The Green Energy Wall Can’t Arrive Quickly Enough

From the MANHATTAN CONTRARIAN

Francis Menton

We are fast approaching something I have called the “Green Energy Wall.” The “Wall” consists of some combination of real-world obstacles, partly cost and partly physics, that will inevitably end the quest for emissions-free “net zero” electricity generation well before the goal of zero emissions is reached. I first identified the approaching Wall in this post in December 2021, and remarked that it was “gradually coming into focus” in this follow-up post in November 2023. Everyone who pays attention and is capable of doing basic arithmetic knows that the we are approaching this Wall, some jurisdictions much faster than others. (New York has voluntarily put itself in the front ranks.).

What we don’t know is how the hitting of the Wall will manifest itself: Widespread and frequent blackouts? Regular, enforced load-shedding brown-outs? Tripling or quadrupling of electricity prices? A political uprising as people realize that they have been duped by scammers claiming that an energy transition would be easy and cheap? Or perhaps it will be all of the above.

Meanwhile, the years pass slowly. The impossibility of the situation we are digging into becomes more and more obvious, but so far there is no obvious crisis. Will it arrive in another year, or two? Or maybe five?

Consider New York. Multiple statutes and regulations commit us to energy-transition mandates that simply will not be met. Among the fantasies are two major statutes passed in 2019, one for New York State (Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act), and the other for the City (Local Law 97); and vehicle emissions standards adopted in 2022 by New York’s Department of Environmental Conservation.

Start with those vehicle emissions standards. In 2022 the DEC adopted for New York the standards and requirements set forth in the California Air Resources Board’s “Advanced Clean Cars II” regulation. California’s regulations call for minimum percentages of vehicles sold to be “zero emissions” starting with the 2026 model year, and then rapidly scaling up to 100% “zero emissions” by the 2035 model year. Here is a chart from CARB of the percentages of vehicles sold, by model year, that are supposed to be “zero emissions.”:

EVs are not the only things that qualify as “zero emissions” (e.g., hydrogen vehicles qualify), but EVs are the only things that qualify and also exist in meaningful numbers. The 2026 model year begins around September 2025 — that is, about 16 months away. What is the current percent of vehicles sold in New York that are “zero emissions”? A piece on March 6, 2024 in the New York Times puts the percentage of electric vehicles sold in the New York “metropolitan area” in 2023 at less than 10%. The article does not give a figure for New York State as a whole, but undoubtedly the figure for the state — including rural upstate areas — is well less than the percentage in the City and suburbs. Meanwhile many sources report that EV sales have suddenly declined sharply in the first quarter of 2024. (I can’t find statistics on that broken down by state.). But even if EV sales in New York State continued to increase in the first months of this year, are they really going to somehow get to 35% of all sales within a little more than a year? And then to 43% after just one more year, and then 51% after one more year, and so on to 100% by 2035? This is completely ridiculous.

Equally ridiculous is the mandate in the CLCPA for 70% of electricity generation from “renewables” by 2030. The people in charge of implementing this mandate are completely incompetent and have no idea what they are doing. After passage of the Act in 2019, the first significant step, in 2020 and 2021, was to close the two zero-emissions nuclear reactors at Indian Point that provided about 25% of New York City’s electricity, and replace them with two brand new natural gas plants, thus substantially increasing emissions. So to date, the progress toward the so-called 70 x 30 goal has been negative.

The signature initiative to achieve the 70 x 30 goal is a plan for 9000 MW of offshore wind off the coast of Long Island. In this post on March 5 I did the simple arithmetic to calculate that, if all of that capacity actually gets built, it would at best provide about 16% of New York’s current electricity consumption — before the addition of new loads from the electrification of the vehicle fleet and of home heating. Granted, we have the large hydro plant at Niagara Falls that they count as “renewable,” plus some other hydro resources that, together with Niagara Falls, might come to 20% of consumption. So with those plus the offshore wind, perhaps we can get to 35% of consumption. (Meanwhile, the offshore wind projects keep getting canceled and delayed as the developers maneuver to get themselves increased prices.)

How are we going to get to 70% from renewables in under 6 years? They literally have no clue. Something called a “Scoping Plan” has been generated pursuant to the CLCPA. It foresees a need for something they call the “Dispatchable Emissions Free Resource.” This is something that does not currently exist, and likely will not exist during any relevant time frame.

Yet the lack of any viable replacement has not prevented New York from pledging to close its well-functioning natural gas plants. Several were scheduled for closure this year. But then, back in November, somebody noticed that there was nothing to replace the plants, so the forced retirement of four of these plants got postponed for two years. News flash: two years from now, we’re still not going to have anything to replace these plants. The same will be true four years from now, and six and eight and ten. Will they simply keep postponing the mandated closure? Perhaps this is how we avoid smashing into the Green Energy Wall.

And then we have Local Law 97, supposedly mandating all large (25,000 square feet and up) residential buildings to convert to electric heat, mostly by 2030. This will represent an increase in the demand on the grid by something in the range of 30%. This at the same time as the natural gas plants are mandated to close, to be only partially replaced by some highly irregular offshore wind that will not fully replace the gas generation, let alone begin to supply the increased demand.

Something has to give here, and it will give. It will be much for the best if this happens quickly, rather than dragging on for years and years.

4.9 38 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

137 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Sean Galbally
May 15, 2024 6:06 am

Too many people including academics are commenting on “climate” when they have very little knowledge of proper scientific analysis. They are commenting purely on opinions which should not be used for decision making.

Ron
Reply to  Sean Galbally
May 15, 2024 9:32 am

What is the point in the “net zero” mandate when you have China and India moving in the opposite direction! CO2 emissions continue to increase unabated regardless of what the west does!

Someone
Reply to  Ron
May 15, 2024 2:24 pm

“Net zero” is stated goal. The real goal is to profit from spending $$ trillions.

Reply to  Ron
May 16, 2024 5:09 am

The goal is the destruction of Western Civilization. The idiotic leftists are like good little lemmings jumping off the cliff to our mutual destruction. Because Western Civilization invented evil and no other civilization has committed evil. So it must be destroyed. Oh, and the Orange Man is bad.

SteveZ56
Reply to  Sean Galbally
May 15, 2024 1:26 pm

Not only is there lack of scientific analysis, but also a lack of engineering analysis, which requires solving mass and energy balances. When the required energy output exceeds the energy input by orders of magnitude (factors > 10), that’s when they hit the wall.

An engineering analysis also requires an economic analysis. A government or academic or bureaucrat can’t force people to buy vehicles they can’t afford, when cheaper vehicles based on well-proven technology are available.

Also, if these rules apply to New York State, what’s to prevent a New Yorker from traveling to PA, NJ, or CT to buy an ICE car, and driving it back home to New York? It would have out-of-state tags that have to be renewed every year, but the neighboring states would gladly collect the registration fees.

Tom Halla
May 15, 2024 6:07 am

The Green Blob is just doing “Demand The Impossible”.

Reply to  Tom Halla
May 15, 2024 6:32 am

yuh, like JFK saying we’ll go to the moon by the end of the decade- but that was a simple engineering problem compared to the truly impossible, decarbonizing the planet.

oeman50
Reply to  Tom Halla
May 16, 2024 4:01 am

This reminds me of Obama stating that he increased the MPG on cars. He did diddly. He just promoted a regulation requiring it. The auto companies and their engineers did the real work.

May 15, 2024 6:22 am

Nobody said it would be easy. Spain showed this year that renewables lead to lower prices. Despite doomsayers the german grid got more reliable every passing year.

India and China add a huge amount of renewables to their grid each year. If the US want to stay behind to please their ff barons, they will pay a high price for it.

But fossil fuels will soon hit a wall.

Trying to Play Nice
Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 6:43 am

India and China add a huge amount of coal burning power plants to their grid each year and they don’t care about air and water pollution. Can you give us some enlightening information on how Spain showed lower prices from renewables? Other than by increasing subsidies.

Reply to  Trying to Play Nice
May 15, 2024 6:55 am

Spanish Power Is Almost Free With Renewables Set for Record
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-02-29/spanish-power-is-almost-free-with-renewables-set-for-record

Coal’s share in India’s power generation capacity drops below 50% for 1st time since 1960s
https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/coals-share-in-indias-power-generation-capacity-drops-below-50-for-1st-time-since-1960s/articleshow/110136350.cms

First they came for capacity, soon generated electricity will follow. 😀

Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 7:08 am

This is utterly ridiculous. You cite a Bloomberg piece which mentions spot pricing. It means nothing. Spot price rises and falls are a consequence of extreme intermittency. One day or week or month when they collapse is part of the problem, not a sign that intermittent supply is the solution.

You could cite the UK periodic huge surges in spot price as a counter example, but why bother? It too, other than illustrating the silliness of using spot prices in this way, shows nothing.

What you need to compare is the cost of generated dispatchable electricity. Do a proper study, including all the costs, ie not LCOE as generally practiced. Every time this is done, wind and solar come out costing several times as much as conventional.

Even though the fuel is free.

But neither you nor Nick or any of the other renewable advocates here will ever cite such studies. Because they don’t show what you want to believe.

Reply to  michel
May 15, 2024 7:10 am

Then how me your studies.

Idle Eric
Reply to  michel
May 15, 2024 1:13 pm

It seems MYN must’ve gone to bed.

I’m sure he’ll respond tomorrow.

JonasM
Reply to  michel
May 15, 2024 1:57 pm

But that’s just a Blog post! Show me a peer-reviewed study, blah, blah, blah…

(Predicting his next move…)

Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 7:56 am

It’s for the proponents of new tech- forced upon the rest of us at immense cost- to prove their point.

Scissor
Reply to  michel
May 15, 2024 7:13 am

Exactly right, deceivers intentionally conflate and confuse spot pricing and capacity with real pricing and generation.

Reply to  michel
May 15, 2024 7:14 am

And no, you are claiming that renewables are cheaper than conventional, on a fully costed basis.

You show the evidence!

Reply to  michel
May 15, 2024 7:28 am

Also read Roger Caiazza – lots of references to him in Menton’s blog.

Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 8:46 am

As a home owner in Spain I can confirm electricity is not free….

KevinM
Reply to  Hysteria
May 15, 2024 1:18 pm

Yes, that gets to cost per unit _to_whom_. The cost includes public money used to build and maintain generation.

Bill Toland
Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 9:30 am

Myusername, you have confused capacity with output. This is a common mistake of journalists who have no understanding of how electricity grids operate.

Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 9:49 am

Spanish Power Is Almost Free With Renewables Set for Record

you may be right because i have noticed many many Spaniards posting here how happy they are about free electricity. lol.

D Sandberg
Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 10:18 am

username, Spain is #1 in solar because Spain is #1 in solar subsidies (besides their southerly latitude advantage).

In Spain, solar installation incentives have evolved over time. As of the latest information available, here’s a summary of the incentives:

  1. Tax Rebates: Homeowners can receive up to 60% of their installation costs back as a solar panel tax rebate, depending on where they live in Spain12.
  2. Property Tax Reductions: There are reductions in property tax (IBI) and the licenses needed to install solar panels (ICIO), which vary by municipality12.
  3. IRPF Deduction: A tax deduction of 20% of the installation cost is available, with a maximum limit of €5,000 per year3.
  4. Grants: Previously, grants were available under the Real Decreto 477/2021, funded by the European Union as part of the Next Generation EU recovery plan. However, these grants ended on December 31st, 202312.
  5. Autonomous Community Assistance: Specific assistance may be available from the Autonomous Communities4.
atticman
Reply to  D Sandberg
May 15, 2024 2:08 pm

Still doesn’t make the sun shine at night, though…

Rick C
Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 10:30 am

Current price in Spain €0.29/kwh. That’s close to the EU average. Also seems they have about €3Billion/yr in subsidies.

Reply to  Rick C
May 15, 2024 1:13 pm

I wonder who pays for those subsidies! 😉

KevinM
Reply to  Rick C
May 15, 2024 1:21 pm

That looks like a cost-to-consumer number, and It’s about 3x higher than middle aged Americans will be used to. Bloomberg article should have explained it.

Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 12:56 pm

soon generated electricity will follow.”

Not from wind and solar it won’t .

The generated electricity on a windless evening is still an absolute ZERO.

KevinM
Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 1:08 pm

From the Bloomberg: “Prices in Spain are near €2/MWh, compared with €67 in France”
As the article is written in US English by a NY-based corporation, it would help to list prices in USD. Also I’m going to look to see if any attempt is made to describe price to whom? If electric power were really almost free anywhere under any set of rules, then that place would be shipping aluminum cans to all other nations.

Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 1:11 pm

Where does Spain get its electricity on a windless night, Luser?

Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 1:17 pm

I’m guessing you’re in the UK like your predecessor Griff, unless you’re Griff? So I’ll give you the same challenge, set your electricity use to match that of Solar and Wind. Currently you’ll have to be at 7.5%.
https://gridwatch.templar.co.uk
Wind load factor varies on a daily basis from 1% to 60%. For Solar it’s 0.26% to 23%. Unfortunately they both can be at the low end simultaneously.
How that variability can lead to the cheapest electricity is beyond sensible comprehension.

Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 2:41 pm

Coal’s share of India’s electricity generation is many times larger than wind or solar.

Why are you wrong with everything you post?

Is a conscious decision to be WRONG… or just continual bad luck ??

India-electricity
Trying to Play Nice
Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 3:10 pm

Is it that you can’t read or that you can’t understand what you read

Spanish consumer electric prices dropped to levels not seen since 2021. Wow. I didn’t read your article because I’m not getting a Bloomcrap account to read gibberish you provide.

You’ve been on this website for a long time now and you still don’t understand the difference between the BS rated capacity and real actual generation. If you looked past all the greenie articles about how coal is at it lowest portion of capacity in India you might have seen the report that they used a record amount of coal.

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/india-fires-up-coal-use-emissions-during-election-heat-wave-maguire-2024-05-09/

oeman50
Reply to  MyUsername
May 16, 2024 4:08 am

In fact, there are times of overgeneration of renewable sources that cause prices to go negative. That means you have to pay someone to take the power! So now you can claim that renewables are even better than free. Of course, this does not work during dunkelflaute.

J Boles
Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 7:12 am

Well then it is time that YOU got up to speed and put the solar panels on your roof, get off that fossil fuel energy, you know, the car and the lights and the heat, get off that FF and lead the way, the Great Climate Leap Forward. Go ahead, show us!

Reply to  J Boles
May 15, 2024 7:58 am

And they never do. Like the forestry haters here in Wokeachusetts- it turns out they all burn wood and amazingly, they all live in wood homes with lots of fine wood furniture and tons of paper products. (of course they’re also climate nut jobs)

Reply to  J Boles
May 15, 2024 8:32 am

Solar panels are built using fossil fuel energy. All the so-called renewables require fossil fuel energy for gathering raw materials, manufacturing, delivery, installation, etc.

If he really believed, he’d live in a yurt made from locally-sourced biodegradable materials.

Reply to  J Boles
May 15, 2024 1:15 pm

Luser knows that it relies totally on fossil fuels and their derivatives for everything in its pitiful existence.

It won’t be giving up the massive benefits of fossil fuels any time in its lifetime.

Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 7:26 am

Spain showed this year that renewables lead to lower prices

Average retail electricity price in Spain in 2023 was EUR0.241/kWh. For comparison, Hungary was EUR0.091/kWh a fraction of the cost in Spain. And Spain hangs off France for dispatchable power from nuclear.
https://www.euronews.com/next/2023/03/29/energy-crisis-in-europe-which-countries-have-the-cheapest-and-most-expensive-electricity-a

And the question that needs an answer is how many wind turbines and solar panels did Spain actually manufacture using solely wind power and/or solar power. I can ensure you the answer is zero.

Net Zero is an illusion promoted by incompetent clowns. And supported by China’s willingness to build their industry on mostly domestic coal sources.

The current technology is actually carbon intensive due to the limited life of all the hardware needed. If wind turbines, batteries and solar panels lasted more than 200 years they may save carbon but any life less than that and they are carbon generators requiring more than they can save.

Spain imported USD50bn worth of stuff from China last year. That is where all developed countries look to get the transition hardware..

Dave Andrews
Reply to  RickWill
May 15, 2024 7:52 am

China had a record £57.92bn ($72.4bn) trade surplus in April 2024. They don’t mind how long such surpluses may continue.

Reply to  RickWill
May 15, 2024 8:00 am

while China, while using vast amounts of ff is laughing its way to world power

Tern11
Reply to  RickWill
May 15, 2024 8:41 am

EROI. Windmills can’t make windmills.

Reply to  Tern11
May 15, 2024 9:57 am

That myth just won’t die, huh?

Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 1:18 pm

Because it is totally true.

Fossil fuels are used to mine, transport, manufacture and install EVERY part of a wind turbine…

.. from the in-ground foundations to the very tip of the blades.

KevinM
Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 1:27 pm

Add a link to shut him up… or shut up? It’s not the kind of language I prefer, especially defending jargon that peaked in 2008, but:
Do windmills have a positive EROI?
If the answer is yes than the same link can be pasted as a response every time.

Editor
Reply to  KevinM
May 15, 2024 3:16 pm

It’s not about EROI (EROEI), it’s about intermittency.

Editor
Reply to  RickWill
May 15, 2024 3:12 pm

“Net Zero is an illusion promoted by incompetent clowns.”.

Hmmm.

Net Zero is a scam, started by psychopathic billionaires and promoted by incompetent clowns.

I think it’s time to set up and maintain a list of the names of those psychopaths and their involvement.

Malcolm Chapman
Reply to  Mike Jonas
May 16, 2024 4:18 am

Yes, I agree with that. Extravagantly wealthy narcissists are screwing things up for lots of poor people. This is not good. It would be good to be able to call this out in some visible way. I could write a book about it, probably, if I tried, but that would have no effect. And better people than me have already done that. In a world where news is dominated by social media platforms, which I neither use nor understand, I genuinely don’t know what to do about the problem. Any ideas gratefully received. Giving my backing to WUWT and the GWPF is my small contribution, along with talking about it to anyone that will listen.

Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 7:54 am

“Spain showed this year that renewables lead to lower prices.”

Counting all the subsidies? Counting cost of the loss of ecosystem values? That is, converting green acreage to solar and wind energy? Counting loss of real estate values to properties next to such “green” energy? Counting loss of aesthetic value in beautiful Spain? Counting toxic damage to landscapes where rare minerals are mined for solar and wind energy? Counting the need for industrial scale battery backup systems? Counting the immense cost in brain damage to those who have lost their mind to the green energy faith? Can you list the cost for electricity in Spain for say, the last 20 years?

Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 8:29 am

If the US want to stay behind to please their ff barons…

Yes, we should all be worried about falling behind in the race to the bottom.

CD in Wisconsin
Reply to  More Soylent Green!
May 15, 2024 8:54 am

It’s a race which the U.S. should not even enter. If MUN hates the FF barons, he should stop contributing to the demand for their products. No one is forcing him to do so.

Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 8:48 am

Spain showed this year that renewables lead to lower prices.

For historical reasons the “Trading Economics” website is included in my browser’s “bookmarks” hierarchy.

URL : https://tradingeconomics.com/spain/electricity-price

Keeping the default “Frequency = 1D” (daily) option, but changing the “Custom Dates” (the third icon) to “Start = 2020-01-01” gave me the attached screenshot of Spain’s daily “spot” electricity prices for the last 4 (and a fraction) years.

I submit the conjecture that it is possible that factors other than “installed renewables capacity” may have — just “may have” — influenced Spain’s “spot” electricity price over that time period …

Spain-electricity-prices_010120-150524
Reply to  Mark BLR
May 16, 2024 1:32 am

UK prices have also fallen over the last 18 months or so, from absurd to merely ridiculous. It has nothing to do with renewables.

Capture
Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 8:50 am

ROTFLMAO. Man you are deluded.

How does building two separate systems (since “renewables” need 100% backup when they’re not working, which is more often than they are working) to provide the same product make the product less expensive?!

Even the people pushing this worse-than-useless garbage can’t hide the fact that it increase costs. The classic quote from Barack Obama –

“Under my plan, electricity prices WILL NECESSARILY SKYROCKET.”

Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 9:32 am

Ref. Germany – only imports “save” our grid, including by nuclear power generated electricity from France – not blinding the grid as German did 😀

Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 9:37 am

The fairy taile of cheep solar

comment image

Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 10:38 am

Nobody said it would be easy.

Something in the realm of possible would be nice, though.

D Sandberg
Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 10:38 am

User, going from more than 0.50 EUR/KWh to 0.30 EUR/KWh is “something”, but then there’s that 3.3% inflation thing that may have something to do with paying for all those solar incentives.

Mr.
Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 12:12 pm

MUN, I offer you this factual summation of the status and outlook for “energy transition”.

Only cultish deniers of reality could argue with this –

https://robertbryce.substack.com/p/what-media-wont-tell-you-about-energy-transition?utm_source=multiple-personal-recommendations-email&utm_medium=email&triedRedirect=true

KevinM
Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 1:01 pm

Spain showed this year that renewables lead to lower prices.
Please elaborate.

JamesB_684
Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 1:22 pm

There is plenty of uranium on Earth for base load sources … and if we need more FF, Titan has vast quantities of carbon compounds. It’s like the universe is loaded with the stuff…

Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 2:05 pm

India electricity by source

COAL is increasing rapidly.. solar and wind are barely visible.

India-electricity
Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 2:07 pm

India Energy use .. COAL and OIL do nearly all the work and are responsible for most of the increase in the last few years.

India-Energy
May 15, 2024 6:30 am

It seems that every so often, the lunatics take over the asylum.

Here in Wokeachusetts, we’re all totally immersed in climate hysteria. Every day, every newspaper has a climate emergency/disaster story. All governments, state and local are all pushing this hysteria. All talking about how we must decarbonize everything. I see little resistance. I offer lots of resistance- always sending links to some of the better postings here, videos from Tony Heller and others to key players in the state government, enviros, forestry people, academics, etc. – but I’m totally ignored. It’s as if I have leprosy. As if they’re all thinking, “oh, it’s just Joe again, he’s a demented old fool who spent too many years deep in the woods- so he thinks we’re not having a climate emergency- best to just ignore him”.

May 15, 2024 6:31 am

Another great post by Francis Menton. Keep up the good work!
Another possibility for “the wall” to become more visible, perhaps, is the implementation of the so-called “cap and invest” allowances on fossil fuels. Supposedly to be put into effect by the end of 2024.
https://capandinvest.ny.gov/

guidvce4
Reply to  David Dibbell
May 15, 2024 7:15 am

Well, its NY. A real bunch of nuts in charge of that state. The bill will come due and the folks that actually pay the bills, the taxpayers, will revolt one way or another. Many will leave the state for friendlier places. Leaving the “useful idiots” with a handful of massive problems. Maybe.

May 15, 2024 7:05 am

The picture is fitting: Black coal is hitting a green renewables wall 😀

Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 9:40 am

What’s about your forehead, as you are allways running full power against a solid wall with your posts about “renewables” ?

Reply to  Krishna Gans
May 15, 2024 10:01 am

It’s entertaining. 😀

Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 10:07 am

So you are masochist ? 😀

Mr.
Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 12:15 pm

It’s moronic.

Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 1:27 pm

Your posts are low-IQ slap-stick comedy, at best. !

Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 1:27 pm

Currently in Australia..

NSW… 90% COAL
QLD.. 88% COAL and Gas
Vic… 84% coal and Gas, 14% hydro

Much lauded renewables SA.. 73% GAS, 5% Diesel.

Reply to  bnice2000
May 15, 2024 2:49 pm

PS.. the only “wall” coal in NSW is likely to hit is when it is providing 100% of required electricity !!

May 15, 2024 7:06 am

Under the graph in the above article:
“A piece on March 6, 2024 in the New York Times puts the percentage of electric vehicles sold in the New York “metropolitan area” in 2023 at less than 10%. The article does not give a figure for New York State as a whole, but undoubtedly the figure for the state — including rural upstate areas — is well less than the percentage in the City and suburbs.”

Here is the figure of total and percentage EV ownership for the state of New York as reported on February 26, 2024:
Registered EVs: 84,670
Percent of registered EVs: 0.75% (this including, of course, all EVs sold in the state in 2023)
—source: https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/amount-of-electric-vehicle-owners-by-state

May 15, 2024 7:06 am

Here’s the Wikipedia article on:

     California Independent System Operator

If you investigate the CAISO you will find that they are going to solve the intermittent Wind and Solar problem with giant batteries the size of shipping containers.

The CAISO isn’t going to disappear any time soon.

California-Independent-System-Operator
Curious George
Reply to  Steve Case
May 15, 2024 7:10 am

They are already running out of other people’s money.

0perator
Reply to  Steve Case
May 15, 2024 7:37 am

Those burn pretty spectacularly.

Reply to  0perator
May 15, 2024 8:05 am

Maybe they should burn a few at the annual burning man festival. 🙂

Reply to  0perator
May 15, 2024 8:21 am

Somebody has to explain to me why lead acid batteries aren’t used. Lithium batteries are great for applications where weight is an issue, but not if the battery is stationary. Fork lift truck in warehouses don’t use lithium batteries. Lead acid batteries don’t burn.

Lead       $1.03 / lb
Lithium   $6.88 / lb

Randle Dewees
Reply to  Steve Case
May 15, 2024 8:57 am

Yeah, I’m curious too. I sometimes just chalk it up to Li is new tech therefore has to be better.

I think there is a bit of energy volume density separating the two, but that shouldn’t be an issue besides dedicating a bit more land. Considering the safety zone that should border any significant Li facility, the footprint for a Pb acid facility might be a lot smaller!

Recycling Pb based batteries uses well known efficient processes.

I have Pb acid storage at my off-grid cabin, I don’t worry about the batteries catching fire.

Reply to  Randle Dewees
May 15, 2024 10:09 am

Cell phone towers have a enclosure at the base with various components one of which is a big drawer full of lead acid batteries for when the grid power fails. Lithium would be a poor choice considering the cost and fire hazard.

Reply to  Randle Dewees
May 15, 2024 1:34 pm

Perhaps you are not factoring in the huge concerns about kiddies’ lead poisoning,

Reply to  Steve Case
May 15, 2024 4:22 pm

Somebody has to explain to me why lead acid batteries aren’t used. 

In fundamental terms, lithium has a valency of 1 for a molecular weight of 6.94g/mol. For lead it has valency of up to 4 for a molecular weight of 207g/mol. So for price parity in terms of mobile electrons, lithium would need to be 7.4 times the cost per unit weight than lead per unit weight.

However, in lead/acid chemistry, lead only offers 2 valance electrons so the weight advantage for the lithium chemistry is around 15 times.

But there is more. The lead acid batteries have much lower turn around efficiency. Also the cycle efficiency drops off far more dramatically with lead acid than lithium. The ratings given for batteries is based on discharge rate. Lead/Acid is rated at 10 hours or 0.1C while lithium are usually rated at 2 hour rate or 0.5C. To get equivalent cycle life, the lead/acid batteries would need to be rated about 5 times higher than the lithium.

But there is still more. The electrochemical potential of lithium-ion chemistry is almost twice the potential of lead/acid chemistry. So each valence electron gives twice the bang in lithium-ion compared with lead/acid.

If lithium batteries could be built for less than $100.kWh and lasted 200 years then they would be useful for a limited number of higher power applications. At global level, there is not enough lithium available to make a difference in transport and energy supply.

Reply to  RickWill
May 16, 2024 9:56 am

Thanks, very informative.

mleskovarsocalrrcom
Reply to  Steve Case
May 15, 2024 7:57 am

“If you investigate the CAISO you will find that they are going to solve the intermittent Wind and Solar problem with giant batteries the size of shipping containers.” Did you forget the /S?

Reply to  mleskovarsocalrrcom
May 15, 2024 8:24 am

?????????????????

Reply to  Steve Case
May 15, 2024 9:13 am

“/S” for sarcasm. But there’s no sarcasm, that’s really how they plan to do it.

Reply to  More Soylent Green!
May 15, 2024 10:15 am

Thanks. The California Independent System Operator really is on their way to providing 24 hour service, its just a matter of safety, cost and environmental issues.

mleskovarsocalrrcom
Reply to  Steve Case
May 15, 2024 10:35 am

The CAISO and you are delusional if you think battery backup for wind and solar is viable to provide 24X7 electricity for a substantial grid size, one that includes businesses and homes. Cost is prohibitive. Battery life cycle is prohibitive. But most of all, what’s providing the power to keep the batteries charged after depletion in adverse wind and solar conditions? You don’t understand the requirements.

Reply to  mleskovarsocalrrcom
May 16, 2024 10:00 am

The definitive answer to the battery storage theory was given by the UK Royal Society. I keep referring to it, but no-one seems to read it. Its here:

https://royalsociety.org/news-resources/projects/low-carbon-energy-programme/large-scale-electricity-storage/

There is a briefing and a full report. The bottom line is, you cannot do it with batteries. That is why they proposed instead digging out 900 caverns, sealing them, and filling them with hydrogen, which would have to be stored for decades, to deal with the periodic season long calms which happen every few decades.

It is obviously impratical to do this with caverns, but its simply impossible to do it with batteries.

Erik Magnuson
Reply to  Steve Case
May 15, 2024 8:15 am

The CAISO were the folks who were warning about the “Solar Duck Curve” problem several years ago. New residential solar installations are being credited at wholesale rates, not retail rates, which has led to a 75% drop in new residential solar installations.

Reply to  Erik Magnuson
May 15, 2024 9:16 am

You can’t pay retail to solar customers. The power companies have overhead. People who think it’s unfair should buy their own batteries for storage. The electric utilities aren’t banks.

Reply to  More Soylent Green!
May 15, 2024 11:34 am

Nor should solar customers be subsidized by not paying for T&D, which they utilize whether they are receiving or delivering energy into the grid. If they don’t like it, they can just opt out of tying into it.

J Boles
May 15, 2024 7:10 am

Good article, and exactly what has been on my mind for years…when? When will we hear that first “WOO!!” as if dipping a toe in a lake and realizing it is going to be a cold swim.

Reply to  J Boles
May 15, 2024 7:15 am

Spoiler: Never.

Editor
Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 3:30 pm

I have to agree with MUN on this. Tbey will never ever admit to having been wrong. There will never be a “WOO!!”. Their one and only motive is and always has been to stay in control. They may retire with their ill-gotten gains, they may transition seamlessly to a new paradigm, they may be edged out by a new control-hungry group, but it is extremely unlikely that there will ever be any kind of confession.

Reply to  observa
May 15, 2024 8:08 am

Since its the Asian nations that have thriving economies- if the auto makers can’t sell in North America and Europe due to absurd requirements- they’ll sell their cars in Asia. Well, at least the Asian auto makers will, while “the West” sinks into irrelevance.

Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
May 15, 2024 9:19 am

There will be demand for ICE vehicles as long as the public is allowed to buy them. Demand will end when something better comes along.

The West isn’t sinking into irrelevance, it’s digging itself into a hole of irrelevance through green deindustrialization policies.

Reply to  More Soylent Green!
May 15, 2024 10:04 am

Car makers are scared of chinese EVs – or do you think the talk about tariffs and slave labour investigations is just coincidence? Nobody cared before. They want to protect their claim, only to create their own Detroid in a few years.

Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 1:17 pm

Biden wants to get reelected. He needs Michigan and he believes pandering the UAW might help get the state for him.

You’re right, Biden and the democrats just didn’t care before. He didn’t care about reindustrializing America, about exporting our jobs, about China taking our tech. Nope. None of it.

Biden owes China too much.

Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 7:15 pm

Anyone with any common sense should be worried about Chinese EV.

I bet you will never buy one. !!

missoulamike
Reply to  bnice2000
May 16, 2024 2:46 am

Dude can’t afford to buy a tricycle. Trolling is minimum wage….

Reply to  MyUsername
May 16, 2024 10:08 am

Car makers are scared of chinese EVs

Yes, of course they are – costs and prices are too low for the European or US car makers to compete.

But that’s really not the issue at the moment. Suppose you allow unlimited Chinese EV imports. What then?

The evidence is increasingly that people will not buy them at almost any price. In the UK, fleet providers will still buy them for company car issuance. If you are going to either pay income tax on a car you are provided with according to its retail value (which happens with ICE) or get it tax freee (which happens with EV), of course you will take an EV. Or many will.

This is the only thing holding up the UK EV market. But the problem is, the EVs come off lease after three years, and then arrive on the used market. At this point you have a glut, falling used prices, and large losses for the fleet car providers.

Their business model depends on being able to sell cars at a profit when they come off lease.

So, we now have the situation in the UK where car manufacturers are going to have to reduce their supply of ICE cars, so as to meet the EV sales quotas, currently 22% of sales or pay 15,000 sterling per car over quota.

This is not going to work. The country is drifting into a real crisis on cars. Its starting to bite this year, but next year halfway through it may have become unmanageable.

Bob Rogers
May 15, 2024 7:46 am

(b) Commencing in model-year 2025 each manufacturer’s sales fleet of medium-duty and heavy-duty vehicles, produced and delivered for sale in New York, must, at minimum, contain at least the same percentage of ZEVs subject to the same requirements set forth in California Code of Regulations, title 13, sections 1963, 1963.1, 1963.2, 1963.3, 1963.4 and 1963.5 (see Table 1, section 200.9 of this Title) using New York specific vehicle numbers.”

It doesn’t apply to passenger cars, and I don’t see anything that prevents buyers from going out of state. How long is NY going to pass up all that sales tax?

Curious George
Reply to  Bob Rogers
May 15, 2024 7:58 am

Easy. Hefty registration fee for out-of-state vehicles.

May 15, 2024 8:26 am

What percent of global emissions are from passenger vehicles? What percent of global emissions are American passenger vehicles?

The number is less than 2.5%. If we magically reduced US passenger vehicle emissions to nothing, it would mean nothing. Zero effect. Zip. Nada.

Yet we’re wasting trillions on it.

Reply to  More Soylent Green!
May 16, 2024 10:11 am

Well, the issue also is, suppose we do get them electric. Where does the power come from? Mostly from coal or gas. And that is not going to change, intermittency is going to make it impossible to replace the coal and gas with wind.

So the whole thing is totally pointless. Just burn the fossil fuel in the cars, don’t bother converting it to electricity to burn in the cars.

UK-Weather Lass
May 15, 2024 8:40 am

If there were any competent thinkers left willing and able to provide expert opinion they would surely have spoken out by now about how nuclear is the only clean emission free option humanity has left beyond hydro since even wind and solar are heavily reliant upon fossil fuel intensive processes and have not, thus far, shown any capacity to contribute to a reduction in overall global emissions.

The idiots continue to talk the talk but just cannot manage to walk the walk. Isn’t it COVID-19 all over again except much, much worse, and with all the usual suspects still roaming free?

Reply to  UK-Weather Lass
May 15, 2024 10:07 am

If you kept up about nuclear beside the wishful thinking and shilling, you would see why nobody advocates for nuclear.

Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 3:34 pm

Poor Luser.. WRONG as always

Even your beloved gruniad is against your ignorance

Nuclear power generation is likely to break records in 2025 as more countries invest in reactors to fuel the shift to a low-carbon global economy,


As is anyone else with any knowledge of the situation

According to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), nuclear energy could contribute about 14% of global electricity by 2050, up from its 10% share today.”

observa
Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 5:54 pm

No we’re blowing it on Snowy2 hydro (with gas backup that’s not in the costing)-
Australia ‘going for second best’ with Snowy Hydro as Finland unveils new nuclear reactor | The Courier Mail
Which since it’s trying to add to the plucked low hanging fruit of the original Snowy Hydro Scheme will be extremely vulnerable when a General Drought comes along again.

Reply to  observa
May 15, 2024 7:52 pm

Sorry, but Snowy 2 is not in the running for anything but near worst !

Best would be a couple of modern new coal fired power stations in each eastern state.

2nd, use gas.. plenty of it under the ground if the enviro-loons would get out the way

3rd Nuclear.

Reply to  MyUsername
May 16, 2024 10:14 am

….nobody advocates for nuclear….

Maybe. Opinions can differ. But what do you want to see? There are two choices.

  1. Continue with gas, coal and meet current and growing demand
  2. Constrain demand so it can be supplied by wind and solar.

Which do you want? The one thing you are not going to get is current or increased demand supplied by wind and solar. That’s just wishful thinking.

Editor
Reply to  UK-Weather Lass
May 15, 2024 3:33 pm

A competent thinker would treat CO2 emissions as a benefit.

Idle Eric
May 15, 2024 9:03 am

My guess is that the wall arrives when the existing fleet of CCGT plants reach the end of their economic lives and cannot be refurbished or replaced due to regulations, or the basic economics of the market.

Since a lot of these are now pushing 30 years old (in the UK anyway), that’s likely to be soon.

Reply to  Idle Eric
May 15, 2024 3:35 pm

Since the UK absolutely relies on GAS to fill the huge gaps in pseudo-renewables…

…. the whole of the UK will hit a brick wall !

They did this to themselves. !!

May 15, 2024 9:28 am

Climate ‘Activism’ is ‘Science™’

Today, we’ll take a look at the netherworld of the prophets of doom.
As many readers know, in recent years, the agit-prop about what once was a ‘theory’ (greenhouse effect) has morphed ‘climatic change’ to ‘global warming’ and ‘climate change’.
The fear in Central Europe is particularly is palpable, as evidenced by the a ‘country comparison’ of this item carried out by Ipsos globally last month:

May 15, 2024 9:39 am

How is a PHEV zero emissions? Is this just a legal fantasy?

Mr.
Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
May 15, 2024 12:20 pm

No Jim, it’s not a legal fantasy. Just common old bullshit.

Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
May 15, 2024 1:32 pm

No EV is zero emissions in any meaningful way

May 15, 2024 9:53 am

Back at the time of the Glasgow COP 1 read that European renewables had peaked in 2017 and in 2019 there was a backlog of 47GW of spent Wind units awaiting decommissioning. Also 8 renewables companies had gone bankrupt in that year and investors were fleeing the sector.

Since, we’ve had the rush on nat gas panic by European govs fearing their citizens were at risk of freezing to death in the dark, this after a relentless self-immolating campaign by these governments to destroy the petroleum industry that they now so desperately needed, paying spot prices up to 10x that of contract prices they turned down 2 yrs before! Germany had to re-open a moth-balled coal-fired plant quickly, bulldozing over part of a willmill farm to expand coal deposit!

It was a no-brainer to predict that the 2017 peak renewables is a permanent thing. European no-brainer leaders now knew it. They’ve been spinning pipedreams to to carve out some time to figure out how to extricate themselves from this gross stupidity. The Russian invasion was a timely answer to their prayers.

Reply to  Gary Pearse
May 15, 2024 10:12 am

Never change 😀

Reply to  MyUsername
May 15, 2024 1:38 pm

Poor luser, you will always have the mind of a 5-year old… you chose it as first preference.

cuddywhiffer
May 15, 2024 11:18 am

If New York City, and state, require that all of their new vehicle purchases are BEVs, that will account for much of that target in the beginning, but just like Hertz, reality will soon bite. No one else wants the damn things. Give it about three years of breakdowns; garbage piling up; emergency vehicles stuck on highways; crime, ballooning… the Green Wall will bankrupt the city. Those who could move have already gone.

KevinM
May 15, 2024 12:26 pm

“It foresees a need for something they call the “Dispatchable Emissions Free Resource.” This is something that does not currently exist, and likely will not exist during any relevant time frame.”

Fusion power is due to be commercially available next week. The fuel is free in the oceans that cover 2/3 of earth and magic elves are already under contract to build the plant for free. The elves have agreed to work weekday nights as not to interfere with local traffic.

Edward Katz
May 15, 2024 2:24 pm

The 2nd paragraph of this article does an excellent job of explaining the reasons why the Green Energy Wall is imminent. People are already fed up with paying increasing prices for goods and technologies to fix a non-existent problem. By 2030 they’ll be so fed up that politicians will risk their careers if they push the Green agenda any further, and there are few of them willing to give up their sinecures to do so.

Beta Blocker
May 15, 2024 3:30 pm

Let’s use a real-world example to explore the many issues associated with replacing reliable coal-fired, gas-fired, and nuclear generation with wind and solar power backed by grid-scale batteries.

The Northwest Power & Conservation Council’s 2021 power plan calls for adding 3500 megawatts of wind and solar power, plus 720 megawatts of demand response power, to the Northwest’s regional power supply. Very limited grid-scale battery storage is included in the 2021 plan because hydropower fills the need for energy storage.

Since the NWPCC’s 2021 power plan was published in early 2022, the Biden Administration has adopted environmental and energy policies which will force the early retirement of the region’s coal-fired and gas-fired power generation capacity. In addition, the Biden Administration has signed an agreement with the State of Washington and with the region’s Indian Tribes which will force the removal of four large hydroelectric dams on the lower Snake River in Washington State.

The practical effect of these policies is that both the 3500 Mw baseload additions and the 720 Mw demand response additions must be zero emission wind and solar; and further, must have very high annual capacity factors which match those of the legacy power generation systems now targeted for early retirement. As a consequence of this developing situation, the installation of very substantial grid-scale battery storage must now be included in the Northwest’s long range power plan. 

I’m engaged in a personal project to analyze the costs of adding the necessary wind, solar, and battery systems to the Northwest’s power grid. As of May 15th 2015, I’m about half finished. These slides show my progress to date:

Project banner headline:
comment image

Slide 1 of 9, Task Status as of May 15th 2024:
comment image

Slide 2 of 9, Project General Outline:
comment image

Slide 3 of 9, Engineering Analysis: Objectives and Problem Statement:
comment image

Slide 4 of 9, Engineering Analysis: Background:
comment image

Slide 5 of 9, Engineering Analysis: Assumptions:
comment image

Slide 6 of 9, Wind & Solar Daily Average Capacity Factors, January 2022 through February 2024:
comment image

Slide 7 of 9, Wind & Solar Daily Average Capacity Factors, October 2023 through February 2024:
comment image

Slide 8 of 9, Choice of a Centralized Site Location — Repurpose the Hanford Site: 
comment image

Slide 9 of 9, Project Tasks Not Yet Started, plus Remarks:
comment image

GENERAL REMARKS:

The NWPCC’s 2021 power plan assumes that electricity can be readily imported from outside the Northwest region whenever it is needed. The true fact is that the forced early retirement of the coal-fired and gas-fired capacity now attached to the Western Interconnect, plus the breaching and removal of four large hydro-electric dams on the lower Snake River, will result in significant shortfalls in power generation capacity beginning in the late 2020’s.       

As this situation evolves over the next decade, power grid reliability will trump power grid cost as a primary driver for power planning. For my cost analysis study, the aggregated performance requirements being applied to new-build wind & solar systems, plus their battery backup systems, is chosen to match what would be possible with the construction of three Westinghouse AP1000 nuclear power plants at 1200 Mw each (baseload), plus twelve NuScale SMR modules at 77 Mw each (demand response & load-following).  

As always, comments and suggestions are welcome. Have at it ……..

Richard Greene
Reply to  Beta Blocker
May 17, 2024 12:40 pm

This may be impossible but two years of weather data are not even close to enough. You would need to search for at least 50 years for wind droughts, solar droughts and compound droughts.

I researched these topics before deciding to call wind and solar grid “ruinables”.

Wind droughts, or prolonged periods of low wind speeds, pose challenges for electricity systems largely reliant on wind generation. Using weather reanalysis data, we analyzed the global distribution of and trends in wind droughts using an energy deficit metric that integrates the depth and duration of wind droughts.

Wind and solar droughts can hit during peak grid demand—and last nearly a week — ANS / Nuclear Newswire

Center of the American Experiment has been warning about the impact of wind droughts on electric reliability for years. One of the most severe wind droughts we have found in our research occurred in the Midcontinent Independent Systems Operator (MISO) region in January 2020.

As we noted in our 2022 report, the region experienced an 82-hour wind drought during which all of the installed wind capacity on the 15-state MISO grid—22,040 megawatts (MW)—generated less than 10 percent of its potential output during this timeframe. Of those 82 hours, 42 straight hours saw wind capacity factors below 1.5 percent, which you can see in the graph below.

Capt Jeff
Reply to  Beta Blocker
May 17, 2024 3:27 pm

How can we track the progress of Beta Blocker’s Project? As a Northwest resident, I am deeply troubled by the irrational approach being adopted by this state.

observa
May 15, 2024 6:20 pm

Something has to give here, and it will give.

It sure will with the news that Ausgrid in NSW (responsible for poles and wires) wants to charge rooftop solar owners 1.2c/kWhr for feeding into the grid between 10am and 3pm and so it begins after FIT rates have been dropping like a stone. Aussies have been piling on rooftop solar to save on their rising fickle energy bills to the point they’re on a third of homes. With general cost of living squeals the Federal Budget has just announced $300 bill rebate for all households to give you an idea how the watermelons are panicking in Canberra.

observa
Reply to  observa
May 15, 2024 7:13 pm

PS: It’s like this dummies with free energy from Gaia-
Low wind harvest in South Australia – WattClarity
You aint anywhere near paid for the firming required for fickles ONLY so let the incentivation begin.

Reply to  observa
May 15, 2024 8:44 pm

People should also realise just how tiny the amount of electricity used in SA is.

SA is currently using 740MW …

…. this compares to NSW which is just over 7000, Qld 6300, Vic 4,100.

NSW in summer and winter can easily reach 10,000+ MW demand

Bob
May 15, 2024 9:15 pm

The green energy wall should come sooner rather than later. I think the gas plants should be shut down on schedule. It would only take about two days for everyone to realize what a bunch of flakes have been leading us around by the nose, lying, cheating and giving us the royal shaft. They need stiff prison sentences. We know who they are we should be going after them.

Verified by MonsterInsights