By Paul Homewood
h/t stewgreen
The failed Independent is getting excited about the latest figures for renewable energy.
In fact, during Q3 wind and solar only rose from 16% last year to 18% this.
As we have already seen though, during this month, when demand is much higher than in summer, wind and solar are running at less than 15%, whilst the grid is solely dependent on fossil fuels and nuclear to keep running.
But what really stood out in the Independent article was some unashamedly mendacious statements by Dr Jonathan Marshall, energy analyst at the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit.
For instance:
The latest record is “yet another nail in the coffin for the claim that renewables cannot be a sizeable part of the UK’s electricity mix”
The simple reality is that the grid is still wholly reliant on dispatchable power from coal, gas and nuclear, without which the country would be back in the Dark Ages. Without wind and solar however, we would not notice the difference.
Or:
This vindicates those who have had confidence in the ability of renewable energy to reliably supply the UK with power.
Renewables cannot “reliably supply”, otherwise the government would not be holding Capacity Auctions each year, to pay for standby capacity for when the wind does not blow and the sun does not shine.
Or:
When the UK started to put wind farms and solar panels up and down the country, there were a lot of warnings that the unpredictability of the way electricity is generated – as it is only produced when the wind blows and sun shines – would lead to issues balancing the grid,” he said.
Prior to the Climate Change Act of 2008, energy industry representatives and some politicians claimed renewable energy sources would not be able to supply reliable enough for a modern economy to run on.
These quarterly statistics coming out showing higher and higher rates of renewables show how far away from the mark these predictions were.
Given that wind and solar are still only supplying less than 20% on average, his claim is irrelevant. The real problems will begin when their share gets higher, and conventional capacity is squeezed out.
He also deliberately conflates “wind/solar” with “renewable”. This ignores the 10% supplied by biomass, which even he might begin to be embarrassed about.
But for outright lies, this one really does take the biscuit:
“Record low prices for new renewables will bring bills down for British homes and businesses.”
New renewable projects due to come on stream in the next five years will be eye wateringly expensive and heavily subsidised, all of course to be added to power bills.
For instance:
1) The Biomass/CHP plant at Teeside, due to open in 2018, will earn a guaranteed £134.87/MWh, three times the current market price.
2) Seven offshore wind farms projects, Beatrice, EA, Hornsea, Neart, Walney, Burbo and Dudgeon are planned to add 4.3 GW of capacity between this year and 2022, adding 81% to current capacity.
They have been given contracted prices of between £123.47 and £161.71/MWh, again all guaranteed and index linked.
3) Fifteen onshore wind farms will also be built in the next two years, with guaranteed CfDs of up to £89.23/MWh.
On top of all this, the Capacity Market mechanism becomes operational next winter, costing £955 million, a cost that will only rise in years to come as more renewables come on to the system.
None of this is a state secret, as the OBR have already confirmed just how much more renewable energy is going to cost every one of us:
This sort of bare-faced lie is what we would expect from politicians or the BBC. Even the press would not get away with such outrageous claims, as the complaints body IPSO would come down on them like a ton of bricks.
But apparently it’s acceptable from the ECIU, a supposedly objective body which claims that it supports informed debate on energy and climate change issues in the UK.
Or, for that matter, somebody who calls himself “Dr”.
As we know though, the reliability of information coming out of the ECIU, run by ex BBC man Richard Black, has long been dubious. And we also know it is funded by a number of left wing foundations, many in the US.
It is now clear that their only purpose is propaganda, and not “informed debate”.
via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
December 22, 2017 at 01:12PM
Iowa Climate Science Education 