Category: Daily News

White Lies, Damn Lies, and California Lies

Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach

It must be another day ending in a “y”, because once again, Governor Gavin Goodhair Newsom of California is pushing lies about California. Here’s the deceptive claim, the headline is below.

So, what is “clean energy” in California? Is it the much hyped solar and wind that everyone is picturing in their heads when they read this headline?

Of course not.

Does “clean energy” include hydropower? Well, that depends on what lie you’re telling at the time.

California has an insane “renewable energy mandate”. By imperial fiat, Gavin Goodhair has decreed that by 2030, at least 60% of retail electricity sales must come from renewable energy resources such as wind, solar, geothermal, biomass, and small hydroelectric generation under 30 megawatts.

Note what they don’t count as “renewable energy”? Large hydro generation, the everyday kind that comes from dams all over the US and provides a good chunk of California electricity.

And why isn’t large hydro counted as renewable?

Because if they counted large hydro, on day one of the renewable mandates, we’d already have surpassed the required percentage of electricity sales coming from renewables.

And their justification for blocking big hydro? Well, it was the claims about big dams releasing CO2 from the construction, the concrete, and mostly from rotting vegetation underwater releasing methane and CO2. Which are mostly true. They do emit CO2, as do most human activities, although not huge amounts. But it was enough for big hydro to get kicked to the curb for political reasons.

But of course, when it comes to wanting to boast about “clean energy”, suddenly in California, big hydro is promoted to be one of the “clean” good sources of electricity … even though it still doesn’t count for the renewable mandate.

And the same is true of nuclear. For years, we were told that between construction and mining emissions, plus there being only a finite amount of uranium, that nuclear plants weren’t noble enough to be counted as “renewable energy” … but now, under the new rubric of “clean energy”, they’re back in the fold.

Funny how that works …

The second lie in the headline is that they are NOT counting energy in California. Instead of total primary energy consumption, they are only counting electricity, which is only about one-fifth of the energy that we use.

And how much electricity in California comes from those poster children of renewability, which are solar and wind?

Here’s how much.

Figure 1. Primary energy consumption and solar plus wind energy consumption in California from 2004 to 2023. Why is electrical use dropping? Because skyrocketing electrical costs and insane CO2 “Cap And Trade” policies have driven energy-intensive industries out of the state.

All the rest of their vaunted claim about “TWO THIRDS CLEAN ENERGY!!!” depends on nuclear, large hydro, and a bit of geothermal.

Despite the billions of our taxpayer dollars that Californian politicians have wasted on wind and solar, it’s gonna take a while for wind and solar to pick themselves up off the floor and make a difference … so the pluted bloatocrats sitting on their dead … databases in California simply fold them in with what they otherwise call evil nuclear and big bad hydro and claim a huge effect.

And what did we get for our billions spent on unreliable electricity? Here’s what Governor Goodhair’s insane focus on “cheap” wind and solar renewables has done to our electricity costs.

Figure 2. Consumer electricity prices in the US and in California.

Folks, please listen to those who live in this poor, benighted state. I grew up in California. It had beautiful beaches, mountains, a thriving economy, and an excellent education system.

It still has the beaches and mountains, but Democrats have flooded the state with illegal aliens, spent billions of taxpayer dollars on healthcare for those illegal invaders, destroyed the economy, pushed electricity costs to insane levels, invited homeless people to camp on the streets, spent $20 billion from the taxpayers on the homeless and can’t say where the money went, driven our educational system below that of Mississippi, forced people to flee the state for Texas and Florida, and meanwhile, I pay $0.30 per kWh for my highly intermittent electricity.

California can’t even keep the power on. My power has gone off three times in the last two weeks. It’s so bad in general that I had to spring kilobucks for a propane generator to deal with blackouts and brownouts … and the politicians’ response?

Their genius plan is to unilaterally jack up gasoline prices by $0.50 per gallon for no reason in this year alone, call for an end to the use of natural gas for stoves, water heaters, and home heating, and ban gasoline-powered cars, mowers, chain saws, leaf blowers, hedge trimmers, and small engines … yeah, that’s the ticket.

And meanwhile, AI computing is driving electrical demand through the roof. Freakin’ brilliant!

I’ve watched the ugliness up close, and I beg you all—do NOT ever vote for Gavin Goodhair, Kamala Harris, Adam Schiff, or any California Democrat politician for ANYTHING. They have totally destroyed the once-beautiful state of California, and their highest goal is to extend and increase that destruction all across the US.

Grrr … you know, if I weren’t such a paragon of virtue, I’d be saying bad words right about now …

w.

PS—Why don’t I leave California? I can’t afford to, plus I live out in a gorgeous enfolding redwood forest near the coast north of San Francisco and away from the cities and the madness.

PPS— Gavin Goodhair is not only destructive. He’s for sale to the highest bidder. One story among many of his corruption is in the article Corporate Donors Gave Big to a Newsom Family Charity. Then the California Governor Took Their Side on State Issues..

PPPS—Here’s Gavin on the recent discovery of child slave laborers on several marijuana farms in California.

Did Gavin Goodhair actually say that? Of course not, he’s far too smarmy to say something that direct. What he actually said was:

“There’s a real cost to these inhumane immigration actions on hardworking families and communities, including farmworker communities, across America. Instead of supporting the businesses and workers that drive our economy and way of life, Stephen Miller’s tactics evoke chaos, fear and terror within our communities at every turn. 

Yeah, because that sounds so much more sophisticated than the old Democrat refrain, “Who will pick our cotton if we don’t have slaves”

PPPPS—As usual, I ask that when you comment, you quote the exact words you are discussing. Saves heaps of misunderstanding.


Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

via Watts Up With That?

https://ift.tt/M62Lgxr

July 16, 2025 at 12:02PM

Ray Sanders On The Corbett Report

By Paul Homewood

 

Congrats to Ray Sanders for getting the message across to a wider audience:

 

 

via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

https://ift.tt/BNO8DG6

July 16, 2025 at 11:56AM

Future Energy Scenarios 2025

By Paul Homewood

 

It’s time for this year’s FES, which is the same fanciful nonsense as usual:

 

 image

https://www.neso.energy/publications/future-energy-scenarios-fes

The 2030 stage I presume is little changed from their November Clean Power 2030 Plan, so let’s take a closer look at 2050.

As usual there are four scenarios, but I will concentrate on the Electric Engagement (EE), which assumes go full out on electrification.

image

Demand for electricity will more than double to 785 TWh, with peak demand reaching 144 GW.

This is the electricity system they envisage for 2050:

image

If we simplify this, we get this for EE in 2050:

 

image

In short, even including Interconnectors, we will only have firm capacity of 120 GW, Without Interconnectors, it drops to 96 GW, but we will need 144 GW to meet demand. The latter is based on ACS peak demand, essentially an average of peaks over several winters.

They should be using true peak demand, say on a 1-in-20 year basis, which would probably push the number up to around 160 GW.

We can effectively discount solar power in winter, and we know that we can have days and weeks on end with wind power running below 10% of capacity.

So how does NESO propose to fill this gap?

Storage will help to meet the peaks for an hour or so, but their own table above indicates that their 81 GW will only be enough for three hours. In a two week dunkelflaute, there will be no surplus power to recharge them ready for the next day.

Daily demand will probably average out at around 150 GW at its winter peaks, looking behind the NESO calculations.

So how will NESO fill the gap? Use less, apparently!

They naively believe they can draw 51 GW from EV batteries at peak times. How many drivers will even be at home at those times? And who in their right mind would plug their car in and simply allow the grid to draw off half their juice, in the hope it will be replaced overnight?

Even ignoring EVs, they also expect peak demand to be voluntarily cut by 31 GW, about a quarter. Half of this will come from switching off heating at home. Forget about switching your heating and hot water on in the early morning – you will just have to heat your home at night instead.

And, again, will there be enough electricity at off peak to charge up all those EVs?

image

NESO talk about “rewarding consumers” for halving demand. What they really mean is that if they don’t they will be punished via extortionate prices. It’s like telling a criminal he is lucky because you only cut one of his hands off, not both!

But perhaps the most remarkable admission in this NESO report is that conventional thermal power will still play the dominant role in 2050, not flaky renewables.

My dispatchable table above splits down:

image

The hydrogen comes from steam reforming with CCS and electrolysis, in roughly equal quantities.

We will therefore have to spend tens, probably hundreds, of billions building new nuclear, hydrogen burning generators, CCS gas plants, not to mention all of the associated infrastructure. Electrolysers and steam reformers will be needed, along with hydrogen storage and distribution networks.

So why bother to spend billions more on intermittent wind and solar farms?

Given the fact that hydrogen is much more expensive than natural gas, the electricity system we end up with be be horrifically expensive.

I’ll leave you with the NESO graph of the electricity supply in a “typical” week in winter:

 

image

image

Demand peaks at 137 GW.

On three days, large scale “demand turn down “ is required, as much as 63 GW.

This is despite low carbon generation and imports working flat out.

A closer look at that period of Tuesday into Wednesday, when renewable output was low – hour 39 to 68.

image

Renewables averaged 25.2 GW, still probably double we could reasonably expect on windless days. The system was reliant on 4.9 GW of storage discharging, which would not have lasted much longer than this 29 hour period.

And we were also heavily reliant on imports.

To balance the books, demand had to be reduced by 10.8 GW, from a total of 97.3 GW.

Forget about charging your cars and running your heat pumps at off peak. There would not be enough electricity even at those times to meet overall demand for the whole day.

via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

https://ift.tt/BnDId5i

July 16, 2025 at 11:49AM

Arctic Ice Melting 4 Days Faster Mid-July 2025

After a sub-par March maximum, by end of May 2025 Arctic ice closed the gap with the 19-year average. Then in June the gap reopened and in July the melting pace matched the average, abeit four days in advance of average.

During this period the average year loses ~2.5M km2 of ice extent.   MASIE on day 166 was ~300k km2 down, and the gap increased to almost 550k km2 by June 30 (day 181). The deficit to average then reduced to ~350k km2, which persisted over the last 12 years including yesterday, day 196. The graph shows MASIE 2025 matching the average on day 192, four days in advance.

The regional distribution of ice extents is shown in the table below. (Bering and Okhotsk seas are excluded since both are now virtually open water.)

Region 2025196 Day 196 2025-Ave. 2020196 2025-2020
 (0) Northern_Hemisphere 8007061 8358377 -351316 7556873 450188
 (1) Beaufort_Sea 1022304 866531 155773 931056 91248
 (2) Chukchi_Sea 718615 643869 74745 612932 105683
 (3) East_Siberian_Sea 976061 921340 54721 659117 316945
 (4) Laptev_Sea 645741 559270 86471 174286 471454
 (5) Kara_Sea 153545 360645 -207100 159679 -6134
 (6) Barents_Sea 14342 56080 -41738 39446 -25105
 (7) Greenland_Sea 387402 402761 -15359 400498 -13096
 (8) Baffin_Bay_Gulf_of_St._Lawrence 268783 311662 -42878 232167 36616
 (9) Canadian_Archipelago 630633 711293 -80660 733866 -103233
 (10) Hudson_Bay 155460 349275 -193815 520027 -364567
 (11) Central_Arctic 3032353 3171652 -139299 3093040.21 -60687

The table shows  the two largest deficits, the Atlantic Kara basin combined with Hudson Bay, exceed the total difference from average. In addition are lower ice extents in Central Arctic and Canadian Archipelago, offset by surpluses in Beaufort Sea and other Eurasian shelf basins.  Note that Hudson Bay with 350k km2 average ice extent yesterday will have less than 100k in three weeks.

Why is this important?  All the claims of global climate emergency depend on dangerously higher  temperatures, lower sea ice, and rising sea levels.  The lack of additional warming prior to 2023 El Nino is documented in a post NH and Tropics Lead UAH Temps Lower May 2025.

The lack of acceleration in sea levels along coastlines has been discussed also.  See Observed vs. Imagined Sea Levels 2023 Update

Also, a longer term perspective is informative:

post-glacial_sea_level

via Science Matters

https://ift.tt/tPZNFTj

July 16, 2025 at 10:31AM