Finally, New York State Tells The World How To Achieve Net Zero Carbon Emissions

From The MANHATTAN CONTRARIAN

Francis Menton

Sometimes, it seems like the world is just flailing away in its concerted efforts to achieve zero carbon emissions. In the U.S. the President can’t get his grand “green” plans through a Congress controlled by his own party. In Europe, a countryside blanketed with wind turbines can’t counteract a wind drought in 2021, and emissions rise even while natural gas prices spike to nearly 10 times the U.S. level.

New York may be a late-comer to Net Zero plans, but by God, our politicians and bureaucrats are so much smarter than those clowns across the country or the pond. In 2019 the New York legislature enacted the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (Climate Act), self-described on the State’s website as “the nation-leading [law] to empower every New Yorker to fight climate change at home, at work, and in their communities.” The Climate Act set a series of highly ambitious targets for emissions reductions (e.g., 70% renewable electricity by 2030, 100% zero-emission electricity by 2040, 85% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050). It also created a Climate Action Council to figure out how to achieve these targets. Task number one for the CAC has been to propound a so-called “Scoping Plan,” containing the details informing us how this will be accomplished.

Through 2020 and 2021 we waited on pins and needles as the CAC and some seven advisory sub-panels held dozens of meetings and beavered away on their big report. And then finally, on December 20, the curtain went up: the CAC finally released its Draft Scoping Plan to the public. Follow this link to download a copy of the full thing — 330 pages, not including appendices.

If you think that a document with this kind of build-up and heft would contain at least a little serious effort to grapple with the major engineering problems of decarbonizing everything from the electrical grid to home heating to private autos to aviation to ocean shipping, all at the same time, think again. The words “incompetent” and “amateurish” come to mind, but don’t really even begin to describe how bad this work product is. The 330 page length, filled with padding, fluff, and repetition, is mainly to assure that nobody whose time is valuable will ever be able to read it. The authors are like a parody version of King Canute, who actually believe that when they order the tide to stop rising, it will obey.

Consider the vision here for decarbonizing the electrical grid. Remember, under the law, we are required to achieve a zero emission grid by 2040. But other jurisdictions that got a much earlier start pushing toward the same goal can’t seem to get above 50% electricity from renewables for any substantial duration. The wind and sun just don’t work enough of the time to get past that level, no matter how many facilities you build. What will New York do differently? From the Scoping Plan, page 149:

Vision for 2030. The Climate Act requires that 70% of statewide electricity come from renewable energy sources by 2030. The Climate Act also requires 6,000 MW of distributed solar by 2025 and 3,000 MW of energy storage be installed by 2030. This can be accomplished by aggressive deployment of existing renewable energy technologies such as wind, solar, and energy storage. With the primary procurement mechanisms already established to do just that, the recommendations included here for 2030 look to ensure that the procurement mechanisms lead to construction and operation of renewable energy and accelerate the pace and reduce the cost of decarbonizing the electric grid.

(Emphasis added.). Actually, anyone paying attention knows that 70% of electricity from renewables cannot be achieved by just building more wind and solar facilities, and existing types of batteries can provide only the most limited help, and even then at outrageous cost.

The vision for 2050 is even more pure fantasy. Again from Scoping Plan page 149:

Vision for 2050. By 2040, the Climate Act requires that the State achieve a zero-emissions electricity system as well as 9,000 MW of offshore wind by 2035. Achieving this will require all of the actions identified for 2030, further procurement of renewables, and a focus on developing new technology solutions.

The technology to do this does not currently exist, but if we just order it to come into being, it will happen. The authors who presume to order this to happen don’t even pretend to know what technologies may be sufficient to reach their goals, or how much this may cost.

Equally delusional are the plans for transportation, appearing at pages 93-117. The Scoping Plan reports approximately 9 million personal autos registered in New York as of November 2021. The first all-electric Tesla came out in 2008 — thirteen years ago. After those thirteen years, what percent of our personal autos in New York are all-electric? From page 93:

As of November 2021, one half of one percent of the over 9 million registered LDVs in New York were ZEVs.

One half of one percent would be about 45,000 of the 9 million after 13 years. But supposedly we are now going to go to 3 million all-electric cars in just the next 9 years, and then on to essentially all electric by 2050. How to get there? From page 94:

An aggressive and implementable mix of policies will be required to accelerate GHG emission reductions to the level needed by 2030. By 2030 nearly 100% of LDV sales and 40% or more of MHD vehicle sales must be ZEVs and a substantial portion of personal transportation in urbanized areas would be required to shift to public transportation and other low-carbon modes. New York can achieve these goals through ZEV sales requirements and accompanying incentives and investments to help achieve these mandates, historic investments in expanded public transportation and micro-mobility, enhanced bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, smart growth development, market-based policies that support lower-carbon transportation choices, and potentially a clean fuel standard that reduces the average carbon intensity of fuels as the transition to zero emissions vehicles proceeds.

Order it up, and it will happen. How much extra will New Yorkers have to pay for all these electric vehicles? No mention of that here.

And what is the plan for, for example, air travel and freight rail? From page 95:

Some segments of hard-to-electrify subsectors, such as aviation, freight rail, and potentially some MHD vehicles are expected to rely on green hydrogen and renewable biofuels (e.g., renewable jet fuel) to fully replace fossil fuel combustion if zero emission applications are not feasible.

Airplanes will run on “green hydrogen.” Has there been as of today any demonstration of the feasibility of such a thing, let alone any company working to develop a commercial version?

The Scoping Plan does build on what is called an “Integration Analysis,” that supposedly weighs (wildly underestimated) costs against (almost entirely imaginary) benefits of this energy transition, and comes out with a supposedly positive answer. I don’t have nearly the space here to go into detail on this subject, but highly recommend a November 22 Report from the Empire Center called “The Green Scheme,” as well as the December 15 blog post at Roger Caiazza’s Pragmatic Environmentalist of New York site titled “Review of Costs in Green Scheme: The Climate Action Council’s Climate Transition Cost Analysis.” Here is one among many choice quotes from Caiazza:

The Integration Analysis is not a feasibility study. The Analysis does not include an engineering evaluation to determine how the grid has to be upgraded to maintain current reliability standards much less how much it will cost. One feasibility aspect that is included is a technology to cover the need for zero emissions, firm dispatchable resources. The analysis proposes using hydrogen resources for this aspect of the system but that technology has not been proven at the scale necessary for New York’s requirements. Any cost estimates of an unproven technology are wildly uncertain. In addition, I cannot find any reference to necessary transmission ancillary services support so I agree that the grid issues raised have been overlooked.

I suppose one possibility is that New York actually proceeds down the road laid out in this “Scoping Plan,” and rapidly hits the green energy wall that I discussed in my post a couple of weeks ago.

Read the full article here.

4.8 21 votes
Article Rating
171 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
billtoo
December 30, 2021 2:07 pm

this is easy. defund the police. everyone moves somewhere else. done.

Bryan A
Reply to  billtoo
December 30, 2021 2:28 pm

The population density of Manhattan is such that, it would take covering an area roughly the size of Connecticut with Solar Panels to decarbonize NY, NY and allow for back-up battery recharging.

This is based on the size of Topaz Solar Farm, the amount of electricity it generates, and the fact that it can only do so at NAMEPLATE CAPACITY for 4 hours a day extrapolated to the current total energy consumption of Manhattan (Commercial, residential, transportation, heating, water heating and cooking…and to allow for back-up battery recharging WHILE the energy is being used during daylight hours for business and other daily needs)

Last edited 17 days ago by Bryan A
Willem Post
Reply to  Bryan A
December 30, 2021 2:44 pm

Keep dreaming

Doug
Reply to  Bryan A
December 30, 2021 5:30 pm

Only 4 billion AAA batteries added to what is already in place might just do it

Bryan A
Reply to  Doug
December 30, 2021 5:43 pm

They could put them all in the already aptly named Battery Park

Willem Post
Reply to  Bryan A
December 30, 2021 6:29 pm

Priceless!

Timo, not that one
Reply to  Bryan A
December 31, 2021 6:15 am

I almost blew my coffee out my nose.

Randle Dewees
Reply to  Doug
December 30, 2021 8:05 pm

AAA = butterfly sneeze

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Randle Dewees
December 31, 2021 8:28 am

Moody Blues fan?

William Astley
Reply to  Bryan A
December 31, 2021 8:14 am

The tricky problem which is never discussed is because there is less sunlight in the winter than in the summer … The batteries need to be magic batteries that can store energy for months. Real batteries discharge internally and loss of a few percent of their charge each day.

The other tricky problem is wind and sun gathering equipment wear out need to be replaced and energy is required to build the sun and wind gathering equipment and to install and maintain the green stuff.

Germany has proven that it is not possible to get to zero CO2 emissions using the green scams. What happens is energy becomes so expensive all the high energy production moves to China. China has promised to destroy their economy sometime after we destroy our economies.

https://notrickszone.com/2018/03/28/germany-proves-that-burning-money-on-green-energies-does-not-reduce-co2-emissions-bitter-result/

https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/01/business/germany-inflation-eurozone/index.html

German inflation hits 29-year high as energy costs spike across Europe

garboard
Reply to  William Astley
December 31, 2021 11:32 am

the reality is that the higher the latitude the poorer the performance of pv . winter electric output for pv’s at ny’s latitude is only a trickle charge

Curious George(@moudryj)
Reply to  billtoo
December 30, 2021 2:33 pm

The Climate Action Council reports to the NY State Legislature. My proposed recommendation would be a highly technical one: Abolish the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Mission accomplished.

AndyHce
Reply to  Curious George
December 30, 2021 3:07 pm

Not quite. The second step would be to again figure out all the rest of physics, chemistry, mechanics, biology, and essentially everything else since what happens now would no longer work in this revised universe. Once things were understood, if ever, then work out how to operate under the new regime.

Peter W
Reply to  AndyHce
December 30, 2021 3:55 pm

In other words, just abolish all of the established laws of science and pass some new ones.

RickWill
Reply to  Peter W
December 30, 2021 6:05 pm

In other words, just abolish all of the established laws of science and pass some new ones.

Now you’re talking – this is straight out of the Climate Science lecture notes. That is how the “Greenhouse Effect” was created.

It is the basis of Climate Models; able to create and extinguish matter at will; can have energy pass from low potential to high potential; energy can simply be created or extinguished without a source or sink.

Reply to  Peter W
December 31, 2021 12:58 am

That is the Marxist Creed.
People must be made to adopt different behaviour to the one that has kept mankind alive for a million years.

Oldseadog
Reply to  Peter W
December 31, 2021 2:16 am

Pure Bandar-log thinking. Superb.

SMC
Reply to  billtoo
December 30, 2021 4:54 pm

As long as they leave their dysfunctional politics behind in NYC, fine. If they can’t do that, then they should stay to enjoy the utopia they are creating.

Zig Zag Wanderer
December 30, 2021 2:09 pm

The authors are like a parody version of King Canute, who actually believe that when they order the tide to stop rising, it will obey.

Canute ordered to tide not to come in precisely to demonstrate to his court that he did not have power over nature.

Mason
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
December 30, 2021 2:13 pm

Thanks, I will have to look that one up!

Alasdair gray
Reply to  Mason
December 30, 2021 2:52 pm

Canute was one of us contrarians. He pretended to heed the stupidity of his advisers in order to dramatically expose their vacuous inanity . Oh for a Canute in the west instead of goons like Brandon and Bojo
You know i dont like talkin about

our leaders like that but you really cant let it pass.
Their rule will be short lived before Xi and the boys jackboot their way in

Mason
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
December 30, 2021 2:25 pm

I see, the court jester suggested the king could stop the sea from rising. Ah, I thought John Kerry was not in NY.

Perry
Reply to  Mason
December 31, 2021 3:11 am

After King Canute the Great died in 1035, his son King Harold l reigned for 5 years. He was described thus: He went astray from the qualities and conduct of his father King Cnut, for he cared not at all for knighthood, for courtesy, or for honour, but only for his own will.
An apt description for the Bidens?

An earlier English king was Æthelred, known as the Unready. The name is derived from Old English unræd meaning “poorly advised” & it is a pun on his name, which means “well advised”. The tragedy for the English was not that he was a poor king, for the English had had many poor kings before. It was that he ruled for 37 years.

 “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” (George Santayana-1905).

Steve Z
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
December 30, 2021 3:57 pm

Not the case for Barack Obama, who said that “we” would stop the seas from rising. How did that work for Hurricane Sandy, which struck New Jersey and New York City in 2012?

Mr.
Reply to  Steve Z
December 30, 2021 5:08 pm

It would only matter if it struck Martha’s Vineyard.

John Hultquist
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
December 30, 2021 7:17 pm

like a parody version “

I think this says what you want.

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  John Hultquist
December 30, 2021 10:58 pm

Yes, on rereading, I think you are correct, mea culpa.

Rich Davis
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
December 31, 2021 6:34 am

+100

It’s nice to see someone who acknowledges a mistake.

Pat from kerbob
December 30, 2021 2:09 pm

As a canadian, Justin Trudeau has taught me that saying you want to do something is the same as actually doing it.
So this committee hits all the right buttons

Meanwhile it’s -30c here in the real world of the canadian prairies, our wind is over performing at 20% while solar is keeping us alive with 3% output.

Thanking coal and gas for keeping me alive
http://ets.aeso.ca/ets_web/ip/Market/Reports/CSDReportServlet

Spetzer86
Reply to  Pat from kerbob
December 30, 2021 2:36 pm

How are those heat pumps working out at -30C? Probably got some nice warm air coming up the vents, I’m betting /sarc

2hotel9
Reply to  Spetzer86
December 30, 2021 3:16 pm

Once the backup gas burner furnace kicks in. 😉

Pat from kerbob
Reply to  Spetzer86
December 30, 2021 6:55 pm

No heat pumps to be seen
Just lots of natural gas burning merrily away

PCman999
Reply to  Pat from kerbob
January 1, 2022 10:56 pm

The suicide cult running NY also banned any new gas lines from being run – not as though they are anywhere close to replacing gas heat and waterheating – just to make sure they maximize the damage from their ecocult.

There won’t be any gas heat to fallback on.

Mason
December 30, 2021 2:10 pm

Just waiting to see NY collapse like Germany and New South Wales. In the meantime, the Northeast suffers because no gas pipelines can cross NY from Pennsylvania to supply them with gas.

Frank from NoVA
Reply to  Mason
December 30, 2021 5:07 pm

Yes, but every state affected by NY’s pipeline and fracking ban is already a CAGW basket case, so, no harm no foul.

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  Mason
December 31, 2021 9:52 am

New York has a fracking ban, not a pipeline ban.

PCman999
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
January 1, 2022 10:58 pm

No they did stop permiting running new gas lines – or have they come to their senses?

Zig Zag Wanderer
December 30, 2021 2:12 pm

Actually, anyone paying attention knows that 70% of electricity from renewables cannot be achieved by just building more wind and solar facilities

I think it definitely can.

Oh, you mean usable electricity, reliable and when you need it? That’s a different story…

Zig Zag Wanderer
December 30, 2021 2:15 pm

New York can achieve these goals through ZEV sales requirements and accompanying incentives and investments to help achieve these mandates, historic investments in expanded public transportation and micro-mobility, enhanced bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, smart growth development, market-based policies that support lower-carbon transportation choices, and potentially a clean fuel standard that reduces the average carbon intensity of fuels as the transition to zero emissions vehicles proceeds.

Rarely have so many words been written by so many people in one single sentence, to make so little sense.

Last edited 17 days ago by Zig Zag Wanderer
David Streeter
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
December 30, 2021 2:30 pm

What if you don’t want to ride a bycycle?

Spetzer86
Reply to  David Streeter
December 30, 2021 2:42 pm

You’ll ride the damn bicycle and like it. But you won’t own it, just have it on lease. But you’ll still like it.

AndyHce
Reply to  Spetzer86
December 30, 2021 3:10 pm

Not on lease. Catch a working bike leaning against anything upright (if you can) and peddle away.

Robert Hanson
Reply to  David Streeter
December 30, 2021 2:46 pm

Unicycles are a reasonable alternative.

Peter W
Reply to  Robert Hanson
December 30, 2021 3:59 pm

Even when you are in your 80’s and beginning to lose it?

Robert Hanson
Reply to  Peter W
December 30, 2021 4:02 pm

Did I really have to add the /sarc to that?

Drake
Reply to  Peter W
December 30, 2021 5:16 pm

If you are beginning to lose it at ANY age, you cannot do your part for the party. If you cannot do your part for the party then you are no longer needed and can be eliminated.

Don’t worry, you will provide for the fatherland upon your removal, Soylent Green anyone?

Jim Gorman
Reply to  Robert Hanson
December 30, 2021 4:53 pm

How about horses and donkey carts?

Dave Fair
Reply to  Jim Gorman
December 30, 2021 8:20 pm

Just think of all the green poop-scoping jobs Xiden will create. I love it when they talk about all the new green jobs they will produce with our tax dollars. Like, I really do want to pay more for the same product.

Rich Davis
Reply to  Dave Fair
December 31, 2021 6:46 am

Not just the energy we use, we also get to make it “affordable” for people who can’t or won’t work.

Retired_Engineer_Jim
Reply to  David Streeter
December 30, 2021 2:52 pm

On icystreets? Oh, with Global Warming, NY will never again have icy streets.

Pauleta
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
December 30, 2021 2:42 pm

You have to understand it’s a very aggressive plan. Usually these plans work, but sometimes they don’t.

AndyHce
Reply to  Pauleta
December 30, 2021 3:11 pm

The aggression part generally get something done. Rarely to many people’s satisfaction.

Rick C
Reply to  AndyHce
December 30, 2021 10:23 pm

When liberals talk about aggressive plans they just mean really, really expensive ones.

whiten
Reply to  Rick C
December 31, 2021 4:55 am

Scooping Plan.

AndyHce
Reply to  Rick C
January 2, 2022 1:46 pm

Enforced with a gun at your head.

PaulH
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
December 30, 2021 5:44 pm

How many micro-mobilitys are in one full mobility? I have a hard time keeping up with the new woke conversion arithmetic. 😉

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  PaulH
December 30, 2021 7:01 pm

It should be a million, but who can tell these days? To understand woke mathematics, all you need is a firm belief in the value of √(-1)

peterg
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
December 31, 2021 1:44 am

I have a firm belief in mathematical i or engineering j, essential to the solving of cubic polynomials and understanding 3 phase AC electrical systems, as well as many other areas, however I do not understand “woke” mathematics.

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  peterg
December 31, 2021 3:19 am

Yeahbut…

If you’re woke enough, you can really believe that imaginary numbers are real…

Timo, not that one
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
December 31, 2021 6:40 am

“Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.”

The Red Queen (via Lewis Carroll)

otsar
Reply to  peterg
December 31, 2021 12:43 pm

They have to use imaginary numbers because they are out of phase with reality.

H.R.
Reply to  PaulH
December 30, 2021 9:35 pm

To convert to proper SI units, One Mobility is equal to 100 Olympic-size Swimming Pools.

I leave further SI conversions to Empire State Buildings, Manhattans, and Great Pyramids as an exercise for the student.

Rich Davis
Reply to  H.R.
December 31, 2021 7:07 am

At first I thought you were saying that a mobility has units of length cubed, which seemed incongruous for a mode of transport, but after further reflection I realized that you were referring to cost.

If the cost of an Olympic swimming pool is $400k https://www.fixr.com/costs/build-swimming-pool
and a mobility is equal to 100 OSPs, then a mobility costs $40 million, thus a micro mobility costs $40.

Now nobody knows what a micro mobility looks like when it’s at home, but if it only costs $40, then I reckon it must be something like a 100m ride on a public unicycle.

How’d I do professor?

H.R.
Reply to  Rich Davis
December 31, 2021 4:32 pm

🤣🤣🤣 A+++

We all now know more about Mobility and Micromobilities than the maroons who wrote the darn report.


WUWT… when the absurd needs explained, we explain the absurd. 👍

PCman999
Reply to  Rich Davis
January 1, 2022 11:04 pm

One micro-mobility = 1 pair of shoes, the mode of transport most will be using during long cloudy and windless periods.

H.R.
Reply to  PCman999
January 2, 2022 2:56 pm

Oh… so a micromobility = two feet?

Davidf
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
December 30, 2021 10:00 pm

And whatever else it is, it aint market based

Trying to Play Nice
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
January 1, 2022 3:53 pm

They paid a bunch of morons hundreds of thousands of dollars a year for 2 years to write a 4th grade creative writing paper?

GeoNC
December 30, 2021 2:18 pm

Scoping plan. Integration analysis. Aggressive and implementable. As if these wonderful sounding phrases will heat or power your home in NY. If you plan on staying in NY you’d better plan on living in the 18th century for 20 hours a day.

Mason
Reply to  GeoNC
December 30, 2021 2:22 pm

It was the beginning of the little ice age wasn’t it? And NY was frozen solid!

Spetzer86
Reply to  GeoNC
December 30, 2021 2:43 pm

There were lots of shit jobs in NYC in the 18th century. Literally…

Teddy Lee
Reply to  GeoNC
December 31, 2021 6:58 am

Does it kill old folks in nursing homes?

December 30, 2021 2:21 pm

King Canute was a smarter guy than all of the Global Warmists in New York State.

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  nicholas tesdorf
December 30, 2021 3:24 pm

Setting the bar a little low, aren’t you?

Drake
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
December 30, 2021 5:17 pm

THAT made me LOL. Thanks ZZ.

Chris Nisbet
December 30, 2021 2:28 pm

is not a feasibility study”.
Has there been one done at all? Or is it normal practice to legislate something without knowing if it’s even feasible. (I have a horrible feeling it’s probably not that uncommon).

2hotel9
Reply to  Chris Nisbet
December 30, 2021 3:20 pm

Yes indeedy! Nannie Pelosi ‘splained it to us, “We have to vote for the bill to see what is in it.”.

John Bell
December 30, 2021 2:31 pm

It seems to this retired mechanical engineer that the more ‘renewable’ energy you have in the mix, the more and more fossil fuels are needed to prop up the renewables. Like a dog chasing its tail…

Willem Post
Reply to  John Bell
December 30, 2021 3:09 pm

Hi Fellow Mechanical Engineer,

It would be FAR, FAR worse.

The wind, solar and batteries approach would be a very expensive albatross hanging around the necks of economies, weighing them down so much, they would collapse under their own weight.

The EU is aiming to get to that NIRVANA, by not signing long-term gas contracts with Russia to get a STEADY supply of gas at about $10/million Btu, YEAR AFTER YEAR

The EU is facing an energy crisis, because:

– Brussels’ RE idiots refused to sign long-term contract for gas from Russia
– The US, EU and NATO are stupidly trying to contain and pressure Russia.
– There is minimal wind, minimal solar, and some nuclear plants are down with “issues”
– The EU sucked gas from storage during summer, that would be needed in winter 
– Germany and Belgium will close down more nuclear plants in 2022, for “green” reasons. 

– Russia provides gas, as required by signed long-term contracts, plus about 5%
– The 5% is sold by Gazprom on the spot market at very high prices.
– Germany and France received all the 2021-contracted Russian gas by mid-December
– Germany and France are pumping some of that gas, via Poland, to Ukraine, which buys it at high cost, because Ukraine refuses to directly buy from Russia at low cost.
– Owners are diverting LNG carriers to the EU to rake in on the high-SPOT-price bonanza.
– US spot price $7/million Btu; EU spot price $65/million Btu

Here is an article that sums it up.

LEGAL FIGHT OVER NORD STREAM 2, AS EUROPE ENERGY COSTS SOAR AHEAD OF COLD WINTER
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/fresh-legal-fight-erupts-over-nord-stream-2-as-europe-energy

Last edited 17 days ago by Willem Post
Gary Pearse
Reply to  Willem Post
December 30, 2021 5:24 pm

Willem, in the linked report I found: “Burning biomass (mostly trees), etc., is OK, because the combustion CO2 is “renewable”.

I think we may have a solution to decarbonizing transportation. Steam cars and trucks! We could also build small steam power plants in our garages! How green can you get!!

H.R.
Reply to  Gary Pearse
December 30, 2021 9:48 pm

And you can power your garage steam power plant with lawn clippings and shrub trimmings.

And don’t forget about the methane in your septic tank.

Grid? Grid? We don’ need no steenkin’ grid.
😜

Rich Lambert
Reply to  Gary Pearse
December 31, 2021 5:30 am

Power vehicles with charcoal. comment image

anthropic
Reply to  Willem Post
December 30, 2021 9:35 pm

The last thing the world needs is Putin swimming in cash, his grip firmly on Germany’s energy.

Rick C
Reply to  Willem Post
December 30, 2021 10:39 pm

As another Mechanical Engineer, it is obvious that not a single competent engineer was involved with this NYS report. If there was one he/she would never had allowed them to specify energy storage in units of MW and not MWHrs (or more appropriately TeraWatt Hours). No one who has seriously looked at the problem of making 100% renewable energy work has concluded that the energy storage required is economically feasible.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Willem Post
December 31, 2021 7:11 am

“US spot price $7/million Btu; EU spot price $65/million Btu”

Thats got to hurt!

Those EU politicians really have things screwed up. They are locked into the CO2-caused climate change delusion, and are all marching towards the edge of the cliff, unable to break free of the delusion. So, over the cliff they will go, taking a lot of innocent people with them.

Perhaps the problems the EU and UK are having with trying to power their economy with windmills and solar will cause New York politicians to rethink their plans for reducing CO2.

The people of New York need to get rid of the foolish politicians they are allowing to govern them. It’s so bad, a major house cleaning is required. There are way too many socialists in positions of power in New York. Socialism screws up everything it touches. Wise up, New Yorkers.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
December 31, 2021 11:39 am

Tom,
Perhaps the problems the EU and UK are having with trying to power their economy with windmills and solar will cause New York politicians to rethink their plans for reducing CO2.”
And, just perhaps, those problems will not cause New York politicians to rethink their plans for reducing CO2.

If I lived in NYC, or the state, I wouldn’t be holding my breath.

I live in The Blond’s Earthly Paradise, where Scotland – now under the wildly incompetent FishWife – is to be the Saudi Arabia of Wind.
Apparently.
Without batteries, or power lines, or insulation.
But I expect they’ll kill a shed load of journalists – should they try to report honestly.
And the subsidy swallowers here – as elsewhere – still seem to have the full watermelon end in view.

Auto, not holding my breath here, either!

Gary Pearse
Reply to  John Bell
December 30, 2021 5:00 pm

But, no! Backup will burn hydrogen, uh…erm… produced using backup power from batteries. These New York Climate Council folk weren’t born yesterday, ya know!

Reply to  John Bell
December 31, 2021 1:05 am

I went over the data and calculated the cost of having enough windmills to meet demand no matter whet the wind did, i.e. to take ‘the wind is always blowing somehwere’ at sufficient face value to find out how MUCH was always blowing somewhere…

…around £14 per unit, that is probably around 20c now.
Obviously people would burn anything they could find to keep warm so all the trees in the parks would be gone…

DonM
Reply to  John Bell
December 31, 2021 1:47 pm

We are past the antics of the dog chasing it’s tail.

Up until my dog was about 3 yrs old she would go in circles a three or four times to get the treat when I told her to ‘get her tail’.

Over the next year she just turned back and touched her tail with her nose (good enuf for the treat).

After four years old she just turned her head slightly to the side and expected the goody. She yells at me vociferously if she doesn’t get it.

Per Caiazza:

“The Integration Analysis is not a feasibility study. The Analysis does not include an engineering evaluation to determine how the grid has to be upgraded to maintain current reliability standards much less how much it will cost…. In addition, I cannot find any reference to necessary transmission ancillary services support so I agree that the grid issues raised have been overlooked.”

New York is too lazy to even claim that it can catch its tail. At best it is just showing us its ass & expecting us to be impressed.

Last edited 17 days ago by DonM
Gordon A. Dressler
December 30, 2021 2:36 pm

From the above article regarding New York state’s “Climate Act”:
“100% zero-emission electricity by 2040”

As Yul Brenner famously stated, acting as Pharaoh of Egypt in the film the Ten Commandments, “So let it be written, so let it be done.”

It will be worse than to trying to build a pyramid in 18 years.

Willem Post
Reply to  Gordon A. Dressler
December 30, 2021 2:57 pm

Politicians have watched too many Ten Commandments movies.

They think they are omnipotent;

They live in abra-cadabra land

A TSUNAMI of votes is needed to wake them up from their fairy-tale, pixie-dust dreams, in November 2022.

That will be the ONLY way to end their tilting at wind mills.

Here is an article dealing with the MULTI-$TRILLION fantasies of Build Back Better

“BUILD BACK BETTER” WOULD COST $4.490 TRILLION OVER THE NEXT DECADE, IF PROVISIONS WERE MADE TO LAST 10 YEARS
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/build-back-better-would-cost-3-95-trillion-overt-the-next-decade

Last edited 17 days ago by Willem Post
Willem Post
December 30, 2021 2:44 pm

The solution to man-made global warming is to have a lot less people, say ten times less, and more animals, say 100 times more.

Another approach would be for one of those 100 megaton-TNT bombs to flatten New York City, to end it as a heat island, and major source of CO2.

Those solutions would be far less expensive and more effective than wind, solar, and batteries will ever be, no matter how much debt-adding subsidies we throw at them.

Here is an article that sums it up:

PLAYING RUSSIAN ROULETTE WITH RELIABLE ELECTRICITY SERVICE IN NEW ENGLAND   
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/playing-russian-roulette-with-reliable-electricity-service-to-new

Last edited 17 days ago by Willem Post
Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  Willem Post
December 30, 2021 3:27 pm

say ten times less

You can say “ten times less” as often as you like and it will still be a meaningless phrase

DMacKenzie
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
December 30, 2021 6:33 pm

I think he means one-tenth as much. The “ten times less” terminology is used in some remote colonies…. /s

H.R.
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
December 30, 2021 10:05 pm

Oh, I dunno, Zig Zag. The average politician is ten times less intelligent than any earthworm selected at random from a telephone directory.***



***What? You didn’t know earthworms had telephones? Who else do you think took over all those billions of rotary dial phones that were dumped in landfills? Admittedly, at first it was a challenge for the earthworms to figure out how to dial them. But once they got past that…

So now you know why the earthworms all come up at the same time when it rains. They all get a call to let them know.

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  H.R.
December 30, 2021 10:59 pm

😅

Thomas
Reply to  Willem Post
December 30, 2021 3:34 pm

How can even politicians be so stupid? I guess we would call it aspirational legislation. But even aspirations ought to be based on realistic goals.

Peter W
Reply to  Thomas
December 30, 2021 4:06 pm

You will never get a legislature to pass any realistic goals. Too expensive!

Willem Post
Reply to  Peter W
December 31, 2021 3:41 am

Peter/Thomas,

Politicians are far from stupid.
They know what it takes got get elected and re-elected.
They are experts at bait and switch, smoke and mirrors,
hokus- pokus, etc.

By the time skeptic folks apply reality analysis, and wise themselves up (made difficult, because of US Media aiding and abetting with fake news), politicians will have thrown so much dust in the air, and put up smoke screens, people still do not know what is up or down, and end up voting for the a.. holes anyway.

Shumlin, Pelosi, et al., have been doing it for decades.

Excerpt from

“BUILD BACK BETTER” WOULD COST $4.490 TRILLION OVER THE NEXT DECADE, IF PROVISIONS WERE MADE TO LAST 10 YEARS
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/build-back-better-would-cost-3-95-trillion-overt-the-next-decade

CBO Estimates are Flawed

It is well known, at least among US Congress members: 

1) CBO was created by the US Congress to create the appearance of “oversight”, and 
2) CBO is billed “independent”, even though it is beholden to just one client, the US Congress. Anywhere in the world, this would be considered a conflict of intertest.

3) CBO has under-stated costs, over-stated revenues, and understated deficits of government programs for decades, plus CBO never shows a 5% to 10% contingency. 

Over time, program eligibility and benefits are increased, but the offsetting revenues do not entirely cover the increased cost.
Table 1A shows an example of such estimating. 

Government programs end up costing much more, and have less offsets, than “advertised”. 
Government programs appear small, at first, but their costs inevitably grow beyond control 
This has contributed to the huge $30 trillion US government national debt, over the decades. 

Trust, but Verify; US Senators Getting a Second Opinion: In case of the multi-$trillion BBB bill, some US Senators obtained estimates from private entities, which, as they expected, revealed the CBO estimates were low-balled, in the usual manner.

Those estimates revealed, the combination of 1) artificially shortening expiration dates, and 2) CBO “estimating”, regarding the BBB bill, resulted in a deception of historic proportions. 

As usual, the American people had no idea such shenanigans had been happening for decades, because the US Media does not properly analyze and publish the numbers, as was done in this article. 

BTW, I sent this article to about 80 members of the VT Media, and almost all VT Legislators, and several VT quasi-government organizations, but there was no response.

Private Entity Estimates of BBB Bill: The Tax Foundation and Penn-Wharton are private economic consulting entities. They often estimate costs and impacts of government programs. Their estimates of the BBB Bill, based on various program expiration dates (US House version), are shown in table 1A

Columns 2 and 3 show the Tax Foundation and Penn-Wharton estimates. See Phase 2 for more detail.
Column 4 shows the CBO estimate, which is much less than the other estimates. See URL
https://taxfoundation.org/build-back-better-plan-reconciliation-bill-tax/#timeline

Last edited 17 days ago by Willem Post
Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  Thomas
December 30, 2021 7:07 pm

How can even politicians be so stupid?

Joe Biden has entered the chat

Last edited 17 days ago by Zig Zag Wanderer
RicDre
December 30, 2021 3:11 pm

This reminds me of a comic that is pertinent to “Net Zero” projects:

e17323073cc3316afefe11e8b72d8f89[1].jpg
Last edited 17 days ago by RicDre
Timo, not that one
Reply to  RicDre
December 31, 2021 7:45 am

Actually the chalkboard should have the step one equation read “First a miracle occurs”.
That would be the “Big Bang” theory.

Jamaica
December 30, 2021 3:12 pm

I saw a banner in Brooklyn (278 west before Cadman plaza) today that read ” Ban cars, reforest the roads”

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  Jamaica
December 30, 2021 3:28 pm

It would be more amusing if it was on a bumper sticker

gringojay
Reply to  Jamaica
December 30, 2021 3:29 pm

I’ll be back …

D88212B5-4228-459A-B2C6-A77BACB62EA6.jpeg
2hotel9
December 30, 2021 3:24 pm

Let it be written, let it be so. Seem to remember some other a$$hole in the past saying that crap.

Harves
December 30, 2021 3:24 pm

Give them credit where it’s due; they have managed to conclude that aviation is hard to electrify. So there’s clearly someone involved with a double digit IQ.

Dave Andrews
Reply to  Harves
December 31, 2021 8:43 am

In the UK Airbus is working on three concepts of aircraft with the aim of developing the worlds first zero emission commercial aircraft by 2035. These will be hybrid-hydrogen aircraft powered by hydrogen combustion through modified gas turbine engines. Liquid hydrogen is used as fuel for combustion with oxygen.

Additionally fuel cells create electrical power that complements the gas turbine in a “highly efficient hybrid-electrical propulsion system”

https://www.airbus.com/en/innivation/zero-emission/hydrogen/zeroe

Will they succeed? Don’t know but you can register for updates on their site.

Kelly sander
Reply to  Dave Andrews
December 31, 2021 8:13 pm

Hydrogen in an airship. What could possibly go wrong.

Bill Powers
December 30, 2021 3:26 pm

Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act or CLACPA for short is Brilliant as it has a claptrap ring to it which is perfect, since claptrap is “absurd or nonsensical talk or ideas.” And to think that most of these people went to college to get to be this stupid.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Bill Powers
December 30, 2021 5:34 pm

And to think that most of these people went to college to get to be this stupid.

But three quarters of them did women’s studies and the other quarter did gender studies.

Martin
December 30, 2021 3:31 pm

Equivalent to Googling how to build an anti gravity harness after jumping out of the airplane.

markl
December 30, 2021 3:32 pm

Now I get it. After all these years the answer has been right in front of me but I failed to understand. Climate Change isn’t about actually doing something. It’s all about saying and writing all the right things that appease the environmentalists but will never happen. It’s one big virtue signaling activity meant to allow people to outdo one another on paper. No action required. Those that are actually wasting time, money, and space to achieve CC nirvana don’t get it yet either. But they will.

Robert Hanson
Reply to  markl
December 30, 2021 4:08 pm

Yes, Grasshopper, you are beginning to learn….

H.R.
Reply to  Robert Hanson
December 30, 2021 10:25 pm

Grasshopper will achieve total enlightenment when he figures out where subsidies, grants, kickbacks, and cronies fit into the picture.

Toto
December 30, 2021 3:38 pm

It is possible to have 100% of energy used generated by green sources. It is possible to have 100% of all vehicles electric. It’s possible to have 100% of all airplanes electric …
… there just won’t be very many of them, it won’t be anything like you are used to.
You will have nothing, but you will be happy. Or else.

Frank from NoVA
Reply to  Toto
December 30, 2021 5:35 pm

Well, that’s Marxism for you. And it won’t be limited to energy. As Rothbard said about production under Marxism in general, “This absurd ideal of the man “able to do everything” is only viable if (a) everyone does everything very badly, or (b) there are only a very few things to do, or (c) everyone is miraculously transformed into a superman. Professor Mises aptly notes that the ideal communist man is the dilettante, the man who knows a little of everything and does nothing well.”

December 30, 2021 3:44 pm

I just wrote about Virginia’s spookly similar stupid law. They have 780 square miles of nature destroying solar lined up and more coming. (VA uses only a half to a third as much juice as NY.)
https://www.cfact.org/2021/12/27/paving-virginia-with-solar-slabs-is-a-bad-law/

To be fair they cannot say how it will be done because it cannot be done. But they can’t say that either. So the thick report is just a really big waffle. Pass the syrup.

Nine years is an eternity in politics but in engineering it is the timeframe for a major project, which they are not even close to starting. It might take that long to complete the Environmental Impact Statement for the offshore wind junk. Assuming there are no endangered whales in the way.

Robert Hanson
Reply to  David Wojick
December 30, 2021 4:11 pm

To be fair, that’s 9 years for the EIS, then 12 more years to settle the lawsuits.

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  David Wojick
December 31, 2021 3:21 am

we can be sure they’re not counting the carbon lost as you convert 780 sq. miles into toxic, slave made solar panels- lost from the trees cut and soil disturbance

n.n
December 30, 2021 3:53 pm

Zero Emissions at the source that follows a shared/shifted responsibility protocol. Color… appearance matters.

Paul Blase
December 30, 2021 3:54 pm

Two possibilities. First, New York’s neighboring states make a fortune selling them power. Two, they all go “woke” and freeze to death.

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  Paul Blase
December 31, 2021 3:23 am

the neigbhoring states of VT, MA, and CT area also going to be moving towards net zero nirvana- so they won’t have any energy to sell, as their economies slowly die off

Steve Z
December 30, 2021 3:56 pm

{QUOTE FROM ARTICLE]

“Airplanes will run on “green hydrogen.” Has there been as of today any demonstration of the feasibility of such a thing, let alone any company working to develop a commercial version?”

{END QUOTE]

Yes, there was. It was called the Hindenburg. It was a lot slower than an airplane (even in its day), and it went up in flames.

It is possible to make renewable jet fuel by feeding triglycerides in plant oils and animal fats to a reactor, which makes glycerine and fatty acids, then hydrotreat the fatty acids to make hydrocarbons that can be blended into jet fuel or diesel fuel (depending on molecular weight).

But these processes are far more expensive than distilling kerosene out of petroleum and hydrotreating it to remove the sulfur. And do we have enough plant oils and animal fats to make enough biojet fuel to power all of today’s aircraft?

CD in Wisconsin
Reply to  Steve Z
December 30, 2021 6:56 pm

“Yes, there was. It was called the Hindenburg. It was a lot slower than an airplane (even in its day), and it went up in flames.”

***********

Had a good laugh when I read that line Steve. Right on the target. Kudos to you.

The most plausible explanation for the Hindenburg disaster that I’ve heard is that hydrogen was leaking out through the skin of the ship. Static buildup on the outside of the ship ignited it. Boom!

Mike Dubrasich
Reply to  Steve Z
December 30, 2021 8:07 pm

There are plenty of fatheads in NY.

Speed
December 30, 2021 3:58 pm

First they should make a list of all the projects that need to be completed (wind turbines, fields of solar panels, batteries, hydroelectric dams, EV Automobile charging stations <i>et al</i>.

Issue RFPs for all the above.

RFP: request for proposal, a detailed specification of goods or services required by an organization, sent to potential contractors or suppliers.

And finally, tell the legislature and the citizens of New York State how much it will cost and when it will be completed. That should keep eveyone busy for a few years.

Or they can start work on a fleet of nuclear power facilities.

Robert Hanson
Reply to  Speed
December 30, 2021 4:15 pm

Out of the question because one, nuclear power is evil. And two, if that worked, society could continue on in the same technological way it’s been going, And ending that is part of the plan.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Speed
December 30, 2021 8:32 pm

Speed, you’re going too fast! Before you can issue an RFP you have to describe what you want in detail. All NY can say now is that it wants Net Zero by 2045. How to get there they have no idea.

H.R.
Reply to  Dave Fair
December 30, 2021 10:42 pm

If they just give me all of the money now, right up front, I’ll take care of it.

Absolutely Zero by 2022.

Honest. I will. Scout’s honor. Pinkie swear. They can trust me They can take it to the bank… as will I.

.Guaranteed. Absolutely Zero by 2022.

(“Have my pilot warm up the engines on the Gulfstream and file a flight plan for a non-extradition country.”}

Olen
December 30, 2021 4:02 pm

They will go broke long before 2050 and drag a lot with them if they proceed. Go broke because any wealth got will be worthless. And did they ask anyone such as the people.

Rod Evans
December 30, 2021 4:06 pm

Look the solution to NY going net zero is simple. They just need to get the solar panels to work at night as effectively as they do during the day. Now that can’t be too difficult can it? We all know working the night shift is not popular, but needs must.
The other option is simple too. They need to get the wind turbines to operate on those days when the wind isn’t blowing. Again it is just a simple engineering problem. I am sure someone like that nice Mr Bloomberg or AOC can help sort that out…..

Timo, not that one
Reply to  Rod Evans
December 31, 2021 8:28 am

“They just need to get the solar panels to work at night as effectively as they do during the day.”
Just install them under the street lamps.

Dave Andrews
Reply to  Rod Evans
December 31, 2021 9:00 am

They could use the battery backup to power the wind turbines when the wind isn’t blowing and then use the wind turbines to recharge the batteries and then, oh wait – forget it

Willis Eschenbach(@weschenbach)
Editor
December 30, 2021 4:06 pm

Per my calculations, it will take finding sites, clearcutting, installing, testing, and commissioning 6.5 square miles (4,160 acres, 16 sq km) of solar farms every month starting tomorrow until 2030.

Or if you prefer wind, they’ll need to find sites, clearcut, excavate, install, test, and commission 450 1-MW wind turbines every month starting tomorrow until 2030.

Oh, plus install transmission lines to the new generating facilities, which are often FAR from where the power is needed.

w.

Rod Evans
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
December 30, 2021 4:19 pm

When you put it like that Willis you make it sound so simple, I am amazed the net zero advocates have not suggested 2025 for their target date. 🙂

alastair gray
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
December 30, 2021 4:54 pm

Oh you are such an old sourpuss Willis raining on the green parade. Did you make allowance for a (generous)capacity factor of about 40% and laying by storage for the 60% of the time your wind turbines are idle, with a storage efficiency of 50%. If not multiply your answer by 4

Jim Gorman
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
December 30, 2021 5:02 pm

That doesn’t even consider the upgrading of the secondary distribution plant to carry the additional load.

H.R.
Reply to  Jim Gorman
December 30, 2021 10:47 pm

360 pages? It’s gotta be in that report somewhere, Jim. They wouldn’t forget that now, would they?

Steve Z
December 30, 2021 4:11 pm

The photo above the article, showing a couple sitting on the grass in Central Park, shows an idea for some green energy. There are lots of geese on the ground in that picture, so why not collect all the goose poop and run it into an anaerobic digester and make methane?

Of course, you still have to feed the geese. There are not enough fish in Central Park Lake to keep that many geese alive year round.

About 45 years ago, Canada geese were considered an endangered species, so people started feeding them to build up flocks around small lakes. The problem is, the geese tended to settle wherever they were fed, and there are no “leaders” left in the flock that know the way to Canada, so we have large flocks of well-fed geese year-round near lots of lakes in New England, some of them sitting on the ice all winter.

But if you’re on the shore, and want to take a swim or launch a boat, be careful where you step!

CD in Wisconsin
December 30, 2021 4:26 pm

“This can be accomplished by aggressive deployment of existing renewable energy technologies such as wind, solar, and energy storage..”

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

Yea, right. And the Titanic was unsinkable. God help them.

Dave Fair
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
December 30, 2021 8:41 pm

The “irresistible aggressive deployment” will be met with the “immovable NIMBY.” Something may happen, but exactly when, what and the costs are all unknown. Bring money, lots of it.

Gary Pearse
December 30, 2021 4:50 pm

“85% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050”

Am I wrong in reckoning that as you decarbonize the atmosphere (lower the partial pressure of CO²), you cause increased outgassing from the oceans? Isnt this the reason why no sign of change in CO² was observed under Covid lockdown?

Jim Gorman
December 30, 2021 4:51 pm

“… and a substantial portion of personal transportation in urbanized areas would be required to shift to public transportation and other low-carbon modes.”

You forgot these words should be bolded. You won’t own an automobile of ANY kind and you will like it because public transportation will take everywhere you are allowed to go and at any time in is convenient for the public transportation agency.

Mike Dubrasich
Reply to  Jim Gorman
December 30, 2021 8:11 pm

Peddle-power buses! Or even better, greenies yoked to pull carts.

Pariah Dog
Reply to  Mike Dubrasich
December 31, 2021 2:44 am

I remember peddle-powered buses from my time in Auckland. Of course, they also served you lots of beer.

Beercycle_Christchurch_New_Zealand.jpg
Al Miller
December 30, 2021 5:25 pm

For the love of god – will one of these leftist loony areas actually do it! – ban fossil fuels for real. Let the world sit and watch the chaos. That will quickly put an end to this stupidity.

RickWill
December 30, 2021 5:57 pm

There are primarily two ways to go about achieving the stated objectives.
A. Aggressively upgrade or replace existing infrastructure – current technology does not make this feasible for the current demand in New York.
B. Determine what can actually be built realistically in the time and reduce the demand accordingly – means rapid population decline.

The third approach is a combination, and most likely, where the aggressive effort pushes up the cost of living and people leave voluntarily. I believe that is what is occurring in California. New York has already started the decline.

One advantage of getting in early is to burden nearby states with intermittency and grid instability. Essentially use the power grid in adjacent states as batteries. That has worked for South Australia, Germany and UK as well as California. It is easy to sell the idea of zero marginal cost electricity to neighbouring states. They will probably jointly fund the transmission line upgrades. New York could even fund the construction of wind and solar farms in adjacent states on the basis that they provide jobs.

Doonman
December 30, 2021 6:00 pm

The future is a wonderful thing, especially when you can predict it. Of course, you then rely on the unborn to agree with your assumptions, because they will eventually be born, grow up and decide how they wish to live their own lives.

Unfortunately, no one asked them before hand what they will decide to do with their lives after all that planning we did for them before they existed.

Damon
December 30, 2021 6:41 pm

What is ‘renewable’ jet fuel? In my experience, if the petrol tank is empty, the car stops. It does not re-start when the sun rises.

Pat from kerbob
December 30, 2021 6:56 pm

“Everything looks easy to people with no knowledge”.

garboard
Reply to  Pat from kerbob
December 31, 2021 3:46 am

anything is possible if you don’t know what you’re talking about

WR2
December 30, 2021 7:14 pm

Will the last person to leave NY please turn off the lights? Oh wait, the lights will already be off.

Quilter 52
December 30, 2021 7:33 pm

Easy to resolve. Just cut all incoming power to NY by a minimum of 50% to 75% . 50% allows those lovely climate idiot NY residents to cut their power usage in half. The remaining 1/3 is to help with the NY residents usage of power for unimportant stuff like growing food, making clothes, providing the latest electronics etc. Also so that they can practice getting fit, halve the number of taxis and cut the subway by half as well.

Should work a treat and then they can tell the rest of us how to live our lives without their hypocrisy showing. Pity about the winter cold but heck, someone has to DO
SOMETHING !!!!!!!!!!!!

Quilter 52
December 30, 2021 7:35 pm

A second thought. Perhaps it is time to move Wall Street to someplace with a functioning brain.

Reply to  Quilter 52
December 31, 2021 12:09 pm

Rules out London at present.
Besides the Blond, we have a midget Mayor ‘of London’ [Not my Mayor] who is also committed to the Green nonsense.

Auto

Jeff Alberts
December 30, 2021 11:11 pm

empower every New Yorker to fight climate change at home, at work, and in their communities.”

The problem is, no one will know if they’re succeeded.

Let’s say they manage to reduce CO2 worldwide to less than 300ppm. Extreme weather will still be extreme, glaciers will always be either receding or advancing (those are the only two choices), sea level will always be rising or falling (again, no other choices). Villages near glaciers will be destroyed if they advance, those depending on shore fishing will starve if the ocean recedes, etc., ad infinitum.

Someone will be impacted no matter which way things go. It’s known as “life”.

In other words, “fighting climate change” and winning is impossible.

Rod Evans
December 31, 2021 12:40 am

Now come on, let us be fair here.
It takes a lot of word skill to write 330 pages of nothing, then present it as a detailed explanation of how to do that nothing with additional appendix for good measure.
Germany will close three nuclear power plants today and the last three nuclear plants will close by the end of 2022.
Any developed intelligent political authority that can do that, at the start of winter this far North, tells us there is no limit to what these climate alarm zealots will do.
Soylent Green may not be as unlikely as we once thought….

IanE
Reply to  Rod Evans
December 31, 2021 2:22 am

Well, they will have to do something with all the dead bodies.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Rod Evans
December 31, 2021 7:43 am

“Germany will close three nuclear power plants today and the last three nuclear plants will close by the end of 2022.

Any developed intelligent political authority that can do that, at the start of winter this far North, tells us there is no limit to what these climate alarm zealots will do.”

It’s hard to imagine that any rational person thinks it is a good idea to shut down perfectly good nuclear reactors, in an environment where “renewables” are failing and winter is coming on strong.

There’s no room for letting these nuclear plants continue to run until at least next spring? It can’t get much more stupid than this.

fretslider
December 31, 2021 1:45 am

In short, it’s pure bolleaux

michael hart
December 31, 2021 3:01 am

It can only be nuclear. At some point the false promise of unreliables will strike home. But how long, oh Lord, how long?

Tom Abbott
Reply to  michael hart
December 31, 2021 7:46 am

“But how long, oh Lord, how long?”

It’s going to be too long for some unfortunate people. They will be the crash-test dummies for the rest of us.

Joseph Zorzin
December 31, 2021 3:02 am

“85% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050”
Heck, Massachusett’s more sophisticated politicians passed a net zero bill whereby the state will be 100% free of any “carbon pollution”. In fact, no CO2 molecules will be allowed to cross the state lines into MA. It’s forbidden.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
December 31, 2021 7:56 am

Look at all the crap the Climategate Charlatans have stirred up.

All of this based on a Big Lie. The Lie that the Earth is currently experiencing unprecedented warming caused by CO2, when the only unprecedented warming that exists is in the computers of the Climategate Charlatans, not in the Real World.

Now, politicians are doing all sorts of stupid things based on believing, or are cynically taking advantage of, this CO2 climate change delusion.

Texas has hit the Windmill Wall, and Germany and the UK may be close to doing the same. Maybe these trainwrecks will be sufficient for others to change their course and reject windmills and solar as the basis for a power grid.

Jim Turner
December 31, 2021 6:16 am

‘Airplanes will run on “green hydrogen.” Has there been as of today any demonstration of the feasibility of such a thing, let alone any company working to develop a commercial version?’

This reminded me of the fact that the Saturn V rocket (the one that propelled the Apollo missions into space, although I suspect most people reading this blog would know that) was fuelled by liquid oxygen/kerosine for the first stage and liquid oxygen/liquid hydrogen for the second and third stages, but I had never considered why, so I looked it up. It turns out that liquid hydrogen has the greater energy density by mass but kerosine (essentially what modern jet aircraft use) has the greater energy density by volume. The first stage has to propel the vehicle through the relatively dense trophosphere where aerodynamic drag is much more significant, liquid hydrogen would have occupied three times the volume and therefore contributed significantly to drag. The second and third stages (which had shed the weight of the first stage) did not have this issue and so could exploit the higher energy density by mass of liquid hydrogen. This is why aircraft – atmospheric vehicles – use kerosine not liquid hydrogen. In addition of course liquid hydrogen does not exist at normal terrestrial pressures and must be stored in pressure vessels which adds extra weight penalty as well as hazard.

observa
December 31, 2021 8:13 am

Thanks for wading through the usual dross to pick out the key fantasmagoracles and the money quote-

a substantial portion of personal transportation in urbanized areas would be required to shift to public transportation and other low-carbon modes. New York can achieve these goals through ZEV sales requirements and accompanying incentives and investments to help achieve these mandates, historic investments in expanded public transportation and micro-mobility, enhanced bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure,

We get the picture. The chosen ones drive the Teslas with plenty of refuel stations while the deplorables take a hike-
New York City to invest $420M in electric vehicles and infrastructure; all-electric fleet by 2035 – Green Car Congress

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  observa
December 31, 2021 8:39 am

I’m giving you a +1 for “fantasmagoracles”.

Nick B.
December 31, 2021 8:15 am

So called “carbon neutral” is very easy to achieve. Everything became “carbon neutral” after carbon taxes were paid.

Bill Everett
Reply to  Nick B.
December 31, 2021 8:33 am

The average yearly human contribution of CO2 into the atmosphere from 1960 through 2020 was less than one-tenth of one PPM. If the US is credited with contributing half of that amount, then the US annual contribution of CO2 was one-twentieth of one PPM per year. Thats so close to net zero it would appear no further efforts at reduction are needed.

Sylvia
January 1, 2022 6:22 am

The arrogance of world politicians who think THEY can CONTROL how much sun, wind or any other “energy” you care to mention obviously think they are GODS who can control our weather !!! The sooner these MORONS come down off their clouds and join us mortals in the REAL WORLD the better. WE NEED RELIABLE, CHEAP ENERGY and they are promising UNRELIABLE, HUGELY EXPENSIVE help but NOT ENERGY !!!!!

%d bloggers like this: