Biden powers his own political disaster with energy fantasy

This commentary was first published January 2, 2022 at the Washington Times

by Dr. Patrick J. Michaels – January 4, 2022

Anticipating earlier in December that Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) might scuttle his climate plan (which he did Dec. 19 on Fox News), President Biden signed an Executive Order commanding that all the electricity that the federal government uses be from “100 percent carbon pollution-free” sources by 2030.

The order means that federal juice either has to come from zero-emission sources (like solar and wind) or that any carbon dioxide emissions be sequestered away, which usually means burying them underground. There hasn’t been sufficient success with this “sequestration” to make any dent in the growing global emissions curve. Biden’s non-carbon dioxide sources explicitly include electricity from nuclear fission, which his green allies are doing their best to put out of business.

Our Energy Information Agency (EIA) claims fully 40% of our power is already carbon dioxide-free, with 20% from “renewable” solar energy and wind turbines and 20% from nuclear.

Rapeseed field in front of a nuclear power plant

Nuclear is pretty much off the table. California is about to shut its lone nuke at Diablo Canyon, which supplies nearly 10% of the state’s power. Last April, (then) Governor Cuomo shut down one of New York’s, the Indian Point plant, which the AP cheekily headlined “Gone Fission”. There are three reactors remaining in the state.

So how is the government going to come up with the remaining 60% of electricity by 2030, which now comes mainly from natural gas (40%) and coal (20%)? It won’t be made up with nuclear, as there’s only one new plant in the current pipeline, Georgia Power’s Vogtle plant, scheduled for a 2024 completion. There’s not likely to be any other until after 2030.

Biden’s order means that all of this power is going to come from wind and solar. (Non-emitting new hydropower is a political nonstarter.) But they are terribly unreliable. The sun is below the horizon half of the time, and too close to it to produce much electricity for at least an hour after sunrise and before sunset. Ninety percent of incoming solar radiation can be blocked by dense overcast. And some of the coldest temperatures occur when the wind doesn’t stir the air, which also peaks electricity demand with no supply from the wind.

Because a stable electrical grid requires stable power, quick backup can only be provided by maintaining a large reserve of gas-fired generators. The importance of this became obvious last February in Texas , when improperly insulated gas plants couldn’t make up for shortages in wind generation. The Texas grid, which is independent from the rest of the country, came to within minutes of a complete black crash, restarting from which would take up to a month. Given the cold temperatures, that would have been one of the greatest disasters in U.S. history.

Besides courting disaster, Biden’s Executive Order is fantasy. The government can’t deploy enough solar and wind — let alone making it reliable — to supply all of its power without carbon dioxide emissions. There is no battery technology that can reliably accommodate for the intermittent failures of wind and solar. Protecting this fragile grid from its obvious inability to supply a steady stream of power 24/7 will require massive backup from a nimble source like natural gas.

It’s not clear at all that Biden — or whomever is handing him the note cards before he faces the camera — is interacting with reality when ordering the federal government to do what is simply impossible.

Fortunately, people are catching on. The likelihood that he will have any legislative authority after next years’ election is vanishingly small. The Democrat Party made a deal with unreality when it thought it could push such a weak and compromised president for four years without an intervening electoral disaster. Barack Obama lost 65 hours seats because of political overreach in the 2010 congressional races. Biden’s poll numbers — as shown by the generic congressional ballot — are even worse, much worse. Currently, the largest repudiation of a governing political party in U.S. history seems not only possible but likely.

Dr. Patrick J. Michaels is a Senior Fellow at the CO2 Coalition in Arlington VA, Virginia State Climatologist 1980-2007, and Past-President of the American Association of State Climatologists. He also serves on the Board of Directors of the Science and Environmental Policy Project

This commentary was first published January 2, 2022 at the Washington Times

4.9 25 votes
Article Rating
177 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Nick Schroeder
January 5, 2022 10:08 am

“…20% from “renewable” solar energy and wind turbines and 20% from nuclear.”

Is this capacity or energy?
How many here know the difference?

EIA Total Energy.jpg
Pat from Kerbob
Reply to  Nick Schroeder
January 5, 2022 10:22 am

That has to be what is going on here, i see no stats anywhere that renewables provided 20% of usa generated electricity.

Derg
Reply to  Pat from Kerbob
January 5, 2022 10:46 am

This is like all these corporations buying renewable credits which is nothing more than virtue signaling because they will never use that electricity.

Bryan A
Reply to  Derg
January 5, 2022 11:10 am

Note to author:

Fortunately, people are catching on. The likelihood that he will have any legislative authority after next years’ election is vanishingly small. The Democrat Party made a deal with unreality when it thought it could push such a weak and compromised president for four years without an intervening electoral disaster. Barack Obama lost 65 hours House seats because of political overreach in the 2010 congressional races. Biden’s poll numbers — as shown by the generic congressional ballot — are even worse, much worse. Currently, the largest repudiation of a governing political party in U.S. history seems not only possible but likely.

Autocorrect is not your friend

Last edited 20 days ago by Bryan A
pat michaels
Reply to  Bryan A
January 5, 2022 1:21 pm

No chit! I just looked at the original MS that went to the Times and indeed “hours” is there. Thanks for pointing this out; sorry I missed it. I must have read this thing over a dozen times before it went off.

PCman999
Reply to  Derg
January 5, 2022 10:09 pm

It’s OK, tomorrow Biden will sign another executive order that will require the earth to stop rotating once the Sun is over Chicago, and that way solar power will become 3-4x times more effective. Also nightly use of electricity will drop as well as crime and traffic accidents. Win-win all around.

Dennis G Sandberg
Reply to  Pat from Kerbob
January 5, 2022 11:23 am

wind, 8%, solar 3%, hydro 7%, Geothermal and biomass 2% (roughly)

pat michaels
Reply to  Dennis G Sandberg
January 5, 2022 1:21 pm

Believe that adds up to 20.

Pat from kerbob
Reply to  Dennis G Sandberg
January 5, 2022 4:12 pm

I see my mistake, I thought Biden was referring to energy, when he just mentioned electricity.

Most of the charts I see are primary energy, renewables a much smaller proportion of that.

Still the only way they can pretend the government is only using electricity from renewables by any date is if they claim all the bad stuff goes to homes and industry.

Short of setting up their own grid it’s simply a book keeping exercise

Surely the government does not use 20% of the electricity generated in the USA so technically they could make this claim today?

griff
Reply to  Pat from Kerbob
January 6, 2022 1:08 am

Renewables became the second-most prevalent U.S. electricity source in 2020 – Today in Energy – U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

In 2020, renewable energy sources (including wind, hydroelectric, solar, biomass, and geothermal energy) generated a record 834 billion kilowatthours (kWh) of electricity, or about 21% of all the electricity generated in the United States.

(2021 figures don’t seem to be collated yet)

HotScot
Reply to  griff
January 6, 2022 8:08 am

Blah, Blah, Blah……

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  griff
January 6, 2022 8:35 am

“second-most prevalent” = also ran

I might point out also that hydroelectric (first installed in 1882), biomass, and geothermal are not intermittent sources. They actually make sense.

Philo
Reply to  griff
January 7, 2022 4:38 pm

Naughty, naughty!! Hydroelectric, biomass, and geothermal were all being used before solar and aeroelectric became partially successful subsidiary electric sources.

There is NO way a electric grid can be run efficiently with just solar and aeroelectric. It would require impossibly large batteries just to keep them running reliably, much less 24/7.

ghl
Reply to  griff
January 9, 2022 2:16 am

Griff
From the same report.
We expect coal-fired electricity generation to increase in the United States during 2021 as natural gas prices continue to rise and as coal becomes more economically competitive. Based on forecasts in our Short-Term Energy Outlook (STEO), we expect coal-fired electricity generation in all sectors in 2021 to increase 18% from 2020
Swings and roundabouts. No absolutes in this life.

pat michaels
Reply to  Nick Schroeder
January 5, 2022 1:15 pm

I used the most recent annual data from the Energy Information Administration (EIA). Despite its parent agency being the Department of Energy, most people think their data is pretty robust.

Normally I would be very suspicious of anything climate-related coming out of DOE (i.e. Ben Santer works for them), but I haven’t seen a lot of criticism of their retrospective data, which this is.

John
Reply to  Nick Schroeder
January 5, 2022 4:17 pm

we should make the wind and solar brigade use the Oil industry RAU (reliability, Availability, Utilisation) criteria
Reliability = will it be mechanically / electrical running all the time (should be better than other forms for solar and probably worse for wind)
Availability = well this is terrible for both wind and solar way worse 33% for wind at best and solar 25% at best on an annual average) most thermal stations exceed 98%
Utilisation wind and solar will again fail way to much solar in the middle of the day so you cant use and you cant store sensibly similarly for wind power at the wrong time of day

overall RAU for wind and solar is probably less than 10% of name plate capacity – so if you have a 100MW nameplate you will be probably only 87,000MWh in a year vs a 100MW thermal station of 100MW would give you 850,000MWh in a year

using this you would need 10 times as much wind and solar but remembering it is not transferable this is probably optimistic and it would be more like 15 to 20 times of the name plate capacity

good luck America

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  John
January 6, 2022 9:44 am

Agree except

using this you would need 10 times as much wind and solar but remembering it is not transferable this is probably optimistic and it would be more like 15 to 20 times of the name plate capacity

Multiplying what is produced when not needed at times when not needed doesn’t really change much – wind and solar are basically worse than useless.

As a general comment, I seriously doubt 20% of electricity actually used comes from wind and solar, since much is produced when/where it is NOT needed; “produced,” maybe but that is just another way to make their contribution look like it is bigger than reality.

Last edited 19 days ago by AGW is Not Science
John Endicott
January 5, 2022 10:08 am

“It’s not clear at all that Biden — or whomever is handing him the note cards before he faces the camera — is interacting with reality when ordering the federal government to do what is simply impossible.”

His order won’t last till 2030 either a future president (2024 or 2028) that’s a little more in touch with reality will sign an EO that nullifies Biden’s EO, or reality itself will slap whomever is in charge as we approach 2030 upside their silly heads and they will be forced to “update” the order to a later date that will also never see fruition. The laws of physics aren’t going to change just because Brandon has a pen and a phone.

Last edited 20 days ago by John Endicott
Reply to  John Endicott
January 5, 2022 10:17 am

Um John, Brandon has a pen and he’ll change the laws of physics with an EO!

Scissor
Reply to  Steve Clough
January 5, 2022 10:52 am

Maybe he’s going for a do over.

Thomas
Reply to  Steve Clough
January 5, 2022 11:59 am

Tomorrow he’s going to sign an order that will stop plate tectonics.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Thomas
January 5, 2022 4:13 pm

Until the early ’60s, the “scientific consensus” was determined plate tectonics had never started. All the White House needed to do was to cancel Wegener and declare that they’re going back to the consensus. Google would have been on it like white on rice.

LdB
Reply to  Thomas
January 5, 2022 4:58 pm

He also needs to sign the no more twister executive order that caused a bit of grief.

J Mac
Reply to  John Endicott
January 5, 2022 1:48 pm

Biden regime’s ‘Broke Back Better’ plan!

Spetzer86
Reply to  John Endicott
January 5, 2022 3:51 pm

How many times did Trump struggle to overturn an Obama EOs that should’ve been easy-peasy? All it takes is a judge somewhere willing to stand up and say “no”, it seems.

Pat from kerbob
Reply to  Spetzer86
January 5, 2022 4:15 pm

I don’t recall when the USA became a constitutional monarchy, where what the King says goes?

Executive orders, along with all these academics who say we have to destroy democracy to save the planet seem to be a far greater problem than climate change

Probably already too late for us here in canada.

Last edited 20 days ago by Pat from kerbob
John Endicott
Reply to  Spetzer86
January 6, 2022 4:39 am

True, but the next president can take a page out of Brandon’s book and simply ignore what the courts (including the supreme court) say and press a head anyways.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Spetzer86
January 6, 2022 8:43 am

Unfortunately, there does seem to be an element of legal inertia that impedes changes once the EO has been in force for a period of time. That tends to encourage EOs. That is particularly bad when the EO is written out of frustration with Congress being unwilling to actually legislate on what is their responsibility, and not the president’s. Some of the EOs should be challenged on constitutionality because of a violation of separation of powers.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
January 6, 2022 9:49 am

Some of the EOs should be challenged on constitutionality because of a violation of separation of powers.

Many, if not most of them should.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  John Endicott
January 6, 2022 9:47 am

That, or I guess we’ll just have to have a lot more “government shutdowns.” As long as they take the concomitant pay decrease for hours not worked!

Tom Halla
January 5, 2022 10:09 am

The major problem in Texas was too much use of wind, period. The subsidized wind reduced the amount of conventional sources on the grid, so when we had several days of freezing rain and still air, it nearly went down.
Failure to charge weather dependent sources for the required backup was the major problem, along with the coldest weather since 1913.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  Tom Halla
January 6, 2022 9:51 am

Plus the fact that the Eco-Nazis forced them to use electric, as opposed to gas powered, compression to move gas through the natural gas pipelines.

Which meant when the wind face-planted the gas fired plants stopped getting a reliable supply of gas. Double face-palm!

gringojay
January 5, 2022 10:10 am

“Days of Our Life” used to just be a daytime soap opera.

DD33B5EE-8266-4C98-BBDA-990E797337E5.png
Andy Pattullo
Reply to  gringojay
January 5, 2022 10:19 am

I love that. Thank you

January 5, 2022 10:16 am

Easy solution Brandon. Build back better solar panels in all the pristine federal land that was prohibited from fossil fuel exploration. Wouldn’t it be grand to view millions of solar panels/windmills in our national treasures?

Jeffrey C. Briggs
Reply to  Steve Clough
January 6, 2022 8:07 am

Those who support climate and energy reality should need nothing more to stop the crazy renewable tide than photographs of wind farms and solar arrays that already exist and create a shocking blight on favorite greenist landscapes. The existing eye-gouging of these energy “farms” is only the beginning; we need to start telling people in California, for example, that the horrifying windmill vista on the way into Palm Springs is no longer a quaint headshaker of an experiment, but what is waiting for them in their own neighborhoods when they return home. Photos of the windmills offshore at last year’s Open Championship in the UK were jarring just in the background; we need to provide a lot more of the photographic evidence of what is in store for our environment without fossil fuels. Should put an end to the insanity pretty quickly.

Andy Pattullo
January 5, 2022 10:18 am

Live in a fantasy world and expect to die young. Hitch your political career to unicorn farts and you can stop calling it a career, maybe just call it missed opportunity.

SteveB
January 5, 2022 10:23 am

Expect to see lots of kwhr accounting tricks as multiple electricity customers each take credit for the same carbon free power.

D. J. Hawkins
Reply to  SteveB
January 5, 2022 2:19 pm

I have no doubt that this is firmly in the wings, likely to sweep up multiple brokers.

Rud Istvan
January 5, 2022 10:25 am

This is another proof that Biden has some form of dementia. Signing an EO that is obviously impossible to achieve is not a good look. One of many. No wonder 25 House Dems have already decided to retire. More will be in November.

Bernie1815
Reply to  Rud Istvan
January 5, 2022 2:10 pm

But the Soviet Union did this for almost 30 years – if not still until today. When you silence critics and outlaw debate, all kinds of nonsense gets promulgated.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Bernie1815
January 5, 2022 4:17 pm

The social media giants Nazis are already cancelling people, ideas and opposition everywhere they can … using ever more effective tools.

John Endicott
Reply to  Bernie1815
January 6, 2022 4:40 am

And the Soviet Union ultimately collapsed as a result.

Izaak Walton
Reply to  Rud Istvan
January 5, 2022 7:29 pm

This is an executive order that is easy to achieve. The US federal government uses less than 10% of the total amount of current renewable energy generation in the US every year. Hence all that is required is that the US government switches its electricity supplier to one that uses renewable electricity.

Doonman
Reply to  Izaak Walton
January 5, 2022 7:53 pm

Except the order says nothing about renewable energy.

Where did you get that idea? It says all electricity purchased must be “100% carbon-pollution free”.

Since all electricity is generated by turbines which use steel that requires carbon, the federal government is going to be sitting the dark. Since I seriously doubt that any president in 2030 will allow that to happen, the entire executive order is complete nonsense. It has no practical application.

PCman999
Reply to  Doonman
January 5, 2022 10:04 pm

Change ‘turbines’ to ‘something made with carbon’ and you would be right. Wind turbines blades are made out of wood and fibreglass – but use lots of materials like concrete and steel that have carbon emissions. Infact wind power has twice the carbon footprint per kWh produced as nuclear power. And solar has about 10x the nuke footprint. I guess Biden doesn’t really care about the environment.

Derg
Reply to  Izaak Walton
January 5, 2022 10:00 pm

You just get dumber with each post. Next you are going to tell us Benghazi was started by an internet video.

ghl
Reply to  Izaak Walton
January 9, 2022 2:56 am

Izaac
or buy pieces of paper from A. Gore.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Rud Istvan
January 6, 2022 8:49 am

You are assuming that ‘Brandon’ actually has read the EO that he signed, but was written by staffers with degrees in law or liberal arts.

Frank from NoVA
January 5, 2022 10:25 am

“President Biden signed an Executive Order commanding that all the electricity that the federal government uses be from “100 percent carbon pollution-free” sources by 2030.”

Assuming we survive this guy and his progressive supporters, I’d be in favor of bringing the date forward as much as possible in order to shut the entire unconstitutional mess down pronto.

Duane
January 5, 2022 10:29 am

It’s all for show to mollify their Warmunist True Believers and other assorted ultraliberal interest groups who have taken over the Democratic Party, much as the Trumplicans have taken over the Republican Party. Once upon a time the moderates in both parties ran things, but over the last decade completely lost control.

So Obama issues a set of unenforceable executive orders, then Trump comes in and unissues all those orders, then Biden comes in and issues his own executive orders, and whoever follows Biden will unissue them come 2024.

Biden is particularly under pressure to issue unenforceable orders because the Democrats realize their goose is cooked in this year’s mid term elections and likely will lose control of both houses of Congress, making Biden an emasculated lame duck for the rest of his term. If Trump is the GOP nominee again, the Biden will likely win reelection. If the GOPers have any brains they’ll dump Trump and nominate someone who won’t scare the hell out of independents and centrists like Trump did.

Mr.
Reply to  Duane
January 5, 2022 11:03 am

Could Nikki Haley then be the best-placed GOP candidate for 2024?

Gregory Woods
Reply to  Mr.
January 5, 2022 11:33 am

Hell no!

Mr.
Reply to  Gregory Woods
January 5, 2022 11:52 am

I asked because clearly ideas and policies no longer matter for electoral purposes, it’s now all about “identity”.

Haley is –

  • female
  • able to claim to be a person of color

Those “attributes” are Shirley more appealing to US voters these days than someone who is –

  • white
  • male
  • experienced
  • right of center
  • willing to fight
Retired_Engineer_Jim
Reply to  Mr.
January 5, 2022 12:32 pm

Competent and numerate, as well.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Mr.
January 5, 2022 4:22 pm

In our brave new, intersectional, world those criteria, combined with Engineer_Jim’s two, are all social defects worthy of cancellation or worse.

Last edited 20 days ago by Rory Forbes
Mike BeDamned
Reply to  Mr.
January 6, 2022 7:55 am

“Surely, you jest.”

“Stop calling me Shirley!”

commieBob
Reply to  Duane
January 5, 2022 11:10 am

I have some hope that the Republicans can get their shit together.

Jordan Peterson just interviewed Dan Crenshaw. link What a pleasant change from some Republican meat heads who don’t need to be named. (No, I’m not referring to Trump.) The Republicans can become the party of intelligence and wisdom. They can consign the Democrats to being the party of whacko ideas and unintended consequences.

In the ongoing Country’s most important problem poll, the biggest single item has been “The government/Poor leadership” for a very long time. People want something better and the Republicans can provide it.

Last edited 20 days ago by commieBob
Retired_Engineer_Jim
Reply to  commieBob
January 5, 2022 12:33 pm

But can the Republicans become “the party of intelligence and wisdom” in less than six months?

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
January 6, 2022 8:43 am

All the Republicans need is a leader with intelligence and wisdom”, and Republicans have several to chose from.

Mason
Reply to  commieBob
January 5, 2022 3:10 pm

He is my Rep and he listens to me on Climate Change.

NWStever
Reply to  commieBob
January 5, 2022 3:53 pm

Yes exactly! Dan Crenshaw for the win and restoration of rational, constitutional governance.

Retired_Engineer_Jim
Reply to  Duane
January 5, 2022 12:31 pm

The January 6th Committee is going to make sure that they are still investigating “The Insurrection” and blame all Republicans for “the Threat to Democracy” right up until November. If the Republicans continue to acts as they are currently, I don’t see a big swing in seats in November. I can’t vote for any of them (Dem or Rep).

I hope that I am wrong.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
January 6, 2022 8:48 am

“The January 6th Committee is going to make sure that they are still investigating “The Insurrection” and blame all Republicans for “the Threat to Democracy” right up until November.”

Oh, yes! The Democrats are definitely going to try to use Jan 6 as a means to smear all Republicans and Trump in particular.

Biden got up on tv today to try to blame everything that has happened in the past on Trump (what else is new?). There is no evidence that Trump is to blame for anything that happened on Jan. 6., but of course, Democrats and propagandists don’t need any evidence to make their charges.

Trump fired right back at Biden in his typical manner. It put a smile on my face.

Biden and the Democrats are trying to divide America, and this is part of the process. I think what they are going to end up doing is uniting the Right like never before.

Last edited 19 days ago by Tom Abbott
MarkW
Reply to  Duane
January 5, 2022 1:56 pm

Your hatred of Trump is causing you to see things that aren’t there again.
The idea that Biden could beat Trump is so strange that only you could come up with it.

BTW, I was wondering why you feel the need to display your mental delusions at every opportunity.
Trump has nothing to do with this issue, yet you drag him in, in order to prove your social justice credentials.

Dave Yaussy
Reply to  MarkW
January 5, 2022 2:14 pm

Duane’s point is that the Republicans have a better chance of winning in 2024 if Trump isn’t running. I agree that there are lots of people who won’t vote for Trump who would be glad to vote for another Republican.

I assume that the important thing for him (as it is for me) is to replace Biden. If some other Republican has a better chance than Trump to beat him, put me in the other category.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Dave Yaussy
January 5, 2022 4:30 pm

Duane is completely wrong. If Trump runs he will win. Biden hasn’t a hope in hell of even making it to 2024, never mind being in the running. Even his own party have rejected him. Trump has even greater support now than in the past.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Rory Forbes
January 6, 2022 8:52 am

“Duane is completely wrong. If Trump runs he will win.”

I know one thing: If Trump runs, I’m voting for him.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Dave Yaussy
January 6, 2022 8:51 am

“Duane’s point is that the Republicans have a better chance of winning in 2024 if Trump isn’t running. I agree that there are lots of people who won’t vote for Trump who would be glad to vote for another Republican.”

Yes, there are a lot of misinformed and downright stupid people in the world. I can see them making the mistake of not voting for Trump.

Frank from NoVA
Reply to  Duane
January 5, 2022 2:42 pm

“If the GOPers have any brains they’ll dump Trump and nominate someone who won’t scare the hell out of independents and centrists like Trump did.”

Duane, care to list which of Trump’s policies scared the hell out of independents and centrists, and while you’re at it, can you let us know what a “centrist” is? Thanks in advance.

Shanghai Dan
Reply to  Frank from NoVA
January 5, 2022 4:09 pm

“A centrist is anyone who agrees with me. If you’re more conservative, you’re a right-wing extremist. If you’re liberal, you’re a communist. I am a centrist.”

Derg
Reply to  Shanghai Dan
January 5, 2022 10:05 pm

Exactly, people had a hard time disagreeing with Trump’s policies.

TonyG
Reply to  Frank from NoVA
January 6, 2022 11:45 am

“care to list which of Trump’s policies scared the hell out of independents and centrists”

Sure:
CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NPR, AP, etc.

Oh, I thought you said propaganda.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Duane
January 6, 2022 8:40 am

“It’s all for show to mollify their Warmunist True Believers and other assorted ultraliberal interest groups who have taken over the Democratic Party, much as the Trumplicans have taken over the Republican Party. Once upon a time the moderates in both parties ran things, but over the last decade completely lost control.”

Trumpians are not radicals. They are common-sense Republicans, Conservatives and Independents.

It’s a *good thing* that Trumpians have taken over the Republican Party.

Last edited 19 days ago by Tom Abbott
Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Duane
January 6, 2022 8:58 am

… the Biden will likely win reelection.

You are saying that the American public is stupid enough to re-elect a man who has demonstrated that he is suffering from dementia, can’t deliver on his campaign promise of getting COVID under control, has to take responsibility for the highest inflation in decades, and has been impotent in addressing the supply line backlogs?

I think that your mental capacity has been compromised by your personal hatred of Trump.

Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
January 5, 2022 10:38 am

President Biden signed an Executive Order commanding that all the electricity that the federal government uses be from “100 percent carbon pollution-free” sources by 2030.

Taken literally (in the actual meaning of the word “literally”, not the inverted way many people use it today), this is going to be a tall order, even assuming a permissive definition of “carbon pollution-free” to include nuclear and hydroelectric.

Aside from large swaths of the metro DC area, thousands of military bases and offices in the US count as part of the federal government. Additionally we have military bases in
dozens of other countries and embassies and consulates in pretty much all of them. Anyone have a clue on how to run Thule AFB (Greenland) on 100% carbon-free power, aside from permanently mooring a nuclear aircraft carrier there?

I take it back; this won’t be a tall order or even an impossible one. To do all this by 2030 is 100% pure fantasy.

And at some point, the fact that all the “carbon offset” investments don’t really reduce CO2 emissions will be recognized and prosecuted as fraud.

Gordon A. Dressler
Reply to  Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
January 5, 2022 11:19 am

“. . . and prosecuted as fraud.”

Since the US Government is 100% supportive of the meme that “CO2 is the main cause of global warming climate change”, they will NEVER prosecute themselves. Furthermore, I have heard it said that it is impossible for an outside individual or group to sue the Federal government unless you first receive their permission to do such.

Matt Kiro
Reply to  Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
January 5, 2022 1:29 pm

Im all in favor of running the federal government on 100% renewable power, except for the military. 90 % of the gov’t wouldn’t be able to operate if this happened and that wouldn’t be a bad thing.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Matt Kiro
January 6, 2022 8:54 am

So you are an advocate for smaller government and a strong defense. Sounds good to me. 🙂

AndyHce
Reply to  Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
January 5, 2022 1:43 pm

The wording “carbon pollution-free” can no doubt be interpreted in many ways, especially within the legal system where words frequently don’t mean what they mean to the rest of society. It does not say “carbon free”, it could be saying only carbon sourced electricity is allowed, but that source has to not pollute, “pollution” itself being a very subjective word.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  AndyHce
January 6, 2022 8:56 am

Carbon Pollution = Orwellian manipulation of the language

Deacon
Reply to  Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
January 5, 2022 6:03 pm

Alan,
great post…as one who spent over 2 1/2 years aboard a Navy ship (a Marine deployed) I would be very interested to hear how they will deploy enough solar panels or windmills to power the electicity demands of the 100’s of Navy vessels…they are Federal Property…could be very difficult for the Sub fleet. the Aircraft Carriers have lots of deck space…but really not much room for panels or windmills…
Also a lot of electricity demand on the helos I flew….no room for batteries, not very good for windmills…solar panels would not work in the high wind streams…
interesting challenges for the Pentagon folks to figure out!!

Chris Wright
Reply to  Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
January 6, 2022 3:28 am

As coal and gas are “100 percent carbon pollution-free” then they should be fine.
CO2 is not pollution. It is completely clean, safe to breathe, odourless and invisible. It is what makes the planet green. If there were no atmospheric CO2 than all the plants and trees would quickly die and most of humanity would starve to death.

It’s extraordinary that people who call themselves green demonise the very thing that makes the planet green. What better proof that the whole thing is completely barking mad?
Chris

Robert Hanson
Reply to  Chris Wright
January 7, 2022 1:48 pm

If there were no atmospheric CO2 than all the plants and trees would quickly die and most of humanity would starve to death.” Slight quibble: ALL of humanity would starve to death.

Stephen A Browne
January 5, 2022 10:47 am

If you’re getting electrical power through the national power grid you cannot know what power plant using what fuel or energy source generated the electrons flowing to your electrical outlets. All electrons are the same. They don’t have a return address saying where they came from. This executive order is simply silliness. There are hundreds if not thousands of separate Federal facilities around the country. Joe better be planning to disconnect all federal facilities from the grid and build dedicated solar power plants and wind mills for each and every federal site.

Gregory Woods
Reply to  Stephen A Browne
January 5, 2022 11:39 am

Don’t you just love those Green electrons?

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Gregory Woods
January 6, 2022 8:57 am

Green electrons don’t clog the grid, that’s how you can tell the difference.

Gordon A. Dressler
Reply to  Stephen A Browne
January 5, 2022 12:11 pm

Well, true about individual electrons . . . but not so true about electrical energy accounting means.

As but one example under Biden’s plan, if the huge Norfolk Naval Shipyard in Virginia used, say, 1 million kWh of grid electricity in one month, it could be accounted for, and replaced by 1 million kWh of “carbon-pollution free electricity” supplied to the grid from hydroelectric dams in the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), a federally-owned electric utility corporation in the United States.

The core issue, I believe, is that the US government itself does not own the amount of fossil-fuel-free electrical generation capacity (hydroelectric, wind, solar, geothermal) that is sufficient to supply its US, let alone international, demand for electricity.

And there is NO WAY for the US to significantly add to its current capabilities to generate “100 percent carbon pollution-free” electricity within the next 8 years, short of converting US nuclear-powered naval vessels to docked energy sources.

Last edited 20 days ago by Gordon A. Dressler
RickWill
Reply to  Stephen A Browne
January 5, 2022 2:27 pm

Joe better be planning to disconnect all federal facilities from the grid and build dedicated solar power plants and wind mills for each and every federal site.

You are seeing this in technical terms. It is far simpler than this.

It is a matter of just buying all the output of any number of “renewable” energy generators until the total energy purchased meets the Federal Agencies consumption.

Think how willing any “renewable” energy generator will be to lock in all they can produce over the lifetime of an asset in a government guaranteed contract. They will shave their margins. You could expect truck prices to be around $50/Mwh or even lower. So Federal Government has all its electricity supply locked in at the wholesale level. There will need to be some connection fee for local connectors but all the energy is paid for under a few large contracts.

Tom.1
January 5, 2022 11:02 am

You would think that even Slow Joe would think to ask, “How are we going to have electricity when the wind isn’t blowing?”

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  Tom.1
January 5, 2022 2:01 pm

You would think that even Slow Joe would think…

Can you see the fallacy of that idea yet?

Ted
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
January 5, 2022 3:29 pm

Ziggy, instead of only a +/- option, we need a giggle+/- option for that kind of comment! That made me laugh.

Last edited 20 days ago by Ted
John Endicott
Reply to  Tom.1
January 6, 2022 4:50 am

“You would think that even Slow Joe would think”

Slow Joe doesn’t think, he just reads the script (including, at times, the stage directions, IE “end of quote”) that is handed to him by his handlers.

ResourceGuy
January 5, 2022 11:07 am

Meanwhile the risk takers toil on to pay for the politico nonsense.

ExxonMobil discovers more oil off Guyana’s coast – ABC News (go.com)

Gordon A. Dressler
January 5, 2022 11:08 am

Hmmmm . . . I think I see through President Biden’s dictate (mandate?) that “all the electricity that the federal government uses be from ‘100 percent carbon pollution-free’ sources by 2030”.

Since it is quite obvious that no new nuclear power plants can be approved, built and brought on-line in next 8 years—and neither can any “carbon pollution-free” sources be emplaced in this time period to support this massive shift in supply source for electrical power—even under a crash program with federal funding, Biden’s unannounced plan must therefore be to permanently dock at US ports a large percentage of the US military fleet of nuclear-powered aircraft carriers and submarines to supply the needed electricity.

I guess Biden thinks that since he so “successfully” exited US military forces from Afghanistan last August, and since he has been “successfully” conveying to Putin strong warnings of severe sanctions if Russia invades Ukraine, the US doesn’t really need all of its military might anymore.

All Biden needs to do to complete this plan is to order up a large number of extension cords 🙂

Last edited 20 days ago by Gordon A. Dressler
AndyHce
Reply to  Gordon A. Dressler
January 5, 2022 1:45 pm

And that would provide 1% of non-ship electrical demand.?

Robert Hanson
Reply to  Gordon A. Dressler
January 7, 2022 1:55 pm

Just because an aircraft carrier is “nuclear powered”, that doesn’t mean the entire ship doesn’t produce any Co2. And since it does, that means the power it produces can’t be called Co2 free.

Michael in Dublin
January 5, 2022 11:12 am

Biden’s Executive Order is fantasy

Fantasy is fun. This is not fantasy but lunacy.

Willem Post
January 5, 2022 11:12 am

100% CO2 free is easy to do

Utilities do it all the time, to LOOK GREEN, without spending a dime from their own pocket.
Utilities sign power purchase agreements, PPAs, with any wind or solar producer anywhere, at whatever price, and presto, they can call themselves GREEN.

The federal government would do the same.

This scheme works, because the political entity, called EPA, allows two categories, source-based, and contract-based.

All utilities ACTUALLY obtain their electricity supply by connecting, via substations, to the high voltage grid, which has an electricity mix of all the generators feeding into the HV grid.

In case you did not know, electricity travels on the grid, as electro-magnetic waves, at near the speed of light, or from northern Maine to southern Florida, about 1800 miles in 0.01 second.

Any politicians or RE aficionados talking about a Vermont mix, or Pennsylvania mix, is totally ignorant of the laws of physics.

But, that does not stop them from pontificating on energy matters, telling us to this and that.

yirgach
Reply to  Willem Post
January 5, 2022 2:02 pm

Willem,

Thank you for that post. Critical thinking has been suppressed far too long.
Astonishment by real science is a lost art.

Y

Rud Istvan
Reply to  Willem Post
January 5, 2022 2:53 pm

Fun basic physics fact. The distance from Chicago to NYC is about 1000 miles. They are grid interconnected by HVAC.
So, (trick question) how far does an electron on the grid between them travel at near the speed of light?
A: Less than a meter, since it is AC and the EMF is a 60 hertz (alternating 120x/ second electromagnetic wave, unlike DC. It is all back and forth, not very far.

Jim Turner
Reply to  Rud Istvan
January 5, 2022 4:17 pm

Please correct me if I’m wrong (I’m a former chemist, not a physicist) but I think there are a couple of technical errors circulating here. First of all references to electromagnetic waves in wires is wrong. Electromagnetic waves are photons not electrons and they travel through space – gamma, UV, infra-red and microwaves are examples. AC current has a waveform but it is not electromagnetic. Secondly I think it is the signal that travels through a wire at the speed of light, the individual electrons move much slower. None of this makes Biden’s plan any smarter of course.

Doonman
Reply to  Jim Turner
January 5, 2022 9:54 pm

An electron only moves from one atom’s outer valence band to another atom’s outer valence band in materials that allow electrons to be exchanged readily when exposed to an electromotive force. These are materials that do not have a complete number of electrons in the atom’s outer valence band. These materials are called “conductive”. The current flow through the complete circuit made up of these materials is called the “flow of holes” created by each electron leaving one atom for the next.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Rud Istvan
January 6, 2022 9:23 am

Back in the days when long-distance communication was through telegraph lines, it became apparent that electrons moving through copper wires did not propagate with the same speed as electromagnetic radiation in a vacuum. Actually, the electrons that come out at the far end are not the same as the ones that enter at the origin. It is the electromagnetic field that propagates, cascading electrons along the length of the conductor.

The index of refraction of transparent materials is inversely proportional to the speed of propagation of the electromagnetic wave. That is, the higher the index of refraction, the slower an electromagnetic disturbance moves through the material. For opaque conductors, the equivalent to the complex refractive index of transparent crystals is the complex dielectric constant, which is large for metals.

Frank from NoVA
Reply to  Willem Post
January 5, 2022 3:22 pm

It’s true that any load serving entity (LSE) can satisfy some portion of its load obligations through a PPA. But all that means is that the system operator (ISO) will be looking at the counter party to that PPA to provide the required amount of physical energy to the grid at the appointed time. So, I don’t see how the Feds could just sign a bunch of agreements with suppliers of phantom green energy to satisfy the EO. Maybe I’m missing something.

Curious George(@moudryj)
January 5, 2022 11:23 am

King Canute comes to mind.

A silver lining is that Joe Biden clearly won’t run for President in 2028.

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  Curious George
January 5, 2022 2:02 pm

You misunderstand Canute’s point

John Hultquist
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
January 5, 2022 6:50 pm

 Canute, Ostriches, owls – metaphor and myth – wrong

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  John Hultquist
January 5, 2022 10:32 pm

I too can write meaningless unconnected words, but I choose not to.

John Endicott
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
January 6, 2022 4:58 am

Indeed, like the albatross, many have gotten the meaning of the actions of King Canute (aka Cnut the Great) entirely backwards.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Curious George
January 5, 2022 6:18 pm

King Canute was one of the good guys … playing on our team.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Curious George
January 6, 2022 9:27 am

The concern is who the DNC will nominate to replace him! Kamela? Hillary? Some dark horse willing to hide in their basement while the MSM campaigns for them?

Robert Hanson
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
January 7, 2022 2:16 pm

Peter Paul Montgomery Buttigieg seems to be the frontrunner. 🙂

Gregory Woods
January 5, 2022 11:27 am

Bring it on, Traitor Joe!

David S
January 5, 2022 11:32 am

Note that the due date is 2030. That’s after Biden leaves the White House.
Anyway reality is not something the Dems know how to deal with.

Willem Post
Reply to  David S
January 5, 2022 12:10 pm

Most Dem/Progs are career bureaucrats

They have not a clue regarding reality, because all they do is cost, plus more cost.

There is never a thought of efficiency

Making a profit is off the street table, because it is a dirty word, to be taxed away, as much as they can get away with.

ghl
Reply to  David S
January 5, 2022 3:26 pm

Whatever happens in 2024 and 2028 it is an instruction to spend up big now. A Trillion in the hand….is worth many after the next election… etc.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  David S
January 5, 2022 6:20 pm

There is considerable evidence that even when occupying it, he’s rarely all there. He’ll be lucky to complete his current term.

Dave
January 5, 2022 11:40 am

The man’s a figurehead. His handlers are insane.

Doug
January 5, 2022 11:45 am

I guarantee the White House temp will never be affected .. The Brandon administration needs to be ignored by real Americans . Do not comply with any law passed in the last twelve months . It’s your legal right under the umbrella of civil disobedience.

Robert Hanson
Reply to  Doug
January 7, 2022 2:21 pm

Right now California law requires wearing a mask when inside public spaces. Went to 3 grocery stores yesterday. Big signs just inside the door about masks being required.

About 30% of shoppers were NOT wearing a mask, and no one said a word about it to them. 😉

Dr. Bob
January 5, 2022 11:47 am

And one has to keep in mind that any power source, Wind, Solar, Nuclear, Hydro, has its own associated GHG emissions so there is no chance that any power source can have Zero Emissions. Unless and until every component and every process used to make the power production device has zero associated emissions. Right now, and for the foreseeable future, Zero CO2 emissions is a fantasy.

Timo, not that one
Reply to  Dr. Bob
January 5, 2022 12:30 pm

Correct Dr. Bob. To make wind, solar, nuclear, or hydro, you need first to make steel. There is no way to make steel without prodigious amounts of coal. Game over.

lmo
January 5, 2022 12:10 pm

That is one way to have less government, easier than cutting off funding, you just cut the power to various departments, agencies etc.

I didn’t think the democrats were about that?

High Treason
January 5, 2022 12:14 pm

There’s a hole in the bucket.
At the foundation of the calls for lunacy is the inconvenient truth that the Democrats took control of the US by electoral fraud. They are not supposed to be there at all. Highly malicious tactics were involved to steal the election. Deliberate traitors are calling the shots.
If you think about it, could basement hiding, demented Joe Biden have received more votes than any Presidential candidate in US history? Really? Anyone who believes that Joe Biden really received 82 million votes-even more than Obama must still believe in Santa Claus.
What is looming is the State of the Union address. How will Joe get through this? How will he get through the cognitive tests?
We live in interesting times.

Thomas
Reply to  High Treason
January 5, 2022 1:26 pm

High T. The Liberals call that “the big lie,” which makes me think it’s probably true.

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  High Treason
January 5, 2022 4:49 pm

True Fact:

To date Brandon has spent 25% of his alleged “Presidency” on vacation.

John Endicott
Reply to  Carlo, Monte
January 6, 2022 5:00 am

25% on physical vacation. fully 100% of it has been on mental vacation

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  High Treason
January 6, 2022 9:32 am

It does seem improbable that a person with such low polling numbers could have received a record number of votes.

But, then to quote Lincoln, “You can fool some of the people all the time.”

Robert Hanson
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
January 7, 2022 2:26 pm

You left out the other part of the quote.

And of course, you can’t win a National election with just “some” votes. That takes a strategy of ‘vote early, and vote often’.

markl
January 5, 2022 12:22 pm

I say great! Let them try. It will affect the federal government so they’ll be their own victims. They’ll never get Congress to allocate that much money for the boondoggle regardless of who’s in charge.Let the planning begin so the people understand what they’re on the hook for.

Steve Z
January 5, 2022 12:31 pm

If Biden’s new “Executive Order” can be safely ignored because it is impossible to realize, can we just ignore the one he signed to stop the Keystone XL pipeline?

No matter how much Biden or Kerry or others complain about the dangers of “global warming”, neither Biden nor Congress can repeal the laws of thermodynamics.

Biden should try to lead by example–instead of returning from Delaware to the White House aboard fuel-guzzling Air Force One, he should ride a bicycle. That would have been lots of fun in last weekend’s snowstorm!

Thomas Gasloli
January 5, 2022 12:42 pm

I don’t know, maybe it would be a good thing for the Federal government to shut down every time the wind stopped blowing. 😃

AndyHce
Reply to  Thomas Gasloli
January 5, 2022 1:54 pm

California voters passed a “sunshine” or “transparency” or some such word, law to prevent all the back room, you-will-never-know, deal making of public law for private interests. All gatherings for such dark doings now include a lawyer sitting in so they can claim attorney privilege and thur reveal nothing. Nothing else changed. The feds would continue to do whatever they want, you would just know even less about it than now.

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  AndyHce
January 5, 2022 2:06 pm

Attorney privilege only allows the attorney to refuse to answer, Shirley?

Dave Fair
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
January 5, 2022 2:22 pm

It, with exceptions, applies also to client communications with his attorney.

AndyHce
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
January 5, 2022 8:04 pm

It worked in CA to totally bypass the voters mandate. Of course, the courts generally want whatever the legislature wants.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Thomas Gasloli
January 5, 2022 2:20 pm

Politicians make their own wind, from both ends.

John Endicott
Reply to  Thomas Gasloli
January 6, 2022 5:02 am

The wind never stops blowing from the orifices of politicians

Mikeyj
January 5, 2022 12:59 pm

It’s easy the old fool will be dead long before 2030. It won’t be his problem. Executive orders last the length of his rein of incompetence, which hopefully will be short.

Dan Pangburn
January 5, 2022 1:12 pm

The alarmists blame climate change on the mistaken assumption that CO2 started it.
 
Alarmists have fooled a lot of people with that assertion (which is a mistake). Their entire theory is based on the false assumption that warming was initiated by CO2 increase and water vapor increased as a feedback to the temperature increase. Apparently they never actually checked or they would have discovered that WV has increased far more than possible from just temperature increase (the relevant feedback).
 
The simple algorithm to calculate WV increase from temperature increase reported by UAH is included in Sect 8 of http://globalclimatedrivers2.blogspot.com The results for temperatures reported by HadCRUT4 are graphed in Sect 7 of https://watervaporandwarming.blogspot.com
 
Temperatures calculated using measured water vapor make an excellent match to measured average global temperatures since before 1900 as shown here.

Aintsm 1850 2020 sine.jpg
Derg
Reply to  Dan Pangburn
January 5, 2022 10:15 pm

Where is the warming of the 30s?

Dan Pangburn
Reply to  Derg
January 6, 2022 8:57 am

The graph is average global temperature as reported by HadCRUT4 with 5-year smoothing. It includes the warming thru the 30s.

Robert Hanson
Reply to  Dan Pangburn
January 7, 2022 2:31 pm

Any graph that has 1945 being far hotter than the 1930’s is obviously fake.

Dan Pangburn
Reply to  Robert Hanson
January 7, 2022 4:41 pm

RH,
I don’t make fake graphs. I suppose that someone who makes fake graphs might think everyone does. You obviously did not look at the HadCRUT4 reported data or the graph.

Alba
January 5, 2022 1:21 pm

Meanwhile, in the UK, as in the USA, inflation is a big political issue, especially rising energy prices. So the UK Labour Party is calling on the Government to abolish the 5% VAT on domestic gas and electricity bills. Political expediency trumps climate change yet again.

Derek Thompson
Reply to  Alba
January 5, 2022 1:55 pm

I moved into a house and my elec bills dropped 50%. Surprised as it is a larger house. Elec supplier , bulb, put my direct debit up by 75% in autumn. Their sell was green energy. 100%. When the price of ff went up they hit me with the rise just had my latest bill… I’m in debt by about a month’s payment. They’re bust and are run by administaters because they can’t pay their gas bills!!!! How fn green is that. Oh, BTW the gov price cap is removed in April.

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  Alba
January 5, 2022 2:08 pm

Inflation? You mean printing huge mountains of pretend money causes inflation?

Wow, who’d’ve thunk that?

AndyHce
January 5, 2022 1:23 pm

Federal Government electricity is mostly not independent of other electricity. It is a completely shared resource outside of secure military installations like naval ships.

Terry
January 5, 2022 1:29 pm

The lawn surrounding the White House would be a good start for windmills, and solar, and John Kerry’s place too.

AndyHce
January 5, 2022 1:41 pm

The wording “carbon pollution-free” can no doubt be interpreted in many ways, especially within the legal system where words frequently don’t mean what they mean to the rest of society. It does not say “carbon free”, it could be saying only carbon sourced electricity is allowed, but that source has to not pollute, “pollution” itself being a very subjective word.

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  AndyHce
January 5, 2022 2:09 pm

The wording “carbon pollution-free” can no doubt be interpreted in many ways

Perhaps it means free carbon pollution?

January 5, 2022 1:43 pm

I think my latest article is related:

https://www.cfact.org/2022/01/04/environmentalism-has-lost-its-way/

Paving the countryside with solar slabs, killing huge numbers of birds with wind choppers, and then using toxic chemical energy to process the juice, violates all the basic principles of environmentalism. They have lost their way.

Dave Fair
Reply to  David Wojick
January 5, 2022 2:36 pm

David, its the old question: “If you call a dog’s tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have?” Calling unreliables green doesn’t make them environmentally friendly.

RickWill
January 5, 2022 2:09 pm

The Australian Capital Territory, a similar seat of federal government as DC in the USA, achieved 100% “renewable” electricity a few years ago. It was not hard to do.

It is a simple contractual fiddle where you have a supply auction that is open to any generator anywhere in the network. You agree on a price for all their output and then onsell that output into the wholesale market.

The federal government would simply set up an auction that all “renewable” energy generators could participate in and keep then rolling until they have enough energy locked in supply contracts to match their use – wallah 100% “renewable”

In Australia, the ACT government is not the Federal Government and must burden electricity consumers and rate payers with any folly they get into through the contracts. What is now hurting said consumers and rate payers in the ACT is the negative wholesale prices. Contracted generators have sold their output in advance so are no longer sensitive to market signals. There is no curtailing when the price goes negative.
https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/7197512/evoenergy-wants-a-big-rise-in-electricity-prices-to-cover-acts-renewables-targets/

As part of the government’s 100 per cent renewable target, solar and wind generators are paid for the energy they generate.

Payments are calculated by the difference between the feed-in tariff price and the wholesale electricity price.

ACT Energy Minister Shane Rattenbury said the drop in wholesale electricity prices was partly due to the impact of the pandemic.

“The cost of the ACT’s feed-in tariff scheme has been well below forecast levels for several years, which has resulted in lower household electricity costs than would have otherwise occurred,” Mr Rattenbury said.

Federal agencies have unlimited funds so the difference between struck rates for an auction and the wholesale price is not a problem.

If you have stayed with me, you may realise this is essentially a ponzi schema where the early adopters can make hay until more intermittent generation is encouraged into the network without recognising their real cost. Once intermittent generation in the network averages around 20%, it gets very expensive to keep the grid stable. Think of the issues in Texas last year occurring every day without decisive load management.

Last edited 20 days ago by RickWill
Dave Fair
Reply to  RickWill
January 5, 2022 2:32 pm

“Decisive” load management is the goal of many players. It is actually “decisive” control of peoples’ lives for ideological purposes.

Bob
January 5, 2022 2:10 pm

The whole renewable energy/net zero notion is so stupid it takes my breath away. There is only one way to put a stop to this nonsense and that is to control the amount of energy delivered to each household. I would like to say we should limit the energy available to the government also but even I recognize that some departments are truly essential. However if we cut the amount of energy delivered to government workers residences it won’t take them long to wake up.

Ed Norman
January 5, 2022 2:14 pm

It is simple really: Biden will just claim to be using the 40% that is already “green”, and then blame everyone else for not doing their part.

Roger Knights
January 5, 2022 3:00 pm

The Democrats feel they must accede to extreme greenism lest the Green party run a spoiler / vote-splitter presidential candidate, as happened in 2000. This explains their apparent irrationality and their refusal to listen to climate contrarians.

January 5, 2022 3:10 pm

He is only demanding that the government use only CO2 free energy. So if all the nuclear and some of the wind goes to government uses, everyone else can use gas and coal, no?

stinkerp
January 5, 2022 5:20 pm

We can get pretty close to Biden’s lofty goal fairly easily if we start closing down federal agencies. They’ll be using zero energy—renewable or otherwise—and saving American taxpayers money and grief. Let’s go, Brandon!

Rich Davis
January 5, 2022 5:49 pm

It’s not clear at all that Biden — or whomever is handing him the note cards before he faces the camera…

Whoever, not whomever. C’mon, you’re writing for public consumption. Is there nobody who knows the difference between the nominative and accusative?

Sad

pat michaels
Reply to  Rich Davis
January 5, 2022 8:35 pm

Ooh that’s a big gotcha! My Latin and composition teachers at Benet Academy (the latter being one of the great ones, who just retired) would be very unhappy. I appreciate you reminding me to be a bit more careful.

PJM

Robert Hanson
Reply to  Rich Davis
January 7, 2022 2:43 pm

Seriously? I thought we all knew by now, grammar is racist.

Somehow, with sky high inflation, the border wide open, FFs under attack, public schools teaching CRT, and most of our elites hell-bent for Marxism, I just can’t get worked up over the “difference between the nominative and accusative”. Sorry, but I just can’t…

GeorgiePorgie
January 5, 2022 6:37 pm

When their printing press for money gets sold out they will be using coal and wood.

John Hultquist
January 5, 2022 6:54 pm

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitol_Power_Plant

They have tried with the US Capitol area.
This wiki article could use an update.

Izaak Walton
January 5, 2022 7:26 pm

The author appears to be confusing various different things. In 2017 the EIA stated that the total US government’s energy usage was about 1 quadrillion BTU which includes fossil fuel use for vehicles which is the majority of it. In contrast the total renewable energy output in 2020 was 11 quadrillion BTU and included 7 quadrillion BTU worth of energy generation. So in other words there is at least 6.5 quadrillion more BTUs of electricity than is needed for Biden’s executive order. All the federal government has to do between now and 2030 is to sign contracts with existing renewable energy suppliers rather than fossil fuel based energy suppliers.

Derg
Reply to  Izaak Walton
January 5, 2022 10:19 pm

You and your stupid ideas.

Doonman
January 5, 2022 7:37 pm

President Biden signed an Executive Order commanding that all the electricity that the federal government uses be from “100 percent carbon pollution-free” sources by 2030.

Joe Biden will not be president in 2030, therefore his executive order will not have any effect.

Notice the word “executive”. It only has meaning if you are one.

Last edited 20 days ago by Doonman
AndyHce
Reply to  Doonman
January 5, 2022 8:11 pm

Executive orders issued many decades ago are still ruining people’s lives today.

lynn
January 5, 2022 10:51 pm

I wonder how many diapers Biden goes through a day ? And if Dr. Jill has to change them ? And if those diapers could be used for power plant fuel ?

michel
January 6, 2022 12:06 am

This a classic policy, and should be a case history when the history of the climate wars is written.

First, as the piece points out, the policy is impossible to implement. Wind and solar are not reliable enough sources of generation to power any large organization, including the Federal Government.

Second, even were it possible to implement, it would not reduce Government emissions by a large percentage. Nationally electricity generation is about 25% of total emissions (Source: EPA). So the most you can reduce Government emissions by is going to be 25%.

Third, even if it were possible to implement, Government emissions are a fairly small percentage of total US emissions. I haven’t found figures for how much, but we can get an idea from sector emissions:

Land use & forestry 12%
Agriculture 10%
Industry 23%

We know none of these are government, and then of the remainder only a fraction will be government. You can get an idea from the total number of Federal employees, which was about 2.3 million in 2020.

It seems unlikely based on all this that government is doing more than about 10% of total national emissions, and of that 10%, only a quarter will be from electricity, so the proposed measures can’t reduce national emissions by more than about 2.5%.]

Whatever, do the calculation however you like, there is no way that electricity consumption by the Government can account for a significant proportion of US national emissions.

Conclusion, even if possible, the measures will not significantly reduce US emissions.

Fourth, even more obviously, they are not going to reduce global emissions. Say the US is emitting about 5 billion tons a year out of a global total of about 37 billion. So the measures might reduce global emissions by about 2.5% of 5 billion, which is, have I got this right? 125 million tons out of the 37 billion and rising. Say the estimates are off, say that the total is double that. Its still not significant, its still going to be overwhelmed by Chinese increases in emissions in a year or so.

Future historians of this moral panic will want to analyze carefully how it came about that the best and brightest in the US and the UK became focussed on doing things that were at the same time impossible and, even if possible, totally ineffective.

There are parallels in the UK – the crazed Net Zero project, which consists of replacing cars with EVs, home heating by heat pumps, andat the same time electricity generation with wind and solar, and at the same time converting gas grid to hydrogen… Again, impossible to do and useless even were it possible.

Future historians will probably point out that this wave of irrationality and denial was not confined to climate, it manifested in the gender and race wars also. And they will probably point out how the problems it created were not confined to climate, gender and race. By far the largest costs will be attributed to the real problems that were crowded out by this focus on non-problems with topics of little real importance, while the real crises developed unnoticed in the background.

Global Cooling
January 6, 2022 3:38 am

Big Federal Government is not sustainable. It runs out of funding. Availability of staff is another question mark.  Decentralization and privatization will be done for the remaining government activities.

Global and federal solutions do not match peoples’ need everywhere. A thing that works in California, may not be appropriate in Alaska.  Biden already said that there is no federal solution to .. you know the thing.

States, counties, towns and villages will be back in power.

January 6, 2022 5:16 am

The Feds would just do what the “100%” towns and companies do, which is buy green certificates. Where and when the green power is produced is irrelevant. However a national renewable portfolio standard, which the Dems want, would destroy the certificate market.

JamesD
January 6, 2022 2:10 pm

“when improperly insulated gas plants couldn’t make up for shortages in wind generation.”

Feed gas to a gas plant has already been dehy’d via glycol and emerges with a dew point around -130F. How about load shedding booster compressors on main lines and load shedding the cooling water pumps at a nuke plant?

H.R.
January 6, 2022 5:28 pm

“Biden powers his own political disaster with energy fantasy”



The only thing Biden powers is the poop in his pants.***



*** [Announcer’s voice] “This pResidency sponsored by…. Depends.”

Maurice B Singleton
January 7, 2022 1:00 pm

Just limit the size of government to what can be supported by renewables.

%d bloggers like this: