’d rejoice over the fact that Biden’s plan would require a HUGE increase in mining, which was my former profession.
Add to that their insistence in eliminating the internal combustion engine, and miners will have an added incentive to “rape and ruin” the earth, as the wacko environmentalists always claimed.
Unintended consequences come to mind, right griff?

Gunga Din
Reply to  RockyRoad
December 20, 2020 1:53 pm

There’s plenty of kids in the Congo to digand die for the materials to achieve the California Dream State.
PS How long ago was it that California Dreamers decried “Sweat Shops” and the stores that bought their goods?

Last edited 2 months ago by Gunga Din
Richard Page
Reply to  griff
December 20, 2020 1:54 pm

Griff, it’s fairly easy to plot the areas of high food bank usage (as a proxy for fuel poverty) in the UK and correlate these with energy costs by regions. The fact that the highest use of food banks is in areas with the greatest amount of unreliable energy production and highest energy costs is glaringly obvious. One can only imagine why this fact is being covered up. I expect that a similar exercise done with US data might yield a similar correlation between food bank use and high levels of unreliables in a region.

Lrp
Reply to  griff
December 20, 2020 3:47 pm

it is because of the cost of energy associated with unreliables

Ack
December 20, 2020 6:31 am

Lets start buy building all these monstrosities next to rich, liberal communities.

Ron Long
Reply to  Ack
December 20, 2020 7:01 am

NIMBY!

James Snook
December 20, 2020 6:40 am

In the U.K. an increasing cost will be the constraint payments built into wind farm contracts which the grid operator has to pay them when the unpredictable output from our ever increasing number of farms exceeds the requirements of the grid and they have to feather their blades. Boris ludicrously believes that we can can be the “Saudi Arabia of Wind”implying that any excess can be sold. Oil is sold at a fixed price, but a buyer of surplus electricity can beat the price down to peanuts. Duh!

griff
Reply to  James Snook
December 20, 2020 7:18 am

There are new power lines being built, already reducing constraints, plus increasingly there will be grid scale storage to mop up electricity now constrained. a diminishing problem.

James Snook
Reply to  griff
December 20, 2020 10:06 am

There is no grid scale storage being built. A few wheeler dealers are dabbling in batteries for single farms to buy low when there is too much generation and sell high when the wind doesn’t blow but there is no way that constraint payments can be avoided if Boris has his way and quadruples wind capacity by 2030 when will have a name plate capacity in excess of our demand.

griff
Reply to  James Snook
December 21, 2020 12:48 am

James there are multiple grid scale storage sites built and building in the UK and there will be more of them: understand I am addressing the issue of constraint here, I’m suggesting there won’t be payouts because batteries (or renewable hydrogen generation perhaps) will take up the slack. I am not arguing here about powering the whole country off batteries. and of course UK will have 7GW or more of interconnectors to the mainland European grid.

fred250
Reply to  griff
December 21, 2020 4:16 am

griff, you idiot.

…they may be called “grid-scale” but they are TINY, MEANINGLESS GESTURES

I’m guessing that you are WELL AWARE of that fact.

Batteries can never and will never “take up the slack”

They DO NOT PRODUCE ELECTRICITY..

Stop your mindless little fantasies..

MarkW
Reply to  fred250
December 21, 2020 12:05 pm

If griff’s world, words matter more than facts.
If they are called grid scale, then they are. Anyone who disagrees just doesn’t understand how climate science works.

fred250
Reply to  griff
December 20, 2020 10:45 am

ROFLMAO

griff on his little la-la fantasy land trip as usual….

There is NO battery, ever, that could be capable of operating at grid scale.

Even the largest battery in the world are only capable of storing enough for a small fraction of an hour of actual supply in a tiny system..

Great to see you are still utterly clueless about what “constraint” payments are for.

MarkW
Reply to  griff
December 20, 2020 10:57 am

I see griff is still delusional enough to believe that grid scale storage actually exists.

fred250
Reply to  griff
December 20, 2020 12:17 pm

Let’s look at what the hugely expensive battery in South Australia is doing

comment image

Despite SA demand being nearly twice what they are producing.. NO BATTERY.

Not much wind either. And see how little SA uses compared to NSW, Vic and Qld.

And see all that black and brown in the 3 main eastern states

That is COAL.. That is what supplies the huge, RELIABLE bulk of electricity !!

fred250
Reply to  fred250
December 20, 2020 12:19 pm

When the battery does actually supply, it appears as a tiny band at the end of the SAsupply.

No-one in their right mind could ever call it “grid-scale”

Lrp
Reply to  griff
December 20, 2020 3:49 pm

What grid storage are you talking about and how much of it, specifically?

MarkW
Reply to  Lrp
December 21, 2020 12:05 pm

He read an article in the Guardian.

Al Miller
Reply to  griff
December 20, 2020 5:14 pm

rofl!!!! grid scale storage?! HAHA

CD in Wisconsin
December 20, 2020 6:41 am

Legend has it that Napoleon said that you should never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake. If no one interrupts Biden and Sanders with the rollout of their solar and wind energy plans, it will likely leave the U.S. economy in a very precarious state. Once we see the consequences of what they have done, no one is going to care what the climate is (or isn’t) doing.

If the scientific and engineering illiteracy and ignorance of Biden, Sanders and the Democrats does leave the U.S. in a disastrous economic state, the Democrats and their supporters will have no one but themselves to blame for it. Certainly though, they will find a way to place the blame on anyone else but themselves.

The voters get what they voted for. When politicians listen to and believe in the wrong people preaching the wrong sermon, we all pay the price for its consequences regardless of political affiliation.

MarkW
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
December 20, 2020 11:01 am

You’d be amazed at the number of people who actually believe that the problems with the Veteran Administrations hospital system is proof that the private sector can’t be trusted with the health care system.
Most voters will never tie the problems with the grid with renewable energy, because the news media will never permit them to be told. Instead they will be told that all of the problems with the electric grid are being caused by evil capitalists and that the only solution is to turn everything over to the government.

Retired_Engineer_Jim
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
December 20, 2020 11:36 am

Oh, come now – they’ll blame Trump (and, probably, Bush). I’m waiting for Biden and Harris to start blaming all their problems on what they inheritred from Trump.

saveenergy
Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
December 24, 2020 3:07 am

But that’s what ALL politicians & bad managers do …
Trump blamed O’bummer
O’bummer blamed Bush
Bush blamed Clinton
It’s a revolving revolting door of blame, a bizarre game of pass the Parcel .

CD in Wisconsin
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
December 20, 2020 12:12 pm

Many years ago, I heard the Libertarian Party presidential candidate (Harry Browne I think) put it quite nicely. He said govt breaks your leg and then hands you some crutches and takes credit for your ability to get around on them. Never mind that govt broke your leg in the first place.

Gregory Woods
December 20, 2020 6:46 am

Another huge problem is the production and disposal of these weapons of mass destruction…

ozspeaksup
Reply to  Gregory Woods
December 21, 2020 3:55 am

yeah just where? is the tons of RE coming from to produce 60k birdshredders in usa I wonder

Nick Schroeder
December 20, 2020 6:46 am

1) By reflecting away 30% of ISR the albedo, which would not exist w/o the atmosphere, makes the earth cooler than it would be without the atmosphere like that reflective panel set on the dash. Remove the atmosphere/GHGs and the earth becomes much like the moon, a 0.1 albedo, 20% more kJ/h, hot^3 on the lit side, cold^3 on the dark. Nikolov, Kramm (U of AK) and UCLA Diviner mission all tacitly agree.

2) the GHG up/down welling, “trapping”/”back” radiating, 100 % efficient, perpetual warming loop requires “extra” energy which it gets from

3) the terrestrial surface radiating that “extra” energy as an ideal, .95 emissivity black body which

4) it cannot do because of the non-radiative heat transfer processes of the contiguous atmospheric molecules.

1 + 2 + 3 + 4 = 0 RGHE + 0 GHG warming + 0 CAGW.

All science backed up by experiment, the gold standard of classical science.

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/nicholas-schroeder-55934820_climatechange-globalwarming-carbondioxide-activity-6655639704802852864-_5jW

(Working on experiment V 5.0)

Ron Long
December 20, 2020 6:58 am

Good report, Byran and Tom. If Republicans don’t win at least one of the Georgia Senate seats up for vote Jan. 5, the Biden Administration is going to spiral out of control. Since Cognitive Decline Joe Biden reads everything off a teleprompter, and even then makes a mess of things, he will do what the looney left tells him to do. Look at Biden: the lights are on but nobody is home. How can this chopping up and frying our flying friends keep on? Who thinks China is going to cooperate with this nonsense and save the climate? This gets crazier and crazier and it cannot end well.

ozspeaksup
Reply to  Ron Long
December 21, 2020 3:59 am

chinas laughing itslef silly
all the RE and the solar setups
and in aus thousands of china made HWS using the heat exchanger setup
subsidsed to be near free(not really) by dan andrews green delusional mindset
not many realize that when its 4c or lower their hot waters going to cost them considerably more as the setup kicks to main supply mode

Mickey Reno
December 20, 2020 7:11 am

Biden’s plan is Bernie Sanders’ plan. It is a power grab of government running the energy sector, centralizing it, controlling it and ergo, controlling you and me. And somehow Sanders’ Socialist magic is supposed to make this cluster f*** into glorious success, when in truth, it will be a Soviet-style economic disaster. Pay attention you gullible climate cry babies, Progressives want to revive the process of writing 5-year plans.

griff
December 20, 2020 7:21 am

Guardian Saturday: ‘Blustery winter weather helped Great Britain’s windfarms set a record for clean power generation, which made up more than 40% of its electricity on Friday.
Wind turbines generated 17.3GW on Friday afternoon, according to figures from the electricity system operator, narrowly beating the previous record set in early January this year.’

(Grid didn’t collapse)

(?unsure about posting links in new format: straight copy doesn’t work?)

Reply to  griff
December 20, 2020 9:28 am

And when the wind is over ?

Meab
Reply to  griff
December 20, 2020 9:39 am

griff,

Anyone with half a brain realizes that the problem happens when the wind dies down on a grid that’s overly reliant on (unreliable) wind power. The problem doesn’t happen when there’s a steady wind. DUH. When the wind dies down, either for a short or a long period, the slack must be taken up by a reliable backup power source but those backup sources are extremely expensive and thus DO NOT exist. The backup is currently provided predominately by keeping and maintaining fossil fuel generation sources. Thus, because you can’t rely on it, wind power is FAR more expensive than the phony accounting done by the eco-nuts. That’s what the article was about but you either didn’t read it or are unable to comprehend it.

MarkW
Reply to  Meab
December 20, 2020 11:07 am

Anyone with half a brain

THat leaves, griff, loydo and the rest of our resident alarmists out.

Climate believer
Reply to  griff
December 20, 2020 9:46 am

“Blustery winter weather helped”

…. yeah, because we all know what happens when it doesn’t.

In other news, a new study found the hours of darkness seriously effecting solar power production.

Bryan Leyland
Reply to  Climate believer
December 25, 2020 8:15 pm

But the Spanish found how to solve that problem. The subsidies were so good that it it was worthwhile installing diesel generators to run all night. Finally, somebody decided that a Solar farm producing power at night was a bit odd.

James Snook
Reply to  griff
December 20, 2020 10:58 am

The Gruniad conveniently failed to report that on a third of the days in November, percentage wind contribution was in low single figures at the time of peak demand and was exceeded by imports.

Climate believer
Reply to  James Snook
December 20, 2020 11:28 am

Griff take note…… I know you hate cherry-picking.

MarkW
Reply to  griff
December 20, 2020 11:06 am

Once again griff demonstrates that he really doesn’t understand how to work with numbers.
First off, being able to produce 40%, during a time of low demand, and only for 5 minutes is nothing to be proud of.
In an earlier post, griff was proud of all the interconnects being built between Britain and the rest of Europe, but in this post he wants to pretend that the British electrical grid is completely independent from the rest of the world.
Finally, griff wants to pretend that all of the problems the Brits are already having with their electrical grid don’t exist.

December 20, 2020 7:31 am

Check the Island of Hawaii, Real time power generation: https://www.islandpulse.org
First you will notice most of the power is generated by oil at least at night. Further checking will show the highest electricity costs in the U.S.A. There best and least cost power is from a 180 MW coal plant they plan to shut down. Basically, Hawaii Electric is into the “Green New Deal” and paying the price.

ozspeaksup
Reply to  Dick Storm
December 21, 2020 4:01 am

what happened to their geothermal setup?
i know the lava got close but did miss wiping it out

Klem
December 20, 2020 7:32 am

‘Tom Harris, M. Eng, is executive director of the Ottawa, Canada-based International Climate Science Coalition.’

The Canadian left truly dispise this guy. They try to dismiss him at every opportunity, but he carries on undaunted.

DMacKenzie
Reply to  Klem
December 20, 2020 8:40 am

Engineers are mostly hated by elitists, their opinions ignored by innumerate eco-agendists, and unsolicited by politicians…..those who most readily have the knowledge to understand CO2 emissivity, heat transfer, and power generation economics are not even contacted out of fear that the tax and wealth redistribution agenda, or other CO2 emissions schemes, might be flawed….

Gunga Din
Reply to  DMacKenzie
December 20, 2020 2:06 pm

I can fantasize about the women I might have married.
But reality is, I have the woman I love, despite her faults and my own.
The Green/Red goons would have us all live in a fantasy that doesn’t exist.
Reality can never measure up to Fantasy.
But in the end, Reality is what is Real.

Kevin R.
Reply to  Gunga Din
December 20, 2020 6:15 pm

Well said.

MarkW
Reply to  Gunga Din
December 21, 2020 12:11 pm

Reminds me a bit of Garth Brooks, “Unanswered Prayers”.

https://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/garthbrooks/unansweredprayers.html

Doonman
December 20, 2020 7:45 am

As I sit here writing, my solar panels are covered with ice as the sun has not risen high enough yet to melt it. My gas fired furnace is running and keeping me warm. I would put another log on the fire to help the ambiance too, but fire places are outlawed because wood smoke will kill you.

I can hardly wait until all gas fired furnaces are eliminated to save us from pollution and global warming.

Paul Johnson
December 20, 2020 7:46 am

This article seeks to track down all the incidental grid COSTS from intermittent renewable power. It’s easier to consider the VALUE of intermittent power.

Assume a fossil fuel/nuclear power grid that fully meets demand. Add a unicorn intermittently providing 20% to 100% of demand for free with semi-predicable outages of minute, hours, or days. What happens to costs? In the real world, all the existing equipment is still needed to cover unicorn shortfall/outages. Capital, operating, and maintenance costs remain the same or increase due to cycling. Only fuel costs are reduced.

Thus, the value of non-dispatchable power is at most the avoided fuel cost for the back-up systems.  

John Bell
December 20, 2020 8:54 am

Wait until energy prices go up and the poor start screaming in pain, they the USA will be begging for TRUMP return.

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  John Bell
December 20, 2020 10:01 am

Nope, not after the shenanigans he pulled after this election. Surely the Republicans can come up with someone else. They need to start now.

MarkW
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
December 20, 2020 11:10 am

Good God, he asked that states actually abide by their own election laws. The traitor

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  MarkW
December 20, 2020 12:45 pm

Wrong. He tried to change the rules after the fact. And yes, by threatening our democratic system of voting he is a traitor.

MarkW
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
December 20, 2020 3:19 pm

I see that your hatred of the man has caused you to start seeing things that never existed.

fred250
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
December 20, 2020 12:23 pm

Come on.. exploit your TDS and tell us about these “shenanigans”…

….. apart from expecting a fair count process under the law and the constitution.

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  fred250
December 20, 2020 12:50 pm

Look, moron, I voted for Trump in both elections, despite his shortcomings, and because I knew that Biden and the Democrats would be a disaster due to their insane energy policies. But his actions after the election have crossed the line, and into treason territory. Republicans with any backbone have turned against him. But you’re too stupid to know any of that.

John
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
December 20, 2020 2:13 pm

The democrats crossed the line before, during and after the election. If we have let them get away with this without disclosing what they did they will do it every election

MarkW
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
December 20, 2020 3:21 pm

How dare Trump not accept that your guys stole the election fair and square. Trump refuses to accept that Democrat governors should be allowed to use executive orders to over ride laws on the books.
How dare Trump ignore the hundreds of affidavits regarding illegal behavior on the part of state election officials.

fred250
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
December 21, 2020 1:41 am

“But his actions after the election have crossed the line,”

Utter and complete BS

Expecting fair constitutional elections is NOT treason

You are a mindless cretin.

Obviously a leftist/Harris apologist.

MarkW
Reply to  fred250
December 21, 2020 12:13 pm

What are the odds that he voted for Trump as he claims?

Nick Schroeder
Reply to  John Bell
December 20, 2020 3:48 pm

While the mechanics of the election might not have been compromised that misses the real point.

If the press box was stealing signs for the opposing team would you concede the game quietly? Astros?

Donald Trump should never concede because he did not lose a second term to Joe Biden, he lost to the press.

The fake news MSM propaganda coup machine deceived and corrupted the prole electorate with fake climate change, a fake pandemic and fake racism.

Fake democracy from a fake fair election.

The coming progressive socialism, coercion, oppression and economic calamity will be real.

MarkW
Reply to  Nick Schroeder
December 21, 2020 12:14 pm

After months of proclaiming that the Hunter Biden story was fake news, CNN recently decided that it was a story worth covering.
Probably so that they can declare that the story is old news when it comes up again after inauguration

Last edited 2 months ago by MarkW
Tom
December 20, 2020 9:08 am

Either these things will work at some reasonable level and at a cost that people are willing to tolerate, or they won’t. It needs time to play out and it’s not as if we are jumping out of a plane without a parachute. We also need more time for whatever the climate is going to do to happen. At some point, if the climate calamity never materializes, then the whole thing will die for lack of interest. This will never stop the fossil fuel haters from trying to stop everyone from using it though.

MarkW
Reply to  Tom
December 20, 2020 11:13 am

For some ideas, you don’t need run experiments in the real world to tell whether they are good ideas or not.
We know what works and what doesn’t work when it comes to keeping the electrical grid stable. Randomly intermittent sources of power do not work. The math is simple. Beyond that, we have the experience of other countries who have drunk the kool-aid more deeply than we have.

saveenergy
December 20, 2020 9:09 am

“Within five years, we will install 500 million solar panels, including eight million solar roofs and community solar energy systems, and 60,000 made-in-America wind turbines.”

60,000 wind turbines installed over 5yr = 33 per day…every day.

500 million solar panels installed over 5yr = 273,972 per day…every day.

right !!

You are going to need all the Mexicans, Chinese, & all immigrants you can get your hands on to do that lot.

@ Griff & loydo there’s an opportunity to ‘save the planet’ go get an installation job.

MarkW
Reply to  saveenergy
December 20, 2020 11:14 am

They need to increase the world’s production of wind and solar by a factor of ten first. You can’t install panels that aren’t being made.

fred250
Reply to  MarkW
December 20, 2020 12:26 pm

The amount of coal, oil, and other minerals, needed to do that, would be enormous..

….. great for Australian COAL and iron ore exports. 🙂

All this new mining of minerals etc….. lucky I have mining shares , hey 😉

December 20, 2020 9:23 am

Biden’s plan promotes the world experiencing massive environmental degradations and humanity abuses from mining in foreign countries for the minerals and metals to support solar, wind, and EV batteries. Additionally, those foreign countries have significantly less environmental regulations, if any,  for the mining efforts, thus greater emissions to the world’s air, but Biden believes that Americans only breath the air in America.

Philip
December 20, 2020 9:27 am

The article starts with the assumption that grid frequency is maintained by the flywheel effect of rotating generators. Which is true (pretty much) of the current state.

But it doesn’t have to be that way. Imagine a grid where there is not a single rotating generator (at least, not one directly connected). All power is generated by inverters, synchronously linked.

Now it doesn’t matter what load you apply, the frequency won’t change. That problem is gone.

However, we now have other old problems, like voltage falling as too much load is applied – brown outs – and the fact that there is a limit to the current that an inverter can supply before it is damaged. It will be shut down before that point is reached, throwing more load on those remaining, which may well now too be overloaded and shut down – cascading blackout.

This problem is typically dealt with by load shedding – with “smart meters” there is now no need to black out whole areas, the load can be cut to more targeted loads. Such as your heating. It could be even more targeted to ensure that privileged classes were spared, and the cuts delivered to less deserving classes – such as households stuffed with white privilege.

The whole system then becomes a political weapon.

MarkW
Reply to  Philip
December 20, 2020 11:16 am

I see you’ve never tried to control an electrical grid. The idea that millions of electronic inverters can be controlled with the kind of precision needed to maintain frequency stability is nonsensical.

Philip
Reply to  MarkW
December 20, 2020 3:52 pm

You mean like the ones on roofs all over America, in solar power farms all over America? They are frequency controlled tightly enough to allow them to feed power into the grid.

This is the aim of the renewable power mob. No more huge generators driven by coal, gas, oil, water or atomic power.

There is no problem deriving a high precision sync signal. Ask any cheap gps receiver.

Rainer Bensch
Reply to  Philip
December 21, 2020 4:02 am

Yes, and you can assign any phase offset to 1PPS to at least microsecond precision for each source separately.

MarkW
Reply to  Rainer Bensch
December 21, 2020 12:20 pm

And what do you do when the phase delay starts to change because of rapidly changing conditions?

Paul Penrose
Reply to  Philip
December 21, 2020 9:46 am

You’ve obviously never tried to synchronize multiple digital devices to within a microsecond. The GPS timing signal is not precise enough for that. I worked on a project that required keeping less than a hundred locally networked processors synchronized to within only +-10ms and that was difficult enough. Trying to do that with thousands/millions of processors spread across a large geographical area is not possible.

BTW, all DC devices that feed into the grid today synchronize to the frequency that is provided by the big spinning generators you want to get rid of. That is your “high precision sync signal”. In reality, for wind, solar, and their battery backup future to have a chance, we would have to convert our entire electric infrastructure over to variable voltage DC. While possible, it would be insanely expensive and disruptive – to the point it would probably bankrupt any nation that tried it.

MarkW
Reply to  Philip
December 21, 2020 12:19 pm

Thank you for proving your utter ignorance on the subject.
The solar farms are frequency followers. If the grid frequency goes down, so do they. If the grid frequency goes up, so do they.
The fact that you actually believe that they are providing frequency stability shows that you believe what you want, without actually trying to learn something.
The fact that you believe being able to receive a gps signal is equivalent to trying to control the frequency of the grid is yet more evidence that you have no concept what the words you are using actually mean.

Leonard Weinstein
December 20, 2020 9:29 am

While I am a skeptic that global warming is a problem (it has only warmed from the recent little ice age to the average level over the last 10,000 years, and is presently only slowly rising), the whole issue is moot. There have been two recent developments for cheap carbon free (and nuclear as we know it free) power sources that can replace all present power. These are Rossi’s e-cat SKL and Mill’s hydrino power generators.

Jan Benes
Reply to  Leonard Weinstein
December 20, 2020 11:01 am

To those here who dismiss Dr. Mills achievements as one big scam: His 100kw water boiler is doing it now. There is a validation report written by an idependent scientific observer. It starts to be really hard to ignore his theories. Maybe some of you could just have a look on the validation report.. It is not that big effort after all.https://brilliantlightpower.com/pdf/Report_on_Water_Bath_Calorimetry_12.04.20.pdf

MarkW
Reply to  Jan Benes
December 20, 2020 3:24 pm

More hidden experiments and unnamed independent observers.

If his theories actually worked, he wouldn’t have to beg for investors.

MarkW
Reply to  Leonard Weinstein
December 20, 2020 11:17 am

Mythical solutions for mythical problems.

BTW, we still have about 5C to go before getting to the average temperature of the last 10,000 years.

fred250
Reply to  Leonard Weinstein
December 20, 2020 12:30 pm

Get back to us when they have a least a dozen in stable operation.

Until then.. keep dreaming little fantasies.

MarkW
Reply to  fred250
December 20, 2020 3:25 pm

I’d settle for one. So long as it was fully open and anyone could examine it completely.

Sara
December 20, 2020 9:40 am

It will be a highly unjust future in which all those except the wealthy will lack the energy to be healthy and safe and will simply be left freezing in the dark. – article.

Or maybe some of those naifs will snap out of it and realize that they will HAVE to take care of themselves, and get going on self-sufficient things like oil lamps and woodburning stoves.

Or maybe not. Maybe they’d just be too uninformed and possibly unskilled to do anything but wait for their doom to fall on them.

I’m quite glad I won’t be around to see this happen, but on the other hand, I have my doubts about it ever really coming to fruition. It ain’t cheap and it ain’t reliable and never will be either of those.

jorgekafkazar
Reply to  Sara
December 20, 2020 3:33 pm

Most injustice today is perpetrated by those who claim to be fighting injustice.

RockyRoad
December 20, 2020 9:50 am

Why the constant and incessant push to eliminate carbon, the gas of life??

Oh, wait–the answer is in my question!… they don’t want life (people, plants, or animals) to flourish!

Greedy Bolsheviks!

n.n
December 20, 2020 9:51 am

They’re Green as in clean, renewable, redistributive greenbacks. That said, save a bird, whack a wind turbine. Think of the polar bears’ appetizers, give to World Walrus Foundation.

dh-mtl
December 20, 2020 9:58 am

So let me see if I understand this correctly. Biden wants to go to all green energy.

Let’s for the sake of argument limit this ambition to replacing fossil fuels for electricity consumption (this would eliminate coal plus about 25% of natural gas demand) and gasoline (about 45% of oil demand).

The US currently has about 1.2 million MW of electricity production of which about 65% is coal and natural gas – 780 000 MW.

Replacing 9 MM bbls/day gasoline, assuming electricity is twice as efficient and demand is level loaded, would add an additional 400 000 MW of demand.

Assuming the capital cost cited in the above (say $60 billion to replace 4000 MW) of $15 Million per MW means that replacing fossil fuels in electricity and gasoline (i.e. about 35% of U.S. Oil and Natural Gas consumption) would cost about $18 trillion or roughly 75% of US annual GDP.

Almost all of the raw materials required for this equipment, plus much of the equipment itself will be imported, and paid for with ever-shrinking US Dollars (https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/next-dollar-problem-has-just-arrived). As well these figures do not include the investment in the factories that will be required to build the portion of the equipment that will be sourced in the U.S. These two factors will markedly increase the cost.

Thus we can safely say that creating the infrastructure to replace coal and 35% of U.S. oil and natural gas consumption will cost a minimum of 100% of US annual GDP.

Let’s assume that this investment will take place over 20 years, i.e. it will require an investment of a minimum of 5% of GDP per year.

To put this into perspective 5% of GDP per year is equivalent to 1/3 of GDP from US mining, manufacturing and construction combined, and 1/3 of US capital investment. This will cause either massive trade deficits, sinking the dollar even further, or crowding out of all other strategic and developmental investments, or in all likelihood a mix of both.

In addition, what is not mentioned in this paper is the cost of maintenance. Solar, wind and batteries, contrary to current generating capacity, are exposed to the elements, have relatively short life spans and are widely distributed, all factors that increase the cost of maintenance. Thus maintenance costs will be much higher than for the current system. So we can expect annual maintenance costs of at least 10% the capital cost. So once the system is fully installed we can expect maintenance costs of at least 10% of GDP.

So to summarize, to replace coal plus 35% of oil and natural gas in the U.S. will require a capital expenditure of (at a minimum) 100% of GDP (US GDP is currently approx. $55000 per capita), Assuming that it is carried out over 20 years, this represents a third of current U.S. goods and construction expenditures and a third of current capital expenditures over that period, and will thus crowd out all other discretionary investment. At the end of this period, the U.S. will have an electrical system whose annual maintenance costs will be least 10% of GDP (i.e. more than $5000 per capita per year, 2/3 of current mining, manufacturing and construction GDP and 2/3 of current investment),

And all for no material benefit!

If I were Russia and China, I would be cheering Biden on!

fred250
Reply to  dh-mtl
December 20, 2020 11:04 am

And as wind and solar infrastructure dies, It will need replacing, and a much increased cost, ON TOP OF the expenditure you mention.

Waste management surfaces and land fill will be inundated.

Retired_Engineer_Jim
Reply to  dh-mtl
December 20, 2020 11:49 am

I fear that you have assumed that GDP would remain constant. As the hit to the economy increases each year, GDP will go down.

walt
December 20, 2020 10:03 am

The transition to 100% solar and wind will make the suppliers of those systems rich. The environmental upheaval caused by mining and processing materials for the new panel farms and wind farms are ignored. The power grid expansion to connect the farms and storage facilities will not be an easy sell to NIMBY people.

Kevin
December 20, 2020 10:04 am

Has any utility (municipal or investor-owned) ever reduced it’s rates because they switched to renewables?

John
Reply to  Kevin
December 20, 2020 2:27 pm

my town is about to switch electric providers, we have a choice of renewable ,for a higher price or basic for a lower rate.

Tom Abbott
December 20, 2020 10:26 am

From the article: “The reality is that Biden’s ambitions for large-scale, low-cost solar or wind power cannot possibly be achieved by 2035, or even 2050”

That’s the bottom line.

The Loony Left requires the impossible.

tom0mason
December 20, 2020 11:42 am

Why look at Biden’s idiotic plans? It not as if the Chinese puppet will be president.

Gary Pearse
December 20, 2020 12:48 pm

Brian and Tom, you missed out the cost of millions of acres of land to be tufted and glazed with renewables. Also the huge direct and indirect costs to the environment, slaughter of winged creatures, etc.

Do you know Denmark, which is one sixth the size of New Zealand, cut down a hundred km strip along the coastal boundary of their only national park/forest to stud it with windmills. Of course none of this is really the the point. The objective has been admitted to on many occasions by the people running the climate charade. I believe they are happy for us to occupy ourselves jumping all over the ‘takedown’ of what is simply a feint for something dark and awful.
.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Gary Pearse
December 21, 2020 4:37 am

Gary, the first thing that goes through my mind when windmills are mentioned is the horror of seeing these monstrosities spread all over the landscape, if the radical Democrats get their way.

Not in my back yard! 🙂

TonyG
Reply to  Tom Abbott
December 21, 2020 7:50 am

When I lived in CA, I remember the windmills on I-10 heading to Palm Springs littering the desert, and most of the time, even during Santa Anas, most of them were not turning.

People think THAT mess is “environmentally friendly”?

Olen
December 20, 2020 1:29 pm

Its a disaster already and Democrats want to expand on it and it should not happen. For full disclosure or exposure there should be a look at who is invested in this scheme.

Gunga Din
December 20, 2020 1:31 pm

Mr. layman here.
Bottom line.
Batteries need something to recharge them … and batteries don’t last forever, whatever technology they are based on.
The biggie is: There is absolutely no need to depend on them.
What’s the excuse to build an infrastructure based on them?
To back up the proven unreliable to replace the proven reliable?
Why replace the proven reliable?
Flowers might, theoretically, bloom a week too early?
Who can prove that is not “Natural”?
Who can prove that anything “Man” has done is not “Natura/?

(PS Editing is not easier.)

MarkW
Reply to  Gunga Din
December 21, 2020 12:24 pm

Flowers might, theoretically, bloom a week too early?

More like a few hours to early.

Zigmaster
December 20, 2020 1:37 pm

The relative cost argument is easy to refute once the desire to reduce emissions is eliminated. If A is base load cost and B is renewables cost but B cannot exist without A as a backup , A+ B can never be equal to or less than A alone.
The cheapest and best path is to educate the people about the lack of danger that is climate change and that there is no need to try to reduce emissions.Reversing the global warming indoctrination would not only save future generations of gazillions in future energy costs but create a more efficient and reliable grid.
Renewables are not the problem. The belief system that supports them is.

MichaelJ
Reply to  Zigmaster
December 20, 2020 3:07 pm

If just 1/2 of Biden’s climate policies are enacted, it is easy to see how over 1 BILLION humans will die due to starvation, hypothermia and disease. It will lead to a massive reduction in food supplies et al and the people in poor countries will die by the millions, is this what the Liberals are intentionally doing now? Perhaps this is the “socialist way” as Scrooge said, “better they die to decrease the surplus population”.

TonyG
Reply to  MichaelJ
December 21, 2020 7:27 am

Just look at the Covid response for a preview.

TonyG
Reply to  Zigmaster
December 21, 2020 7:26 am

A+ B can never be equal to or less than A alone.

According to the latest “new” math, it can if you FEEL it strongly enough.

markx
December 20, 2020 3:40 pm

Yes. It is apparent that they are not just ‘plug and play’. Some planning is required, and major grid restructuring is necessary.

Stockyard Hill is just the latest, and by far the biggest, of any number of projects that have been delayed – either during construction or commissioning – over the last few years. And the true reasons are rarely explained.

Some constraints and delays have been sheeted down to broader network issues, such as the lack of network capacity, the lack of system strength, the risk of voltage oscillations, and potential congestion problems.

https://reneweconomy.com.au/why-are-the-blades-not-spinning-at-australias-biggest-wind-farm-79852/

link

Walter Sobchak
December 20, 2020 4:45 pm

I assume they are accounting for turning the entire vehicle fleet over to battery operation and replacing gas fired appliances with electric, including basic heat.

Rob_Dawg
December 20, 2020 4:54 pm

> “For various reasons, 1,000 kilowatts (kW) of wind or solar power seldom produces more than 800 kW.”

A 1kW solar system cannot produce 500kW average due to ummm night. Then there’s losses and clouds. Wait. My bad. You cannot model clouds so just ignore them.

Rainer Bensch
Reply to  Rob_Dawg
December 21, 2020 4:16 am

I had another problem with his calculation. How does he come to 16 000 MW from 4 000 MW needed by all the capacity factors given?

Al Miller
December 20, 2020 5:08 pm

You forgot to say either mindnumbingly stupid, or stunningly evil, choose one or both… This idea has been tried in several locales with inevitable failure. I give you Germany which has all but admitted outright failure, England where energy poverty is now rampant, California living in blackouts and denial that the energy they need comes from elsewhere. I particularly enjoyed the experiment in Ontario Canada where the government guilty of raising energy prices to stunning levels was shown the door in a massive defeat at the next election.

RickWill
December 20, 2020 5:18 pm

Lots of good stories in Australia today about the filing cost of wholesale electricity. We are told it is all due to the growing sources of “renewable” generation and that the old coal plants did not break down so often.

The wholesale price HAS fallen. However the retail price remains stubbornly high. The obvious conclusion is that the middle men are making more money. However, in this case, it is not the obvious but the almost invisible system costs.

The attached chart shows the system costs levied in the NEM by quarter. What has to be realised is that most of this costs fall on SA retailers and WDGs separate to the wholesale price settlements.

It is interesting to note that Q1 2020 was exceptional. That resulted from a 2 week outage of the interconnector. It effectively doubled the wholesale cost of electricity in the state but does not show up in the reported wholesale price. It demonstrates how a small part of a network can get a free ride from the reliable, high inertia generators connected to the network.

Screen Shot 2020-12-21 at 12.11.38 pm.png
RickWill
Reply to  RickWill
December 20, 2020 5:27 pm

The AEMO report also indicates the value of a battery in a grid infested with WDGs. The attached shows the cost recovery for the HPR in South Australia. Note the high income during Q! when Sa was disconnected from the rest of the network and had to stand alone. AEMO actually took control of the battery to keep SA network stable but the battery made a lot of money – essentially doubling the price of electricity to consumers.

Unless you have a good grasp of why these costs are incurred then you do not understand the issues confronting high penetration of WGDs on a network.

Screen Shot 2020-12-21 at 12.21.04 pm.png
RickWill
Reply to  RickWill
December 20, 2020 5:34 pm

Another aspect that often gets little mention when handling ever increasing amounts of intermittent generation is the curtailment factor. As more WDGs connect, they all tend to produce at the same time so it is inevitable that they will need to reduce output due to insufficient demand.

The coal generators have got smarter about forcing grid scale WDGs into curtailment so it is now a common feature and the volume of curtailment is being estimated in the Australian NEM per attached.

Screen Shot 2020-12-21 at 12.29.09 pm.png
Joel O'Bryan
December 20, 2020 5:25 pm

More reason to move to Texas.

Texas and its ERCOT-run grid will tell the Biden Admin and its diktats to go take a FFL. And without Congress’s legislative approval, Texas will likely prevail in the Courts in that fight.

December 21, 2020 4:03 am

Posted previously on wattsup:

In 2002 Dr Sallie Baliunas, Astrophysicist, Harvard-Smithsonian, Dr Tim Patterson, Paleoclimatologist, Carleton U and Allan MacRae TOLD YOU SO 18 YEARS AGO. We published in 2002:

1. “CLIMATE SCIENCE DOES NOT SUPPORT THE THEORY OF CATASTROPHIC HUMAN-MADE GLOBAL WARMING – THE ALLEGED WARMING CRISIS DOES NOT EXIST.”
See Michael Shellenberger’s 2020 confession “On Behalf Of Environmentalists, I Apologize For The Climate Scare”.

2. “THE ULTIMATE AGENDA OF PRO-KYOTO ADVOCATES IS TO ELIMINATE FOSSIL FUELS, BUT THIS WOULD RESULT IN A CATASTROPHIC SHORTFALL IN GLOBAL ENERGY SUPPLY – THE WASTEFUL, INEFFICIENT ENERGY SOLUTIONS PROPOSED BY
KYOTO ADVOCATES SIMPLY CANNOT REPLACE FOSSIL FUELS.”
See Michael Moore’s 2020 film “Planet of the Humans”.

The green objective is to destroy prosperity and move the USA into a planned economy – with a few rich at the top looking down on the many poor peasants. That model now describes most of the countries in the world. Europe and Canada are far down that “Poverty Road to Venezuela”, and the USA will follow if Biden and the Demo-Marxists are elected.

Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
December 21, 2020 4:26 am

Our above 2002 major conclusions that contradict the global warming and green-energy frauds were made in 2002, based on fundamental laws of physics, which do not change in 18 years – or 18,000 years.

The Big Picture:
The global warming / climate change scam, the Covid-19 full-Gulag lockdown scam, the specious linkage of these two huge frauds, and the leftists’ “Final Solution”, the
Marxist “Great Reset” – aka “Live like a Chinese peasant”.

WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM PRESENTS: THE GREAT RESET— “YOU’LL OWN NOTHING, AND YOU’LL BE HAPPY.”


The World Economic Forum’s twitter account deleted the tweet in which this video was originally embedded in 2016.

The Alberta government, like so many others, has been duped and has adopted a failed
strategy of trying to appease leftist fraudsters who are intent on destroying our free society. Alberta government policies have caused more than a decade of strategic and economic failure.

Watch as Sky News Australia exposes the “Great Reset”, the wild Marxist “Final Solution” from the World Economic Forum (WEF), as espoused by its founder Klaus Schwab (aka “Doctor Evil”) and a host of bizarre villains straight out of an Austin Powers film.



(Schwab starts at 5:05 of the video)

Really, good people, it is long past time that you realized you have been duped, for decades. We are governed by scoundrels and imbeciles. 

Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
December 21, 2020 5:57 am

Maurice Newman of The Spectator Australia nails it:
https://www.spectator.com.au/2020/10/dangerous-elites-planning-the-great-reset/
[excerpts]

A lasting side-effect of Covid-19 is the universal growth of state power.
Despite global death rates peaking last April and immunity building even
without a vaccine, authoritarian leaders are clinging to their recently
acquired powers. No doubt they view individual freedom as an optional extra not an inalienable right and want their new powers to become a normal part of
governing.

Already, Professor Schwab and his colleagues have started mobilising vast networks of left-wing activists. Indeed, the 2021 annual summit will include members of the WEF’s thousands strong Global Shapers Community, youth crusaders located in 400
cities across the planet. As Schwab says, ‘The changes we have already seen in
response to Covid-19 prove that a reset of our economic and social foundations
is possible. This is our best chance to instigate stakeholder capitalism’. Those who scoffed at claims that climate change was a stalking horse for a new world order, should think again. That reality is now in full view.

Come January 2021, Professor Schwab’s Great Reset campaign will begin in earnest. Should his ideological opponent, US President Donald Trump, not be re-elected, a major obstacle to achieving his societal and economic revamp will be gone. Schwab is determined that a return to a post-Covid business-as-usual world ‘will not happen’.

Indeed, the World Economic Forum, the United Nations and its various
agencies will use the current depressed economic environment, masked as it is by endless government support, together with renewed forecasts of apocalyptic climate change, to push for a ‘more inclusive social contract’, a decarbonised economy and a ‘control without ownership’ business sector, where companies ‘serve all stakeholders not just shareholders’.

Intense pressure will be applied to parliaments everywhere to pass enabling laws and to abdicate more responsibilities to unelected bureaucrats in
global institutions. Crony capitalism is anathema to genuine market economies and, giving more leverage to those who encourage it is simply fascistic. No surprise that some of the organisations behind the ‘stakeholder capitalism’ push are accused of corruption, sexual harassment, cover ups and a general abuse of power. Still, the WEF’s oligarchy derives much of its extraordinary influence and wealth from these same institutions and no one should doubt their Big Brother intentions.

Indeed, anyone who fears big government and values free speech, freedom
to choose and property rights, should be terrified. Yet, so far, political, business and church leaders, along with the mainstream media, seem oblivious to the threat and turn blind eyes to the dictatorial abuses already perpetrated in the name of the pandemic. There is even bi-partisan support for policies which, two decades ago, would have been considered politically and economically unthinkable.

Stripped of the propaganda, the Great Reset is not new. It’s another fascist experiment being pushed by controlling elitists. Economic growth and social mobility must be subordinate to the collective. Connections will be institutionalised and privilege perpetuated. History demonstrates the children
of the elites will receive preferential access to higher education and elite
positions. ‘Inclusion’ and ‘fairness’? Forget it. Think inequality, serfdom and misery.

************************************

We are governed by scoundrels and imbeciles.

Regards, Allan MacRae

Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
December 21, 2020 6:44 am

OK children, let’s not PANIC like we did earlier this year. The last full-Gulag Lockdown for Covid-19 was (at best) a really stupid error – but more likely a global scam led by the WHO.

THE LATEST COVID VARIANT IS CAUSING ‘MAYHEM’
More nations are shutting down travel from the UK
By Evann Gastaldo, Newser Staff
Posted Dec 21, 2020
https://www.newser.com/story/300301/heres-the-latest-on-out-of-control-covid-variant.html

Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
December 21, 2020 6:26 am

Maurice Newman of The Spectator Australia nails it:
https://www.spectator.com.au/2020/10/dangerous-elites-planning-the-great-reset/
[excerpts]

A lasting side-effect of Covid-19 is the universal growth of state power. Despite global death rates peaking last April and immunity building even without a vaccine, authoritarian leaders are clinging to their recently acquired powers. No doubt they view individual freedom as an optional extra not an inalienable right and want their new powers to become a normal part of governing.

Already, Professor Schwab and his colleagues have started mobilising vast networks of left-wing activists. Indeed, the 2021 annual summit will include members of the WEF’s thousands strong Global Shapers Community, youth crusaders located in 400 cities across the planet. As Schwab says, ‘The changes we have already seen in response to Covid-19 prove that a reset of our economic and social foundations is possible. This is our best chance to instigate stakeholder capitalism’. Those who scoffed at claims that climate change was a stalking horse for a new world order, should think again. That reality is now in full view.

Come January 2021, Professor Schwab’s Great Reset campaign will begin in earnest. Should his ideological opponent, US President Donald Trump, not be re-elected, a major obstacle to achieving his societal and economic revamp will be gone. Schwab is determined that a return to a post-Covid business-as-usual world ‘will not happen’.

Indeed, the World Economic Forum, the United Nations and its various agencies will use the current depressed economic environment, masked as it is by endless government support, together with renewed forecasts of apocalyptic climate change, to push for a ‘more inclusive social contract’, a decarbonised economy and a ‘control without ownership’ business sector, where companies ‘serve all stakeholders not just shareholders’.

Intense pressure will be applied to parliaments everywhere to pass enabling laws and to abdicate more responsibilities to unelected bureaucrats in global institutions. Crony capitalism is anathema to genuine market economies and, giving more leverage to those who encourage it is simply fascistic. No surprise that some of the organisations behind the ‘stakeholder capitalism’ push are accused of corruption, sexual harassment, cover ups and a general abuse of power. Still, the WEF’s oligarchy derives much of its extraordinary influence and wealth from these same institutions and no one should doubt their Big Brother intentions.

Indeed, anyone who fears big government and values free speech, freedom to choose and property rights, should be terrified. Yet, so far, political, business and church leaders, along with the mainstream media, seem oblivious to the threat and turn blind eyes to the dictatorial abuses already perpetrated in the name of the pandemic. There is even bi-partisan support for policies which, two decades ago, would have been considered politically and economically unthinkable.

Stripped of the propaganda, the Great Reset is not new. It’s another fascist experiment being pushed by controlling elitists. Economic growth and social mobility must be subordinate to the collective. Connections will be institutionalised and privilege perpetuated. History demonstrates the children of the elites will receive preferential access to higher education and elite positions. ‘Inclusion’ and ‘fairness’? Forget it. Think inequality, serfdom and misery.

************************************

Regards, Allan MacRae

Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
December 21, 2020 6:45 am

Moderator – please delete this double-post.

MarkW
Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
December 21, 2020 12:28 pm

For a few hours after you post, you have the ability to go back and edit a post. Perhaps you can delete everything and replace it with a “Double Post” comment.

ResourceGuy
December 21, 2020 9:53 am

It’s been many months now since we were told orbiting solar arrays would take over the electricity market. What happened? Did the ad dollars run dry?

Paul Penrose
December 21, 2020 9:57 am

The biggest problem I have with this analysis is that no consideration was given to how much over-generation margin is needed to ensure that the storage systems can be recharged in a reasonable time frame while still also supplying enough for peak demand. Sure, sometimes you will be lucky and can use off-peak generation to recharge partially depleted storage systems, however when you more deeply deplete them, you need to have overcapacity to recharge them before the next big draw-down event – all the while providing for current demand. Even just using back-of-the-envelope calculations you need at least 2x overcapacity on the generation side, and for real grid security, probably 3x or 4x. Now just how economic does your “renewables” + storage solution sound?

%d bloggers like this: