Created with GIMP

Australian Financial Review Advises Readers to Embrace Climate Investments

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

According to the AFR, “You don’t want to own a portfolio that has a high allocation to carbon-intensive companies that cannot make the transition.”. Just one problem – there will be no green energy transition.

Climate change investing: jolly green giant or next bubble?

Renewable energy assets are hurtling towards $US4 trillion following the pandemic and renewed global commitments to net-zero emissions. Avoiding harmful sectors and companies is no longer enough; investors want to back climate winners.

Tony Featherstone
ContributorMar 20, 2021 – 12.00am

Climate change investing once had a green agenda. Now it’s black-and-white: portfolios stacked with high-polluting companies risk wealth destruction and missed opportunity.

When COVID-19 erupted, climate change investing was meant to take a back seat. The opposite happened: money poured into funds that invest sustainably.

“Before these changes, it was hard for markets to fully factor carbon emissions into asset prices. There was too much uncertainty about the approach of China and the US, under Donald Trump’s leadership, towards climate-change policy. There’s far greater clarity now.”

Investors need to act on this change. You don’t want to own a portfolio that has a high allocation to carbon-intensive companies that cannot make the transition.

“Entire balance sheets are trying to find the best renewable assets,” says Glover. “With that comes the risk of valuation bubbles. We’ve seen a huge increase in valuations for renewable assets globally in the past six months, and clean-energy companies trading on sharply higher multiples. Some valuations are starting to become disconnected from reality.

Tesla’s $US680 billion valuation is a prominent example. Those who believe the visionary electric vehicle company will transform energy markets over 50 years can justify its staggering valuation.

For everybody else, Tesla is wildly overpriced

Read more: https://www.afr.com/wealth/investing/climate-change-investing-jolly-green-giant-or-next-bubble-20210316-p57ba3

How can I be so confident stating there will be no green energy transition? The reason is, top engineers and scientists, green enthusiasts who have examined the green transition in detail, have come away utterly dismayed at what they discovered.

Can you think of a greener company than Google? Here is what top Stanford qualified Google scientists Ross Koningstein and David Fork had to say about the green transition.

What It Would Really Take to Reverse Climate Change

“At the start of RE<C, we had shared the attitude of many stalwart environmentalists: We felt that with steady improvements to today’s renewable energy technologies, our society could stave off catastrophic climate change. We now know that to be a false hope …

Renewable energy technologies simply won’t work; we need a fundamentally different approach.”

Read more: http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewables/what-it-would-really-take-to-reverse-climate-change

Other engineers and scientists have come to the same conclusion.

The Limits of Clean Energy
If the world isn’t careful, renewable energy could become as destructive as fossil fuels.

BY JASON HICKEL | SEPTEMBER 6, 2019, 8:51 AM

We need a rapid transition to renewables, yes—but scientists warn that we can’t keep growing energy use at existing rates. No energy is innocent. The only truly clean energy is less energy.

In 2017, the World Bank released a little-noticed report that offered the first comprehensive look at this question. It models the increase in material extraction that would be required to build enough solar and wind utilities to produce an annual output of about 7 terawatts of electricity by 2050. That’s enough to power roughly half of the global economy. By doubling the World Bank figures, we can estimate what it will take to get all the way to zero emissions—and the results are staggering: 34 million metric tons of copper, 40 million tons of lead, 50 million tons of zinc, 162 million tons of aluminum, and no less than 4.8 billion tons of iron.

In some cases, the transition to renewables will require a massive increase over existing levels of extraction. For neodymium—an essential element in wind turbines—extraction will need to rise by nearly 35 percent over current levels. Higher-end estimates reported by the World Bank suggest it could double.

The same is true of silver, which is critical to solar panels. Silver extraction will go up 38 percent and perhaps as much as 105 percent. Demand for indium, also essential to solar technology, will more than triple and could end up skyrocketing by 920 percent.

And then there are all the batteries we’re going to need for power storage. To keep energy flowing when the sun isn’t shining and the wind isn’t blowing will require enormous batteries at the grid level. This means 40 million tons of lithium—an eye-watering 2,700 percent increase over current levels of extraction.

Read more: https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/09/06/the-path-to-clean-energy-will-be-very-dirty-climate-change-renewables/

Iconic British presenter David Attenborough gets it, he wants a “global green energy Apollo Programme” to try to make renewable energy affordable – a moonshot to achieve a goal he knows is unachievable with current technology.

Michael Moore gets it – his investigative team set out to identify and expose the big oil conspirators working to suppress the green revolution. But Moore did not find a big oil conspiracy. What Moore claims to have found instead was a group of greedy corporate green sellouts, whom Moore claimed in his film are wildly exaggerating the potential of their expensive government subsidised renewable energy offerings.

Even countries blessed with an abundance of readily available geothermal and hydroelectric resources are struggling to make it work. New Zealand is considering rationing energy, and has been accused of cheating on their published carbon figures to inflate the alleged progress of their emissions reduction plans.

I’m not advising people ignore renewables, and simply embrace coal and fossil fuel as if the green push is not happening. Governments are heaping taxes and climate damages on otherwise viable carbon intensive industries, then in some cases panicking and handing out massive subsidies when they realise they are about to lose something important. Company valuations across a broad spectrum of sectors are increasingly set by the whim of politicians, and I have no more idea of what politicians will do next than anyone else.

An old merchant banker once told me “plenty of people have gone bust waiting for the market to make sense”. But gambling on the foolishness of others, or the fickle whims of politicians, is also a risk.

All the money in the world is not enough to fund the proposed transition to a zero carbon economy. The trillions Biden and others plan to spend will build a lot of solar panels and wind turbines – but they will not facilitate significant retirement of dispatchable power sources. It doesn’t matter how many solar panels and wind turbines you build, wind turbines need wind to operate, and solar panels need sunlight. If you have neither for an extended period, as happens a few times per year in most places, and if neighbouring states are also facing power shortages, only dispatchable power can save you from a blackout.

So it seems inevitable that something is going to come unglued at some unpredictable point in the future – at some point investors, voters and politicians will realise renewables are a dead end. What happens after this moment of realisation is anyone’s guess.

5 22 votes
Article Rating
98 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Steve Case
March 19, 2021 11:04 pm

I know a very smart talented guy, runs his own start up manufacturing company, is an accomplished musician, good family man and staunch liberal democrat. I asked him, “Do you really believe the world economy can be run on solar panels and wind turbines?” He answered without hesitation or any qualifications with a simple “Yes”

There’s no point in starting a discussion. I am reminded of the believers in Harold Camping and his predictions. What did his followers do when the sun rose just as it always did? These people are there in great numbers and they are in power and can be quite nasty and dishonest.

It’s going to be a long wait before the reality of the situation sets in. Global Warming, Climate Change, The Climate Crisis will have a 40th birthday this year, and it probably will take another 40 years to fall part. The USSR took that long to collapse under it’s own weight.

The true believers are in power, and that is the new normal. The depressing events of November 3rd 2020 will be repeated until it can no longer be sustained. I have no idea what the revolution that will follow will look like. I won’t be here to see it but my grandchildren will. God help us all.

H B
Reply to  Steve Case
March 20, 2021 12:01 am

what a load of crap 80% of thw world po[pulation will die if you do

Patrick MJD
Reply to  H B
March 20, 2021 4:07 am

100% of the population will die from birth.

Spetzer86
Reply to  H B
March 20, 2021 6:32 am

That’s sort of the plan. You really need to follow along with the text.

MarkH
Reply to  Spetzer86
March 21, 2021 2:51 pm

I think they’re aiming for 95% though

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Steve Case
March 20, 2021 12:04 am

Sadly, I share your bleak outlook. The November 6 election was a watershed of ingrained corruption, from the top down. When the righteous haven’t even got access to an unbiased court system, we’ve entered the era of Orwellian times … that he had intended to be purely fictional and instructive. I’m closing in on 80 and I’ve been aware of the trends for half my life. Although I didn’t like Trump at first, I discovered that he got things done and was a man of his word. I was hoping to see the turning point away from Marxist pollution before I die. I fear that won’t happen.

Roger Knights
Reply to  Steve Case
March 20, 2021 2:30 am

“It’s going to be a long wait before the reality of the situation sets in. Global Warming, Climate Change, The Climate Crisis will have a 40th birthday this year, and it probably will take another 40 years to fall part.”

All it will take is a strong and/or sharp cooling trend. There’s a 25% chance. Or a Texas-size blackout in a green region of the country—any country.

“The true believers are in power, and that is the new normal. The depressing events of November 3rd 2020 will be repeated”

The 2020 mid-terms will likely deliver Congress to the GOP and hamper the GND. In 2024, the GOP could win again, if Tucker Carlson or an equivalent figure runs.

Derg
Reply to  Roger Knights
March 20, 2021 3:38 am

Many of the GOP are investors in “green.” They sit behind the scenes collaborating with others who give money to terrible ideas like solar and wind. Too much money to be made for all of them.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Derg
March 20, 2021 10:15 am

The alarmist Republicans are a problem and should be required to justify their claim that CO2 needs regulation before they go any farther down the New Green Deal path.

These guys should be challenged at every turn because they give aid and comfort to the lunatic Democrats that are trying to use CO2 to enslave the rest of us. Not to mention that there is no evidence that CO2 needs regulation.

michael hart
Reply to  Roger Knights
March 20, 2021 9:26 am

Roger, the problem with the GOP is that so many of them can’t, or won’t, see the real problem. Trump refused to, too. He continued using Twitter for four years after he should have realised Silicon Valley was out to destroy him.

They were incredibly angry, not just that Trump won in 2016, but that they didn’t stop him when they thought they had done enough to do so without saying as much. Such is their arrogance. And such was Trump’s. Trump turned out to be slow and wrong.

At that point after election Trump and the GOP were in the best position to do something about it, but acquiesced to several more years of increasing power and influence for ‘San Francisco’ politics. Now, things are worse. It is clear you need to win in the politicised law courts as well as an election. Oh, and you’ll have the FBI spying on you if you’re not the “right” kind of person running for election.

Yet many Republicans think it will automatically swing back their way, like before. The crazies have other plans, and they are currently succeeding. Japan is a good example of a modern “Democracy” where one party never actually loses power in government.

Drake
Reply to  michael hart
March 20, 2021 1:59 pm

In 2017 the house and senate were run by beltway republicans with their hands in the till. TRUMP! brought many to the white house and then fired them to get them OUT of congress. 7 R Senators voted to convict, on D house FALSE claims proven by the recent WaPo retraction. Clean house of RINOs. Two D Senators win by the timely “NEWS” that TRUMP! threatened the SoS in Georgia. That R SoS lied. Needs to be sued for slander/libel, whatever.

These truths can be used to build in 2022 and 2024.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Steve Case
March 20, 2021 10:11 am

“The true believers are in power, and that is the new normal.”

This is true. This is the problem.

Mr.
Reply to  Tom Abbott
March 20, 2021 10:54 am

I see a clear likeness in the agw/renewables congregation to that of established (and very rich) religions.

These took centuries to gain momentum and power, and still occupy seats at the top tables of governments.

Now, given that the same dearth of rationality is evident in established religions and the agw conjecture, I can’t see the latter being discarded in the foreseeable decades.

Vincent Causey
Reply to  Steve Case
March 21, 2021 1:50 am

It won’t take 40 years because the functioning of society will have collapsed long before. And besides, the observed temperatures will have fallen so far behind model predictions that it will be obvious the hypothesis was wrong. How many times can you adjust the temperature upwards? I don’t know, but arctic sea ice will still be there, doing its thing; sea level rise will won’t be any worse than it is now. The people shivering in the dark are likely to notice this, even if the media continues to shill.

ResourceGuy
Reply to  Steve Case
March 21, 2021 8:48 am

The backup plan for Dems is heavy investment in marijuana business startups from growers to retail and new product research. Medication is the answer against stark reality.

Iain Reid
March 20, 2021 1:02 am

As stated in the report, only dispatchables can save you from a blackout.

It is much more than that, you cannot run a grid without dispatchables because wind and solar cannot balance supply and demand as they are asynchronous. That is they cannot support frquency by modulating output. Wind and solar are not equivelant to coal or gas (Hydro if available) and are not a direct replacement. There is a limit to how much a grid can accept of non synchronous generation and the mor ethere is the harder it becomes to keep it stable.

This is an aspect that seems not to be widely recognised.

Steve Case
Reply to  Iain Reid
March 20, 2021 1:32 am

A short search on “how do wind turbines synchronize with the grid” turns up this:

The meat and potatoes of a wind turbine are its rotor, gearbox, and generator. … The gearbox output shaft turns the shaft of a generator. The generator connects to the utility grid through conversion circuits that change the ac it generates to dc, and finally to ac synchronized with the grid frequency.

Juan Slayton
Reply to  Steve Case
March 20, 2021 5:26 am

True at the site level. Also true at the grid system level. From Wikipedia (Sorry, Griff, but if you can give me an up-to-date correction of this entry, I will consider your 1:57 AM comment:

PACIFIC DC INTERTIE
The Pacific DC Intertie is an electric power transmission line that transmits electricity from the Pacific Northwest to the Los Angeles area using high voltage direct current. The line capacity is 3,100 megawatts, which is enough to serve two to three million Los Angeles households and represents almost half of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power electrical system’s peak capacity.
….
A DC line is also ideal for connecting two AC systems that are not synchronized with each another.

griff
Reply to  Iain Reid
March 20, 2021 1:57 am

Your information is way out of date.

fred250
Reply to  griff
March 20, 2021 3:09 am

Your mind is well past its use by date.

It is basically non-functional.

EVERYTHING that Ian said is still totally and absolutely relevant and FACTUAL

Unlike anything you type.

Last edited 1 month ago by fred250
fred250
Reply to  griff
March 20, 2021 3:18 am

UK electricity currently

Wind 10%

Interconnects 10%

Solar 6%

Guess what’s doing the BULK OF THE HEAVY LIFTING griff-fool

GAS 46%

Nuclear 15%

THANK GOODNESS FOR FOSSIL FUELS, hey griff.

Derg
Reply to  griff
March 20, 2021 3:41 am

You are correct Griff…unreliable forms of energy like solar and wind are slightly less inefficient than they use to be, but still wasteful.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  griff
March 20, 2021 4:10 am

“griff

Your information is way out of date.”

Can you substantiate that comment with facts?

Last edited 1 month ago by Patrick MJD
Reply to  Patrick MJD
March 20, 2021 4:26 am

griff never can, neither will 😀

Lrp
Reply to  Patrick MJD
March 20, 2021 8:38 am

It’s an article of faith

Pat from kerbob
Reply to  griff
March 20, 2021 8:21 am

He is 100% correct
Wind and solar are dead weight on society
Like you

MarkW
Reply to  griff
March 20, 2021 10:17 am

If you are so convinced that the info is out of date, then that implies you have access to information that is more up to date. If so, supply it. If you can’t, that just shows that you are lying again.

mothcatcher
March 20, 2021 1:22 am

Eric

You say “there will be no green energy transition”. I think it would be better to say that “for there to be a green energy transition makes no sense”. Doesn’t mean that it won’t happen. The green steamroller has already trampled and silenced most of the opposition, and at this point it is difficult to see the path by which a grassroots revolt could possibly stop it.

Such a transition can indeed be accomplished, though at an almost unimaginable cost. That cost won’t really be visible, though, to those suffering, until it is far too late.

The manager of my modest investments is under instructions to avoid any funds going to ‘sustainable’ energy and projects, but that is not necessarily wise financially on my part. Fossil fuel ‘stranded assets’ are not going to be stranded by competition from renewables, but by the legislative hammer that they are now beginning to face. Green investments, under these circumstances, can indeed pay dividends, since the market rules are being rigged for them as in no other case in history, and if they seem to be failing, the market will require to be adjusted even more.You just have to pick the ‘right’ beneficiaries: some will fail, but perhaps choose those with the most political and institutional patronage as the better bet.

But not me. They won’t get a dime of mine, voluntarily.

lackawaxen123
Reply to  mothcatcher
March 20, 2021 1:47 am

he means “it can’t happen” … he didn’t say fools won’t try …

Sommer
Reply to  lackawaxen123
March 20, 2021 6:39 am
mothcatcher
Reply to  Eric Worrall
March 20, 2021 2:33 am

I don’t disagree with anything much of that. If I have an issue with your analysis, it is that we should not underestimate the advances that may be made in renewable efficiencies, and battery technology. They will not be able to overcome the numbers that you quote, which are horrendous indeed, but they’ll enable quite a good fudge while the transition is happening, so that the deep shortcomings of the scheme are never quite obvious.

The fact that you cannot run a wealthy, modern society on renewables won’t stop it happening. Something else gives… wealth, freedom, security, probably all three. And by the ‘inevitability of gradualism’ and the surpression of opposition (already clearly in operation), we will never quite manage to turn the tide. Unless, perhaps, there is an obvious, and prolonged, fall in temperature – which may not happen anytime soon.

Hope I’m wrong.

MarkW
Reply to  Eric Worrall
March 20, 2021 10:28 am

You could also build them on the moon and use rail guns to launch them into orbit.

Lrp
Reply to  mothcatcher
March 20, 2021 8:59 am

I think we should not overestimate the advances in renewables efficiencies and battery technology

MarkW
Reply to  mothcatcher
March 20, 2021 10:26 am

As a technology, batteries are around 200 years old.
As a technology, electric generators are over 100 years old.

There isn’t a lot of room left for improvements in either.

yirgach
Reply to  mothcatcher
March 20, 2021 3:30 pm

“The fact that you cannot run a wealthy, modern society on renewables won’t stop it happening. Something else gives… wealth, freedom, security, probably all three.”

Very well said.

Quote of the day.

LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks
Reply to  Eric Worrall
March 20, 2021 2:42 am

Eric Worrall wrote:
But adverse weather which affects solar and wind turbines at the same time is a fact.

I can already see it… in their desperation to make solar and wind ‘work’ (ie: act to stabilize grid frequency at all times), even more hundreds of trillions of dollars will be flushed down the Green toilet attempting to quash those adverse weather events… injecting clouds with hundreds of tons of liquid nitrogen to get them to rain out so the sun can reach the solar panels, huge country-wide projects to mist water at specific locations to increase local convection (humid air is less dense than dry air) and thus increase wind speed in the bird-blender locations (which will, of course, increase evaporation and thus increase cloud cover, necessitating even more liquid nitrogen injection), etc.

There is no end to the foolish Rube Goldberg machinations these climate loons will conceive of in order that they don’t have to admit their green fantasy doesn’t work.

LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks
Reply to  LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks
March 20, 2021 2:51 am

In fact, I recently saw a video. It showed several train tracks side-by-side. Each train car had a huge weight attached to it. The tracks were on the side of a mountain.

When surplus power is generated, the cars climb the mountain, consuming electricity. When power is needed, they descend, generating electricity.

Of course, this isn’t even close to grid-scale even with a hundred parallel sets of tracks, but that won’t stop the climate loons from throwing money away on attempting it.

The first mechanical failure which sends a train with several thousands of tons of weight hurtling down the mountain will be either catastrophic or hilarious, depending upon whether the climate loons build the tracks above a populated region.

Derg
Reply to  LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks
March 20, 2021 3:46 am

Remember the solar panels used as road surface?

Lol the ideas they come up with

Reply to  Derg
March 20, 2021 4:17 am

The success was zero 😀

Climate believer
Reply to  Derg
March 20, 2021 5:37 am

https://www.sciencealert.com/the-world-s-first-solar-road-has-turned-out-to-be-a-disappointing-failure

I actually went and visited this fiasco at the time it was being built.

Nobody asked me, but I could have saved them 5 million there and then.

A more ridiculous idea would be hard to imagine.

JeffC
Reply to  LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks
March 20, 2021 4:44 am

This latest plan from BP looks like a disaster waiting to happen.

https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/news-and-insights/press-releases/bp-plans-uks-largest-hydrogen-project.html

Perhaps someone with more knowledge than I have could list all of the things wrong with this idea?

Derg
Reply to  Eric Worrall
March 20, 2021 3:43 am

Eric there are no maintenance costs silly, these are perpetual motion machines where the output is $

😜

MarkW
Reply to  Eric Worrall
March 20, 2021 10:21 am

Eric, that number doesn’t count the cost of maintaining the batteries and the facilities that hold them either.

griff
March 20, 2021 1:56 am

There’s already a green energy transition and in most of the world coal power plants are on the way out.

fred250
Reply to  griff
March 20, 2021 2:58 am

ROFLMAO

China and India are building new coal-fired power stations at several times the rate of old power station closures

You are DELUSIONAL !

comment image

Last edited 1 month ago by fred250
Reply to  Eric Worrall
March 20, 2021 4:20 am

There where coal plants admitted to shut down completely, and, what happend ?
They have to stay on standby 😀

Derg
Reply to  griff
March 20, 2021 3:48 am

No kidding as the dumb world leaders drive themselves off the climate cliff.

China and India don’t care. They won’t coal lots and lots of coal.

Dennis
Reply to  Derg
March 20, 2021 10:02 pm

Both UN designated developing (economies) nations, as compared to the developed nations being forced into economic vandalism to the benefit of developing nations.

President Trump was not fooled.

Reply to  griff
March 20, 2021 3:51 am

France just informed to not shut down their nuclear plants 😀
Any idea why ? 😀 😀 😀

Reply to  Krishna Gans
March 20, 2021 5:06 am

Nuclear power: France should not follow Belgian surrealism
(French source)
Face au choix de réduire la part du nucléaire dans sa production d’électricité, la France serait bien inspirée d’étudier les conséquences qu’a entraîné cette décision en Belgique. Par André Berger, Samuel Furfari, Pierre Kunsch, Christiane Leclercq‐Willain, Ernest Mund, Georges Van Goethem et Jacques Marlot

On the eve of the tenth anniversary of the Fukushima tsunami – a report of which has just confirmed that there were no deaths due to nuclear radiation – Le Figaro asked the question “are you in favor of continuing the nuclear program in France? ”. The answer from those who participated could not be clearer: 87% answered yes. Unfortunately, we are not in Switzerland where the population can decide, as decisions are not taken by pressure groups. The danger of resizing the place of this energy in France is worrying.
Energy is life

The question of energy is as crucial as ever. Energy is life. It is even because our body needs energy that we feed ourselves. Without energy, the economy collapses. How can we live without electricity? It must absolutely be available at all times, with the least possible impact on the environment and at a reasonable cost, including for the less fortunate. Nuclear energy meets all these criteria. And yet, for more than 40 years, it has been subjected to unjustified attacks by activists whose motives have nothing to do with rationality. On March 10, at the Belgian College of the Royal Academy of Belgium, a round table organized by the signatories of this letter answered questions from 150 participants for two hours. The scientific answers showed that the arguments put forward by the detractors of nuclear energy do not stand up to factual analysis. And yet, Belgium, a pioneer country in nuclear energy, has decided to abandon this energy.

Translated with http://www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Krishna Gans
March 20, 2021 10:26 am

“Le Figaro asked the question “are you in favor of continuing the nuclear program in France? ”. The answer from those who participated could not be clearer: 87% answered yes. ”

At least they are starting to ask the right questions. That’s a good sign.

Reply to  Krishna Gans
March 20, 2021 10:33 am

I just realised not to have translated the 1 paragraph, sorry

Faced with the decision to reduce the share of nuclear power in its electricity production, France would be well advised to study the consequences of this decision in Belgium. By André Berger, Samuel Furfari, Pierre Kunsch, Christiane Leclercq-Willain, Ernest Mund, Georges Van Goethem and Jacques Marlot

Reply to  Krishna Gans
March 20, 2021 5:10 am

France to extend lifetime of old nuclear power plants
ASN asked state-controlled electricity provider EDF, which manages the country’s nuclear plants, to undertake any necessary work to safeguard their security.

They don’t feel very confident in wind and solar 😀

Last edited 1 month ago by Krishna Gans
Reply to  griff
March 20, 2021 3:53 am

I will not say “there is already a green energy transition”, only a try, not fullfilled and certainly failing at least.
Guess why ‘? 😀 😀 😀

Patrick MJD
Reply to  griff
March 20, 2021 4:13 am

You mean being FORCED out?

Dave Andrews
Reply to  griff
March 20, 2021 8:41 am

Griff,

Your favourite, Germany, still has 84 coal power plants which it has said it will phase out by 2038. Care to bet on that actually happening?

Plus they also regularly call on coal fired plants in Poland as well

Reply to  Dave Andrews
March 20, 2021 10:35 am
Muzza
Reply to  Dave Andrews
March 20, 2021 4:51 pm

Add Russian gas to the equation.

Meab
Reply to  griff
March 20, 2021 9:36 am

griff, you know your statement is a flat lie, yet you continue to repeat it. Not only are China and India expanding coal, but even your favorite “green” country, Germany, has quietly built two dozen lignite burning power plants (dirty coal) in the last two decades. So, griff, why do you continue to lie when you know that you’ll get called out and anyone who doesn’t know that you’re a liar can easily confirm that you are?

MarkW
Reply to  Meab
March 20, 2021 10:41 am

In his safe place, everybody agrees with griff.
He can’t understand why his lies don’t work here as well.

Last edited 1 month ago by MarkW
MarkW
Reply to  griff
March 20, 2021 10:38 am

Once again, griff actually believes that China cutting it’s 5 year plan from 640 new coal plants to 600 new coal plants is proof that China has given up on coal plants.

In the US, coal plants are being replaced by gas plants, because thanks to the frakking revolution, gas is currently cheaper. That’s a situation that won’t last forever.
First, increased demand for gas will push gas prices up, and reduced demand for coal will push coal prices down. Eventually, those two line will cross again.

Thanks to the moronic efforts of your fellow greens to ban frakking where ever possible, they are guarnteeing the return of coal power that much sooner.

There are also places, where thanks to government regulations, companies are abandoning coal. But only a total moron, or progressive, would equate government regulations to a market.

LdB
Reply to  griff
March 20, 2021 5:29 pm

Griff the facts say different, you aren’t even comedy value these days.

Rusty
Reply to  griff
March 21, 2021 9:32 am

Nonsense. Every coal plant on the planet: https://www.carbonbrief.org/mapped-worlds-coal-power-plants

Joel O’Bryan
March 20, 2021 2:59 am

I drove I-37 south, San Antonio to Corpus Christie Texas, on Friday afternoon. Saw at least 7 convoys of trucks and escorts hauling 3×50 meter wind turbine blades headed north out Corpus. The madness, fueled by OPM, continues unabated in Texas. we are so eff’d.

Spetzer86
Reply to  Joel O’Bryan
March 20, 2021 6:40 am

Same in Missouri, Iowa, basically all through the mid-West. All they’re doing is raising our electricity bills and taxes. But people don’t see those aspects. Too far removed in time or so gradual they’re beneath perception for the average person. Still happening.

Lrp
Reply to  Spetzer86
March 20, 2021 9:23 am

When 50% of a country population pays no net tax there is no perception of costs

MarkW
Reply to  Lrp
March 20, 2021 10:48 am

The end game for progressives has always been to have a minority of the population supporting the majority. That way the slaves can’t vote their way to freedom.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Spetzer86
March 20, 2021 10:29 am

“All they’re doing is raising our electricity bills and taxes.”

And raising risks of an electricity blackout.

H. D. Hoese
Reply to  Joel O’Bryan
March 20, 2021 7:24 am

Central coast area has lots of wind, particularly now, two periods when it dies, once when real cold, once when real hot. These whirly birds are making their own microclimate weather. Whooping cranes are smart and adaptable, but their expanding territory is being invaded. Going to be interesting fossils in a couple of decades, maybe both.

H. D. Hoese
Reply to  Joel O’Bryan
March 20, 2021 7:56 am

In a jump to conclusion period what does 100 orcas in the Gulf mean? Too many orcas? Getting cold? Too many prey?

https://www.kvue.com/article/news/local/orca-pod-gulf-of-mexico/285-6877c6b9-f2cf-43b9-b80d-8e486aa9ba62?fbclid=IwAR2ZsrNqhjN6JBXwpxewteczpQGU68nJ84HAm02k3horCIACnHNltQ8h0Dg

March 20, 2021 3:38 am

A not so well known treaty.

Last edited 1 month ago by Krishna Gans
March 20, 2021 3:55 am

Advertising for investments in hydrogen industry is just exploding everywhere, newspaper, WEB….

Bruce Cobb
March 20, 2021 4:19 am

Anyone who deliberately invests in so-called “green” companies or industries is a fool. And we know what they say about a fool and his money.

Spetzer86
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
March 20, 2021 6:41 am

If anyone is not familiar with the parable, send me $5 and I’ll be happy to provide documented evidence of its continued pertinence.

March 20, 2021 6:57 am

“We now know that to be a false hope …”

False hope to solve a false problem. What’s wrong with that?

Gerry, England
March 20, 2021 7:34 am

The turning point may well have to be a total grid failure that takes weeks to restart and in the time there is no power for anyone without a back up generator. The worst scenario is for this to happen during a cold spell which will demonstrate just how much cold kills while a bit of warmth doesn’t. People are going to have to die to end this.

Reply to  Gerry, England
March 20, 2021 10:37 am

People are going to have to die to end this.

They get a green casket….

Dennis
Reply to  Krishna Gans
March 20, 2021 9:59 pm

Cardboard produced from biomass?

Pflashgordon
March 20, 2021 7:50 am

“Entire balance sheets are trying to find the best renewable assets,” 

There are none at grid scale.

Other engineers and scientists have come to the same conclusion.” (As if this is some recent revelation) Just as here at WUWT, most working and retired scientists and engineers who haven’t vested (prostituted) their futures in “green” energy have known from the beginning that this is a colossal scam. In my job, l regularly converse with a wide array engineers and applied scientists, and I have found no “Griffs” among them. Many science and engineering firms are working the renewables industry because it’s a paycheck.

But talk to “sustainability” managers (mostly liberal arts majors), and you find a lot of Kool Aid drinkers.

March 20, 2021 8:15 am

Maybe if skeptic sites like WUWT would publish more of those horizontal temperature charts mentioned in the Notrickszone site, and if readers would keep sending them in to the news publishers, reality might might eventually be recognized by all.

Reply to  E. Martin
March 20, 2021 8:42 am

Where the hope comes from they will be published ?

Pflashgordon
Reply to  E. Martin
March 20, 2021 5:15 pm

I am working on the Environment page for my university system website, and I plan, if permitted by Anthony, to prominently place a link to WUWT and his new Everything Climate website on my home page. Not a huge audience, but it will attract at least some hits from our system-wide EHS staff and maybe a few others. I may try to highlight particularly interesting pieces. Of course, it always runs a risk of being shouted down by activists looking for a fight.

Walter Sobchak
March 20, 2021 8:44 am

Investing like the cool kids is the sort of stuff that journalists, who weren’t allowed to eat at the cool kids table in middle school, love to promote.

It is not a way to make money. Picking a winner and buying it cheap because it is despised by the cool kids. That is how you make money.

michael hart
March 20, 2021 9:06 am

“When COVID-19 erupted, climate change investing was meant to take a back seat. The opposite happened: money poured into funds that invest sustainably.”

Proving nothing, even if true. During a recession, anticipated or real, money pours out of companies with real earning likely to be affected by short-term changes in consumption. It tends to go in to companies such as big pharma which have longer term outlooks on their product development cycles.

Similarly, having no “real” sustainable income to lose, and being backed by continuing government largesse, green-crap investments can appear as relatively safe havens in a financial storm.

LdB
Reply to  michael hart
March 20, 2021 5:43 pm

It’s blatantly false, over $460B AUD exited investment funds as Australians were allowed to take 2 x $10K out of there superannuation due to covid. I suspect this idiot looked at the percentages and assumed it was increasing not realizing the pool of money was decreasing. The correct headline should have been more ethical investors left there money in.

Tom Abbott
March 20, 2021 10:08 am

From the article: “So it seems inevitable that something is going to come unglued at some unpredictable point in the future – at some point investors, voters and politicians will realise renewables are a dead end.”

I agree. The Texas arctic cold front rolling blackout debacle should have opened a lot of eyes. I think it demonstrated the limits of windmills. People were going along thinking we could eventually power everything with windmills. No, we can’t. When the wind stops blowing the windmills stop producing.

Nuclear power should get a second look from investors.

March 20, 2021 10:41 am

Of course. Makes perfect sense when you realize that the main purpose of Global warming hysteria, Covids hysteria, plastic pollution hysteria, fake mass extinction hysteria and woke culture in general, is to destroy Western civilisation. Bad investments will be one more nail in the coffin. We have become degenerate enough that the plan is working.

Dennis
Reply to  BCBill
March 20, 2021 9:58 pm

UN Official Christiana Figureres in October 2015, just before the Paris Conference, admitted that climate change was an excuse to destroy the capitalist system, capitalism that has resulted in enormous advances in technology, medicine and more including prosperity for the people.

Tombstone Gabby
March 20, 2021 11:24 am

Possible blackouts? Even worse, “brownouts“.

Had a friend working in Banning (CA) a couple of days ago, with a good sized but still “portable” (four wheels and a tow handle) air compressor. ‘Brownout’ – AC voltage dropped to what – 95/90 volts. The compressor motor drew more amps – and burned out. Not good at all.

Fran
March 20, 2021 4:49 pm

Let me know if there is a ‘green’ company that pays dividends.

Dennis
Reply to  Fran
March 20, 2021 9:55 pm

And if they do pay dividends how many shareholders would be prepared to fund removal and replacement of wind turbines or solar systems, or would that expenditure to seek dividends for another about 20 years be an exercise in futility, not even a break even unachievable the second time around?

Dennis
March 20, 2021 8:23 pm

Transition, to begin quote real performance not theoretical “Nameplate or Installed Capacity”.

“Capacity Factor” or average of wind installations is around 30 per cent of Nameplate, for those who don’t get it, 100 MW of theoretical energy production is on average only 30 MW.

And solar performance is much lower than for wind turbines.

Despite globally enormous investments into so called renewables they produce far less energy than fossil fuelled power station generators or hydro power station generators, but have forced the cost of electricity up and up and with reliability of grid compromised and requiring “firming”, back up generators, battery and/or water storage, stabilisers, and expensive individual transmission lines for every installation.

I am waiting for the day of reckoning when the around twenty year replacement timing is reached, will investors pay the costs of removal and replacement or abandon their assets, or more to the point assets no longer productive?

ResourceGuy
March 21, 2021 8:42 am

Ask not what you can do for your personal financial wellbeing, but what you can do for the Climate Crusades.

%d bloggers like this: