COP26 Climate Breakthrough? G20 Coal Use Rose 4% in 2021

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

According to the BBC, G20 nations are barely paying lip service to climate targets, with the scramble to restart the global economy driving an uptick in coal use.

Climate change: Carbon emissions from rich countries rose rapidly in 2021

By Matt McGrath

Carbon emissions are rebounding strongly and are rising across the world’s 20 richest nations, according to a new study. 

The Climate Transparency Report says that CO2 will go up by 4% across the G20 group this year, having dropped 6% in 2020 due to the pandemic.

China, India, Argentina are set to exceed their 2019 emissions levels. 

The authors say that the continued use of fossil fuels is undermining efforts to rein in temperatures.

The G20 group is responsible for around 75% of global emissions, which fell significantly last year as economies were closed down in response to Covid-19.

But this year’s rebound is being powered by fossil fuel, especially coal.

This is mainly due to China who are responsible for around 60% of the rise, but increases in coal are also taking place in the US and India. 

Read more: https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-58897805

I don’t think COP26 will be the last global climate conference, the charade will likely stumble on for a few more years. How can Biden and Kerry demand sacrifices from other nations, when coal use is rising in the USA? The entire process is beyond a joke.

5 18 votes
Article Rating
82 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Ron Long
October 15, 2021 2:06 pm

I’m starting to think attendance at the COP series is more about expense accounts and hookers. Shame I’m a slow learner.

Andrew Dickens
Reply to  Ron Long
October 15, 2021 2:17 pm

I wish someone would find out what delegates get for subsistence. And do they get a flat sum, and keep any change, or is it just a matter of submitting receipts? Any info would be welcome.

Scissor
Reply to  Andrew Dickens
October 15, 2021 2:53 pm

Yes, usually expenses are reimbursed on a per diem basis, so if one can find a hospitality suite for food and drinks, then one can pocket a nice sum (about $70/day for Glasgow).

Redge
Reply to  Scissor
October 16, 2021 1:01 am

$70 a day will get you 2 or 3 high-class ladies or a dozen lower class and you’d still have money left over for a few deep-fried Mars bars.

michael hart
Reply to  Redge
October 16, 2021 3:36 pm

I’d give it all up to hear the voice of Clare Grogan, the greatest living Scotswoman.

Redge
Reply to  michael hart
October 16, 2021 11:37 pm

I Could Be Happy too if she’d just wish me Happy Birthday in that voice. I’d melt and say to her Look What You’ve Done girl

Just Don’t Talk To Me About Love

Last edited 1 month ago by Redge
ATheoK
Reply to  Scissor
October 17, 2021 5:23 pm

Where I worked in Federal Government, receipts must be submitted to get paid.

Per diem is an allowance metric, not a gift for government employees. Expenditures over the allowance are borne by the employee.
Expenditures under the maximum rate are only reimbursed according to the receipts

Falsifying travel vouchers is one of the most common criminal charges against Federal employees.

Often, if the hotel where the conference is located is over per diem allowances, the government will frequently cover the higher cost hotel as that is cheaper than costs accrued to the stress and complexity of expensive employees commuting between locations.

It still requires the employee to file a travel voucher with appropriate receipts.

Mumbles McGuirck
Reply to  Andrew Dickens
October 15, 2021 3:48 pm

Rebel News did a great series of videos about the IPCC Climate Conference in Morocco several years ago. The UN built a huge tent city to host the COP complete
with oceans of bottled water and buses that kept their air conditioning running while waiting hours for delegates. It’s a hard knock life (/sarc). It gives you a sense of the luxury and waste that accompanies these dog & pony shows. And it’s all paid for by tax payers and, to a smaller amount, by contributors to NGOs. Of course, many NGOs also get government grants.

https://www.rebelnews.com/

Unfortunately, Rebel News is busy fighting COVID lockdowns in Canada these days, so they probably won’t be covering Glasgow. BTW, COP delegates aren’t subject to COVID isolation rules. But they ARE cancelling the local, annual fireworks display scheduled for the same time as COP26.

Martin
Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
October 16, 2021 3:50 am

I hadn’t heard about the fireworks cancellation – if true it’s very sad that Diwalli fireworks are prohibited 🙂

ATheoK
Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
October 17, 2021 5:28 pm

But they ARE cancelling the local, annual fireworks display”

Due to fireworks pyrotechnics and rockets burning and releasing CO₂?

Dennis G Sandberg
Reply to  Andrew Dickens
October 15, 2021 8:32 pm

confidential for international security issues.

Ian Magness
Reply to  Ron Long
October 15, 2021 2:29 pm

Be careful what you wish for Ron – have you seen Glasgow ladies of the night… in November?
One advantage of the location though – although the average is only 1-2C, if you fly into London then catch a flight to Glasgow, the difference between the cities is often up to 10C. You can experience 1,000 years of global cooling in an hour. Then, when you return, you can experience 1,000 years of warming again in an hour. Isn’t nature wonderful?

iflyjetzzz
Reply to  Ian Magness
October 15, 2021 7:06 pm

Why would private jets make stops enroute to Glasgow?

Dean
Reply to  Ian Magness
October 16, 2021 1:30 am

Isn’t that sort of rise in temperatures dangerous???

Peter K
Reply to  Ron Long
October 15, 2021 4:34 pm

Tim Flannery was a regular attendee, until Tony Abbott closed his “Department of Climate Change” down, based on “the science is settled”. The most important item on the agenda is “where do we go for our next meeting”

Mr.
Reply to  Peter K
October 15, 2021 5:12 pm

Abbott’s rationale for pulling Flanno’s snout out of the taxpayer-funded trough was impeccable –

“he doesn’t actually produce any new scientific research, he’s just a commentator, and he’ll continue to do that on his own time for free. Why would taxpayers have to pay him?”

philincalifornia
Reply to  Mr.
October 15, 2021 5:24 pm

“he doesn’t actually produce any new scientific research, he’s just a commentator, and he’ll continue to do that on his own time for free. Why would taxpayers have to pay him?”

Isn’t that true for all of them?

In that vein, I love the irony of this week with the Queen, Chuckie, the Williams (Prince and Shatner) and Greta piling on the climate crackpots, criminals and other assorted parasites, for only talking about doing something, while they themselves think they are accomplishing something by talking about doing something.

Thank God it’s all bogus and we don’t actually need to do anything about it.

Last edited 1 month ago by philincalifornia
observa
Reply to  philincalifornia
October 15, 2021 9:26 pm

Isn’t that true for all of them?

Nicola Paone – Blah, Blah, Blah (1959) – YouTube

Gerry, England
Reply to  philincalifornia
October 17, 2021 7:08 am

I was very disappointed that the Queen joined in with the bullshit. That only leaves Princess Anne with any sense since the great Duke of Edinburgh passed away.

Reply to  Mr.
October 15, 2021 8:41 pm

The most important agenda item is “Where do we get the money to keep these junkets funded?”

Martin
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
October 16, 2021 3:54 am

Really ? I doubt the supply of money has ever their minds – they know that taxpayers will keep their cash flowing.

Reply to  Ron Long
October 15, 2021 6:25 pm

Well it’s probably not for the haggis.

Tom Halla
October 15, 2021 2:07 pm

The participants will have a chance to party, so if they also get a chance to virtue signal, so much the better. If they really believed in CAGW, it would be a virtual meeting.

Alba
Reply to  Tom Halla
October 15, 2021 2:24 pm

There are expected to be about 30,000 people attending the conference. It would be interesting to know what their total carbon footprint is just for getting here and then travelling home. Obviously the chance to have a good time at someone else’s expense outweighs considerations such as carbon footprints.

Sweet Old Bob
Reply to  Tom Halla
October 15, 2021 4:54 pm

“If they really believed in CAGW, it would be a virtual meeting.”

But then … no Copulation Of Party ers …
😉

Mr.
Reply to  Sweet Old Bob
October 15, 2021 5:15 pm

no Copulation Of Party ers

That’s absolutely guaranteed if Naomi is offering.

ATheoK
Reply to  Mr.
October 17, 2021 5:37 pm

I have difficulty believing that would be by mutual consent.

ATheoK
Reply to  Sweet Old Bob
October 17, 2021 5:36 pm

Copulation is usually mutual consent. Most of the attendees are more interested in screwing taxpayers without consent.

John Garrett
October 15, 2021 2:18 pm

I don’t think COP26 will be the last global climate conference, the charade will likely stumble on for a few more years. How can Biden and Kerry demand sacrifices from other nations, when coal use is rising in the USA? The entire process is beyond a joke.

-Eric Worrall

Gawd I hope you’re right. I am sick to death of listening and reading while the media idiots constantly parrot this amazingly corrupt and stupid pseudoscience.

Mr.
October 15, 2021 2:19 pm

Reality bites.
Again.

ResourceGuy
October 15, 2021 2:21 pm

COP26 is about making party plans for Davos and associated parking reservations for their jets.

Rud Istvan
October 15, 2021 2:21 pm

COP26 was always going to be a bust. No green climate fund of $100 billion per year. More, not less, coal. But there is also a good chance that Glasgow might blackout during the party thanks to shaky renewables, natgas shortage for backup, and the just failed France interconnector that won’t be repaired until next April. That really would be icing on the debacle cake. We can hope.

Pamela Matlack-Klein
Reply to  Rud Istvan
October 15, 2021 3:59 pm

It is petty of me to wish a major snow event on COP-26, especially as it will impact the residents of Glasgow pretty hard and worse if there is a blackout. BUT, they are just going to have to take one for the team this November. There is ample time for them to prepare and stock up on firewood, candles, and food.

philincalifornia
Reply to  Pamela Matlack-Klein
October 15, 2021 5:45 pm

….. ermmm, I think you forgot something else to stock up on.

Wi’tippeny, we fear nae evil;
Wi’usquabae, we’ll face the devil!

They’ll take one for the team.

Redge
Reply to  Rud Istvan
October 16, 2021 1:06 am

That really would be icing on the debacle cake.

Even better if the ice were real

ResourceGuy
October 15, 2021 2:23 pm

Don’t forget your winter coat and hand warmers.

ResourceGuy
October 15, 2021 2:25 pm

Better watch out for a possible Gorecho.

markl
October 15, 2021 2:41 pm

Fossil fuel use is rising faster than renewable energy gains. Who’d have thought with an increasing population we’d need more energy or that people would gladly reduce their lifestyle for and unproven theory?

ATheoK
Reply to  markl
October 17, 2021 5:53 pm

Renewables operate at a deficit. They are still unable to support the physical process of their own construction. Nor is the CO₂ emitted in their construction/installation ever recovered.

2hotel9
October 15, 2021 2:53 pm

Where the hell are the soccer hooligans when they are needed?!?!?

Coeur de Lion
October 15, 2021 2:56 pm

Who is actually paying for this flangadang? Me?

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  Coeur de Lion
October 15, 2021 4:40 pm

Of course. You don’t expect these poor politicians to use their own meagre funds do you? Champagne, caviar and ladies of the night don’t pay for themselves, you know!

Anon
October 15, 2021 3:00 pm

Some more about this here:

COP-Out? World’s Largest Polluter Won’t Attend Climate Summit, Kerry Pessimistic On Progress

So it makes you wonder just what can be achieved given that Chinese officials have informed G-20 envoys that Xi does not currently plan to attend a summit in Italy later this month in person, and diplomats have said that means he’s unlikely to go to COP26 either.

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/cop-out-worlds-largest-polluter-wont-attend-climate-summit-kerry-pessimistic-progress

Actually this serves everyone’s interests, both China’s & the United States’… as without a solution the Democrats will still have a reliable voting block that will go to the polls year after year to “save the planet”.

The last thing the Democrats want is to have the issue solved, as voters will then be free to vote on other issues, some of which could conflict with corporate & Wall Street interests. They have learned a lesson from history, as once Prohibition became a Constitutional Amendment, a reliable voting bloc was vaporized. However, the climate issue is ideal for locking in voters, as even if solutions are implemented, they would take generations to have any impact, if at all.

With the 2020 midterms hanging by a thread and Trump threating to run again in 2024, the climate change voting block will be crucial to bringing home the bacon.

Last edited 1 month ago by Anon
BobM
Reply to  Anon
October 15, 2021 3:59 pm

If Xi doesn’t go, that gives Morrison in Australia huge cover to skip it too.

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  BobM
October 15, 2021 4:43 pm

If Xi doesn’t go, that gives Morrison in Australia huge cover to skip it too.

I wish. I think he’s going because Lizzie had a few hard words about him not going.

LdB
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
October 15, 2021 6:08 pm

He is going he has brokered some sort of deal with the NAT’s on net zero 2050 is the big whisper out of Canberra.

LdB
Reply to  BobM
October 15, 2021 6:04 pm

Putin is also a likely no show .. he won’t go if Xi isn’t there.

Reply to  LdB
October 15, 2021 6:33 pm

Dementia Joe isn’t allowed to go by his puppeteers after the BoJo meeting fiasco of saying “No” to any reporter questions.

ATheoK
Reply to  LdB
October 17, 2021 6:06 pm

Putin has no reason to attend. He already has Europe in contractual thralldom.
No need for Putin to waste his time lying about goals he has no intention ever meeting.

ATheoK
Reply to  Anon
October 17, 2021 6:01 pm

Kerry Pessimistic On Progress”

That’s Kerry’s natural expression. Kerry’s smile can cause priests to swear off wine and black cats to run away squalling.

Rick C
October 15, 2021 3:18 pm

I see that COP26 delegates will be shuttled around in Jaguar Range Rover EVs. Just a small problem that there are few adequate charge points in the Glasgow area, so they’ve hired a fleet of diesel generators which will be run on bio-diesel fuel or at least fuel from containers labeled “bio-diesel”.

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  Rick C
October 15, 2021 4:45 pm

I’m not sure that all those deep-fried mars bars will have a good effect on the biodeisel…

ATheoK
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
October 17, 2021 6:11 pm

Some of them mar bars don’t survive the frying. They could put some sugar slugs into the generators.
What a little extra carbon in the cylinders?

Reply to  Rick C
October 15, 2021 6:30 pm

Anyone who thinks any country’s electric grid is EV-ready for the increased load from for >50% EV is an ignorant fool. It would take 20+ years to make most Western country’s electric grid EV-ready for that kind of load, and then it’d have to be reliable fossil fuel, nuclear power, or hydro-power to provide it.

If it can’t be done, it won’t be done. In the end, reality will win out over ignorant Green EV and renewable energy claims that are detached from reality.

Mr.
Reply to  Rick C
October 15, 2021 7:39 pm

More theatre.

CD in Wisconsin
October 15, 2021 3:22 pm

“I don’t think COP26 will be the last global climate conference, the charade will likely stumble on for a few more years.”

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

Be aware that expensive EV’s are apparently going to be used to chauffeur the COP(OUT)26 delegates around while in Glasgow. Guess what is going to be used to recharge them?

https://tinyurl.com/yyta74yy
https://tinyurl.com/pbh9bj9c

“22 days to Cop26: It is more than a little embarrassing that oil-powered generators are having to be set up to power the plush, electric Jaguar Land Rover SUVs being made available to world leaders at the Cop26 climate summit because of a lack of charging points.

They may be run on recycled cooking oil – surely a marketing opportunity for an enterprising chip shop owner – but the use of generators is an obvious stop-gap measure that exposes just how much needs to be done across the country to create the necessary infrastructure for the rapidly rising number of electric cars.”

*******

It is granted that the generators will be running on recycled cooking oil instead of diesel fuel, but I still wonder how much CO2 the generators will put out on cooking oil. Does the UK expect to produce enough wind power to recharge ALL EV’s (and its economy) in the country after ICE cars are gone? Is there going to be enough recycled cooking oil to do the job if there isn’t enough wind?

Twenty-six COP(OUT) conferences, and God only knows how many more there will be. It is my understanding that China (and maybe others) isn’t going to be there. This has got to be one of the longest-running jokes since who knows what.

CD in Wisconsin
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
October 15, 2021 3:52 pm

…..and what would be really funny is if California gets chosen as the site for a future COP(OUT) conference after portable power generators are banned in the state.

Pamela Matlack-Klein
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
October 15, 2021 4:10 pm

As long as clowns like Mann and his followers draw breath we can count on these circuses continuing on into the future. It will take some real disasters like grid failure during a severe snow storm and a lot of folks dying to get the average citizen to realize what a scam it all is. That could happen soon at the rate everything is falling apart right now, however.

Rod Evans
Reply to  Pamela Matlack-Klein
October 16, 2021 12:15 am

Pamela, that experience has already occurred in February this year in Texas. The climate alarmists considered the weather dependent energy supply was blameless for the deaths. They advanced the view that the inability to pump gas needed to save lives from the cold using the mandated renewable energy was due to inadequate planning.
The alarmists refuse to acknowledge they have failed, They simply blame anything other than renewable energy sources.

Pamela Matlack-Klein
Reply to  Rod Evans
October 16, 2021 12:40 am

With apologies to all the Texans impacted by the February event, it just was not big enough. The entire US needs to go dark before the average citizen can grasp the enormity of the problem with renewables. When everyone is sitting in the dark with no TV, internet, or heat, then the alarmists might find themselves being shouted down for the first time. Right now they constitute a kind of cabaret with their antics because stuff is still working. Their entertainment value will quickly decline when entire countries are in the dark.

iflyjetzzz
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
October 15, 2021 7:20 pm

It’s not a bug; it’s a feature. It helps advocate for massive expenditures to improve the power grid worldwide.

ATheoK
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
October 17, 2021 6:25 pm

The experimental use of hydrogenated vegetable oil to power generators during the building of the 21 Moorfields office development in central London two years saved 1 tonne of carbon for every 350 litres of fuel used”

Totally illogical.
Who knew they could save CO₂ by running extraneous generators…

RickWill
October 15, 2021 3:36 pm

This bears repeating.

The Australian 2020 energy update states that the country produced 19,711PJ of energy for domestic and export market.

A truly staggering proportion of just 0.6% came from intermittent weather dependent sources. 63PJ for wind and 61PJ from solar; both PV and water heating.
Australian Energy Statistics 2020 Energy Update Report_0.pdf

There is no exact number on the spend to achieve that impressive result but it has taken two decades and more than AUD50bn.

What has to be realised is that the earliest of generators are now up for replacement. So over the next 20 years $50bn in today’s dollars will need to be spent just to replace the worn out generators before they collapse.

And of course the current 124PJ from intermittent generators is the low hanging fruit. It has been achieved by imposing an inordinate burden on the fossil fuel generators that is not born by the intermittent sources. The marginal cost of intermittent generation rises rapidly as its share of generation increases.

The idea that extracting energy for modern civilisation from the weather in order to control the weather is so naive that literally ANYONE with more than mush between their ears should be able to comprehend it. There are now numerous examples of the very high expense for intermittent generators that are guaranteed to produce zero when need is most.

LdB
Reply to  RickWill
October 15, 2021 6:07 pm

Did you miss the announcement that the unicorns have come in and we are going to have a Hydrogen and Ammonia green revolution …. toot toot all aboard.

Last edited 1 month ago by LdB
saveenergy
October 15, 2021 4:54 pm

“China, India, Argentina are set to exceed their 2019 emissions levels.”

Does that mean UK will now have to close ALL our industry’s & have rolling blackouts to show them we are superior ??

We could show them we are really serious by cutting all electricity to Glasgow area on the 2nd day of COP26 & stay black for 7 days, plus a major snowstorm would be good so the buggers can’t use their private jets.

Mods:
will I ever be taken off the naughty step ?? & why was I put on it ??
Every post I’ve made in the last few mths gets a ‘Awaiting for approval’ notice & disappears …sometimes for days.
please sort

[unbanned~ctm]

Last edited 1 month ago by saveenergy
saveenergy
Reply to  saveenergy
October 16, 2021 3:08 am

[unbanned~ctm]

Thanks ctm, … it worked !!!
but I’d love to know how/why was I put on it in the first place

Last edited 1 month ago by saveenergy
Dave Fair
Reply to  saveenergy
October 16, 2021 9:50 am

And the Lord said: “I don’t know, saveenergy, there’s just something about you that pisses me off.”

Edward Katz
October 15, 2021 5:54 pm

Great example these delegates are setting since they’re imploring everyone else to cut their carbon emissions; yet they’re doing the complete opposite by flying to Scotland. Couldn’t this conference be held through video links or, better still, considering what it’s likely to achieve, be cancelled altogether?

October 15, 2021 6:23 pm

“The authors say that the continued use of fossil fuels is undermining efforts to rein in temperatures.”

The people who believe that nonsense about CO2 from humanity simply acting in a rheostat-like function on global temperatures also believe in magic. That kind of belief in magic is what has made Climate Change “belief” a religion among the weak-minded Liberals. Their belief is a religion disconnected from any scientific basis of how the carbon cyle on the Earth operates.

Last edited 1 month ago by joelobryan
Carlo, Monte
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
October 15, 2021 6:37 pm

Absolutely, it is a religion, and if someone doesn’t live up to the official expectations of the religion, they can expect to be punished.

Disputin
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
October 16, 2021 2:55 am

weak-minded Liberals

Tautology, Sir!

Robber
October 15, 2021 8:20 pm

“the continued use of fossil fuels is undermining efforts to rein in temperatures”
DId I miss something? is it too hot somewhere?

Dean
October 16, 2021 1:29 am

Let’s Go Brandon!!!!

huls
October 16, 2021 2:57 am

I keep wandering why there is almost always a picture of cooling towers emitting water vapour when there’s an article on global warming or coal.
What have these towers to do with anything?

Joseph Zorzin
October 16, 2021 5:04 am

“increases in coal are also taking place in the US and India”

Really? The USA report says, “The coal industry was already under decline prior to the pandemic, with COVID-19 only accelerating this transition. Employment in coal production fell 13% in Q2 of 2020 and has not returned to pre-pandemic levels…”

Richard M
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
October 16, 2021 9:26 am

I wondered about that too. Although, demenJoe Biden has killed a lot of fracking which has led to higher cost natural gas. This could be creating increased demand for coal.

Last edited 1 month ago by Richard M
jtom
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
October 16, 2021 9:42 am
Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  jtom
October 16, 2021 9:54 am

so, increases in coal production, much for export, in the USA but not a growth industry for use in the country?

what with some American states now having net zero bills with more to follow, I can’t see much future for coal for American power industry

Bruce Cobb
October 16, 2021 5:31 am

The authors say that the continued use of fossil fuels is undermining efforts to rein in temperatures.

Oh my. Just when you think they can’t possibly say anything dumber, they do.
These cretins actually believe mankind can control the temperature of Earth, and by extension, the weather.

willem post
October 16, 2021 6:52 am

EXCERPT FROM:

HAVING FUN WATCHING WIND AND SOLAR FAILING TO STEP UP TO POWER THE WORLD ECONOMY
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/having-fun-watching-wind-and-solar-failing-to-step-up-to-power/edit

INTRODUCTION

Europe is seeing major increases in the SPOT prices of gas/1000 m3, coal/metric ton, and oil/barrel.
This will have an adverse effect on prices at the pump, etc. The price increases happened due to several reasons.

Serbia, Hungary and Turkey had recently signed long-term contracts with Russia at about $3/million Btu.
Those countries were vilified by EU bureaucrats and the handmaiden Media.

Subsequently, SPOT prices of gas started to increase, and the three countries are smiling.
EU SPOT prices of gas increased to about $40/million Btu
US SPOT prices increased to about $5/million Btu, much less than Europe, due to an abundance of domestic gas. See below image.

The EU SPOT price surge is entirely the fault of EU bureaucrats in Brussels, which have urged EU countries NOT to sign long-term gas supply contracts with Russia, because it would send a “the wrong signal regarding fighting climate change”. 

NOTE: Often prices are stated as $/1000 m3 of gas
1000 m3 contains 1000 x 35.315 ft3/m3 x 1000 Btu/ft3 = 35,315,000 Btu
$3/million Btu would be 3 x 35.315 = $105.94/1000 m3
$40/million Btu would be 40 x 35.315 = $1412.6/1000 m3 

REASONS FOR SPOT PRICE INCREASES

1) EU bureaucrats had urged EU countries not to sign long-term gas supply contracts with Russia, because electricity from wind, solar, etc., would increase, and signing long-term contracts would “send the wrong signal”, plus it would give “evil” Russia more clout in EU energy markets.

2) However, EU bureaucrats did not take into account the vagaries of wind and solar. In that regard, they are far from unique.
From April, 2020, to the present, there has been significantly less wind than in prior years.

Even though more onshore and offshore wind turbine capacity, MW, was installed in the UK, Ireland, Belgium, The Netherlands, Germany and Denmark, that did not result in as much of an increase in wind electricity as predicted, due to less than average winds.

3) As a result, the shortfall of wind electricity had to be made up by burning more gas and coal, which rapidly increased SPOT prices of gas to $40/million Btu, and also increased the SPOT prices of coal. 

4) Then, people became aware, the EU winter storage of gas was very low, compared to prior years, which meant energy markets began to bid up the SPOT prices of gas for future, i.e., winter, delivery.

5) At first, EU bureaucrats tried to hide their lack of planning ability, and blame the shortfalls on market manipulation by Russia.
However, Russia proved, with gas system operating data, it had been transmitting gas to the EU, IN EXCESS of long-term contract requirements; in case of Ukraine, the excess transmission was 10%. Various EU countries, that receive a steady supply of low-cost gas from Russia, chimed in to support Russia.

BTW, had the Ukraine gas transmission been any quantity less than per contract, Ukraine would have cried “Russia is using gas as a weapon” to its EU, US, and NATO protectors. 

BIDEN’s 30,000 MW OF OFFSHORE WIND SYSTEMS   
 
Biden’s OFFSHORE wind systems will have an adverse, long-term impact on US electricity wholesale prices, and the prices of all other goods and services, because electricity permeates all economic activities.

The Biden administration announced on October 13, 2021, it will subsidize the development of up to seven offshore wind systems (never call them farms) on the US East and West coasts, and in the Gulf of Mexico; a total of about 30,000 MW of offshore wind by 2030. 

All systems would have 800-ft-tall wind turbines, which would need to be located at least 30 miles from shores, to ensure minimal disturbance of night-time strobe lights. 

Any commercial fishing areas would be significantly impacted by below-water infrastructures and cables.

Total production would be about 30,000 x 8766 h/y x 0.45, capacity factor = 118,341,000 MWh, or 118.3 TWh, which is about 100 x 118.3/4000 = 2.96% of all generation loaded onto US grids. That load would increase due to many millions of future electric vehicles and heat pumps.

The turnkey capital cost for wind systems and grid extension would be 30,000 MW x $5,000,000/MW = $150 BILLION; Biden’s inflation rates may increase that cost. 

The all-in wholesale price of the offshore electricity would be about 18 c/kWh, without cost shifting and subsidies, and about 9 c/kWh, with cost shifting and subsidies. This compares with the average New England wholesale price of 5 c/kWh, during the 2009 to present period. 

Cost shifting and subsidies did not materially affect this price, because the percent of new RE (mostly wind and solar) on the NE grid is very small, after 20 years of subsidies. See URLs

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/high-costs-of-wind-solar-and-battery-systems
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/wind-and-solar-provide-50-percent-of-future-new-england
http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/cost-shifting-is-the-name-of-the-game-regarding-wind-and-solar

BENEFITS TO EU COMPANIES

Almost the entire physical supply of the offshore wind systems would be provided by EU companies, because they have the required expertise and the domestic onshore and seagoing facilities, due to building at least 25,014 MW (end 2020) of offshore systems, during the past 35 years.

Duplicating the EU onshore and seagoing facilities in the US, PLUS implementing 30,000 MW of offshore wind systems in less than 8 years, 2022 to 2030, would be totally impossible.
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/high-costs-of-wind-solar-and-battery-systems

jtom
October 16, 2021 9:48 am

After this winter, I expect to see bumper stickers like this:
DON’T DESTROY TODAY SAVING THE FUTURE

or maybe:
YOU CAN’T SAVE THE FUTURE DESTROYING TODAY

It should hit home after a cold winter with expensive heating costs.

ATheoK
October 17, 2021 5:10 pm

The Climate Transparency Report says that CO2 will go up by 4% across the G20 group this year, having dropped 6% in 2020 due to the pandemic.”

Numbers they can only get by modeling biased estimates, not measurements.

%d bloggers like this: