35 Comments

Irina, I still think you missed your calling. You are a industry thought leader, comedian, and one who stands up for the average citizen. It would be great if you were appointed to manage the energy policies in the EU. Sadly it won't happen as you are ethical and honest. - Keep bringing your insights and passion.

Expand full comment

I wouldn't survive a week in such a job. I lack the necessary qualities. But I'm sure there are people who have them, and I don't mean the incompetence and brainwashed-ness we're seeing from the incumbents. I mean people who are competent, honest, and smart but they will never be let into such a job. Sad world.

Expand full comment

True!

Expand full comment

Well written...

Expand full comment

The whole thing is hard to watch. The G7+ world spinning down the drain on account of a false premise. How much money is being wasted chasing the little CO2 molecule? 97% of physicists know that the absorption is very close to saturated and the ECS close to 1.0C. There are many who argue that no energy is translated to adjacent molecules and the CO2 aids energy transfer away (ie. Cools!). The role of methane in the air (while competing for the LWIR with H2O and CO2) is also shown to be minuscule. So we are being robbed and starved and frozen for what?

Expand full comment

A very good question with different answers, none of them particularly optimistic.

Expand full comment

Not sure there’s an answer. Mostly rhetorical. Personal enrichment seems most probable but the collateral damage doesn’t dissuade?

Expand full comment

It doesn't seem to, no.

Expand full comment

They could care less about CO2. Just another excuse for the Psychopath, Parasite, Malthusian, Club-of-Rome Bankers to impose their New World Order, or Green Agenda, or UN Agenda 2030, or Build Back Better, Great Reset Totalitarian Neo-feudal World Government. Just as their Plandemic and lockdowns/economic destruction was the preface to this plan and had zero to do with public health. And their Ukraine War was just another crisis they deliberately created to further destroy our economic system. These creeps are monsters and people need to just wake up.

Expand full comment

Agreed! Just might be a bit less painful if there was some truth to their justification. Although, i no way agree with their policy solutions even if there was a hint of legitimacy in their conjecture.

Expand full comment

UK will soon have nationalized energy, I see that here in the US they are calling for nationalization of oil and gas as well.... aren't they collecting enough tax revenue from them? I have always said renewables were a socialist form of energy which could uncut everything else... but give no returns... how much darker can this get? This week I have seen so many articles about how much renewables are saving the world and how much money they make for the local communities and how much tax money they bring... not sure how with all the tax abatements...carbon credits, renewables credits...etc. on and on.. The only reason they are keeping the wholesale prices low is that they can sell below wholesale because of the subsidies. I don't know much, but the people writing these articles for the public know nothing! Keep up your good work!

Expand full comment

Thank you! If you want to learn how renewables work (and have a good scare), I strongly recommend "Shorting the Grid" by Meredith Angwin. I was chilled to the bone and I don't even live in the U.S.

Expand full comment

Yes an excellent book.

Expand full comment

if only facts -science - math- physics - and a little common sense could be imparted on our collective bureaucrats - we live in a double feature of - Brazil and 1984

Expand full comment

If only. I've come to the conclusion we live in a brutal medley of "1984" and "Brave New World", marching happily towards "Black Mirror".

Expand full comment

Let's forget that we have spent $3T plus on renewable deployment (not sure if that includes government subsidies or just private capital), its a mature technology at this point and should not require further government subsidies. Those dollars achieved very little as evidenced by the facts in front of our eyes daily. Now imagine we spent $3T in the next 10 years on nuclear power plants, R&D on materials sciences, and maybe curing cancers? I also have no idea where the IEA is getting their facts but would love to audit those models. It's clear they have lost their way.

Expand full comment

This is the scariest and most frustrating question: what if we used this money for something that actually worked/did actual good for a lot of people?

I imagine they devise their models themselves, even I could do that and get the results I want.

Expand full comment

To be accurate you are talking wind & solar, not renewables. Hydro & geothermal are practical. More like over $4T worldwide on wind & solar including the necessary grid upgrades. With zero results. Combustion fuels were 90% of World Primary Energy before the big build and remain 90% after it. Australia has already spent $50B on its wind & solar and has just announced another $20B on grid upgrades to facilitate the fluctuating, long distance wind/solar transmission.

For $24B the little country UAE has built 5.6GWe of Nuclear just finished in 8yrs, starting from scratch, with no experience and no trained workforce. That's more than all of Australia's wind + solar, and unlike wind/solar it is reliable 24/7, 365 days/yr energy, that lasts for 60-100yrs vs 10-30yrs for the wind & solar. Comparing nuclear to wind/solar is called an Apples to Rotten Oranges comparison.

Expand full comment

Irina,

I think this is the first time I hear you properly vent at the wanton idiocy and destruction taking place in the halls of power, mainly in the EU/UK

Sadly, it seems to me that the main voter blocs are either unwilling, indifferent, or unable to vote in leaders who are not going to take them straight into economic privation in the name of saving the world

I love Europe. But it is clear as day to me that 20 years from now, when my kids are adults, that it will be a worse place to live, not better. And that is a very sad thing indeed.

Expand full comment

Bash, I try to remain relatively decent for as long as I can but endless patience is not among my virtues. Sooner or later it ends.

I do hope you're wrong about Europe 20 years from now. I've got a kid growing up in it right now, too. And I must say I've never been happier about living in the backward, conservative, old-fashioned and slow-to-modernise periphery of the Union.

Expand full comment

Thank you - yes it is on my nightstand...getting through it (scary) - slowly...along with Bryce, (love Enron story!) Smil and others... I will be so smart, (ha..ha) but still feel so helpless against the renewables fight, have helped take away some of the local abatements and they are coming now anyway!

Expand full comment

I know the feeling. But informed is prepared and prepared is better than unprepared, if that's any consolation.

Expand full comment

“Yes, I know EVs are not emission-free on a lifecycle basis but let me remind you that the EU considers the burning of U.S.-sourced wood pellets a low-carbon form of energy so we should all be clear there’s no stooping too low for Brussels when it’s about protecting the narrative.”

Hey! Since it will be impossible for them to make enough EVs to fulfill this mandate, maybe they can make cars that run on wood pellets and call them “carbon neutral”!!! That will be great!

Expand full comment

Oh, no, you just gave them a new idea!

Expand full comment

Yes the EU claims they are zero CO2, which is how Britain and Germany scam their emissions data. The EIA puts wood burning power plants @ 1400 gms CO2/kwh vs conventional Coal @ 1100 gms/kwh. With biomass costing 3X that of coal.

Expand full comment

The US doesn't necessarily have enough gas to replace Russia as the marginal supplier even in the future - giving up our cost advantage is a high price to pay to try.

Expand full comment

Yes, that would be a very high price.

Expand full comment

In, I think, the 11th paragraph, you reference 3.8 billion where you mean 3.8 trillion.

Other than nitpicking, great article. It wonderfully captures some of the frustration so many of us have been living with for the last 20 years.

Watching society be stuffed down the garbage disposal by the venal and ignorant. Sigh.

Expand full comment

Oh, no. Thank you for flagging. Please, be as nit-picky as you can, it's a great help. I mean it!

Expand full comment

Excellent piece.

Expand full comment

“I had something else in mind for today...” Well fortunately for us, there is a nearly unlimited pool of things for you to write about these days!

Expand full comment

It can be truly exhausting, picking what the next piece would be about, definitely.

Expand full comment

Hi Irina -- I must ask a question about the use of solar PV.

Sunlight falls pretty much all over the world. That is why it is called a DRE or Distributed Energy Resource. When utilities try to fit Solar PV into their model, which often relies on concentrated hydrocarbon energy to generate electricity and then send it out through the grid, I have to wonder if that is the way sunlight is supposed to be or has to be used.

Are you such a fan of the grid system that you think the Energy Era Transition will not change the way we live?

Expand full comment

I am a huge fan of reliable electricity that doesn't cost an arm and a leg to use. Where and how it comes from is a secondary consideration for me. I totally believe the energy transition will change the way we live, but I don't believe it will be a change for the better.

Expand full comment

Girl, This is not me talking, this is from Nature.

“The history of human culture can be viewed as the progressive development of new energy sources and their associated conversion technologies. These developments have increased the comfort, longevity and affluence of humans, as well as their numbers.”

[Source: Oil & Culture, Nature, Vol.. 426, 20 November 2003, www.nature.com/nature, Nature Publishing Group]

P.S. Please allow me to disagree -- the dystopian outlook that is in vogue these days -- well, people will either create or destroy. You take your pick.

Expand full comment