$36 Trillion for Clean Energy, IEA reports.

[Old Rocks]

Elektra, you stupid little ass, we don't care that coal or petroleum is used in liners or cathodes and anodes. What we care about is the massive amounts of CO2 created in generating electricity. Even the use of coke for smelting steel, and there are many smelters that use electricity, rather than coke, is irrelevant to the amount of CO2 put into the atmosphere from the generation of electricity.

 

[Old Rocks]

New York Times April 2016........."renewable energy stumbling and bumbling towards the future"

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/24/b...e-energy-stumbles-toward-the-future.html?_r=0

5% and growing daily. Soon to be 10%, then 20%, then 40%, you see how it goes. And then your laughing ass will be laughing out the other end.

 

[elektra]

The towers are always steel, which requires coke to create the heat needed in smelting. The rebar in the base is also dependent on Coke. Aluminium, another process that is dependent on Coke. Coke coming from Coal.

You are still guessing about technology. You don't need coke for aluminium. Yes, steel is a high energy cost, but the coal is cheap. There are many other materials that are extremely expensive such as the generator magnets made of a rare earth, niobium.

All of those costs are included in the EROEI of a windmill. You don't need to keep guessing.

Damn, I should never question if I am right, even when I am guessing, I am right. Coke from Coal is needed to make aluminium. Carbon lines are made from coal!

Patent US4113831 - Recovery of sodium fluoride and other chemicals from spent carbon liners

Cathode pots of electrolytic furnaces used in the production of aluminum are lined with side carbon and bottom carbon compositions which are electrically conductive. The bottom carbon is generally of graded anthracite coal and coke bonded together with pitch

Anthracite - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Anthracite is a hard, compact variety of coal that has a submetallic luster. It has the highest carbon content, the fewest impurities, and the highest calorific content of all types of coal except for graphite.

I imagine any coal used in making a pot is a small cost of the entire windmill life cycle. I'm not as concerned with what the materials are as I am about the total cost from manufacture, construction, to maintenance. The chart I showed does cover all costs and favorably compares it with oil and photovoltaics.

Your chart states the opposite and us not very accurate, but it does show wind and solar are much more expensive then fossil fuels and nuclear power.

And again, where is the link.

 

[elektra]

Elektra, you stupid little ass, we don't care that coal or petroleum is used in liners or cathodes and anodes. What we care about is the massive amounts of CO2 created in generating electricity. Even the use of coke for smelting steel, and there are many smelters that use electricity, rather than coke, is irrelevant to the amount of CO2 put into the atmosphere from the generation of electricity.

No smelter get away with not using Coke, post one if you like, otherwise this will be the 30th time in a row you have failed to support your filthy lies. I even bet it will not be as easy as PIE.

 

[Wuwei]

Your chart states the opposite and us not very accurate, but it does show wind and solar are much more expensive then fossil fuels and nuclear power.

And again, where is the link.

I gave the link in post 132.
You are reading it wrong. The data in post 132 shows the EROEI:
Wind 18 (higher)
Nuclear 5 to 15(lower)
Photovoltaic 6 to 12(lower)
Domestic oil and gas 11 (lower)

 

[elektra]

Your chart states the opposite and us not very accurate, but it does show wind and solar are much more expensive then fossil fuels and nuclear power.

And again, where is the link.

I gave the link in post 132.
You are reading it wrong. The data in post 132 shows the EROEI:
Wind 18 (higher)
Nuclear 5 to 15(lower)
Photovoltaic 6 to 12(lower)
Domestic oil and gas 11 (lower)

132? I missed it, but will read it, and respond, thanks, that will take a bit of time.

 

[elektra]

Your chart states the opposite and us not very accurate, but it does show wind and solar are much more expensive then fossil fuels and nuclear power.

And again, where is the link.

I gave the link in post 132.
You are reading it wrong. The data in post 132 shows the EROEI:
Wind 18 (higher)
Nuclear 5 to 15(lower)
Photovoltaic 6 to 12(lower)
Domestic oil and gas 11 (lower)

I think you are misreading the article, if I quote from the bottom it seems to contradict what you are stating and believe.

EROI of different fuels and the implications for society

Alternatives such as photovoltaics and wind turbines are unlikely to be nearly as cheap energetically or economically as past oil and gas when backup costs are considered. In addition there are increasing costs everywhere pertaining to potential climate changes and other pollutants. Any transition to solar energies would require massive investments of fossil fuels. Despite many claims to the contrary—from oil and gas advocates on the one hand and solar advocates on the other—we see no easy solution to these issues when EROI is considered. If any resolution to these problems is possible it is probable that it would have to come at least as much from an adjustment of society's aspirations for increased material affluence and an increase in willingness to share as from technology.

 

[Wuwei]

Your chart states the opposite and us not very accurate, but it does show wind and solar are much more expensive then fossil fuels and nuclear power.

And again, where is the link.

I gave the link in post 132.
You are reading it wrong. The data in post 132 shows the EROEI:
Wind 18 (higher)
Nuclear 5 to 15(lower)
Photovoltaic 6 to 12(lower)
Domestic oil and gas 11 (lower)

I think you are misreading the article, if I quote from the bottom it seems to contradict what you are stating and believe.

EROI of different fuels and the implications for society

Alternatives such as photovoltaics and wind turbines are unlikely to be nearly as cheap energetically or economically as past oil and gas when backup costs are considered. In addition there are increasing costs everywhere pertaining to potential climate changes and other pollutants. Any transition to solar energies would require massive investments of fossil fuels. Despite many claims to the contrary—from oil and gas advocates on the one hand and solar advocates on the other—we see no easy solution to these issues when EROI is considered. If any resolution to these problems is possible it is probable that it would have to come at least as much from an adjustment of society's aspirations for increased material affluence and an increase in willingness to share as from technology.

I don't quite understand what he is getting at. I bold faced the operative word below:

"Alternatives such as photovoltaics and wind turbines are unlikely to be nearly as cheap energetically or economically as past oil and gas when backup costs are considered." ​

He is comparing photovoltaics and wind turbines today to past oil and gas. Today's oil and gas have a lower EROI, and that makes wind a better option.

However, I think I learned something. Just because the EROI is more favorable, doesn't mean that it's cheaper. It only means that it is a more energy efficient technology. At today's low cost of oil, I wouldn't be surprised if oil would be cheaper energy source than wind until it rises to maybe $100 a barrel again even though it has a worse EROI.

 

[elektra]

Your chart states the opposite and us not very accurate, but it does show wind and solar are much more expensive then fossil fuels and nuclear power.

And again, where is the link.

I gave the link in post 132.
You are reading it wrong. The data in post 132 shows the EROEI:
Wind 18 (higher)
Nuclear 5 to 15(lower)
Photovoltaic 6 to 12(lower)
Domestic oil and gas 11 (lower)

I think you are misreading the article, if I quote from the bottom it seems to contradict what you are stating and believe.

EROI of different fuels and the implications for society

Alternatives such as photovoltaics and wind turbines are unlikely to be nearly as cheap energetically or economically as past oil and gas when backup costs are considered. In addition there are increasing costs everywhere pertaining to potential climate changes and other pollutants. Any transition to solar energies would require massive investments of fossil fuels. Despite many claims to the contrary—from oil and gas advocates on the one hand and solar advocates on the other—we see no easy solution to these issues when EROI is considered. If any resolution to these problems is possible it is probable that it would have to come at least as much from an adjustment of society's aspirations for increased material affluence and an increase in willingness to share as from technology.

I don't quite understand what he is getting at. I bold faced the operative word below:

"Alternatives such as photovoltaics and wind turbines are unlikely to be nearly as cheap energetically or economically as past oil and gas when backup costs are considered." ​

He is comparing photovoltaics and wind turbines today to past oil and gas. Today's oil and gas have a lower EROI, and that makes wind a better option.

However, I think I learned something. Just because the EROI is more favorable, doesn't mean that it's cheaper. It only means that it is a more energy efficient technology. At today's low cost of oil, I wouldn't be surprised if oil would be cheaper energy source than wind until it rises to maybe $100 a barrel again even though it has a worse EROI.

Oil, is not used to produce electricity. Nor is diesel.

Wind is not cheap, and wind is not available when we need it, neither wind nor solar can be counted on in emergencies or to supply electricity to industry.

With a $36 Trillion dollar price tag, it is going to make a lot of people real rich, just not me, but we will pay for it, with higher electric bills.

If you look into spain, you will find that solar and wind failed there. They are about broke, by the same amount they spent on Green, Clean, Renewable, Sustainable Energy, which technically speaking is none of those.

 

[Crick]

Okay, let's look into Spain and alternative energy sources.

Renewable energy in Spain
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Renewable Energy in Spain

Renewable Energy (RE)
RE as % of Gross Final Energy Consumption. 16.2% (2014)
Target for above. 20.0% (2020)
Renewable Electricity
Percentage electricity generated by RE. 42.8% (2014)
RE generated / Total electricity generation. 111,459/266,867 GWh Net(2014)[1]
Record % RE covered electricity consumption
64.2% (24/9/12

wind only)[2]
Installed capacity (2015)[3]
Wind Power 23 GW
Bio Energy 0.75 GW
Solar Power 7 GW
Hydro Power 20.3 GW
Geothermal 0 GW
Total 51.1 GW
Country Notes

• One of the worldleaders in windpower generation and turbine manufacturing.

• Europes second largest total windpower capacity after Germany.

Electricity from Renewable Sources in Spain represented 42.8% of electricity demand coverage during 2014. The country has a very large wind power capability built up over many years and is one of the world leaders in wind power generation.

Initially Spain also positioned itself as a European leader in Solar power, by 2007-2010 the country was second only to Germany in installed capacity, however other countries (Italy in particular) have since leapfrogged Spanish development. By 2015 solar power in Spain though significant produced less than a third of that of wind power in 2015.

Spain has set the target of generating 20% of all its energy needs from renewable energy sources by 2020.[4] By the end of 2014 Spain had reached a level of 16.2% of all its energy needs from renewable energy sources.[5]

The story of renewable energy development in Spain is both a mixed and unfinished one. Under previous subsidies the country expanded its renewable base rapidly and helped established a domestic industry in both wind turbine and solar energy. However support was drastically cut back following the global financial crisis and new installations stagnated between 2012 and 2015. The debts incurred during the boom period have led to tougher and retrospective revisions of contracts to providers of renewable energy reducing returns considerably. In being one of the first-to-market countries, Spain faces the challenge of powerful competitors from countries such as Denmark, Germany and China and ironically a cheaper and more mature renewable energy sector which Spain itself helped to pioneer.

In 2015 solar power suddenly demonstrated a possible way through the impasse. The continued fall in prices for solar systems and Spain's abundant sunshine led to prices for solar power reaching grid price parity. Suddenly there was the potential for sustained and spontaneous growth in solar installations in Spain as households and producers could produce power more economically. However the Spanish government introduced what has been dubbed the worlds first "sun tax" on solar installations making them economically less viable as well as draconian fines (up to 60 million Euros) for anyone not complying with the tax.

The tax has proved highly controversial. On the one hand the government has argued that those generating their own power still rely on the national grid for power backup and so should be liable for contributing to the cost. On the other hand, the solar industry has argued that the government is simply trying to protect the centralised established power producers who's revenues would be threatened by this competiitve solar threat. Environmentalists have criticised the tax for artificially blocking Spain from continuing its long standing movement to renewable energy production.

Whatever the merits of both arguments, the controversy can only become more heightened as the price of solar energy continues to fall and if PV solar power installed capacity in Spain were to continue sliding down the EU league from 12th position in 2014 (102.9 kW per 1000 inhabitants). In the same year in terms of wind energy production Spain was much stronger in 3rd position (495 kW per1000 inhabitants).
********************************************************

Not quite the way you described it.

 

[Wuwei]

Wind is not cheap, and wind is not available when we need it, neither wind nor solar can be counted on in emergencies or to supply electricity to industry.

With a $36 Trillion dollar price tag, it is going to make a lot of people real rich, just not me, but we will pay for it, with higher electric bills.

If you look into spain, you will find that solar and wind failed there. They are about broke, by the same amount they spent on Green, Clean, Renewable, Sustainable Energy, which technically speaking is none of those.

We will never run out of oil. The problem is that it is becoming less and less energy efficient at extracting it, and the costs of extracting it will become higher and higher until it is no longer feasible.

One thing the EROEI shows is that even if the pollution from burning it stays the same for the next decades, the pollution from extracting it from the ground will become higher and higher.

 

[elektra]

We will never run out of oil. The problem is that it is becoming less and less energy efficient at extracting it, and the costs of extracting it will become higher and higher until it is no longer feasible.

One thing the EROEI shows is that even if the pollution from burning it stays the same for the next decades, the pollution from extracting it from the ground will become higher and higher.

And considering Crude Oil is required to manufacture Wind Turbines and Solar Panels............

And we do not burn Crude Oil to produce electricity

 

[elektra]

Okay, let's look into Spain and alternative energy sources.

Not quite the way you described it.

Spain's Green Disaster a Lesson for America - Finance - CBN News - Christian News 24-7 - CBN.com

Calzada, an economist, studied Spain's green technology program and found that each green job created in Spain cost Spanish taxpayers $770,000. Each Wind Industry job cost $1.3 million to create.

"President Zapatero, for example, when he came in to power, said he knew, 'he knew' that solar energy was the future," Calzada said. "He 'knew' this, so he put all the public money and investment into this model."

But Calzada's study found that for every four jobs created by Spain's expensive green technology program, nine jobs were lost.

Electricity generated was so expensive that each "green" megawatt installed in the power grid destroyed five jobs elsewhere in the economy by raising business costs.

Obama-Backed Green Energy Company Goes Bankrupt — After Getting Billions From Taxpayers

The Spanish green energy company Abengoa has filed for Chapter 15 bankruptcy protection in the U.S. after getting billions of dollars from the Obama administration to build solar power and biofuels plants.

Abengoa, which has gotten $2.7 billion in federal subsidies, filed for U.S. bankruptcy protection after already filing for bankruptcy in Spain. In U.S. bankruptcy court, Abengoa can get more favorable terms, such as “the so-called automatic stay that halts lawsuits and prevents creditors from seizing assets,” according to The Wall Street Journal.

Abengoa took on nearly $17 billion in debt, according to court filings, after it aggressively expanded in hopes the green energy market would grow much faster than it did. The company has floated a restructuring plan to shed assets until it’s only about $5.5 billion in the hole.



Read more: Obama-Backed Green Energy Company Goes Bankrupt — After Getting Billions From Taxpayers

 

[Crick]

The Christian News? Really? Do you go there often? Are you a devout Christian? Does it color your intellect? Do you reject global warming because it shows the powers once relegated to your deity can be duplicated by humans? Is that the real problem?

 

[elektra]

The Christian News? Really? Do you go there often? Are you a devout Christian? Does it color your intellect? Do you reject global warming because it shows the powers once relegated to your deity can be duplicated by humans? Is that the real problem?

Oh, my bad, I forgot you are a bigot, here you go;

https://www.michigan.gov/documents/energy/090327-employment-public-aid-renewable_419853_7.pdf

In table 3 we summarize the results achieved in terms of employment, subsidies and investment in the three main renewable industries. Since 2000, the renewable subsidies have created less than 50,200 jobs.54 This amounts to 0.2% of Spain’s workforce and 0.25% of Spain´s employed workforce. We can see that the average subsidy per worker added in these three sources of renewable energies is more than half a million Euros (€571,138), ranging from €542,825 per worker added in or by the mini-hydro sector and two-thirds of a million Euros per worker added in or by the photovoltaic sector, to well over €1 million per worker added in or by the wind industry.

 

[elektra]

The Christian News? Really? Do you go there often? Are you a devout Christian? Does it color your intellect? Do you reject global warming because it shows the powers once relegated to your deity can be duplicated by humans? Is that the real problem?

How about fraud in Spain's Solar Power Industry? Solar power at nighttime.

Spanish nighttime solar energy fraud ‘unlikely in UK’

Authorities in Spain have launched an investigation into solar energy installations that have been selling electricity apparently generated at night.

The Spanish government called on the National Energy Commission (CNE) to look into the matter after a newspaper investigation discovered irregularities in the times at which solar energy was being generated.

Spanish newspaper El Mundo found that between November and January, 4500 megawatt hours (MWh) of solar energy were sold to the electricity grid between midnight and seven in the morning

 

[elektra]

The Christian News? Really? Do you go there often? Are you a devout Christian? Does it color your intellect? Do you reject global warming because it shows the powers once relegated to your deity can be duplicated by humans? Is that the real problem?

How about a dozen, would you like one dozen crick, you seem to like that number, lets see what I can do with a dozen! Like you claimed you could do in regards to Antarctic ice.

Watch;

Spain’s Renewable Energy Disaster Draws to a Close

Spain has been held up by the gullible and naïve (some might say, cynical and malign) hard-green-left as the model for our “new” energy future. Some “model”!!

The Spaniards have thrown 100s of billions of euros in subsidies at solar and wind power, and have achieved nothing but economic punishment in return.

The power generated is delivered at chaotic, random intervals: the sun sets every day and the wind stops blowing, just like everywhere else in the world; requiring 100% of wind and solar capacity to be matched by fossil fuel generation sources.

As a result, in the last decade, the true cost of power has spiralled out of control. However, the Spanish government used price caps in an effort to keep prices artificially low. But that simply left taxpayers with an even greater burden to cover the massive cost of renewables subsidies (which represent a state-mandated transfer from the poorest to the richest) – add mounting government debt used to keep the subsidy stream flowing – and it can be fairly said that Spain’s energy policy is nothing short of an economic disaster.

 

[elektra]

Bloomberg, seem like a fair source,

Spain Halts Renewable Subsidies to Curb $31 Billion of Debts

Spain halted subsidies for renewable energy projects to help curb its budget deficit and rein in power-system borrowings backed by the state that reached 24 billion euros ($31 billion) at the end of 2011.

“What is today an energy problem could become a financial problem,” Industry Minister Jose Manuel Soria said in Madrid. The government passed a decree today stopping subsidies for new wind, solar, co-generation or waste incineration plants.

The system’s debts were racked up as revenue from state-controlled prices failed to cover the cost of delivering power. Costs have swollen in the past five years because of an increase in regulated payments for the power grid, support for Spanish coal mines and subsidies for renewable energy plants.

 

[elektra]

Without subsidies, no Wind Power? NO NEW PROJECTS! In 2015!

Spain’s Green energy crippled without subsidy crutch

January 26, 2016 by Andrew Follett, 1
Spain did not install a single new megawatt of wind power capacity last year for the first time since the 1980s.

The Spanish Wind Energy Association admitted Tuesday the country did not install any wind power last year after Spain effectively eliminated costly green energy subsidies in 2014. The installation standstill has left Spain needing to install another 6,400 megawatts of wind energy capacity to meet legally binding European Union renewable energy targets.



- See more at: Spain’s Green energy crippled without subsidy crutch

 

[elektra]

What is interesting in this article is the amount of money lost on the "tariff deficit", that is paying more for the electricity by the government but not passing the cost to the consumer, is this deficit is almost equal to the bailout 41 billion euros Spain received.

If we include the subsidies and grants, we can see that Spain needed a bailout because they spent too much money on failed Wind and Solar Power.

Will the wind in Spain blow slower on the plain? - BBC News

This policy contributed to what Spain calls its "tariff deficit" across the entire power generation sector, thought to amount to 25bn to 30bn euros.

Image captionSpain has the second largest installed wind power capacity in Europe, behind Germany
Something needed to give, and a cash-strapped Spanish government, reeling from banking and property crises that necessitated a 41bn euro bailout package from the European Union (EU) in 2012, abruptly pulled the plug on government support for its energy sector in the same year.

Not only this, but it imposed a 7% tax on all electricity generation revenues, whether renewable or not.

These measures were followed up by further retroactive cuts that could result in "subsidy reduction of about 1.2bn euros for the wind industry in 2014", says Ms Franco. "We don't really know yet what the full financial impact will be."