Tuesday 30 April 2024

NET ZERO AT ALL COSTS

 The madness continues with an announcement that the UK will never reach its target of net zero emissions by 2050, according to the report by Energy Systems Catapult, a government-funded body that promotes innovation (and net zero). The Climate Change Committee, which advises the Government, has described direct air capture as “a necessity, not an option”, for the UK to meet its net zero targets. This comes at a cost of £30 billion at a time when the country has no money to properly fund our roads, schools, prisons etc.

Read more here:

Britain must spend £30bn to strip CO2 from atmosphere and hit net zero, experts warn | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT (wordpress.com)

15 comments:

  1. Impossible is now possible. More solar, more wind, more grid level storage.


    https://www.planetizen.com/news/2024/04/128599-california-grid-runs-100-renewable-energy-over-9-hours



    California Grid Runs on 100% Renewable Energy for Over 9 Hours
    The state’s energy grid was entirely powered by clean energy for some portion of the day on 37 out of the last 45 days.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I have been talking about global warming online since 2006. There is supposed some number that the grid just can't handle with renewable energy saturation. It starts out low and goes higher depending upon the reality that is out there in the world. California doesn't have ample hydro electricity like many countries do with 100% RE or near that amount. And yet, here they are, reaching 37 out of the last 45 days with some portion of the day with essentially no fossil fuels online. The only fossil fuels used was to keep the natural gas turbines at a very small minimum ready to go in case of some emergency. This is a big deal that I am celebrating the reality of.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So, California manages to go part of days with 100% "renewable" energy. I would be a lot more impressed if they could manage a month of 100% usage, across adverse weather conditions, at the same time as also using only "renewables" for all of their infrastructure build -out, no fossil fuelled plant or factories or ships bringing in the solar panels, wind turbines etc

      Delete
    2. This isn't about impressing you. Its about 100% clean energy in steps. When you look at where they came from and where they are going, California will reach more and more days of 100% clean energy. It's just a matter of time and investment.

      Delete
  3. Someone should tell these stupid people to STOP BREATHING then as CO2 is what they exhale !!

    ReplyDelete
  4. This tells me you don't understand the carbon cycle. The earth cannot nearly absorb co2 naturally fast enough as we dig up fossil fuels and burn them. There is more than 150 years of burning FFs that has been added to our atmosphere and oceans.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And if you really thought that atmospheric CO2 was such a major factor you would have been banging the drum for a massive expansion in nuclear as providing the continuously available electricity that a 21st century economy requires to continue functioning.

      Delete
    2. California has a portion of 37 of 45 days at 100% RE. All that is needed is more solar, more wind, and more grid storage. Easy peasy.

      Delete
    3. More grid storage - just how much and at what cost would that be? All of the calculations that I have seen for mass grid storage put it firmly in the realm of one for the fairies in terms of both cost and feasibility.

      Delete
    4. More wind, more solar - just how much land will be required? And what about the consequential loss of habitat, destruction of bird and bat populations from the wind turbines? Seems a peculiar kind of ecology that requires mass destruction to meet a non-existent crisis.

      Delete
    5. The false assumption you have is that global warming is nothing to worry about. The cost of global warming damage way far exceeds the cost of going 100% RE by several times. I imagine that California utilities have already planned for the costs of an entire clean energy system. That gives them experience in the market system as the first to get there. They can leverage their knowledge to help the rest of the world develop their own clean energy system.

      Buildings cars and cats kill way far more birds now than wind generators ever will.


      https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2024/04/30/california-batteries-dominate-evening-grid-with-10-gw-40-gwh-of-capacity/


      California announced that they’ve crossed the line of having 10 GW of energy storage installed on its power grid. As of the announcement, the state had noted that exactly 10.379 gigawatts of output was connected, which was an increase from 770 megawatts that was connected in 2019.

      The state projects that it’ll need 52 GW of batteries connected to its grid by 2045. Along with an additional 57.5 GW of solar, state models suggest an additional 15.7 GW of four hour lithium ion batteries, and 19.5 GW of eight hour lithium ion batteries. Additional pumped hydro and long duration energy storage are also considered, however, in the models the volumes projected for now are low.

      Delete
  5. But you are ignoring the demonstrable fact that atmospheric CO2 levels have been much higher in the past without the "global boiling" to quote the individual from the UN. You cannot explain the Roman Nd Medieval Warm period in your models, when the only variable that you acknowledge is atmospheric CO2 levels. The earth's climate is far more complex than the alarmists naive models.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually I can explain the brief warm periods of the past. They weren't global and today's warming is.

      Delete
  6. Please explain, as I have seen nothing published, and all recent evidence that I have seen indicates that these periods were actually global and not local.
    Also, the true, ie untampered, temperature record for the 20th century indicates periods of heating and cooling, the US thirties dust bowl, the forecasts of the coming ice age in the 70s that was the source of a couple of Hollywood disaster movies....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. https://skepticalscience.com/medieval-warm-period-intermediate.htm

      Go to figure 1 and figure 3.

      Delete

Climate Science welcomes your views/messages.