Guest “From the Famous Failed Prediction Files” by David Middleton
ENERGY Published 5 days ago
John Kerry says US ‘won’t have coal’ by 2030
Climate czar John Kerry claims America ‘will not have coal plants’By Kyle Morris | Fox News
U.S. climate envoy John Kerry said Tuesday in Scotland that America, which boasts the world’s largest economy, will stop burning coal sometime within the next nine years.
“By 2030 in the United States, we won’t have coal,” Kerry told Bloomberg editor-in-chief John Micklethwait during an interview at the COP26 climate conference in Glasgow. “We will not have coal plants.”
Discussing a shift from coal, Kerry placed emphasis on markets being a driving force behind more cost-effective power sources like renewables and natural gas. Kerry also reaffirmed his support of the Biden administration‘s goal to eliminate all carbon emissions from the U.S. power grid by 2035.
“We’re saying we are going to be carbon-free in the power sector by 2035,” Kerry said. “I think that’s leadership. I think that’s indicative of what we can do.”
[…]
Fox News
Meanwhile, at the Energy Information Administration…
ANNUAL ENERGY OUTLOOK 2021
Release date: February 3, 2021 | Next release date: January 2022 | AEO Narrative
Annual Energy Outlook 2021
The Annual Energy Outlook presents an assessment by the U.S. Energy Information Administration of the outlook for energy markets through 2050.
The Annual Energy Outlook narrative
The Annual Energy Outlook narrative is the primary discussion of the Annual Energy Outlook:
[…]
Energy Information Administration
I downloaded the Electricity PowerPoint. Here is slide #2, as it appears in the report:
Here’s the left panel expanded:
Here’s the same dataset, displayed more realistically:
“We’re saying we are going to be carbon-free in the power sector by 2035 2050…”
We’re not only not “going to be carbon-free in the power sector by 2035,” will be generating almost as much “carboniferous” electricity in 2050 as we are today.
Even with EIA’s rosy projections, unreliable energy sources will only account for the overall growth in electricity demand over the next 30 years.
The downside is that the grid will be degraded from ~90% reliable down to ~60% reliable sources.
The EIA’s base case outlook will have the US sacrificing grid resiliency, while barely reducing GHG emissions. They won’t achieve anything other than making energy more expensive and less reliable.
John Kerry’s energy forecasts are the sorts one would expect from someone who barely got a D in geology.
But he did nearly get a B in French.
John Kerry wins the Geico Cavemen Award….
If Lurch was truly serious about reducing emissions, he would move to lift all the anti-nuclear restrictions in environmental impact reports, most of which are Carter era executive orders, and stop the sue-and-settle games with the antinuclear NGOs.
But Kerry is a buffoon. Always has been, always will be.
The only person wrong more times than Biden.
How does a person this incompetent become as rich as him?
By marrying an heiress?
Complete overconfidence in everything he does, a complete lack of humility, a complete lack of empathy, surrounding himself with rich whores (which makes him a bigger whore).
Big picture … he is an overconfident whore and he knows that the Dems will continue to provide an unlimited number of Customers.
”John Kerry: US to be “carbon-free in the power sector by 2035”Jeezuz.
Please line up in front of the betting office in an orderly manner. No shoving!
No developed or developing country will be ever be carbon free as you will always need to have natural gas to step in as the superhero when renewables fail. Otherwise people will suffer. Batteries are not the solution as we cannot source the materials and build them fast enough and disposing or recycling and replacing them is simply unsustainable. The only winter recourse w/o natural gas is to burn “renewable” wood or char in fireplaces and stoves and then we will see some real air pollution won’t we.
There is also the massive need for the NG to make Anhydrous Ammonia. That or starve.
The US can not build enough Nuclear power plants to achieve that goal by 2050, let alone 2035. The effort, however, would create Millions of Green Jobs, over 3,000 direct and 10,000 indirect per plant. Plus the 1,000 new utility employees per plant built.
All in favor of making the person of John Kerry carbon free raise your hand.
An ethical apology. A nonviable choice. An evolutionary “burden”. Planned Profithood (sic) and carbon sequestration is a socially progressive Choice. Nice (pun intended).
What are you on about?
“Careful what you asking or wishing or dreaming for…”
As the saying goes!
Carbon free path, even in consideration of one single person is prohibitively expensive… but still!
cheers
“evolutionary “burden”
in all scales considered, is not a joke….
Calculate the annual human activity contribution to the CO2 level from 1960 to 2020 and you will see that we are already too close to zero carbon status to warrant any costly and disruptive efforts at further reduction. You will find that it was less than one tenth of one PPM per year.
Freeing his carbon is a worthy goal.
Step off John. The world doesn’t need you.
That’s why Kerry became a Democrat. They encourage fail upwards.
Every country that is currently using fossil fuels will continue to do so in 2050, and after, until we run out.
Every B student can figure this out.
Kerry was a C student, so he will NEVER figure it out.
Biden was even worse, C minus. He does not remember in which pocket he put his mask, or how to read from a teleprompter, or whatever.
It is completely outrageous for the EIA to make projections without huge growth of modular nuclear, i.e., multiple 150 MW units at plant sites that had nuclear and coal plants. The US has 60 years of experience with such units, as does Russia.
They won’t, because they are already shutting fossil fuel plant.
there also isn’t a working commercial SMR design: Rolls Royce just this month launched their development programme – first prototype up and running no sooner than 2031, 4 more max by 2035, total power 2 GW
Griff, you need to say who exactly is shutting fossil fuel plants. The UK may be, it has half a dozen. But how many is China shutting? How many is India shutting? How many is the world outside the OECD shutting?
The plain undeniable fact is that China, India etc are building more coal plants, not shutting them. And the plain undeniable fact also is that right now, China is producing and burning more coal than the rest of the world put together, and they are not stopping.
This is why the COP26 resolution was diluted into meaninglessness.
This is also why the great fossil fuel disinvestment campaign has resulted only in soaring share price for Peabody. Rather than driving it out of business as intended and promised.
You need to come to terms with the fact that if this is a problem at all, its a global problem.
You also need to take account of the consequences of your favored policies. It is deeply bad faith to urge on a country, whether the UK or the US, that it move to renewables, which will not supply demand, and to argue that if they do, it will have any effect at all on global emissions.
Its the impossible in pursuit of the unachievable. Get real!
Every time I read about another coal plant in the US being shutdown, I see 2+ more being either put in development or going on-line in other countries.
So? Willem Rost did say “…at plant sites that had nuclear and coal plants.” Also, Rolls Royce may not be a commercial design, but there is very little essential difference between commercial and military designs.
Griff Nuscale has a fully licensed design for a SMR. They will be rolling out be end of the decade
Hey, I live here, griffster, and the only time fossil fuel plants are shut down is when they are replaced by nukes, like the one up north across the state line. That was replaced by a nuclear power plant and was shut down as soon as the nuke plant went online. There were no protests over it, either.
That was about 5 years ago. And now the fishing lake in the park on the state line looks even more like something out of a John Constable painting.
EXCERPT from:
WIND AND SOLAR TO PROVIDE 30 PERCENT OF NEW ENGLAND ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION BY 2050
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/wind-and-solar-provide-50-percent-of-future-new-england
UN Nuclear Chief Sees Atomic Energy Role in Climate Fight
Rafael Mariano Grossi, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, sees near-zero-CO2 nuclear playing a key role regarding the world’s energy needs and CO2 reduction.
RE folks have demonized nuclear, because of accidents and nuclear waste processing and storage.
https://www.mymotherlode.com/news/science/2083337/un-nuclear-chief-sees-atomic-energy-role-in-climate-fight.html
Japan: Japan, with minimal domestic fossil fuel sources, adopted a new energy policy on October 22, 2021, that promotes nuclear and renewables as sources of clean energy to achieve the country’s pledge of reaching “carbon neutrality” in 2050.
https://www.usnews.com/news/business/articles/2021-10-22/japan-oks-plan-to-push-clean-energy-nuclear-to-cut-carbon
Vermont: Folks with RE business interests, financed a scare-mongering campaign for several years, to close down the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant, to “make room” on the grid for their own expensive, highly subsidized wind and solar electricity. See URL
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/high-costs-of-wind-solar-and-battery-systems
The Vermont Yankee nuclear plant, after producing at about 100% of design output for 500 days, would have a shut-down for a few weeks to refuel, then would produce at 100% of design output for another 500 days.
The plant had proven itself highly reliable for decades, with an annual capacity factor of over 90%. In fact, the entire US nuclear sector has an annual capacity factor of over 90%, which proves it is highly reliable.
Russia: Russia plans to build a fleet of floating nuclear power plants and on-shore installations, based on Russian-made small modular reactors (SMRs). These units will be available for deployment to hard-to-reach areas of Russia’s North and Far-East, as well as for export. Such power plants could be used all over the world, instead of CO2-emitting fossil plants.
A Russian-built floating nuclear power plant is equipped with two KLT-40S reactor systems, each with a capacity of 35 MW, similar to those used on icebreakers. It is 144 m long and 30 m wide, and has a displacement of 21,000 metric ton.
The project was started in May 2009. Reactors were installed in 2013. Since December 2019, the ship has been anchored at a dock in the City of Pevek, in northern Siberia, to provide electricity to power the ship and the entire town.
Low-pressure steam exiting the low-pressure end of the steam turbine is used to produce hot water for domestic hot water and for building heating. The hot water is pumped, via underground piping, to a large number of nearby buildings, i.e., a near-zero-CO2, highly efficient (about 65%), DHW/district heating system.
https://www.zerohedge.com/energy/russia-tests-nuclear-powered-showers-siberia
https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Russia-connects-floating-plant-to-grid
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akademik_Lomonosov
Griff, you are the most amazing contrarian I’ve met on the internet. You’re laconic. Curious, when you encounter a red light at a busy intersection, do you say “No, you’re wrong!” and proceed through the wall of crossing vehicles?
Look up FFTF that was working safely in the1980’s . Molten salt reactor.
talk of converting it to power production was stopped when the Obama Admin.
had the reactor cored.
Now there is a problem with wind turbines that can’t be recycled.
Ah, yes, the Small Modular (Nuclear) Reactor . . . the power source that is always “just around the corner” but is more fleeting than a Microsoft OS that doesn’t required monthly or more frequent updates.
griff, one little thing for your spiritual elevation:
A Portuguese proveb says: “Who is waiting for someone to die to have his shoes will die barefoot”. Lousy translation, in Portuguese is much more colorful (“Quem espera por sapatos de defunto morre descalço”).
It seems that you are waiting for the shoes that Rolls Royce will give you “no sooner than 2031” … All right, your choice to go berefoot!… For me, it would be a better idea to have good, reliable shoes in the meantime, while waiting…
Here is our Idiot Climate Envoy in chief as Secretary of State with an absurd descrition of CO2 global warming mechanism at an international forom. A little before 8 minute mark is when he goes totally “loo loo”.
Secretary Kerry Delivers Remarks on Climate Change in Indonesia – YouTube
Lurch is an imbecile. Should be locked up in a rubber room for his own protection. Lurch has no background in science. His education background is steeped in mediocracy. What a b****s***r!!!
and Ale Gore has a BA in English from Ha-vid
Surely he cannot be THAT stupid and ignorant. But maybe that is a necessity for US politicians.
Kerry can be that stupid and ignorant, he thinks he was in Cambodia at Christmas – it’s seared in his memory. It’s just that his memory has numerous holes in the storage areas.
yes he can he is a first class IDIOT
Has he thought through how Heinz is going to get the beans , let alone get them in the tin?
Busch beans because of the Dem climate change supply chain issue is cancelling contracts with farmers because they can’t get enough cans to put the beans in.
“he thinks he was in Cambodia at Christmas – it’s seared in his memory”
That’s funny! Kerry’s crewmates in Vietnam didn’t have much good to say about him.
Kerry can’t be criticized enough. He’s just like Biden, everything he touches, he ruins.
The idiot wants to remove all the carbon from the atmosphere
He should be put in a room with all the CO2 pumped out, maybe this will change his mind.
“maybe this will change his mind.”
Briefly!
Mind? What mind?
Without useful idiots like Kerry the AGW narrative would have no one to speak for it.
Unfortunately, there are a lot of useful idiots in the world.
Ridicule is our friend.
Another student of the Al Gore school of prognostication.
Kerry is the biggest climate scam artist of them all. He lives like a king, has below zero credibility and the sooner he and his climate acolytes are thrown out of Washington the better off the nation will be.
Doesn’t EIA know that we have to electrify everything by 2050? So electricity demand in 2050 should be 12000 billion kwh, not just 5500 billion kwh.
Hasn’t occurred to them yet
It looks like Joe Biden was advised to throw a billion or so to address that issue in his great $1,200 billion infrastructure bill that was just passed and signed into law.
He’s on top of it.
/sarc off
“Carbon” neutral?
That’s a big call.
To be honest who cares about his grades 4 decades ago.
People’s capacity is not set in stone the moment you graduate.
It is the sort of attack warmistas excel in. Surely we can attack his arguments?
Agreed
We did. He’s wrong. Lurch is fick.
It was closer to six decades ago and it was a humorous segue to the Geico cavemen video, after spending 99% of the post factually destroying Kerry’s moronic claims.
–Signed: An A student (3.9/4.0) departmental GPA) in geology from four and a half decades ago in New Haven CT… No, not Yale, the better school, the one closer to the Keg House.
😎
Depends. Way back in BC in the Oz system there were those who worked on the “50% is a pass and 51 is wasted effort” – including me mostly. But it was noted that those students seemed to end up with better jobs. And I was horrified as a US post graduate student to find that a “B” average was required and that was “80 – 90%”! I found that was about as easy as 50 % in our system – GPA of not quite the magic 4.
As for today
“What do you call the person who comes last in their medical year? – Doctor”
“What do you call the person who comes last in their medical year? – Doctor”
But is that really the Doctor you want to handle your dire medical needs? Or do you want one that actually knows what they’re doing?
We might be able to be coal free by 2030 by substituting natural gas. I’m not saying it’s a good idea but we could probably do it because currently we only get about 20% from coal nationwide. https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3
But getting carbon free in the power sector by 2030 will be extremely difficult unless we use nukes. But the people who hate fossil fuels also hate nukes. Also it probably takes about a decade to get through the approval process and design and build a nuclear power plant.. assuming you can get it approved at all.
So to get one online by 2030 they need to start last year.
You certainly could run the US on natural gas… then ramping up wind would allow you to use less gas. Wind while intermittent is predictable – you can turn gas up and down as it wanes and waxes.
There is a whole corner of the US where solar plus battery would handle domestic demand.
first 50% of renewable electricity is easy…
Griffy. “ramping up wind”. “ wind while intermittent is predictable” followed by a “whole corner of the U S where solar plus battery”.
You are utterly delusional.
Griff wants that for the U.S.
No thanks, Griff. We like reliable, cheap electricty over here.
There aren’t enough materials on the planet to make the batteries needed to handle domestic demand with solar. And all you get from the first 50% is higher prices and environmental destruction on a massive scale.
Battery/ you mean the ones that explode? The batteries that rely on Chinese slave labor to mine the rare earths? you mean the ones that can’t hold 50% percent power for more than 48 hrs. ?
Griff you have to get off the Ganja. I mean seriously..
Wow, there are quite a few sailors, firefighters, pilots, surfers, and on and on that are going to love to hear that news . . . assuming they can stop laughing at it, of course.
We could do that, by 2030. And we could capture and geologically sequester every molecule of CO2 emissions from all of the new natural gas power plants. We won’t because there aren’t the financial resources available or logistical capabilities in place to do it by 2050, much less 2030.
We will probably actually do this before the end of this century. The CCS/CCUS industry will become massive before 2030 and many oil & gas companies will honestly be able to state that they have become net-zero emittters (Scopes 1, 2 & 3). However, it will have very little effect on atmospheric CO2 and no demonstrable effect on the weather.
“I think that’s leadership. I think that’s indicative of what we can do.”
–
I think that’s BS.
Dedicated to David Middleton, Geologist & Petroleum Engineer @wuwt.com
The Song of the Frakkers by R.T.Dee
Old Joe was in the White House, toying with his pen,
Thinking very little as was his norm; and then
In rushes Bernie, with his leftist minions three,
One of whom was the well known AOC.
“Hey, Joe, old pal, we have got a job for you.
Get into your Office, set your arse upon a pew.
We need to get your moniker on these Orders Exec.,
To counteract the damage that the Orangeman did do.”
“Wazzat? asked Joe, “I was about to take a nap,
And you and the girls come in, talking loads of crap!
Do I need to read them first? What are they about?
I had better call Pelosi. Girls, don’t shout!”
Now Bernie and his minions were on the far left,
A branch of the Demoncrats of common sense bereft.
They didn’t want Ms. Nancy messing up their acts,
– She might confuse Joe with something bad – like facts.
Birds twittered in the background, led by AOC,
Saying “De-fund the Police, we must stop the XLP,
End the use of fossil fuel, have the schools teach CRT.”
– And a lone voice muttered “Gosh, I really need a pee.”
“Hush, girls,” said old Bernie, “let me have his ear.
If you all talk at once it won’t be very clear.”
“Mr. President, you alone possess the power,
To out-trump Trump – can be done within the hour.”
“This is what the Party needs – what these papers say –
We must stop this fracking and do it right away.
We can’t stop all the fracking but you must understand,
That we can prohibit them from using federal land.”
“What is hell is all this fracking? I never understood
But if the Party says so, guess it can’t be very good.”
A shrilling from the background, like a cat with mange:
“It’s an ecological disaster, all because of Climate Change!”
“Hush, girls,” said old Bernie, “will you let me have the floor?
Old Joe and I go back this twenty years or more.
We understand each other and he isn’t very ‘woke’
If you all keep shrieking he’ll think it’s all a joke.”
“We must stop the XL pipeline because it carries gas,
We need to stop Big Oil and must set it on it’s ass!
Shut down coal plants, de-commission nuclear power,
And you, Mr. President, can do it all this hour!”
So Biden signed his Edicts, but the Frakkers kept on fracking,
Though there weren’t quite as many as there were a while ago;
Yes, Siree! Those Frakkers kept on fracking,
All the way from North Dakota to the Gulf of Mexico.
Oh! They fracked in the Permian, they fracked in the Bakken,
And they fracked in places where the oilmen didn’t go,
They drilled through the clay, the gneiss and the limestone
Down to the shales that were waiting down below.
They pumped out the gas – and if there’s lack of pipelines
They’ll use rail-cars and tankers to carry off the gas,
Nothing stops the Frakkers, they just keep on a-fracking,
From the fields of Pennsylvania to the oil lands of Texas.
Out on the west coast, Californication,
(Meaning how to bugger things by political means),
Shut down the nukes and the coal-fired generation
And instead used renewables not worth a hill of beans.
‘Cos when the wind don’t blow and the sun don’t shine,
You are shit out of luck when it comes to getting power.
If ya only got some hydro and ya lakes are getting lower,
Well, you gotta crank up turbines and use gas or coal.
Oh! They fracked in the Permian, they fracked in the Bakken,
And they fracked in places where the oilmen didn’t go,
They drilled through the clay, the gneiss and the limestone
Down to the shales that were waiting down below.
David,
Do your graphs include or exclude fossil fuel backup for the unreliables?
Fossil fuel backup is fossil fuel generation. EIA counts it as fossil fuel.
ok, thanks for the clarification
It’s funny that electricity production was fairly steady 2010-2020 at 4 Terawatt-hours, but is expected to grow to 5 or more in the future – lots of wasted renewable electricity generated when no one needs it.
Why no talk of a continental grid? The big time difference between east and west coasts might be enough to make all the extra solar panels and wind turbines that are going to be forced on us, sort-of work well enough not to bankrupt us.
Exactly.
Europe has a grid – with many new HVDC lines being added to it.
That’s what avoids constraining renewables and gets round the ‘not windy here today’ issue
And if a large part of Europe is affected by “not windy here today”issue?
Yes, persistent high-pressure systems, with light winds, can cover very large areas. Griff is going to have to extend his HVDC lines a long ways. China, maybe.
Yep China will have plenty of Coal plants…
Griff, mate
So how much wind power does Europe need to account for “not windy here today” issues?
When giving your answer (or more likely not giving your answer), please bear in mind you have to distribute all that lovely wind power across the whole of the EU.
Here’s a clue – if you add together fossil fuels, solar (cos the sun don’t shine at night), and wind, you will get the minimum number of MW you need to guarantee, even when it’s “not windy here today”
From Griff:
Anyone keeping score on EIA predictions?
EIA actually does. Everything they forecast is usually wrong within 5 years. The trick is in predicting which directions things will be wrong over which time periods.
However, unlike John Kerry’s predictions, the EIA’s are based on data and reality as it exists at the time of the forecast. EIA also provides a wide range of forecasts for various scenarios. I just cited their base case forecast in this post.
John Kerry how f**k did this idiot get where he is ?!
Family connections….
It would be a good idea to include financial data alongside energy – the GFANZ outfit fully intend to print $150 trillion during this 30 years, while apparently none of the GFANZ sub-alliances require signatories to stop financing fossil-fuel expansion.
The BofA admits this is greenlghting of the biggest Quantitive Easing QE in history, after the $30 trillion COVID-lighting. This makes the 1% richer, note the private jets at Glasgow…
So which is worse – gas-lighting the scared public with CO2, or green-lighting the same public into hyper inflationary poverty which will debase the dollar and unleash central bank digital currencies, the Regime Change announced at the FED Jackson Hole 2019 confab.
Nixon took the dollar off gold-reserve in 1971 giving us the PetroDollar, then EuroDollar, now the very same bankers are going for a global digital currency – sounds like Keynes’ Bancor refused by FDR at the 1944 Bretton-Woods.
Whether Kerry fully understands Marc Carney’s plain English is not clear – is he Nixon 2? The City of London’s scheme is predictable – no more US dollar.
Wind and solar are not without a carbon footprint. Here in Massachusetts, about 200,000 acres of forest must be destroyed to install solar, even if every building in the state is covered with solar and we build numerous wind turbines at sea- and this is according to a recent state “energy czar” who got fired for admitting this. Clearing those forests emits carbon- much of the cut wood will go to the remaining biomass facilities in the northeast. And, all that land no longer sequestering carbon. Then of course there is the carbon footprint of the companies making the panels and turbines and shipping them from China here- mostly to ports in CT, where they’ll be put on big trucks to ship them to MA. And with all this new wind and solar, we’ll need to expand the grid, covering more of the landscape, etc., etc. Oh, yuh- the many, huge, battery facilities that will be needed- covering more ground- and they aren’t made without a carbon footprint. So, yes, Kerry is an idiot- and yes we should note his “gentlemen Cs” he got. For rich playboys, college isn’t about an education, it’s about meeting people who have all the right connections. But if they’re lazy in college, they’re probably lazy in everything else, easy when you’re rich.
It’s always interesting to hear politicians promising what they are going to do over the next 9 years. I assume that Kerry knows enough about the US Constitution to know that there will be elections for the President in 2024 and 2028 and that there will be numerous elections for the Senate and the House of Representatives during that time. Is he promising that the Democrats are going to win all these elections? Kerry will probably be a ‘here today and gone tomorrow politician’ long before we get to 2030.
All those big plans of the leftists like Kerry and Biden are going to be modified drasticly in the near future.
Radical Democrats are like Climate Change Alarmists in their thinking. They both think the current trend will go on forever.
This morning the PJM Interconnect, covering much of the Mid-Atlantic states is getting a paltry 2600 MW from wind, while coal, gas and nuclear are providing about 89,000MW on a system load of over 95,000 MW. In the windy warm midwest, the wind is still unable to get above 60 percent of capacity, while coal and gas take up the slack. Has anybody explained these numbers to John Kerry?
I don’t think Kerry is using logic in his thought process when it comes to energy supplies.
Kerry is solely focused on efforts to move the socialist/authoritarian agenda forward. If that means destroying the U.S. electric grid in the future, so be it.
Lurch and biden* make a good team. Neither is familiar with the concept of “reality”.
You want carbon-free power? OK, then start building MORE nuclear power plants, upgrade and update current facilities, and take down the wind farms and solar desertification spots. And pick up the trash you leave behind, while you’re at it.
Otherwise, please stuff it.
“We will not have coal plants.” while China has hundreds and are rapidly adding to that total.
We will devastate our economy while making no impact on the rising world wide CO2 emissions.
Such a deal!
From the article: ““We’re saying we are going to be carbon-free in the power sector by 2035,” Kerry said. “I think that’s leadership.”
No, that’s insanity.
EXCERPT from:
WIND AND SOLAR TO PROVIDE 30 PERCENT OF NEW ENGLAND ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION BY 2050
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/wind-and-solar-provide-50-percent-of-future-new-england
China, India, etc., to Continue High Levels of Coal Burning
Each year, China burns about 4 BILLION metric ton of coal, more than the rest of the world combined. China is planning to build 43 new coal-fired power plants and 18 new blast furnaces. Do you really believe that China can afford to stop burning coal? Do you think they want to? Of course not.
Chinese reliance on coal is increasing, and it is expanding its mines to produce an additional 220 million Mt of coal in 2021, up almost six percent from 2020.
The Chinese and the Indians are not going to throw away their economic progress on the altar of global warming. The Indians made it perfectly clear at the beginning of the Glasgow COP26, the developed nations should de-industrialize first, before asking developing countries to follow suit.
India: India declared it would not sign the statement of COP26 goals regarding coal burning. Instead of reading “close down coal by 2030”, India insisted on “phase down unabated coal”. Unabated refers to the common practice of Indian households, etc., cooking over open fires with coal, a major source of local air pollution. It would be phased down (no time limit was stated).
All this means, the burning of coal in power plants, with air pollution abatement systems, would be unaffected (no time limit was stated). The major coal burning countries, such as China, India, Australia, Brazil, the US, etc., would continue to burn coal in power plants.
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/cop26-caves-on-coal-phase-down-rather-than-phase-out
China: Despite various RE boosters, such as financial adviser Bloomberg, bragging about China’s wind and solar efforts, the reality is, almost 80% of China’s electricity growth is from fossil fuels, almost entirely coal.
Because China is so big, that fossil growth is worsening its own air pollution, plus the air pollution around the world; the soot falls on snow/ice-covered areas; melting of snow/ice is much quicker.
In one year, China added 460.2 TWh of fossil electricity, which is 3.9 times the annual electricity supply of NE, or 76.7 times the annual electricity supply of Vermont.
From third qtr. 2020, to third qtr. 2021:
Total electricity production growth was 586.9 TWh, up 10.7%, of which 460.2 TWh, or 78.4%, was from fossil fuels, mostly coal.
Wind growth was 89 TWh, up 28.4%, from a low base
Solar growth was 12.6 TWh, up 10.2%, from a low base.
Nuclear growth was 33.2 TWh, up 12.3%, from a low base
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/11/03/china-still-burning-more-more-coal/
https://chinaenergyportal.org/en/2021-q3-electricity-other-energy-statistics/
China plans to build 200,000 MW of near-zero-CO2 nuclear plants; about 150 units, each 2,350 MW, at about 75 sites, at a cost of $440 billion, by 2035
Amortizing the capital cost at 3.5%/y over 60 years would be ($17,556,485,920/y) / (200,000 MW x 8,766 h/y x 0.90, CF) = $0.01113/kWh, about one third the cost of EU and US nuclear plants.
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/uranium-stocks-soar-market-discovers-chinas-plans-150-nuclear-reactors
https://www.myamortizationchart.com
Several months ago I asked a simple question: If the only source of oxygen that we breathe is made by plants how is it possible to maintain a 20% level of the oxygen with only 400 parts per million feedstock?(CO2). No one has satisfactorily answered this question or really tried. Perhaps we are all doomed and don’t know it. I would really be interested what people have to say about this.
That’s an interesting question!
Consider a small Diesel engine pumping water out of the ground. Say it uses 1 kg/hour fuel and pumps 100 kg/hour water into a lake. Now let that supposed engine run for a few thousand years. It doesn’t matter how big the lake is, it only matters that there is enough fuel to run the engine. Similarly, plants do not care about the atmospheric oxygen level, only that there is enough CO2 to stay alive.
BTW, here’s a chart of CO2 and temperature for the past 600 million years.
https://medium.com/@ghornerhb/heres-a-better-graph-of-co2-and-temperature-for-the-last-600-million-years-f83169a68046
Note that there have been “ice ages” and tropical global weather when the CO2 concentration was far higher than today.
The oxygen in the air used to be CO2, normally a large component of planetary atmospheres, however a couple of billion years of photosynthesis has reduced CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere to levels where photosynthetic plants have been on the verge of asphyxiating themselves.
How can something be renewable when it goes off due to earth’s rotation and unfavorable weather conditions? Probably for the same reason the most dense area in the country, for morons, is located at one spot.
The idiocy of the LEFT/DEM knows no bounds. Not only are the racists they are inept scientifically. GET-THEM-OUT in 12mo. Please. Thank you.
Ya’ll don’t get it. “Carbon neutral” means it will be achieved the same way Google, Facebook, and Yahoo have done it. By buying carbon indulgences.
The Telegraph, quoted by Paul Homewood, put it perfectly:
And it applies just as much to the US as to the UK. At some point the electorate wakes up to the fact that what they are being asked to do, at vast expense, cannot possibly do what it has been sold as doing.
In the UK, it will be Farage or his successor who will capitalize on it. We saw with Brexit that the potential is there. There will be something similar in the US.
Salute!
Until the realists can overcome the warmist phobia of using nuclear power , then we shall fight a running battle for years to come. Ditto for realists not emphasizing the “environmental inpact” of thousands, hundreds of thousands of square miles of trees gone to pellets in England. And those trees were sequestering carbon! GASP.
Despite not able to unequivocably being able to define the complete causes of a warming climate, this fascination with carbon as the root of all evil is literally killing us.
The clever warmists divert arguments to temperatures and sea level and such. Use data from the last two hundred years, plus proxies from longer. O.K., but they ignore 90% of all the good things in those years that humans have invented and implemented to dramatically increase food production, much less millions of items that depend upon electricity to display what civilization is today – warts and all.
Somehow I cannot be convinced that we have gotten here by completely destroying “the planet’ and setting the stage for the end of life as we know it. That is, unless we rewind the clock and revert to a way of life so common a hundred years ago. And we have to do it right now!
There is zero possibility to have the same or more watts, water and watermelons in 50 years by starving the petroleum and nuclear power infrastructure of its ablility to provide reliable power and plenty of it. Not just volts but transportation capabilities and manufactured goods from the eveil fossil fuels.
My soultion is to sequester the greenies that harp on the solar panels and windmills, and wish to exist without using a drop of oil or gasoline. No need to be Fairbanks Alaska, but maybe some comfortable place in the middle of New York or Scotland or Germany. Hope they have super engineers and planners that designed their habitat. What will happen when the first severe blizzard hits and the windmills freeze up, panels are covered with snow, the batteries die after day 3, the EV emergency vehicles cannot be recharged, and worse of all? The Starbucks had to shut down! Oh, hope they stored all their organic carrots and turnups and meat from the free range chickens, hogs and cattle.
Look up Clancy’s ‘Rainbow Six’, and his solution.
Gums rants….
So, according to Kerry, coal use for generating electricity will be eliminated in the US by 2030 because it can be replaced by natural gas and “renewables” . . . read that as be replaced by natural gas.
Then, according to Kerry, using natural gas to generate electricity in the US will be eliminated (as is necessary to “eliminate all carbon emissions from the U.S. power grid by 2035”) . . . just 5 years later.
Yeah, right.
There is no need for me to pile on beyond what other have posted about the outright
naivetéstupidity of John Kerry.Climate change is befuddling people’s brains and making them believe in and fear climate catastrophe.
I worked for large stockholder companies. Having to support lies about future activity and worth made by the CEO during telephone calls with investors was demoralizing. The US EIA technical wonk who made that energy source slide must be a heavy drinker by now. All he did was keep the coal steady at current levels going forth – he couldn’t increase it for political reasons, and he couldn’t reduce it for practical reasons: there was no acceptable substitute he could call on: natural gas and nuclear are forbidden, and renewable at that replacement level would crash the grid!
The guys who oversaw the pullout from Afghanistan had the same problem. Couldn’t say the Biden plan was a disaster, couldn’t offer another for political reasons, just had to stuik with the announced rollout and let the future make the call.
The future of coal will be neither of the phase out nor status quo. When natural gas production declines, as it does at a shocking rate without constant new drilling, coal will have to step up again. Massachusetts will have to get its nighttime winter heating and New York City, its daytime summer air con somehow.
Okay but 2030 is not that far away in utility planning terms, so is he planning to pull the plug without notice at the last minute for industries and households using power from newer coal plants? Some of these industries are very high demand electric arc furnace steel minimills. They operate 24/7 and at night and on calm wind days. Those jobs are some of the highest pay jobs in states and regions.