My post on Saturday noted one big reason for optimism that the green energy fantasy is coming to the end of its run: the first country, Germany, has apparently begun to hit the green energy “wall.” Although Germany has never consistently reached even 50% of its electricity production from wind and solar, its ability to continue its green energy dreams has stalled: its electricity prices have soared, its manufacturing sector has been seriously undermined, its economy is in recession, and recently its green-promoting government has fallen. Its failed example now stands for others to see and avoid.
And as I look around at developments since the election, I see a number of other reasons to reinforce my cautious optimism. Maybe it’s that the political environment has changed, and maybe it’s that some people are starting to recognize that you can’t beat the laws of physics; and maybe it’s some of both. Here are examples:
Banks and investment firms quitting net zero “alliances”
On Saturday’s post, commenter William Bell asked “Who, exactly, is preventing third-world inhabitants from using wood, charcoal, coal, petroleum derivatives, and/or natural gas for fuel and by what means?” Apparently Mr. Bell, and maybe many others, is unaware of the many “alliances” of banks and investors seeking to starve fossil fuels of investment capital, and thus prevent third-world countries (and everybody else) from continuing to use them. Most of these groups are somehow directed and overseen by the UN. Examples of these groups include the Net Zero Banking Alliance (“Bank-led, UN-convened”), the Net Zero Asset Managers Initiative, and Climate Action 100+. I’m sure that I have not got them all. The members are, or have been, a who’s who of all the biggest banks and investment firms in the world.
The Center Square reports here on December 20 that two rather significant banks, Goldman Sachs and Wells Fargo, have just quit the NZBA:
Not soon after the general election, and within two weeks of each other, two major financial institutions have left a United Nations Net Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA). This is after they joined three years ago, pledging to require environmental social governance standards (ESG) across their platforms, products and systems.
House Judiciary Committee issues report accusing large money managers of running a “climate cartel”
On December 13, the House Judiciary Committee issued a Report titled “Sustainability Shakedown: How a Climate Cartel of Money Managers Colluded to Take Over the Board of America’s Largest Energy Company.” The Report documents the process by which the Climate Action 100+ alliance, “emboldened” by encouragement from the Biden/Harris administration, orchestrated replacement of three board members of Exxon in May 2021. The collusive actions of the largest investment firms and proxy advisors are described as a “cartel” clearly violative of the antitrust laws.
Red state AGs sue investment firms for antitrust violations for colluding on “climate” issues
Maybe it’s coincidence, but shortly before the issuance of the Judiciary Committee Report, an antitrust suit was brought on November 27 by eleven red state AGs, led by Ken Paxton of Texas, accusing participants in the investment industry of collusive conduct in enforcing “climate” and other “ESG” goals. The defendants in the case include the three largest money managers, Vanguard, BlackRock and State Street. From Bloomberg Law, November 27:
BlackRock Inc., Vanguard Group Inc. and State Street Corp. were sued by a group of states led by Texas for allegedly breaking antitrust law by boosting electricity prices through their investments, in the highest-profile lawsuit yet against the beleaguered ESG industry. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and 10 other states claim the money managers, as part of their green agenda, combined their market clout and membership in climate groups to pressure coal producers to cut output.
TotalEnergies pauses major wind farm in the waters off New York and New Jersey
Also on November 27, French energy giant TotalEnergies announced that it was “pausing” its major Attentive Energy off-shore wind project in the Atlantic Ocean off New York and New Jersey. In his announcement of the “pause,” Total’s Chairman specifically attributed the action to the anticipated policies of the incoming Trump administration. From Offshore, November 27:
TotalEnergies has reportedly paused development of the Attentive Energy wind farm it planned to build off the coast of New York and New Jersey, CEO Patrick Pouyanne said Tuesday at an energy industry conference in London. “I have decided to put the project on pause,” TotalEnergies’ CEO Patrick Pouyanne said at the Energy Intelligence Forum, according to reports from Bloomberg and Reuters. The decision is one of the first tangible signs of a halt in investment in renewable power sources due to the anticipated policies of the incoming Trump administration. Trump has vowed to stop offshore wind energy development “on day one” of his next term starting in January 2025.
The new Trump administration is still almost a month away from taking office, but already the anticipation of its arrival is having the positive effect of driving some of the parasites into hiding.
There are many more such positive developments out there. I’ll see if I can assemble a few more before year’s end. Meanwhile, I’m as hopeful as I’ve ever been that the green energy mania is fading.
It looks as if the green energy bandwagon may be slowing in America. However, in Europe, it’s still full steam ahead. Ed Miliband is utterly determined that Britain will be the first lemming off the edge of the cliff and will do absolutely anything to achieve this. He wouldn’t care if a million Britons froze to death in winter if his insane climate goals were achieved.
Miliband is not dictator for life. The UK is still a democracy and the voters will be heard. The outcome of the Labour foolishness is predetermined – it is only a matter of time before the voters demand change.
The support for Net Zero will only end in the UK when the actual electricity grid cannot support the population and randomly fails during the coldest weather. Therefore Labour/Conservative/LibDem alliance is in not danger at the moment. It’s probably going to be more problematic as Rachel from Complaints will have to raise more taxes in April at the current rate of progress.
In the mean time percentage on ZE vehicles being sold rises as total sales of cars falls. That part of the plan is working well.
The UK is not a functional democracy since the choices we have are limited and as many already know, the Davos Uniparty have infected our system so all the main parties are variants of socialism. But the fastest growing party Reform gives us hope as while they may have got only 5 MPs, their proportion of the vote was higher than the LimpDumbs who got the third highest number of MPs. Reform were very close to winning a lot of seats that went to Labour in the north and are close to Tory seats in the south. The local council elections in May will be a popularity poll on our Student Union government and the signs are they will get hammered. That could bring about a new leader for Labour. As for the inexperienced Rachel from Accounts/Complaints? She might be toast come the spring as the UK will be in recession with inflation rising and interest rates stuck, but more importantly government bond rates will be high and that drives the mortgage interest rates which ‘working people’ – something Labour have struggled to define – will be feeling.
You are almost right. actually, all political parties are variants of socialism and this includes Reform. I see a small chink of light growing as the notion of independents takes root. This is where the future of the right lays. Eventually, we will see democracy by the people, of the people, and for the people.
Aren’t lemmings closely related to ‘rats’?
RATS was the last UK coal fired power station (Ratcliffe on Soar).
A target of 50% “green” energy – in itself, difficult to achieve – would have reduced CO2 emissions by, errr… 50%, but zealots are never happy, for them it’s 100% or nothing – except, of course, that it never can be 100%. That’s why I doubt the sanity of people like Red Ed Miliband. The most dangerous man since that bloke in Germany some while back…
Happy Christmas everyone!
Actually, it is doubtful that “green energy” (whatever that is**) reduces CO2 emission much at all
The US reduced its CO2 emissions by converting coal to gas.
Germany and the UK have reduced their emissions by destroying their manufacturing base and sending it to China , India etc, probably increasing the overall CO2 released.
** wind and solar are the exact opposite of “green”.. Both are hugely environmentally polluting at every stage… mining , manufacture (absolutely horrendous), installation (environmentally destructive), usage (avian destruction), and final disposal in landfill , or left to rot in place.
I don’t disagree, Brice, I was just arguing on the “Even if one accepts that “green” energy is desireable…” basis in order to underline Miliband’s madness in trying to get to 100%.
I agree Bnice, Green and Energy do not belong together as the result is an oxymoron!
The Greens have had enough say about what they want about energy, now it’s time for the rest of us ordinary people-90% to demand, cheap reliable electricity by whatever means are available, be it fossil fuels, hydro, nuclear and even solar in moderation. None of this energy business has anything to do with climate change, so people get over this non- existent fake environmental climate crisis.
If we don’t get a positive response about our cheap energy requirements from responsible governments, we will vote them out sooner rather than later. First was the US then Germany and Australia will follow if they are smart enough in 2025! However, in the UK, Labour is totally delusional about energy, so the process will take longer unless the people riot or occupy the House of Commons.
Just yesterday in another thread that Warren Beeton fool was trying gaslight me, claiming that steel manufacturing with electric blast furnaces was feasible. They can’t even keep the lights on now, how is uninterrupted power for molten steel possible with wind turbines? Any manufacturer trying this insanity would be quickly out-of-business.
Swedish SSAB plans to be the first steel company in the world to deliver ‘fossil free steel’ to the market on a commercial scale in 2026. How successful and competitively priced it will be remains to be seen. Access to plentiful hydro electric power is probably essential.
I want to see what the metallurgy reports on this hydrogen-reduced steel say. How they overcome the embrittlement problem has been mostly a hand-wave in the press releases. I am not sure I want to live on the 12th floor of a high-rise made with H2Steel.
Agree.
SSAB have been collaborating with Mercedes for some time so I think steel for vehicle production will be their initial step.
According to current data, around 70% of steel in the United States is manufactured using electric arc furnaces (EAFs), which are considered electric furnaces; this means a significant majority of American steel production relies on electric furnaces.
Big River Steel
In 2024, this facility in Osceola, Arkansas became the first steel plant in the world to receive ResponsibleSteel certification. ResponsibleSteel is a nonprofit that audits companies’ progress toward “net-zero steel” production. Big River Steel also gets more than 60% of its electricity from non-fossil-fuel sources.
THAT IS THE CLOSEST TO GREEN STEEL IN THE US.
I did a Bing search on electric arc furnaces and found that these are used for recycling scrap steel. Blast furnaces are still used for smelting iron ore. Didn’t find any info on use of hydrogen for smelting iron ore.
I recall reading awhile back that a pilot process for smelting iron ore with hydrogen malfunctioned, resulting in an explosion that killed a worker and injured several other workers.
particularly for reducing iron to make steel possible, a coking furnace is required. After the iron is in the right oxidation state it really doesn’t matter how one heats it for the final mix. The innovation is with using hydrogen as the reducing agent, but any hydrogen left in the matrix will lead to brittle steal that won’t hold up to stresses as well as the traditional carbon-reduced steal.
I doubt that Millivolt is insane, atticman. But he has a very low (and alas accurate) assessment of how well British education prepares the population for critical thinking.
In plain sight, he and Sir Stalin are obliterating the ancient rights of Englishmen along with the utter replacement of Englishmen.
I don’t believe that it is the accidental outcome of insanity.
But indeed, happy Christmas! Turn to thoughts of hope and joy.
ancient rights- maybe time for a constitution and bill of rights? nobody pitching for that?
Perhaps not – we wouldn’t be $34T in debt if our Federales had actually been constrained by our Constitution.
How often is it even 50% in Germany? Under ideal conditions only? At night in windy weather? If it’s only under ideal conditions- it would be useful to get the average for all the hours in a year.
Even if “green energy” was to reach 50%, the CO2 “reduction” wouldn’t be anywhere close to 50%. This is because fossil fuel plants need to kept on warm standby, at a minimum, so that they can take over whenever “green energy” fails.
I’ve seen no blowback from Microsoft’s announcement that they will be reopening Three Mile Island — certainly a good sign.
Yes, I agree it’s a good thing.
I hope Microsoft has employed some experienced “restart” experts who know what they are getting into. I have no knowledge of Three Mile Island’s current mechanical condition. However, recommissioning equipment that has sat idle, unpowered and/or unmaintained for any number of years can quickly become uneconomical.
I’m not sure you just walk back in and flip on the switches.
Microsoft isn’t restarting Three Mile Island, they contracted to use the electricity, if I’m not mistaken.
Doesn’t someone have to restart it first?
Reactor 1 was running until 2019.
Thanks Bob.
Those that haven’t kept up could start here:
Restarting Three Mile Island: Quick Facts
“Maybe it’s that the political environment has changed, and maybe it’s that some people are starting to recognize that you can’t beat the laws of physics; and maybe it’s some of both.”
The myopic obsession with the physics of the so-called “greenhouse effect” must come to an end one way or another. And the physics of electrical power generation and hydrocarbon fuels cannot be faked.
It may take a few more years for this to be fully realized, but it is from the physics of the general circulation that the claims of GHG “warming” are directly refuted. Are rising concentrations of CO2 capable of “forcing” absorbed energy to accumulate down here (i.e. “warming.”) as sensible heat gain in the land + ocean + atmosphere system? No. Energy conversion explains why not. [internal energy + potential energy] is constantly being converted to/from [kinetic energy]. Lorenz described this concept. The ERA5 reanalysis model explicitly computes it. More here. Please read the full text description of this very short time-lapse video. I will paste that full text in a reply. In my view, this is important for skeptics of the climate movement to understand.
https://youtu.be/hDurP-4gVrY
The text description for that video.
************
Are CO2 emissions a risk to the climate? No. The static “warming” effect of incremental CO2 (~4 W/m^2 for 2XCO2) disappears as kinetic energy (wind) is converted to/from internal energy (including temperature) + potential energy (altitude).
This time lapse video shows the daily minimum, median, and maximum values of the computed “vertical integral of energy conversion” hourly parameter from the ERA5 reanalysis for 2022. Values for each 1/4 degree longitude gridpoint at 45N latitude are given. The vertical scale is from -10,000 to +10,000 W/m^2. The minor incremental radiative absorbing power of non-condensing GHGs such as CO2, CH4, and N2O vanishes on the vertical scale as the rapidly changing energy conversion in both directions is tens to thousands of times greater.
So what? The assumed GHG “forcings” cannot be isolated for reliable attribution of reported surface warming. And with all the circulation and energy conversion throughout the depth of the troposphere, heat energy need not be expected to accumulate on land and in the oceans to harmful effect from incremental non-condensing GHGs. The GHGs add no energy to the land + ocean + atmosphere system. Therefore the radiative properties of CO2, CH4, and N2O, and other molecules of similar nature, should not be assumed to produce a perturbing climate “forcing.” The concept of energy conversion helps us understand the self-regulating delivery of energy to high altitude for just enough longwave radiation to be emitted to space.
References:
The ERA5 reanalysis model is a product of ECMWF, the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts. The computed parameters “vertical integral of potential + internal energy” and “vertical integral of energy conversion” are described at these links.
https://codes.ecmwf.int/grib/param-db/?id=162061
https://codes.ecmwf.int/grib/param-db/?id=162064
Further comment:
This is for just one latitude band at 45N. Similar results were observed for 45S, 10N/S, 23.5N/S, and 66N/S.
More Background:
From Edward N. Lorenz (1960) “Energy and Numerical Weather Prediction”
https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusa.v12i4.9420
“2. Energy, available potential energy, and
gross static stability
Of the various forms of energy present in
the atmosphere, kinetic energy has often
received the most attention. Often the total
kinetic energy of a weather system is regarded
as a measure of its intensity. The only other
forms of atmospheric energy which appear
to play a major role in the kinetic energy
budget of the troposphere and lower stratosphere
are potential energy, internal energy, and the
latent energy of water vapor. Potential and
internal energy may be transformed directly
into kinetic energy, while latent energy may
be transformed directly into internal energy,
which is then transformed into kinetic energy.
It is easily shown by means of the hydrostatic
approximation that the changes of the
potential energy P and the internal energy l of
the whole atmosphere are approximately proportional,
so that it is convenient to regard
potential and internal energy as constituting
a single form of energy. This form has been
called total potential energy by Margules (1903).
…
In the long run, there must be a net depletionof kinetic energy by dissipative processes. It
follows that there must be an equal net
generation of kinetic energy by reversible
adiabatic processes; this generation must occur
at the expense of total potential energy. It
follows in turn that there must be an equal net
generation of total potential energy by heating
of all kinds. These three steps comprise the
basic energy cycle of the atmosphere. The
rate at which these steps proceed is a fundamental
characteristic of the general circulation.”
**************
Yep, as I keep saying, “There are no free lunches in physics.”
I concur. It seems to me the most realistic mechanism. The uncertainty comes w the attribution equations which rely on assumed mechanisms that cannot be properly equated as in essense one cannot separate the signals as one could in a lab. That guesswork is fine as far as im concerned. The issue is w politics in regards to ‘settled science’.
I understand that particular mechanism. In order to implement impactful policies you A: create a narrative of ‘settled science’ and act like a religious group w a control/ comply structure, coupled w B: a fear of Armageddon and percecution of heretics.
People are fed up with woke left wing insanity. There’s some evidence that led to Trump’s election, and the Republicans taking both senate and house.
Peter Zeihan points out that the voting patterns in the election weren’t typical.
Folks who have enough education can convince themselves that CAGW is a serious problem, that Anthony Fauci is a hero, and that a woman can have a penis. Fortunately, the majority of voters know better. Defund the universities.
This video, Why Smart People Believe Stupid Things, is worth a look.
I don’t think it’s clear that Republicans have a firm grip on the Senate. Too many RINOs can still spoil the soup.
And isn’t the House majority even narrower than it was before the election?
True but even just a one seat majority means control of all the committees which means bad democrat legislative junk will seldom get to the floor for a vote.
Why sources always brag on renewable wind and solar Capacity rather than actual production?
2023 annual World wind production 2.33 milllion GWh; wind capacity 1017.2 GW
((2,330,000/8760 Hrs/Yr)/1017.2)) equals actual production of 26.14% of Capacity.
2023 annual World Solar production 1.64 milllion GWh; solar capacity 1419.0 GW
((1.640,000/8760 Hrs/Yr)/1419.0)) equals actual production of 13.2% of Capacity.
2023 annual combined World production 3.97 milllion GWh; combined capacity 2436.2 GW
((3.970,000/8760 Hrs/Yr)/2436.2)) equals actual production of 18.6% of Capacity.
2023 Wind and Solar renewable production was 18.6% of capacity and I suspect that 2024 will be some what lower. Depending on the source wind and Solar contributed 11-13.4% of total world electricity production during 2023.
Forgot the sources:
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/wind-energy-consumption-vs-installed-wind-energy-capacity
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/solar-pv-energy-consumption-vs-solar-pv-capacity
And specifically for Germany:
Wind Energy: Around 142.1 TWh, which accounted for approximately 27% of Germany’s total electricity consumption in 2023.
Solar Energy: Approximately 59.9 TWh, which should account for roughly 11-12% of the total electricity consumption.
Germany wind and solar are both grid saturated according to “The Pollack Limit” discussed at length a couple years ago here on WUWT. The Wind CF in Germany is right at 27% and Solar at 12%.Time to give it up, it was an irresponsible waste of capital up to this point, continuing the insanity is well, insane. The new German ruling Coalition after The February 2025 will surely early on end the energewende..
Leftist fantasies never end but eventually they run out of other people’s money to waste.
In the US the investment growth rate for wind power is slow. But solar power and EV investment growth rates still far too high:
The United States’ solar energy capacity has been growing rapidly in recent years, with the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) projecting a 75% increase in solar power capacity from 2023 to 2025
In 2023, the United States’ wind capacity increased by 4% from 2022, reaching a total of 147.5 gigawatts (GW). This is a 10% average annual increase since 2010, when the capacity was 45 GW. The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) expects wind capacity to increase by 7 gigawatts (GW) in 2024, which is a 5% increase from the previous year. This would bring the total wind capacity in the U.S. to 153.8 GW by the end of 2024.
In 2024, the US is expected to invest $312 billion in EV manufacturing, with $223 billion already allocated to specific initiatives. This is a nearly $66 billion increase from January 2023
All cash down the crapper.
Oh, and “capacity” does not equal production.
The percentage increase of investment correlates with the percentage increase of capacity.
Exactly.
It has absolutely nothing to do with electricity actually generated that can be used when generated.
Yes — Greene can’t read.
Number of bad investments correlates well with number of government investments.
Germany may have fatally damaged its manufacturing base as companies close or announce job cuts or relocations out of Germany virtually every week. Sky high energy costs mean that a twelfth of the population are not able to fund a full year forcing consideration to be given to banning disconnections for non-payment even if only during the winter months. Energy companies in the UK are facing an increasing amount of customers in debt and these may be pushed on to those of us who are paying, as if our costs were not high enough already.
Many of the companies that haven’t moved or downsized already, are having trouble finding enough money to maintain their equipment, much less modernize it. This will hamper those companies in the future.
Germany is poised to begin repairing Merkel’s damage: (It won’t be easy and it won’t be quick).
Christoph Strack
4 hours ago4 hours ago
Friedrich Merz, an erstwhile rival of former German Chancellor Angela Merkel, has been a beacon of hope for the conservative CDU party. He now wants to unseat Chancellor Olaf Scholz and take over as Germany’s leader.
Merz has always been a supporter of nuclear energy and has expressed doubts over renewable energy sources such as “ugly” wind turbines.
He drew flak in 2022 for flying his private jet to attend Finance Minister Christian Lindner’s wedding on the island of Sylt at a time of rising energy prices caused by Russia’s war on Ukraine.
Merz has also been accused of pandering to the far right with denigrating remarks about refugees.
He represents a CDU that has become more conservative, although he has stated his refusal to cooperate with the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD).(We’ll see about that, I think he’ll change his mind, he must IMHO)
Shortly after Germany’s center-left government collapsed on November 6, 2024, Merz stated in clear terms that the years of Scholz’s coalition were now history, arguing that this had been a long time coming.
Merz is hoping that he and the CDU/CSU will replace Olaf Scholz and his minority government with the Greens following the February 23 election.
It remains to be seen which coalition partners he would choose to form a new government.
The renewable energy business has been built on lies pure and simple. If we had the strength to hold government, media and academia accountable we wouldn’t be in this mess. If we held individuals accountable and didn’t allow them to hide behind their organizations all of this would end.
Remove the free money, remove the commitment. The clear indicator of a specious cause.
RE has always been a means for the wealthy to extract public money through subsidies, never about reducing CO2 emissions.
I am optimistic for a different reason.
For years, it seemed like the climate skeptics spoke alone, and in a disjointed fashion, making no headway with GQ public.
Now, I’m watching organizations pull together, and some even coordinate their efforts.
Recently, someone told me that 20% of people are hypnotized idiots, 20% question everything, and 60% can be convinced with logic but mostly they just go along with whichever group is loudest.
By coordinating efforts, we can appear to be the winners and pull in the 60%.
Just a thought about “ never consistently reached even 50% of its electricity production from wind and solar”
A true but misleading statement.
“Electricity production” is not full-time electric service–as we are used to and require.
“Electricity” from intermittent, sporadic machines does not/cannot provide full time, on-demand electric service. (for typical residential, commercial, industrial use).
To contribute at all, solar and wind must connect to a grid of rotating generation from coal, natural gas, oil, large hydro, or nuclear. With specialized equipment at various grid locations calculated for reliability, stability and regulation.
AC frequency, voltage, current, reactances, and other instant (frequency in HZ or AC cycles are usually 1/50 or 1/60 of a second. A transmission grid or distribution network requires controls that continuously monitor and take stabilizing actions as needed to provide AC within best engineering practices.
Best engineering practices used to include lowest capital, construction, and operational costs. Sadly no longer used.
Do not be surprised if they invent something new to kick start the mad rush to One World Order.