Month: January 2023

Vital Energy Lessons for Virginia and America

Legislators shouldn’t Californicate Virginia or America on EVs and Green Energy

Paul Driessen       

When they open their 30-day session January 11, Virginia’s Senate and House of Delegates must correct some serious energy mistakes they made two years ago, when Democrats controlled nearly the entire state government and passed the “Virginia Clean Economy Act.”

One of its party-line provisions requires that Virginia adopt California’s requirement that only low emission vehicles (LEVs) be sold by model year 2025 and only zero emission vehicles (ZEVs) by MY 2035. That means in barely twelve years only new electric vehicles (EVs) could be sold in Virginia.

Again mimicking California, in addition to EVs, the VCEA also requires a massive shift from affordable, reliable coal and natural gas-generated electricity to expensive, weather-dependent, land-intensive wind and solar electricity, stabilized and backed up by huge batteries.

As I’ve explained previously (here, here, here and here), this is unworkable. Texas, Buffalo and the Midwest have demonstrated that heavy reliance on wind and solar can bring deadly blackouts during blizzards. California told residents not to charge their soon-to-be-mandatory EVs during last summer’s heat waves, to prevent blackouts. Switzerland might ban EV charging this winter for the same reason.  

The Suburban Virginia Republican Coalition PAC (SUVGOP) recognizes these realities, and understands that the wind turbines, solar panels and transmission lines will not be in Democrat strongholds like Alexandria, Arlington, Falls Church and Richmond. They will be in beautiful rural Virginia, which will also be hardest hit by bans on gasoline and diesel vehicles. SUVGOP has therefore gotten the ball rolling on reversing these ill-advised laws, by launching a campaign to repeal LEV/ZEV mandates.

SUVGOP calls its campaign “Don’t CA my VA.” (When I lived in the Centennial State, bumper stickers proclaimed a crasser version of this message: “Don’t Californicate Colorado.”)

Arguments for avoiding or terminating LEV/ZEV mandates are compelling – for Virginia and America.

* While great for short hauls and some motorists, EVs don’t get you far along on your 800-mile vacation trip; recharging can take hours, depending on multiple factors; and charging stations are more limited off main highways.

* You don’t want to get caught in your EV during a hurricane evacuation or blizzard, especially since already limited battery life decreases in cold weather and with heater or AC use.

* EVs (and backup batteries) can burst into chemical-fueled infernos, especially if they get immersed in water. That can be catastrophic and deadly if the EV is in a home or underground garage (or on a cargo ship loaded with EVs). The fires cannot be extinguished with water.

* EVs require 3-4 times more metals than internal-combustion cars: copper, iron, nickel, aluminum, cobalt, lithium, rare earths and others. Those materials don’t just appear via Materials Acquisition for Global Industrial Change mechanisms (MAGIC). They must be dug out and processed, somewhere.

China’s BYD Auto company alone used 13,000 tons of copper to make EVs in 2016. Based on average porphyry ore deposits today, every 100,000 tons of copper requires processing 23,000,000 tons of copper ore, after removing 35,000,000 tons of overlying rock – using explosives and fossil fuels!

Start calculating how many billions of tons of copper and other metals and minerals would be required for all the EVs, wind turbines, solar panels, transmission lines, and grid-stabilizing and backup batteries Virginia, or your state, or the United States or entire world, are planning to mandate. Then calculate how many trillions of tons of ore that would require – and how much mining, blasting, processing and fuel.

Where will all that work take place? In whose backyards? With how much ecological destruction, air and water pollution, hazardous waste generation, slave and child labor, and human health risks?

“Clean” energy and vehicles? There may be zero emissions out of Virginia EV tailpipes – maybe even at the electricity source, if it comes from wind or solar power, when the wind is blowing and sun is shining.

But there is no “zero emissions” for mining, processing and manufacturing. It just happens somewhere else, often in Africa or Asia, often by Chinese companies – affecting someone else’s air and water quality, scenery, croplands, wildlife habitats, wildlife, health and wellbeing.

Meanwhile, millions of acres of Virginia and US lands would be covered with turbines, panels, transformers and transmission lines; millions of birds, bats and other animals would be killed annually.

Bottom line: There is no such thing as “clean, green, renewable, sustainable” energy or vehicles. It’s just a matter of where and how and how much the mining and materials processing, manufacturing and emissions take place. It’s just a matter of how good the “green” PR programs are; and whether US environmentalists, journalists and politicians recognize … or cancel and censor … these realities.

Earth’s atmospheric, oceanic and climate systems are global. The loss of habitats and species is a global problem. We should think globally, and act locally.

Regarding backup batteries, the VCEA mandates acquisition of 3,100 megawatts of storage. Assuming legislators meant 3,100 megawatt-hours, this would require some 36,000 Tesla half-ton 85-kWh modules; and it would still meet less than 1% of Virginia’s average daily electricity consumption (and less than 0.5% of its peak demand). This doesn’t include batteries to stabilize wind-solar grid fluctuations.

Virginia legislators therefore need to address these vitally important issues, as well – with some precision:

* How many wind turbines, solar panels, transformers, backup/grid-balancing battery modules, and miles of new transmission lines will The Old Dominion need to replace existing coal and gas generation?

* How many more will it require after half of all cars, trucks and buses are electric? After restaurants and new and remodeled homes are forced to have electric home and water heating, stoves and ovens, instead of gas – and upgrade home and neighborhood electrical systems to handle the added loads?

* Where and on whose property will all these “renewable” systems and power lines be installed? How many millions of acres of land and coastal areas (and their wildlife) will be impacted? Will residents or local governments be able to veto developments? How often will eminent domain be employed?

* How many millions (billions?) of tons of metals, minerals, carbon-fiber composites, plastics, concrete and other materials will be needed? How much ore, overburden and fuels? How many tons of pollution will be emitted, cumulatively, throughout the mining-processing-manufacturing-transportation process?

* How many of these materials (and turbines, panels, battery modules and transformers) will come from China or other adversarial nations, or their surrogates?  

* Under what pollution control, wildlife habitat and endangered species protection, workplace safety, slave and child labor, and other “responsible sourcing” laws will all this work be done?

* Where will worn out, broken and obsolete solar panels, enormous wind turbine blades and other non-recyclable equipment be landfilled?

* How many billions or trillions of dollars will all this cost Virginia and US ratepayers and taxpayers?

It takes more than declaring that actions taken under “clean economy” laws are “in the public interest” to make it so. It’s vital that legislators look beyond tailpipes, and beyond Virginia or US borders, to avoid destroying the planet with wind and solar, to save it from fossil fuels and “manmade climate change.”

The 2023 legislative session is a perfect opportunity to start reexamining “clean economy” assumptions, misconceptions and mandates – and implementing reality-based Environment-Social-Governance (ESG) principles. Are Virginia’s legislators up to the task?  

Paul Driessen is senior policy analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org) and author of books and articles on energy, environment, climate and human rights issues.

via Watts Up With That?

https://ift.tt/sAlh3Ux

January 9, 2023 at 08:39PM

Southwestern Solar: Bright Shining Disappointment

Solar farms in Southwest USA from Solar Energy Maps

D. Dowd. Muska reports in his National Review article A Bright Shining Disappointment.  Excerpts in italics with my bolds and added images.

Solar has failed in the Southwest.  In the ’70s, it all seemed so simple.

President Carter issued a proclamation declaring the sun “an inexhaustible source of clean energy.” A joint resolution of Congress predicted that “the development of solar technologies will provide an abundant, economical, safe, and environmentally compatible energy supply.” Robert Redford assured Americans that “the sun will always work” and “never increase its price on a heating bill.”

But nearly 50 years later, solar’s failure is blindingly clear. The Southwest Public Policy Institute, where I serve as a senior fellow, recently explored the contribution sunshine makes to utility-scale electricity generation in eight states: Oklahoma, Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, Utah, Arizona, Nevada, and California. What we discovered was jarring.

In the Southwest, solar generates a mere 6.4 percent of utility-scale power (power from facilities where total generation capacity is one megawatt or greater), despite the region enjoying the sunniest skies in America. While California (16.7 percent) and Nevada (14.4 percent) had the heaviest solar shares, the drop-off in the other states we studied was profound: Utah (8.1 percent), Arizona (5.5 percent), New Mexico (5.0 percent), Texas (3.1 percent), and Colorado (3.0 percent). Coming in last — and by a country mile — was the Sooner State, at a miniscule 0.1 percent.

These disappointing figures are all the more perplexing when one considers the massive level of government succor that has flowed the solar industry’s way since the late 1970s, the era of Annie Hall, the Bee Gees, and the Star Wars Holiday Special. In 2012, an audit by the Government Accountability Office found that federal agencies have overseen hundreds of “initiatives that support solar energy across the four key federal roles”: R&D; “fleets and facilities,” “commercialization and deployment,” and “regulation, permitting, and compliance.” For decades, wildly generous tax credits have been offered at the federal and state levels. And in the late 1990s, lawmakers began to adopt renewable portfolio standards, which required power suppliers to generate or purchase “green” electricity. In Arizona, 15 percent of power must satisfy these standards by 2025. In Nevada, the rule is 50 percent by 2030. And in New Mexico, all electricity is mandated to be “zero carbon” by 2045.

Enjoying both free fuel and government-conferred advantages, solar power should play a leading role in the Southwest. Yet it doesn’t.

This indicates that solar’s problems are fundamental. As the Institute for Energy Research recently noted, sunlight is “relatively weak because it must first pass through the atmosphere, which protects the Earth from the sun’s intensity.” In 2015, a study by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology described the solar radiation that reaches us as suffering from “low energy density.” In addition, even the most-efficient photovoltaic panels in common use today convert far more solar irradiance to heat than electricity.

Intermittency, in energy journalist Robert Bryce’s opinion, is another “killer drawback” for solar: “Lower power output on cloudy days and during the winter — and zero output at night — means that solar power facilities must be paired with expensive batteries or conventional power plants in order to prevent blackouts or brownouts.”

“Free” fuel, it turns out, isn’t so free. As the Manhattan Institute’s Mark P. Mills explained:

Claims that wind, solar, and EVs have reached cost parity with traditional energy sources or modes of transportation are not based on evidence. Even before the latest period of rising energy prices, Germany and Britain — both further down the grid transition path than the U.S. — have seen average electricity rates rise 60%-110% over the past two decades. The same pattern is visible in Australia and Canada. It’s also apparent in U.S. states and regions where mandates have resulted in grids with a higher share of wind/solar energy. In general, overall U.S. residential electricity costs rose over the past 20 years.

But those rates should have declined because of the collapse in the cost of natural gas and coal — the two energy sources that, together, supplied nearly 70% of electricity in that period. Instead, rates have been pushed higher thanks to elevated spending on the otherwise unneeded infrastructure required to transmit wind/solar-generated electricity, as well as the increased costs to keep lights on during “droughts” of wind and sun that come from also keeping conventional power plants available (like having an extra, fully fueled car parked and ready to go) in effect by spending on two grids.

Then there’s the NIMBYs. Utility-scale solar, in community after community,
faces resistance from locals.

In November, the Roswell Daily Record reported that a New Mexico regulatory agency “voted against three proposed [solar] projects after hearing objections from county residents.” Issues raised included fencing that “will deter from scenic views and hurt property values” and “concerns that the panels contain hazardous substances.” According to The Durango Herald, residents near Hesperus, Colo., have banded together to fight a photovoltaic project, citing concerns about “water runoff” and “direct loss of 1,900 acres of elk habitat.”

In short, solar has not been shining very bright since it came on the scene in the ’70s. Indeed, even in the sun-drenched Southwest, solar has proven inefficient, unreliable, and — when all costs are considered — expensive. That should be a warning:

If it struggles here, in ideal conditions, how well
can it be expected to perform in the rest of the country?

D. Dowd. Muska is a senior fellow at the Southwest Public Policy Institute, a research institute dedicated to improving the quality of life in the American Southwest by formulating, promoting and defending sound public policy solutions.

When it opened in 2014, the Ivanpah Solar Power Facility was the world’s largest solar thermal power station, covering 4000 acres in the Mohave desert. While Ivanpah was supposed to be the future of clean energy, it seems that the rate at which it burns fossil fuel might actually outweigh any environmental benefits of solar power production.

via Science Matters

https://ift.tt/2QJfjB7

January 9, 2023 at 07:49PM

Do Google Search Options Conceal Climate Data that is Contrary to Government Alarmists Propaganda?

Guest essay by Larry Hamlin

The recent political shenanigan revelations of the Twitter social networking system exposed by the Musk purchase show government efforts to manipulate and control information so only their viewpoints and positions are presented and supported while contrarian views are concealed, rejected, or disposed of as flawed and irrelevant. One can only wonder how extensive this government manipulation has spread in the social networking information sites.

Some examples are provided below of recent significant climate science data outcomes that do not support climate alarmist claims of a “climate emergency” and how these scientific data outcomes have been delt with in the information web world.

The year 2022 North Atlantic Hurricane season has concluded with NOAA’s “climate model“ predictions provided in their May and August forecasts of an “above normal” season proven to be flawed and failed as noted in the WUWT article  below.

A Google search for information sources addressing the year 2022 North Atlantic hurricane season shows the following:

NOAAs failed “70% confidence” claim (shown below) for its year 2022 model projections is completely ignored in the Google search heading options with the most prominent search heading being “Damaging 2022 Atlantic hurricane season comes to a close”. Google appears to avoid alerting anyone to a search option result that did not support the “climate emergency” hype or the fact that NOAA “model” forecasts even in August 2022 (halfway into the season) still could not get it right.

Nor were there any search options offered to the data provided by Colorado State University’s extensive tropical storm records, data and analysis shown below indication that the 2022 North Atlantic Hurricane season had a total energy ACE level that was more than 22% below the average for such seasons as measured for the 30 year period of 1991 to 2020.

The global average temperature anomaly data is now available for the year the 2022 average temperature anomaly that shows a continuing declining trend for the period 2015 to 2022. Provided below is a Google search for information regarding this continuing global average temperature anomaly declining trend outcome.

There is no information provided in the Google search options that addresses the significant outcome of a declining global average temperature anomaly trend during the last 8 years of the “climate emergency” as shown below from NOAA’s global temperature anomaly data website that indicates a negative -1.05 degrees C per century declining global temperature anomaly trend between 2015 to 2022. 

Once again Google search options seem to make sure that information about a negative global average temperature anomaly 8-year trend during the “climate emergency” is somehow not addressed.

The year 2022 U.S. tornado season is now complete with below average numbers of tornadoes occurring. Provide below is a Google search for information about year 2022 tornado outcomes.

The most complete information regarding U.S. yearly tornado outcomes is available directly from NOAA’s tornado website as shown below which shows data covering the last 18 years (inclusive of 2005 through 2022) that clearly indicates tornado numbers are not climbing during this period of  “climate emergency” with the outlier highest 2 years occurring 12 to 15 years ago.

For some reason this most comprehensive and complete data website regarding the 2022 tornado season is not included in Googles most prominent search options.

How strange.

via Watts Up With That?

https://ift.tt/tXT3efy

January 9, 2023 at 04:34PM

Doomsayer Paul Ehrlich “always wrong” — Morano on OAN

Watch: Morano on OAN TV: Talks about Paul Ehrlich’s claim ‘If I’m always wrong, so is science’ claim – & the NYT seeking shorter people and racist science.

The post Doomsayer Paul Ehrlich “always wrong” — Morano on OAN appeared first on CFACT.

via CFACT

https://ift.tt/6fgv9Kq

January 9, 2023 at 03:03PM