Conclusions from
prior articles on
the green new deal:
-- The cost is huge
-- Most of the cost
is for socialist programs,
unrelated to energy,
-- A 100% "renewables"
electric grid is not feasible,
-- GLOBAL CO2 emissions
will continue to rise with
only a US green new deal, and
-- The US fossil fuel industry
has been a great success --
so why destroy it ?
The U.S.
Green New Deal
supports
100% wind,
hydroelectric,
and solar power
for the U.S., but not
burning wood, which
has CO2 emissions and
causes deforestation.
Existing nuclear
power would
have to remain,
for practical reasons,
but that's NOT a goal,
even though France's
nuclear energy program
has been a long term
success.
I've written many times
that solar and wind
"renewables" are
very expensive
compared with
natural gas.
And they produce
inconsistent energy,
so require a huge
amount of fossil
fuel back-up, or
very expensive
battery back up.
Another problem
is seasonal trends,
where the season
with maximum
electricity output
from solar energy,
for one example,
does not match
the season with
maximum electricity
consumption.
Getting enough
solar and wind
energy during
winters is a
problem.
Energy needs
are less seasonal
in the tropics.
But at higher latitudes,
there's a greater need
for light and heat during
the winter months ...
but solar output
peaks in the summer:
Hydroelectric power
tends to peak
in the spring,
but varies a lot
from year to year:
In some parts
of the world, maximum
wind energy output
best matches winter
consumption needs:
But wind tends to be
variable, from year
to year, and from
month to month.
California’s electricity
consumption peaks
in August, due to
air conditioning usage
-- two months after
their June peak
in solar panel output:
Over 80% of today’s
energy consumption
is from fossil fuels:
Based on the transition
speed since 1985,
moving to an
all-electric economy
would take 100+ years !
Today, wind,
hydroelectric,
and solar
account for about
10% of global world
energy production:
-- Hydroelectric, about 7%
-- Wind, about 2%
-- Solar, about 1%:
For hydroelectric,
wind and solar
to produce 100%
of the world’s
energy supply,
wind and solar,
now at only 3%,
will need
to ramp up
to over 90%
-- meaning a huge
30-fold increase
in wind and solar
energy output.
That won't happen
between 2018
and 2030 --
not even close !
More electric private
passenger autos
are not currently helpful
if the electricity needed
to charge their batteries
comes from coal.
( 64% coal use for
DTE Energy electricity
in my Detroit metropolitan
area -- about half of that
percentage for the entire
world ).
And private
passenger autos
passenger autos
are a smaller share
of total oil consumption
than many people
would expect.
BP data indicates
that only 26%
of worldwide
oil consumption
is used for gasoline.
From a Norway study:
With large subsidies,
EVs are disproportionately
sold to high-income families
as a second vehicle,
often used for
commuting to work.
Prior to the EV ownership,
many owners had been taking
public transportation to work:
Source for above chart:
Holtsmark and Skonhoft
Holtsmark and Skonhoft
"The Norwegian support and subsidy
policy of electric cars. Should it be
adopted by other countries ?"