I am interested about where you get your numbers as you paint a very winning picture about W&S and batteries and EVs…. but I see significant contradictions from numbers by others.
Based on what I have seen we should stay with the cleanest available form of fossil fuels to generate electricity and skip the unreliable W&S and go straight to Nuclear in the long run.
EVs are not going to happen once they have to stand on their own without subsidies and the supply chains are prohibitive from an environmental perspective even if we could scale up to meet the capacity needed.
We will still need fossil fuels for many years to come and we just need to make them as clean as practical in concert with costs that can be afforded.
Also its becoming clear that CO2 may not be the climate change driver and so all our NetZero efforts may be unnecessary, technologically unattainable, economically unviable and extremely foolish.
Based on the data I've seen, I'm afraid that no part of your very civil and polite comment is accurate. Wind and solar are effectively no longer unreliable thanks to grid-scale battery technology (plus other energy storage methods like pumped hydro). EVs have already happened: they're set to make up 25% of new cars sold this year, and already have passed 50% in China. (And incidentally, every major carmaker benefits from implicit or explicit government subsidies, EV or fossil fuel). Much less mining is needed for renewables & EVs than for fossil fuels. Many countries are already generating over 100% of their electricity needs from renewables. Nuclear is clean and safe, but impractically expensive and slow to build compared to renewables, which are the fastest-growing source of electricity-generating capacity in history. And CO2 is pretty clearly the primary climate change driver, with other greenhouse gases like methane also playing a big role and other factors like the masking effect of aerosols introducing complications. For more stats, check out the Rocky Mountain Institute site or Substack (here's one great article https://electrotechrevolution.substack.com/p/rewiring-the-energy-debate), leading data scientist Dr. Hannah Ritchie's work (here's her article on mining hannahritchie.substack.com/p/mining-low-carbon-vs-fossil) and the Ember energy think tank (https://ember-energy.org/) - good places to start!
Sam… thank you for providing some information that I will study and get back with more comments. But Its very clear from my reading that some of your comments border on “honorable wishful thinking” rather than solid data and calculations… but I will look at what you have.
Sam I reviewed the material you sent, but I remain unconvinced on a bunch of levels…
First its clear that NetZero is looking to be downgraded from an emergency to a nice to do some of it sometime into the far future. The climate change emergency is being debunked by many scientists at least in terms of there being no adverse impact drivers that cannot be managed with adaption rather than very damaging mitigation from a prosperity standpoint.
Its clear that as an energy source what you call electrotech is a long term pipedream that may happen but we should place no timeline as its systemic unreliability even with batteries places its total cost benefit way outside of what we can afford to do and still have reliable low cost energy to drive an industrial society.
The supply chain for electrotech is far more demanding than conventional already capitalized capabilities and its clear that if we spent the same funds and effort on nuclear we would not even be having this conversation. The electrotech mines and supply chains will require significant increasing use of fossil fuels so by the time we have the product its carbon footprint will be a huge joke….. as are EVs.
WATCH: Gerard Holland lays out the staggering cost of renewable energy at ARC Australia
The materials to build reliable and long life cycle nuclear is far less than electrotech and the supply chains are far less complex and already established and localized and scaling up far less than starting from almost nowhere with electrotech.
Even EVs are far more supply chain complex than the gas alternatives.
Mark Mills: The energy transition delusion inescapable mineral realities
Its clear that every nation that is moving too fast toward electrotech is getting badly hurt with energy cost increases and reliability crashes…. Spain!
Be aware for every one of your pro electrotech sites on Substack there are an equal number of NoWay electrotech sites with great hard data...
Even the so called rich western nations cannot afford to do this stuff let alone the emerging economies…. They will use what is under their feet the most ….. and that’s coal or gas or they will continue to die from wood smoke!.
I have spent my life supporting product designs and introduction as a manufacturing engineer across many parts of the world and this one (eletrotech) should stay in the design office and lab until its commercially ready.. which it aint!
I go back to what I said in my first comment… Based on what I have seen we should stay with the cleanest available form of fossil fuels to generate electricity and skip the unreliable W&S and go straight to Nuclear in the long run.
I am a climate realist and see so much wrong with NetZero that is unnecessary, technologically unattainable, economically unviable and extremely foolish.
Here are my information sources that make a lot of sense to me..
Again...just none of your comment is true. None of it. I appreciate your efforts to engage, but I don't think this is going anywhere productive. Whatever you choose to believe, solar, wind, and batteries (and likely soon geothermal and more!) will continue growing at the fastest rate of any electricity-generating technology in history, providing overwhelming majorities of all new capacity coming online worldwide, and providing cheap, clean energy in the Global South!
All of what I just wrote is not a pipedream, but a description of our current year-2025 reality. It's already the case. Electrotech *is* a conventional already-capitalized capability!
Getting the numbers from his presentation and reviewing is something you should do..
Trump is right to halt W&S and push nuclear based on this… in Canada we are pushing Nuclear far more and already have a solid installed base in my province that has most of the industry.
Here is more…
An Inconvenient Truth: Our climate policies cant save the environment. So what will? | Bjorn Lomborg
I am interested about where you get your numbers as you paint a very winning picture about W&S and batteries and EVs…. but I see significant contradictions from numbers by others.
Based on what I have seen we should stay with the cleanest available form of fossil fuels to generate electricity and skip the unreliable W&S and go straight to Nuclear in the long run.
EVs are not going to happen once they have to stand on their own without subsidies and the supply chains are prohibitive from an environmental perspective even if we could scale up to meet the capacity needed.
We will still need fossil fuels for many years to come and we just need to make them as clean as practical in concert with costs that can be afforded.
Also its becoming clear that CO2 may not be the climate change driver and so all our NetZero efforts may be unnecessary, technologically unattainable, economically unviable and extremely foolish.
Based on the data I've seen, I'm afraid that no part of your very civil and polite comment is accurate. Wind and solar are effectively no longer unreliable thanks to grid-scale battery technology (plus other energy storage methods like pumped hydro). EVs have already happened: they're set to make up 25% of new cars sold this year, and already have passed 50% in China. (And incidentally, every major carmaker benefits from implicit or explicit government subsidies, EV or fossil fuel). Much less mining is needed for renewables & EVs than for fossil fuels. Many countries are already generating over 100% of their electricity needs from renewables. Nuclear is clean and safe, but impractically expensive and slow to build compared to renewables, which are the fastest-growing source of electricity-generating capacity in history. And CO2 is pretty clearly the primary climate change driver, with other greenhouse gases like methane also playing a big role and other factors like the masking effect of aerosols introducing complications. For more stats, check out the Rocky Mountain Institute site or Substack (here's one great article https://electrotechrevolution.substack.com/p/rewiring-the-energy-debate), leading data scientist Dr. Hannah Ritchie's work (here's her article on mining hannahritchie.substack.com/p/mining-low-carbon-vs-fossil) and the Ember energy think tank (https://ember-energy.org/) - good places to start!
Sam… thank you for providing some information that I will study and get back with more comments. But Its very clear from my reading that some of your comments border on “honorable wishful thinking” rather than solid data and calculations… but I will look at what you have.
I wish it was true, but there is no such thing as renewables.
Please see the First Law of Thermodynamics.
We can only be more efficient.
Solar and wind are highly inefficient and intermittent.
Yes.. the only application would be for remote off grid applications with some FF form of backup
I have a remote shack in the Mojave that would be perfect for panels and some batteries. Gavin, please help and send me some taxpayers money 💰
Ha ha... Better not keep saying bad things about the technology .....walls have ears
I appreciate your constructive engagement! Would that all comments could be so civil. I do think that I am being careful to be describing already-extant facts, not wishful thinking. The reality here is fast-moving, and it's understandable that many (especially in North America, where the transition has been slowed by political dramas) aren't up on the latest statistics. Here's another source for the EV numbers: https://www.canarymedia.com/articles/electric-vehicles/ev-hybrid-sales-outlook-iea . South Australia is one of many examples of developed-world jurisdictions running on a grid with lots of big batteries reducing the problem of renewables intermittency with each one built, and they're nearing 100% renewables by 2027: https://reneweconomy.com.au/another-big-battery-joins-the-grid-in-south-australia-as-state-heads-towards-100-pct-net-renewables/ . In the USA, fossil fuels accounted for less than 5% of all new electricity-generating capacity built in 2024 as renewables continue their rise! https://www.canarymedia.com/articles/clean-energy/chart-almost-all-new-us-power-plants-are-carbon-free
Sam I reviewed the material you sent, but I remain unconvinced on a bunch of levels…
First its clear that NetZero is looking to be downgraded from an emergency to a nice to do some of it sometime into the far future. The climate change emergency is being debunked by many scientists at least in terms of there being no adverse impact drivers that cannot be managed with adaption rather than very damaging mitigation from a prosperity standpoint.
Its clear that as an energy source what you call electrotech is a long term pipedream that may happen but we should place no timeline as its systemic unreliability even with batteries places its total cost benefit way outside of what we can afford to do and still have reliable low cost energy to drive an industrial society.
The supply chain for electrotech is far more demanding than conventional already capitalized capabilities and its clear that if we spent the same funds and effort on nuclear we would not even be having this conversation. The electrotech mines and supply chains will require significant increasing use of fossil fuels so by the time we have the product its carbon footprint will be a huge joke….. as are EVs.
WATCH: Gerard Holland lays out the staggering cost of renewable energy at ARC Australia
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRhNOv1Uo4M&t=4s
The materials to build reliable and long life cycle nuclear is far less than electrotech and the supply chains are far less complex and already established and localized and scaling up far less than starting from almost nowhere with electrotech.
Even EVs are far more supply chain complex than the gas alternatives.
Mark Mills: The energy transition delusion inescapable mineral realities
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrNdJAZ75h4&t=2s
Its clear that every nation that is moving too fast toward electrotech is getting badly hurt with energy cost increases and reliability crashes…. Spain!
Be aware for every one of your pro electrotech sites on Substack there are an equal number of NoWay electrotech sites with great hard data...
Even the so called rich western nations cannot afford to do this stuff let alone the emerging economies…. They will use what is under their feet the most ….. and that’s coal or gas or they will continue to die from wood smoke!.
I have spent my life supporting product designs and introduction as a manufacturing engineer across many parts of the world and this one (eletrotech) should stay in the design office and lab until its commercially ready.. which it aint!
I go back to what I said in my first comment… Based on what I have seen we should stay with the cleanest available form of fossil fuels to generate electricity and skip the unreliable W&S and go straight to Nuclear in the long run.
I am a climate realist and see so much wrong with NetZero that is unnecessary, technologically unattainable, economically unviable and extremely foolish.
Here are my information sources that make a lot of sense to me..
Climate links
Why there is no 'climate crisis'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmdBbs3O1g4&t=1171s
THERE IS NO CLIMATE EMERGENCY!!! - by Nigel Southway
https://nigelsouthway.substack.com/p/there-is-no-climate-emergency
Andrew Dessler vs Steven Koonin: Climate Change Debate
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGNSGyhK_z0
John Christy: Climate Change is Not a Crisis | Tom Nelson Pod #260
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwYVyU_q9Uo&t=242s
Climate Change: What Do Scientists Say? | 5 Minute Video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwqIy8Ikv-c
Why renewables can’t save the planet | Michael Shellenberger | TEDxDanubia
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-yALPEpV4w&t=4s
Mark Mills: The energy transition delusion inescapable mineral realities
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrNdJAZ75h4&t=2s
Wildfires | CO2 Coalition Climate Chronicles #ClimateChronicles #NoClimateCrisis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCC5mBCqNXY&t=230s
WATCH: Gerard Holland lays out the staggering cost of renewable energy at ARC Australia
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRhNOv1Uo4M&t=4s
Australia’s net zero scheme won’t work
http://www.nigelsouthway.org/storage/01JXSMEHD3DMQZXM1BF2KM7SN3.pdf
The Climate Change Stand-off. - by Nigel Southway
https://nigelsouthway.substack.com/p/the-climate-change-stand-off
Debunking 3 Major Climate Change Lies
Again...just none of your comment is true. None of it. I appreciate your efforts to engage, but I don't think this is going anywhere productive. Whatever you choose to believe, solar, wind, and batteries (and likely soon geothermal and more!) will continue growing at the fastest rate of any electricity-generating technology in history, providing overwhelming majorities of all new capacity coming online worldwide, and providing cheap, clean energy in the Global South!
All of what I just wrote is not a pipedream, but a description of our current year-2025 reality. It's already the case. Electrotech *is* a conventional already-capitalized capability!
I agree we are divided even on facts… I will not bother you more but will leave you with a few things..
WATCH: Gerard Holland lays out the staggering cost of renewable energy at ARC Australia
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRhNOv1Uo4M&t=4s
Getting the numbers from his presentation and reviewing is something you should do..
Trump is right to halt W&S and push nuclear based on this… in Canada we are pushing Nuclear far more and already have a solid installed base in my province that has most of the industry.
Here is more…
An Inconvenient Truth: Our climate policies cant save the environment. So what will? | Bjorn Lomborg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dN_ARfPY9rY&t=12s
About 7 minutes in Bjorn shows the plot of the energy cost across nations who have adopted W&S and its very clear we should avoid that journey.
The Law's of Physics and Thermodynamics still hold:
https://tucoschild.substack.com/p/renewable-energy-does-not-exist