Texas State Geologist Scott Tinker: The Bad Assumptions Underpinning COP26 and the Impending Energy Train Wreck

Guest “Reality can be a harsh teacher” by David Middleton

The world is already in an “energy crisis” of sorts due to the tremendous misallocation of capital from functioning energy infrastructure to mythical energy infrastructure. This has largely been driven by the false perception that a massive reduction in greenhouse gas emissions is the only way to save our planet (cue George Carlin). As if this wasn’t bad enough, the COP 26 path “to net-zero emissions” is “paved with” nothing other than “bad assumptions”.

October 28, 2021 – 04:00 PM EDT
The road to Glasgow is paved with bad assumptions


While global leaders prepare to trek to Glasgow for COP26 – the United Nations Climate Change conference – Asia, Europe and Britain are experiencing energy crises, largely politically self-inflicted. The public is paying the price. 


As the guide for getting to net-zero emissions, the International Energy Agency (IEA) – an intergovernmental organization often called the “world’s energy watchdog” – published its “Net Zero by 2050: A Roadmap for the Global Energy Sector” in May of this year, where it describes a “narrow but achievable” path to net-zero emissions. 


As global leaders at COP26 prepare to commit trillions of dollars, guided by this roadmap, it is important to understand how confusing, and even implausible, are some of the roadmap’s key 2050 assumptions. 

Assumption No. 1: No new oil and gas fields, and no new coal mines or mine extensions.

In the roadmap, unabated coal demand declines by 98 percent, when in fact coal in Asia continues to expand significantly. Oil consumption declines by 75 percent, and natural gas by 55 percent.

These fuels are replaced within the roadmap in part by expanding wood, biomass and biofuels, even though bioenergy has been shown by many studies not to be particularly “green.” 


Assumption No. 2: While population and the global economy continue to grow, global energy use actually declines.


Assumption No. 3: Two-thirds of total energy supply in 2050 will come from wind, solar, bioenergy, geothermal and hydro.


Assumption No. 4: In the roadmap, per capita CO2 emissions in developed economies, currently around 10 tons, and in emerging and developing economies – for the more than 6 billion people other on Earth – currently around 4 tons, decline to zero. 


Assumption No. 5: Investments in end-use energy, energy infrastructure, electricity generation and low emissions fuels rise from just over $1 trillion annually to $4 trillion; cumulatively around $120 trillion in the next 28 years. Staggering. 

Achieving any single assumption will be very difficult – but taken in the aggregate, it’s highly unlikely.


Yet, many academics, think tanks, advocacy organizations and government officials continue to propound IEA roadmap-type thinking and produce reports with 80 percent or more solar and wind. Reality can be a harsh teacher as we witness the many self-inflicted global energy crises today, in systems with considerably less than 80 percent. Weather-dependent wind and solar can’t deliver reliable energy at scale without extensive and expensive backup.


The road to green should not be paved with bad assumptions. 

Scott W. Tinker is director of the Bureau of Economic Geology, a professor holding the Allday Endowed Chair at The University of Texas at Austin and produces global energy documentary films. 

The Hill

Assumptions, Meet Reality…

The US Energy Information Administration’s 2021 International Energy Outlook paints a somewhat more realistic path to 2050…

Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, International Energy Outlook 2021 (IEO2021)
Note: Petroleum and other liquids includes biofuels

They forecast that fossil fuels will continue to be the world’s dominant source of primary energy for many decades to come…

Turning an “energy crisis” into a train wreck…

The same EIA base case outlook that has fossil fuel demand increasing past 2050, also features the global internal combustion engine (ICE) light duty vehicle (LDV) fleet peaking in 2038, with the electric vehicle stock approaching 700 million units in 2050…

Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, International Energy Outlook 2021 Reference case

You can’t get there from here…

In order to reach it’s forecast of 673 million EV’s on the road by 2050, the EV production rate from 2041-2050 would have to average nearly 29 million vehicles per year. To put this number in perspective:

All the mines Tesla needs to build 20 million cars a year
Frik Els | January 27, 2021

Elon Musk and his merry band of executive vice presidents had plenty of advice for the mining and metals industry at the company’s Battery Day event in September, where the road map to a $25,000 Tesla was laid out.

How easy it is to mine lithium (just add salt), just how much of it there is in Nevada (enough for 300 million EVs), how to be environmentally friendly (“put the chunk of dirt back where it was”) and, given these facts, why miners haven’t been trying harder. 

Since lithium is “just like widely available”, according to Musk and Tesla’s scientists, they have eliminated other hard to come by metals like graphite (replace it with sand, obvs) and cobalt from batteries (at least in theory), Musk’s prime raw material worry is nickel. 

Nickel and dimed


Devil’s copper is in the details

MINING.COM used data from Adamas Intelligence, which tracks demand for EV batteries by chemistry, cell supplier and capacity in over 90 countries, to calculate the deployment of raw materials in Tesla cars on a sales weighted basis in 2020.

By extrapolating those numbers, the company’s use of raw materials, if it was producing 20 million cars a year instead of the 500,000 vehicles it made last year, was determined.


Graphite is technically not a metal; however it does conduct electricity and is often considered a metal for industrial purposes. MINING.COM

20 million Tesla EV’s per year would require massive expansion of graphite, nickel, lithium, cobalt and MagREO (magnet/heavy rare earths) production. Bear in mind that this massive expansion in metal mining would occur whil global petroleum consumption was increasing by 25%. On top of this, graphite production would have to increase by more than 100% to support the production of 28 million EV/yr.

Ever wonder where most graphite comes from?

Mine production (t)Reserves (t)
China          693,000     700,000    73,000,000
Mozambique          104,000     100,000    25,000,000
Brazil            95,000       96,000    72,000,000
Madagascar            46,900       47,000      1,600,000
Canada            40,000       40,000
India            35,000       35,000      8,000,000
Russia            25,200       25,000
Ukraine            20,000       20,000
Norway            16,000       16,000         600,000
Pakistan            14,000       14,000
Mexico              9,000         9,000      3,100,000
Korea, North              6,000         6,000      2,000,000
Vietnam              5,000         5,000      7,600,000
Sri Lanka              4,000         4,000
Namibia              3,460         3,500
Turkey              2,000         2,000    90,000,000
Zimbabwe              2,000         2,000
Austria              1,000         1,000
Germany                 800            800
Other                 200            200
Tanzania                 150            150    18,000,000
United States                   –                –  
World total (rounded)       1,120,000  1,100,000  300,000,000
Graphite Data Sheet – Mineral Commodity Summaries 2020 (USGS)

That’s just MINING.COM… What do real scientists say?

This paper proposes a CoMIT (Cost, Macro, Infrastructure, Technology) model that can be used to analyse the impact of mass EV adoption on critical raw materials demand and forecasts that, by 2030, demand for vehicles will increase by 27.4%, of which 13.3% will be EVs. The model also predicts large increases in demand for certain base metals, including a 37 and 18-fold increase in demand for cobalt and lithium (relative to 2015 levels), respectively. 

Jones et al., 2020
Metal demand for vehicles (kt).ALCOCRCUFELIMNNI
World Total 2015 (est)12,34553172,049116,765852171
World Total 2030 (proj)17,3851854233289106,731147271808
% Change 2015-203041%3600%33%61%-9%1738%421%373%
Jones et al., 2020, Table 1, summarized.

The impending energy train wreck has already left the station…

How Climate Activists Caused The Global Energy Crisis – OpEd
October 27, 2021 Michael Shellenberger

Over the last decade, climate activists have successfully pressured governments, banks, and corporations to divest from oil and natural gas companies. At first such efforts appeared to be strictly symbolic. But in recent years years climate activists succeeded in driving public and private investment away from oil and gas exploration and toward renewables. The result is the worst energy crisis in 50 years.

Under-investment in oil and gas exploration is not the only cause of today’s energy crisis. The economic comeback from the covid pandemic has pushed up demand. Lack of wind in Europe meant higher demand for both natural gas and coal. And a drought in Brazil meant it had to import natural gas.

But the main cause of energy shortages is the half-decade-long under-investment in oil and gas driven by climate concerns.


Normally, the anticipation of higher oil and gas demand causes firms to increase investment in exploration. That hasn’t happened. The main reason, according to Goldman Sachs, is climate activist pressure on governments, firms, and banks to divest from oil and gas exploration.


It’s not like oil and gas executives didn’t know that underinvestment would lead to today’s price shocks. It’s that they were ignored. When the former CEO of Exxon, Lee Raymond, was asked what kept him up at night he said, simply, “Reserve replacement.” Shareholders had demanded he stop investing. In 2020, under pressure from climate activists, JPMorgan Chase, America’s largest investment bank, removed Raymond from his role as the board’s lead independent director.

Part of the problem is that neither corporations nor governments are taking the right actions. Some are going in the wrong direction. The U.S. Congress appears close to approving a deal to pour $500 billion into renewables and its enabling infrastructure over the next decade. Those taxpayer subsidies could further reduce the incentive for private firms to invest in oil and gas. Even if they don’t, the Biden administration has moved to restrict oil and gas drilling on public lands.


As a result, foreign nations will benefit from rising rising oil and gas prices at America’s expense. Saudi Aramco recently increased its investment in exploration and production by $8 billion. “Of course we are trying to benefit from the lack of investments by major players in the market,” its CEO said.

Increasing America’s dependence on foreign oil producers makes even The New York Times, which has long championed oil and gas divestment, nervous. A reporter there recently warned that “the United States and Europe could become more vulnerable to the political turmoil in those countries and to the whims of their rulers.”

Pundits are increasingly comparing President Biden to former President Jimmy Carter, and the 2020s to the 1970s. And, indeed, today’s energy crisis is eerily similar to what happened back then. Carter throttled oil and gas production, promoted renewables, and provoked a backlash that helped elect Ronald Reagan.

Michael Shellenberger is a Time Magazine “Hero of the Environment,” and president of Environmental Progress. Follow him on Twitter @ShellenbergerMD.

Eurasia Review

Taking 2021 as a starting point, we are looking at three decades of growing demand for fossil fuels and other reliable sources of energy, while continuing to misallocate capital from fossil fuels to unreliable energy sources and electric vehicles. This will drastically increase the demand for energy and mineral resources, while making energy and mineral resources much more expensive and less reliably obtainable.

While the tracks of this energy train wreck were laid in 2014, the past 10 months have made this energy industry observer feel like he’s been watching the greatest hits of Gomez Addams’ train wrecks…

Let’s Go Brandon!


Jones, Ben, Robert J.R. Elliott, Viet Nguyen-Tien. “The EV revolution: The road ahead for critical raw materials demand”.
Applied Energy. Volume 280, 2020, 115072, ISSN 0306-2619, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.115072.

5 23 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tom Halla
November 1, 2021 10:16 am

And of course the green blob is opposed to metals mining in the US as well as oil and gas.
They really seem to want failure.

Reply to  Tom Halla
November 1, 2021 11:15 am

Global idiocy reigns supreme, or as Greta Thunberg put it:
“Whatever the f*** they are doing in there’ at COP26 climate summit”
Well said Greta.

Reply to  Vuk
November 1, 2021 1:54 pm

Let’s go Greta? Joey just took a nap and had to be awakened by a staffer.

Reply to  Anti-griff
November 1, 2021 2:51 pm

As long as “let’s go Greta” is shorthand for ““Whatever the f*** they are doing in there’ at COP26 climate summit”

alastair gray
Reply to  Vuk
November 1, 2021 3:53 pm

Joe Biden fell asleeep at COP26. The most sensible act of his whole ghastly preidency

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  Tom Halla
November 1, 2021 7:41 pm

They even have given that failure a name, “Build Back Better”.

November 1, 2021 10:16 am

In the roadmap, unabated coal demand declines by 98 percent, when in fact coal in Asia continues to expand significantly. 

Outside China coal in Asia – or anywhere else – is already no longer expanding ‘significantly’.

Outside China, less than 12 GW of coal was commissioned in 2020 and, taking into account closures, the global coal fleet outside China declined by 17.2 GW in 2020. Outside China, there was a marked slowdown in 2020 commissioning. India, notably, grew its coal fleet by only net 0.7 GW in 2020. There have been cancellations of future coal power across Bangladesh, Japan, S Korea and Vietnam. India continues to cut back.


Reply to  griff
November 1, 2021 10:41 am

Credible sources?
You also remember what happened in 2020 to demand some cuts in production right?

Last edited 1 year ago by J N
Reply to  J N
November 2, 2021 6:19 am

Like most leftists, griff believes that concurrence is proof of accuracy.
He believes it’s true, there fore it is true.

Reply to  griff
November 1, 2021 11:04 am

Kewl griff. When can we expect the climate to be stabilized?

Reply to  griff
November 1, 2021 11:33 am

Hi Grifo
You are well informed AGW poster boy of WUWT, so I don’t need to remind you it takes 800 years for CO2 to catch up with temperature, but we have left only 9 years and 524 days before ‘the end of the planet’.
Nothing can be done!
Oh rage! Oh despair! Oh time, our enemy!

Last edited 1 year ago by vuk
Reply to  griff
November 1, 2021 12:38 pm

The reason Asian coal is expanding is energy curbs in the West are driving heavy industries and manufacturing to relocate to Asia. Most of those coal emissions are really outsourced British, European and US coal emissions.

Last edited 1 year ago by Eric Worrall
Reply to  Eric Worrall
November 2, 2021 7:52 am

Including solar cell manufacturing, which requires a lot of energy to start with

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  Thomas
November 2, 2021 12:25 pm

Especially coal which is needed reduce raw SiO2 to silicon metal that can then be refined (with lots of heat).

Tom Abbott
Reply to  griff
November 1, 2021 12:43 pm

Griff, I read something today that may seriously affect you.

It seems the UK is proposing a law that would allow the authorities to put internet trolls in jail for up to two years!

Be careful out there!

alastair gray
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 1, 2021 3:55 pm

Oh come on Tom You and I might not like what GRiff says but we should fight to the death for his right to say it

Tom Abbott
Reply to  alastair gray
November 2, 2021 5:30 am

I didn’t tell Griff to shut up. I just told him to be careful.

I actually think Griff does a service to the debate. He brings up all the bogus alarmist talking points and then we get to shoot them down here and in the process instruct others about the true issues concerning Human-caused Climate Change.

Reply to  alastair gray
November 2, 2021 6:20 am

I don’t see Tom advocating for these laws, just pointing them out.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 2, 2021 6:21 am

Tom, don’t you know that these laws will never be used on trolls who are dutifully parroting the government line.

Reply to  griff
November 1, 2021 1:47 pm

Hello griffter….Mikey Bloomberg just said coal is the main reason for man made global warming….he has your “charm” but you don’t have his money, eh?

Dave Andrews
Reply to  Anti-griff
November 2, 2021 8:42 am

I bet if you dig deep enough into Bloomberg’s past investments you would find many in the coal industry.

Reply to  griff
November 1, 2021 2:45 pm

Delusional to the end, eh?

Vietnam’s coal usage, increasing.

“Construction on Vietnam’s Vung Ang 2 coal plant to begin in December”


False in one, false in all.

India, still building coal generating plants, coal smelting and refining plants.
As of 2019, latest numbers available, but one can not ignore India’s all out coal plant construction.comment image

India IEA coal usage:
comment image

You just make up the crap you bleat, don’t you?
Pathetic trollop.

Last edited 1 year ago by ATheoK
Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  ATheoK
November 1, 2021 7:45 pm

Griff had to throw in the fact-free assertion “India continues to cut back.” because between India and China alone, coal buring will continue to grow for at least 30 more years, to 2050. Griff is delusional.

Reply to  griff
November 1, 2021 6:57 pm

ROFL that is like saying outside China no-one else is increasing iron ore use … it only takes China.

Reply to  griff
November 2, 2021 6:18 am

Poor little griff, he really isn’t able to distinguish between government mandates and market actions.

Dave Andrews
Reply to  griff
November 2, 2021 8:38 am

griff, do I have to remind you again that between 2000 and 2020 coal power in the World doubled. That is it grew by 100% and many of those plants will have a considerable life still ahead of them.

Ron Long
November 1, 2021 10:36 am

Assumption No. 6: President Biden needed 85 large black vehicles to go visit Papa Francisco and get a Climate Change Agreement, and that is what made him fall asleep at the COP26 gala, after the tiring reading of his written speech. Because, you know, nothing says world’s most important issue like falling asleep instead of saving the world. Good work, David, but how did you become more-or-less normal growing up on Adams Family and Ron White?

Reply to  Ron Long
November 1, 2021 11:23 am

Go slow on Brandon.

Reply to  Ron Long
November 1, 2021 11:28 am

Assumption 7.
joe Biden poops his diapers twice a day
and Hunter Picasso Biden sells them as art
to hide direct bribery payments .

Tom Abbott
Reply to  SxyxS
November 1, 2021 12:39 pm

I heard somebody today suggest that in lieu of paying illegal aliens $450,000, for the anguish they suffered on the long trek to the U.S., that they should give each illegal alien a Hunter Biden painting as compensation instead.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 1, 2021 1:14 pm

If they want to pay illegals half a million for comitting a crime,
then they will pay them 5 millions as compensation for forcing Hunter Biden paintings onto them.

Reply to  SxyxS
November 1, 2021 1:59 pm

I am willing to pay a nice sum to deport Hairy Legs Biden to China…..and Hunter too.

Reply to  Anti-griff
November 1, 2021 2:07 pm

Xi would sue you for trying to dump hazardous US waste on chinese territory.
The fact that the chinese own him doesn’t mean that they want him (same attitude as with the Juan virus)

Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 1, 2021 2:58 pm

Can’t we give them hunter biddy instead?
And maybe throw in old joe as a bonus?
And maybe kamala as bitters?

Last edited 1 year ago by ATheoK
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 1, 2021 5:36 pm

Yes, Hunter Biden paintings to illegal aliens, but you left out the important after step: government reimburse Hunter directly $500k tax free for each painting.

This establishes money laundering operation to quickly make Hunter the next USA multibillionaire.

Let’a go Brandon!

Abolition Man
Reply to  Ron Long
November 1, 2021 12:09 pm

I think you’re making a rather large assumption that David grew up more-or-less normal, but I would surmise that his overly developed funny bone was also due to large helpings of the Three Stooges and the Marx brothers, especially Groucho; while developing!
Apparently the former Vice President was busy trying to recruit il Papa Francisco into the cabal that surrounds old Dementia Joe. Not satisfied with the pope’s open Marxism, old Joe tried to bring him into the inner circle that pulls his strings and changes his diapers: the skid-Marxists!

Ron Long
Reply to  Abolition Man
November 1, 2021 1:50 pm

yea, but leave out the Three Stooges. I grew up watching them and I turned out OK.

Reply to  Ron Long
November 1, 2021 5:44 pm

So YOU say!

Reply to  Abolition Man
November 1, 2021 3:18 pm

“and the Marx brothers, especially Groucho; while developing!”

Groucho was on radio, television, movies besides being guest on various shows he had his own; “You bet your life”

And his Quiz show.

Last edited 1 year ago by ATheoK
Reply to  Ron Long
November 1, 2021 2:57 pm

Addams family and Ron White are good stuff!

Normal, what is normal?

  • Cut throat suit wearers stabbing each other to get ahead?
  • Bored sick pencil pushers working in anal unretentive badly programmed programs?
  • Isolated insulated bored housewives believing in drama reruns and democrat superiority claims?


Reply to  ATheoK
November 1, 2021 4:34 pm

A lot of the problems in programming com from the widespread use of the latest and “best” software languages that have bugs. Many also link together various snippets of other programs to make a new one fast- and discovering that there are many loose ends that lead to strange behaviors of the “new” program.
Programming is a lot of trouble to begin with and even harder when you don’t know how code is going to work when bits and pieces(functions, algorithms, etc).

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Philo
November 2, 2021 8:34 am

I hadn’t given any thought to this issue. However, it should be obvious that one of the advantages of languages like FORTRAN is that there have been decades to find and eliminate any bugs in the language implementation. The same is true for common subroutines that help speed programming and make code modular.

There are known bugs in Excel, yet MS doesn’t seem to give any priority to fixing them.

Reply to  Ron Long
November 2, 2021 12:21 am

I thought poopy pants only went to the Vatican to get his butt wiped.

Kevin kilty
November 1, 2021 10:54 am

EIA..“world’s energy watchdog” 

Barks at anything that actually moves.

November 1, 2021 10:57 am

Hidden assumption no. 1: Kerry would accomplish anything after being one of the world’s largest emitters of CO2 from travel.
John Kerry and his team downplay expectations for UN climate conference with Congress mulling Biden’s agenda – CNNPolitics

Hidden assumption no. 2: The middle class will be paying for all of this with “unexpected” tax needs and higher inflation. The poor will be paying mainly through inflation.

Hidden assumption no. 3: There won’t a policy-induced recession clearly tied to the climate agenda pushers.

Hidden assumption no. 4: They can lock in their grand policy plans and funding sources before natural climate cooling sets in from the oceans.

Hidden assumption no. 5: The U.S. and its allies will be able to maintain the perception of security when there is none left in declining budgets and growing threats. Allies are expendable don’t ya know in the Bernie Plan.

November 1, 2021 11:06 am

And the biggest assumption of all is that reducing and/or eliminating CO2 emissions will have any effects other than destroying developed economies to the benfit of China and making climate alarmists feel better about themselves.

Pamela Matlack-Klein
Reply to  co2isnotevil
November 1, 2021 11:31 am

I don’t want Climate Alarmists to ever feel good about themselves! I want them to suffer sleepless nights, terminal stress, and GERD! They have turned the world on edge based on their fantasies of what constitutes the perfect world and it is past time that they be shut down permanently. All these mouthy, opinionated, F-wits have no idea just how good they have it in the world today. Let’s ship them all down to Venezuela for an extended visit to find out exactly what life is like in a Socialist country.

Reply to  Pamela Matlack-Klein
November 1, 2021 12:05 pm

Or to Norway or Denmark or Sweden.

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  Simon
November 1, 2021 12:40 pm

Typical propaganda from the keyboard of Simon the Zealot.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Simon
November 1, 2021 1:41 pm

Those are all strongly free market economies or they’d all be poor.

Reply to  Rory Forbes
November 1, 2021 2:31 pm

“Those are all strongly free market economies or they’d all be poor.”
Exactly and no one except the extreme right wing “nuts” are suggesting the US or any first world country is going the way of Venezuela. Typical “oh look the reds are coming” propaganda/BS.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Simon
November 1, 2021 2:51 pm

You’re completely confused, Simon and add absolutely nothing to any discussion. Why don’t you just shut up and read, instead. It’s too much of a chore to get you up to speed.

You take today’s prize for cluelessness.

Reply to  Simon
November 1, 2021 3:43 pm

you have zero clue if you can’t tell the difference between a planned economy like Venezuela and market based economies like Norway Denmark or Sweden there is zero similarity economically

Reply to  Simon
November 2, 2021 6:25 am

Let’s ignore what they are saying and doing.

Don Perry
Reply to  Simon
November 1, 2021 6:56 pm

If you’re saying these countries are socialist, you have your head in a very dark, smelly place.

Reply to  Don Perry
November 1, 2021 8:49 pm

If you’re saying these countries are socialist, you have your head in a very dark, smelly place.”
Oh really? Look and learn. Seems a lot of people through Europe (including the countries I cited) live in democratic socialist countries.

Reply to  Simon
November 2, 2021 6:11 am

well since the prime minister of Denmark specifically said “WE ARE NOT SOCIALIST” that kinda shoots a hole in your moronic economically ignorant argument.

Reply to  Simon
November 2, 2021 6:26 am

A welfare state is not socialism, though it is a big step in that direction.

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  Simon
November 2, 2021 12:28 pm

How’s that Bidenflation working for you, Simon the Zealot?

Reply to  Simon
November 1, 2021 11:22 pm

Simple Simon,

The first time I heard that Norway, Denmark, and Sweden are Socialist a few years ago I looked this up. It turned out that it was a lie told and retold by dishonest Socialist wanna bees. The data is a few years out of date, but I’ll leave it up to you to find if things are any different now. I’m not putting in any additional effort to disprove you as you already have no credibility and aren’t worth my time. Put up or shut up.

1) Sweden is NOT a Socialist country, they’re Capitalist. Lots of welfare, for sure, but all paid for by Capitalism. In Sweden, the Socialist party is called the “Left” party. The Lefts have only 21 seats of the 349 total in the Swedish Parliament. 5 other parties have more seats than the “Left” Socialists, including the Moderate Party, the Centre Party, Sweden Democrats, and the Green party.
2) Norway is NOT a Socialist country, they’re Capitalist. The Labour Party has 49 of the 169 seats in Norway’s Parliament followed closely by the Conservative party with 45. The Conservative party actually leads Norway’s Government. The Socialist Left party, the 5th largest party, has just 11 seats.
3) Denmark is not a Socialist country, they’re Capitalist. The Socialists have just 8 of the 179 seats in Denmark’s Parliament. The Venstre party (center-right) leads Denmark’s Government.

It’s a LIE that Norway, Denmark, or Sweden is socialist.

Last edited 1 year ago by meab
Reply to  meab
November 2, 2021 1:58 am

“Simple Simon”
Huh? Infantile name calling is the first stage of a reply here it seems. OK.
Meathead Meab
How was that for you?

Last edited 1 year ago by Simon
Reply to  Simon
November 2, 2021 6:20 am

hey the name fits and I notice you have no rebuttal for his statements

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  PaulID
November 2, 2021 12:29 pm

Simon old boy here has lots and lots of names he has earned over the few months he has been infesting WUWT.

Reply to  Simon
November 2, 2021 6:27 am

Little difference between that and your usual nonsense.

Reply to  Simon
November 2, 2021 8:49 am

Simple Simon,

So shall we take the fact that you couldn’t support your claim that Norway, Sweden, and Denmark are Socialist as an admission that you are just another Socialist wannabee liar?

Name calling doesn’t work if you can’t back it up with facts. You should know that, Simple Simon.

Reply to  meab
November 2, 2021 12:31 pm

Meathead Meab
Sweden Denmark and Norway are regarded as democratic socialist countries (see links above). They charge high taxes and in return receive a high level of social care for their citizens. In the eyes of right wing US nutters this is a sin to humanity. However their citizens in general seem to value this style of life, so there you go.

Abolition Man
Reply to  Pamela Matlack-Klein
November 1, 2021 12:13 pm

Shouldn’t Antarctica be the climate refuge of choice?
Give them a solar panel, a wind turbine, a tent and food; and see how far they can get into the SH winter!

Pamela Matlack-Klein
Reply to  Abolition Man
November 1, 2021 5:23 pm

Yes, even with the “unprecedented warming” recently, it is still pretty darn cold there. But Greens claim to prefer cooler temps, don’t they?

Janet Smith
Reply to  Pamela Matlack-Klein
November 1, 2021 3:17 pm

The best description of these deluded ratbags. Hear them scream when they can’t charge their phones because the electricity grid has gone down!

David Brewer
Reply to  co2isnotevil
November 1, 2021 11:36 am

So not true. It will also make a lot of the climate alarmists very, very rich.

Last edited 1 year ago by David Brewer
Dana Saylor Sr.
November 1, 2021 11:30 am

If the grid can’t endure a winter storm, what would happen if a million EV’s were added? A lot of energy is also required to mine and refine the raw materials for the batteries. Is the machinery for doing that going to be electric too?

Reply to  Dana Saylor Sr.
November 1, 2021 11:37 am

I worry about the EV emergency responders getting to the EV house fires.

Reply to  ResourceGuy
November 1, 2021 11:45 am

It won’t be a problem, they’ll be an appointment-only system where you can book your heart attack or house fire 7 days in advance

Should work 😉

Reply to  Dana Saylor Sr.
November 1, 2021 2:03 pm

how about 276 million evs, the number of currently registered vehicles.?

Last edited 1 year ago by travis
Reply to  Travis
November 1, 2021 5:10 pm

how about 276 million evs, the number of currently registered vehicles.?

There are 1.8 million EVs registered in the United States, and 10.2 million worldwide.


Replacing the entire fleet is going to take quite a long time, and will take down the grid long before all of the fossil-fuel powered vehicles are replaced.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  ihfan
November 2, 2021 5:47 am

I think replacing internal combustion engine cars will fade away as a bad idea, once reality sets in.

Dave Andrews
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 2, 2021 9:11 am

Well considering there are about 1.4 billion cars in the world today and this is expected to rise to 2 billion by 2050 I think you may well be right.


Dave Andrews
Reply to  ihfan
November 2, 2021 9:04 am

Yep. The International Energy Agency Update on Evs (Aug 23 2021) says at the end of 2020 there were 10.2m EV cars,0.4m light commercial EVs and 0.6m electric buses in the world

They put the US figure at 1.7m but the pew research may be more up to date.


Steve Case
November 1, 2021 11:37 am

These fuels are replaced within the roadmap in part by expanding wood, biomass and biofuels, even though bioenergy has been shown by many studies not to be particularly “green.” 

From the imbedded link above it says:

It had been assumed that young trees mop up more carbon than old ones because they are fast-growing, but recent studies have revealed that ancient woodland growing in temperate regions takes up more CO2 than young plantations.

Anyone who studied ecology in the ’70s learned that the climax forest was the most productive. i.e., produced the most biomass and it would follow – absorbed the most CO2. Have ecology text books changed their tune in the last 50 years?

However, those calculated savings rest on a few key assumptions: first, that the carbon released when wood pellets are burned is recaptured instantly by new growth; second, that the biomass being burned is waste that would have released carbon dioxide naturally when it rotted down. But are those assumptions right?

It looks like the author of that study, Kate Ravilious, ignored the second assumption that the biomass being burned was waste. A Google search finds way down the list this link that says that pellets are also made via clear cutting. The paper industry does this too. Anyone who drives through northern Wisconsin can see this first hand. 

The mental image of cutting large trees for pellets is probably wrong and producing pellets from 100% wood waste is probably wrong too. It’s difficult to arrive at the truth when it comes to anything “Climate Change.”

Reply to  Steve Case
November 1, 2021 12:16 pm

Sounds a lot like Reagan’s statement about Democrats…

Reply to  Steve Case
November 1, 2021 5:01 pm

 the climax forest was the most productive.”

Remember, those dreaming up and assuming such silly green ideas tend to be urbanite/suburbanite desk jockeys with language/literature/soft science degrees.

It’s easy to start with two nearly identical small circles. One inside the other with a slight 1/8-1/4″ thick space between inner-outer.
Point out the rather small area a cambium layer comprises.
Compare that to a tree 1-4 feet in diameter. If necessary, draw a two slices, inner and outer.

Point out how much leaf mass a mature tree grows, every year.
That all trees grow some each year. Ask them if a small tree can grow more than a mature tree.

Slyly, remind them that they themselves can calculate the actual volumes for such a thin sample.

There was one odd character that refused to believe their eyes. News reporter experts Jones told them young trees store more carbon.

Even after suggesting that he try burning a young tree and compare how long that fire lasts versus a mature tree.
Swoosh, over the head.

Reply to  Steve Case
November 2, 2021 12:26 am

My local pellet factory here in Sweden uses trees. We also see a chopper truck that goes round gobbling up piles of the smaller stuff.

Michael in Dublin
November 1, 2021 11:45 am

Will there be a cost benefit analysis looking at the “tremendous misallocation of capital from functioning energy infrastructure to mythical energy infrastructure“?

I have observed over 50 years that the bigger government spending is the greater the likelihood of theft, fraud, misappropriation, mismanagement and waste. The astronomical amounts that climate alarmists demand will lead to astronomical squandering. If this goes ahead I predict this will be the greatest fraud scheme in history – far overshadowing all the major fraud schemes combined.

Reply to  Michael in Dublin
November 1, 2021 12:17 pm

Actually, with Renewable Energy, fraud is never a concern. You just have to understand it’s a fundamental, built-in feature.

Michael in Dublin
Reply to  Spetzer86
November 1, 2021 12:37 pm

Fraud: gaining money or financial benefits by a trick or by lying (Collins)

When those providing renewable energy receive subsidies and payments far in excess of what it would cost consumers to use the cleanest fossil fuels like gas and having to pay for costly electric vehicles looks to me like tricking and lying to naïve consumers.

November 1, 2021 11:47 am

I’m sure David knew this, but I didn’t until a minute ago, so let me share this nugget of knowledge:
“Abraham Gottlob Werner, a German mineralogist, named it (graphite) from the Ancient Greek word γραφειν (“gráphein”), which means to write/draw/record “.
 After well-known use of graphite is in making graphite pencils.

Last edited 1 year ago by vuk
Reply to  David Middleton
November 1, 2021 12:30 pm

Not much in it, and from then on possibly another 50 words all the way from  hagiography to the electroencephalography.
In my part of the world ‘pencil’ is known as ‘lapis’ after latin for ‘stone’

Reply to  Vuk
November 2, 2021 6:34 am

Didn’t the earliest pencils use lead? When I was a kid, we still called the dark stuff in the center of the pencil, lead.

Alasdair Fairbairn
November 1, 2021 11:48 am

You seem to have missed the most important erroneous assumption of all; namely that the CAGW MESSAGE OR MEME is valid. This being at the root of it all.

It seems that no one; but no one, dares to challenge that assumption. Why not?, one may well ask.
IMO this can only be ascribed to very sinister political forces driving the whole debate.

I have my views on this; but ‘off thread’ and in any case would have little traction on the powerful political momentum involved in the whole situation.

Meanwhile a total waste of time, resources and heartache with very dangerous consequences waiting in the wings.

Abolition Man
November 1, 2021 12:22 pm

Great post, again! Thanks, in particular, for the Addams Family clip; that brought back lots of memories of laughter with friends!
The meme neglected to mention a few things; a rapidly growing economy, high wage growth (especially for women and minorities,) and a reduction in wealth inequality for the first time in decades! It’s amazing how quickly our unelected leaders have turned it all around.
The American public is slowly coming to the realization that this is not just incompetence, it’s maliciousness as well!

Carlo, Monte
November 1, 2021 12:38 pm

Re the photo:

The technical railroad term for this event is a “cornfield meet”, when instead of meeting at a passing siding or a station, two trains heading in opposite directions met in the middle of a cornfield with dire unintended consequences.

John Bell
November 1, 2021 1:00 pm

OT a bit, but an interesting video on Periscope films, “Gasoline for everybody” (1947)

Clyde Spencer
November 1, 2021 1:23 pm

Achieving any single assumption will be very difficult – but taken in the aggregate, it’s highly unlikely.

Indeed, the probability for a chain of events to have the desired outcome, such as winning the ‘war on carbon,’ is obtained by multiplying all the probabilities. Just for fun, let me subjectively assign probabilities to all the assumptions. I’ll try to make the estimates generous, but realistic.

  1. I’ll take a median FF value for this: 75%
  2. I think this has low probability: 25%
  3. I think this has medium probability: 50%
  4. I think that this has very low probability: 10%
  5. Toss of a coin: 50%

Multiplying all the probabilities together, 0.75 x 0.25 x 0.50 x 0.10 x 0.50 = 0.0047 or, approximately 0.5%! Would you bet on such odds — 1:200 — at the race track? Even if all of them were 85%, the probability that all of the goals would be achieved is less than 45%.

alastair gray
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
November 1, 2021 4:06 pm

to what parameters do you ascribe your numbers Clyde

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  alastair gray
November 2, 2021 8:13 am

The 5 assumptions listed by Tinker in the main article. You read it, right?

November 1, 2021 1:43 pm

November 1, 2021 8:31 pm
I do not understand how they think COP26 could even address these calls for action. This is a UNFCCC business meeting with a very specific agenda. National Plans are not on it. Neither are global resolutions to stop using coal or hit net zero by 2050, neither of which could possibly pass in any case. As last chances go this is no chance, but the press is full of calls for action or ambition. This is not what COPs do.

The Dark Lord
November 1, 2021 1:52 pm

lets not forget that the solar and wind unicorns the net-zero kooks want/need ALSO require huge amounts of the same metals/minerals …

November 1, 2021 2:26 pm

But in recent years years climate activists succeeded in driving public and private investment away from oil and gas exploration and toward renewables. The result is the worst energy crisis in 50 years.


Oil and gas investment track exactly with demand, always has, always will at least until we reach that hypothetical “peak oil” which nobody can actually define.

The current run up in prices is obvious to all but the Political True Believers.

COVID cause worldwide demand for oil and gas to temporarily plummet, for only about 6-8 months. That sudden and catestrophic drop in demand caused prices to plummet instantly from already modest levels just before COVID to very low prices.

Investment ceased, because nobody know how long the COVID depression would last. Supply decreased. Boom.

Then starting in the fourth quarter of 2020, and continuing through at least the third quarter of 2021, a Vee shaped economic recovery ensued, cause massive uptick in demand, and supply could not keep up with such a rapid uptick in demand. By the way, the same thing happened to virtually everything else in life, from food to building materials to plastics to housing to labor, etc. etc. Shortages everywhere of everything were the result, and inflation took a huge hike. Prices on everything, not just oil and gas, skyrocketed to present levels, inevitably so.

With high prices, investments in oil and gas are now increasing, but they cannot increase as fast as demand did. It will take some time – probably 2022 or 2023 – for supplies of everything including oil and gas to match current still growing demand. Inevitably, oil and gas supplies will overshoot demand, and cause another collapse in pricing.

Wash, rinse, repeat. This has only happened about a hundred times in the oil and gas business, among the most radically cyclical of any commodities on the planet. Just like metals and foods.

That can’t be blamed on renewables. Climate scientists and government bureaucrats are not convincing real life investors to make stupid counterfactual investment decisions. The government can badly invest tax money sure, but enlightened self interest controls private investment decisions.


Reply to  Duane
November 2, 2021 1:00 am


COVID cause worldwide demand for oil and gas to temporarily plummet, for only about 6-8 months. That sudden and catestrophic drop in demand

A few things don’t add up here.
2020 saw the highest volume of CO2 emissions in history. The pandemic made not the tiniest dent in CO2 emissions. The establishment response to this is to claim that fossil fuel demand declined by less than 5% during the pandemic.

How did such a minuscule drop in fossil fuel demand with zero drop in CO2 emissions result in market driven divestment from fossil fuel exploration? None of what you say makes any sense.

Reply to  Duane
November 2, 2021 6:38 am

Total energy demand never “plummeted”.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Walter Sobchak
November 2, 2021 8:48 am

I suspect that the physical properties of synthetic graphite made for nuclear applications will be different from the properties needed for batteries or carbon brushes for motors.

Joe B
November 1, 2021 3:16 pm

“Pain Instructs”.
Profoundly true phrase.
It is incumbent upon all of us who have not been bamboozled to help enlighten the wider population as to the whys and hows of the current situation.
Being in the cold and dark – while staring at impoverishment – will help focus their attention.

Joel O'Bryan
November 1, 2021 7:39 pm

If it’s impossible then it won’t happen. All those tens of millions of assumed EVs needed to replace the ICE vehicle fleets will never be built. One way or another.

The clearest scenario is a reduction of the large, prosperous middle class of the Western Democracies to serfdom. Thus the demand won’t be there because the EVs will be financially out of reach for all but governments, the government political class (party apparatchiks) and the very wealthy.

So if the demand is not there, those minerals will not be mined at those quantities required. This is clearly the real goal of the UN Sustainability Initiatives and the Green Marxists.

Accordingly, the refusal by the Green Marxists to put emissions-free nuclear power into the equations for future energy use is the clearest proof the Climate Scam has nothing to do with climate, and everything to do with elimination of a propsperous middle class. Today, we have a middle class that demands democracy, individual rights, and competes with the very wealthy for the resources they want for themselves and their families. And that is the real target for the Climate Scammers.

Patrick Peake
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
November 2, 2021 4:16 am

Also carbon capture and storage is not considered at all as a solution because it allows coal consumption to continue

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
November 2, 2021 5:56 am

“All those tens of millions of assumed EVs needed to replace the ICE vehicle fleets will never be built.”

I tend to agree.

The vehicle fleet will be electrified eventually, but it’s not going to happen overnight. It will take many decades. It should take many decades, because a lot of things have to come together to make it work, and that will take time. Not by 2030 and not by 2050.

Dave Andrews
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 2, 2021 10:09 am

The IEA published a report in May 2021 on ‘The Role of Critical Minerals in Clean Energy Transitions’ which said a typical electric car requires 6 times the mineral inputs of a conventional car and expected the number of EV sales to reach c.72m by 2040.

As there are currently around 1.4billion cars in the world it is obvious that the growth of EVs, even if somewhat higher than the IEA expects, is nowhere near to replacing those ICE vehicles especially as the number of cars is expected to reach 2 billion by 2050.

Vincent Causey
November 2, 2021 1:19 am

Maybe, just maybe, if the western economies deteriorate to such an extent that their strategic dominance is weakened, then maybe, maybe, a U turn will happen. Nah!

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights