The problems? To build an electrical grid that relies for a large extent on intermittent energy sources is practically impossible. This was shown, theoretically, by Hirth in 2012. His predictions have come true almost exactly.
Countries around the world that have low carbon emissions have universally relied on hydro, geothermal, and nuclear. We KNOW those solutions work. Hydro can't be expanded. But geothermal and nuclear can be. Geothermal by using things like Eavor. Nuclear by things like BWRX-300. Toss in natural gas with carbon capture, as proven by the NET energy project. Add Allum cycle generators to everything. SMRs to replace process heat. Some efficiency improvements. You could fix the problem in around 10 years for a fraction of the price and keep electrical costs low, since I don't need to over build, or have batteries, or build more transmission, etc. Solar and wind - maybe 20% contribution? Something like that.
That's a workable plan, applicable to practically every country on Earth.
Nope - obviously you are unaware of the test plant recently commissioned in Texas that proves you wrong, or the Allam cycle technology that has been worked on for the last 50 years. The company is called NET Power. Look it up.
Allam cycle is a way to make generators more efficient. about 10% more. That means, for the same input, you get 10% more output. Hence about 85 of our natural gas generators could be decommissioned, with the same power output, if they switch to Allum cycle. It also allows for free carbon capture - it occurs as a side effect of the process. You still have to pay to reinject, but given your increase in efficiency, this isn't a big cost.
I'm always struck by how out of the loop people afraid of climate change actually are regarding the state of technology. Seems like, if you were really scared, you'd be an expert on such things. But most, like you, have only vague ideas about how energy works, where it comes from, or what it costs. You fall for big, fanciful scams and pronouncements, with little real knowledge of the subjects being discussed. You are also actively hostile toward people providing you with honest and important information. Pity.
Great article. Have you read a book written by Thomas Sowell back in the mid 90's called "The Vision of the Anointed: Self-Congratulation as a Basis for Social Policy" echoes with what you have written here.
“... however, the transition leadership is a club...” The Climatrons? “...the world needed to replace and build 50 million miles of transmission lines to make the transition work.” And how much copper ore?
I highly recommend Robert Bryce's substack for more details on the actual numbers for high transmission line needs. The copper is one problem, which you wrote about recently. Condemning the land is another. Still another problem is finding the linemen ... it takes over 7 years to train a high tension lineman, and there aren't enough of them now, because so many people prefer "working at home" or trading stocks on the internet, or pictures on OnlyFans.....the average lineman receives a salary over $90K but no women and few men take these jobs.
Oct 28, 2023·edited Oct 28, 2023Liked by Irina Slav
I believe that Irina may largely agree with the same proposal many of us have, which is to enact a much more gradual transition, because its possible, and to replace solar, wind, and coal with nuclear, while retaining gas for as long as possible because of its ability to adjust rapidly to rapid changes in demand.
As for micro-grids, I can well understand the inclination, however that question was settled by the Edison/Westinghouse feud and Westinghouse won. A very large grid with alternating current has vast efficiencies of scale over microgrids. Since the vast majority of electric devices rely upon alternating current and simply cannot be converted to direct current, it would be cheaper to replace them all and that is really, really not happening, I am afraid that purely for antiquarian reasons the world is going to stay with large grids, no matter how many people propose that it change.
Having recently invested in a 6000 watt inverter, which is a size a lot larger than most home solar installations include but its still far too small for the average home being connected to the public grid today in the USA, I can tell you that you are not going to get very many people interested in that kind of cash outlay, especially since the devices have an unknown and dubious average length of service before failing. And that is before you begin to provide a power source......
You sound like someone with actual knowledge and experience, which is very rare.
I worked as a consultant to a utility for seven years, and my job was to reduce carbon emissions. While I was successful in achieving notable reductions, we could have achieved very much more if people would stop proposing pie in the sky solutions and allow the engineers to do their jobs.
These days everyone is an expert on power systems engineering, with advanced degrees from Internet U ;)
It's also depressing. The engineering and economics of utilities are hard to understand, but not that hard. I have a dozen sayings:
Electrify isn't product, it is a service. Inertial based energy is different than inverter-based energy. Electrons don't travel down wires. Utilites don't decide their profits. Engineers and utilities could care less where the power comes from. Power outages kill people. Energy doesn't like to be transformed or contained - this is an unchangeable rule of physics. Every utility in the world, since Edison, has been built exactly the same way, for very good reason. Changing the structure of a utility is harder than changing the source of power.
I know how old you are......first time I heard that I was hitching a ride from Indianapolis to Chicago in an old scrap truck, back when they had two gearshifts .....never forget....
I have a tendency to stoop too low when I become agitated on this topic (and a few others). I end up using simplistic words such as moron, knucklehead, idiot and bozo. I may just steal your highly preferable “this is a mystery to absolutely no one with rudimentary mental acuity” sentence. You nailed it with that one. This is a fantastic piece.
I absolutely loved Rule 3. Quoting Mein Kampf is spot on. I noticed the EU has deployed the disinformation regime against Meta and Tik Tok for not policing the correct story about the current Mideast war. The State will grind on mercilessly. Another excellent piece.
Great post, Irina! It's truly bizarre how "The Science™" has been completely swallowed up by those who are actually against intellectual inquiry.
Climate Science, heck all the environmental sciences, have been corrupt since Dr. James Hansen's stagecraft-show to Congress in 1988, and Medical Science suffered the same fate in 2020.
I'm constantly reminded how Galileo was ostracized when his correct theory of a Heliocentric Galaxy ran afoul of the Geocentric crowd's orthodoxy.
He would likely recognize our times as close to his own, were he to suddenly appear....
As a retired Petroleum Engineer & high school Math teacher, I am reminded of a comment I made numerous times in my working life. This was especially true when talking to peddlers that bring in new gizmos that are going to revolutionize the oil & gas industry. Generally, after a cursory review I would say, "This isn't scalable which means the Math doesn't work." Great article as usual, Irina!
Brilliant. Govt message machines and minions deployed around the world. A little disinformation here. Misinformation there. Eyes wide open to the charade of the century. Sad state of affairs. We fight on. Keep up the good work.
Spot on, as always Irina. I guess the big question is how the Climateers will respond when the physics intrudes on all their beautiful plans. perhaps they will blame the religious right as it would then be God's fault that all of their genius failed, and they wouldn't feel it necessary to recognize their own culpability in the mess.
Wait, $600 Billion a year just in transmission? And that is a doubling? So that means we are spending $300 Billion a year already?
If that is being used to string lines to new customers then great. I guess we all know however that most of this is being used to string lines to “generators” in the middle of nowhere...
These Grifters still pushing the Hydrogen scam. The most difficult fuel to store. Most leaky fuel. Most difficult to transport. Expensive especially if Green Hydrogen. Very dangerous, prone to leaks which can be ignited in a wide range of concentration in air from 4% to 74%. Even a lightning strike a mile away can ignite it. The absurdity of Hydrogen fuel is explained here:
The Unfortunate Truth About Toyota's Hydrogen V8 Engine, Engineering Explained:
Think about this - we only need hydrogen as a storage medium to fix the problems of intermittent power sources like wind and solar, and the low energy density of batteries.
Absent all that, there would be no need for hydrogen at all. We could have EVs and nuclear/hydro/geothermal power to charge them.
Anyone that has worked with hydrogen in a lab knows it's terrible stuff.
You mean "Stop running everything into the ground" does not impose itself on the mind as the obvious message? I'll try harder next time.
Totally agree.
The problems? To build an electrical grid that relies for a large extent on intermittent energy sources is practically impossible. This was shown, theoretically, by Hirth in 2012. His predictions have come true almost exactly.
Countries around the world that have low carbon emissions have universally relied on hydro, geothermal, and nuclear. We KNOW those solutions work. Hydro can't be expanded. But geothermal and nuclear can be. Geothermal by using things like Eavor. Nuclear by things like BWRX-300. Toss in natural gas with carbon capture, as proven by the NET energy project. Add Allum cycle generators to everything. SMRs to replace process heat. Some efficiency improvements. You could fix the problem in around 10 years for a fraction of the price and keep electrical costs low, since I don't need to over build, or have batteries, or build more transmission, etc. Solar and wind - maybe 20% contribution? Something like that.
That's a workable plan, applicable to practically every country on Earth.
Nope - obviously you are unaware of the test plant recently commissioned in Texas that proves you wrong, or the Allam cycle technology that has been worked on for the last 50 years. The company is called NET Power. Look it up.
Allam cycle is a way to make generators more efficient. about 10% more. That means, for the same input, you get 10% more output. Hence about 85 of our natural gas generators could be decommissioned, with the same power output, if they switch to Allum cycle. It also allows for free carbon capture - it occurs as a side effect of the process. You still have to pay to reinject, but given your increase in efficiency, this isn't a big cost.
I'm always struck by how out of the loop people afraid of climate change actually are regarding the state of technology. Seems like, if you were really scared, you'd be an expert on such things. But most, like you, have only vague ideas about how energy works, where it comes from, or what it costs. You fall for big, fanciful scams and pronouncements, with little real knowledge of the subjects being discussed. You are also actively hostile toward people providing you with honest and important information. Pity.
Great article. Have you read a book written by Thomas Sowell back in the mid 90's called "The Vision of the Anointed: Self-Congratulation as a Basis for Social Policy" echoes with what you have written here.
I haven't but everything I've seen as quotes from Sowell I like very much.
“... however, the transition leadership is a club...” The Climatrons? “...the world needed to replace and build 50 million miles of transmission lines to make the transition work.” And how much copper ore?
Loads and loads and loads...
#BelieveTheWoman
I highly recommend Robert Bryce's substack for more details on the actual numbers for high transmission line needs. The copper is one problem, which you wrote about recently. Condemning the land is another. Still another problem is finding the linemen ... it takes over 7 years to train a high tension lineman, and there aren't enough of them now, because so many people prefer "working at home" or trading stocks on the internet, or pictures on OnlyFans.....the average lineman receives a salary over $90K but no women and few men take these jobs.
I believe that Irina may largely agree with the same proposal many of us have, which is to enact a much more gradual transition, because its possible, and to replace solar, wind, and coal with nuclear, while retaining gas for as long as possible because of its ability to adjust rapidly to rapid changes in demand.
As for micro-grids, I can well understand the inclination, however that question was settled by the Edison/Westinghouse feud and Westinghouse won. A very large grid with alternating current has vast efficiencies of scale over microgrids. Since the vast majority of electric devices rely upon alternating current and simply cannot be converted to direct current, it would be cheaper to replace them all and that is really, really not happening, I am afraid that purely for antiquarian reasons the world is going to stay with large grids, no matter how many people propose that it change.
Having recently invested in a 6000 watt inverter, which is a size a lot larger than most home solar installations include but its still far too small for the average home being connected to the public grid today in the USA, I can tell you that you are not going to get very many people interested in that kind of cash outlay, especially since the devices have an unknown and dubious average length of service before failing. And that is before you begin to provide a power source......
You sound like someone with actual knowledge and experience, which is very rare.
I worked as a consultant to a utility for seven years, and my job was to reduce carbon emissions. While I was successful in achieving notable reductions, we could have achieved very much more if people would stop proposing pie in the sky solutions and allow the engineers to do their jobs.
These days everyone is an expert on power systems engineering, with advanced degrees from Internet U ;)
Engineers are not too popular among transitioners, I imagine. They know what can realistically work and what won't, and that's... awkward.
It's also depressing. The engineering and economics of utilities are hard to understand, but not that hard. I have a dozen sayings:
Electrify isn't product, it is a service. Inertial based energy is different than inverter-based energy. Electrons don't travel down wires. Utilites don't decide their profits. Engineers and utilities could care less where the power comes from. Power outages kill people. Energy doesn't like to be transformed or contained - this is an unchangeable rule of physics. Every utility in the world, since Edison, has been built exactly the same way, for very good reason. Changing the structure of a utility is harder than changing the source of power.
I imagine it would be depressing indeed for those, like you, who know how it all actually works.
Some of the best linemen are from Wichita.
I know how old you are......first time I heard that I was hitching a ride from Indianapolis to Chicago in an old scrap truck, back when they had two gearshifts .....never forget....
Also read Mark P. Mills from the Manhattan Inst. He is great on the figures.
Robert is an invaluable source of fact-based, in-depth information, indeed!
I have a tendency to stoop too low when I become agitated on this topic (and a few others). I end up using simplistic words such as moron, knucklehead, idiot and bozo. I may just steal your highly preferable “this is a mystery to absolutely no one with rudimentary mental acuity” sentence. You nailed it with that one. This is a fantastic piece.
Thank you! Agitation is sometimes very inspirational.
It’s agreed that 99% of government study writers don’t want to be defunded.
These climate catastrophists and greenies are in the self promotion and mutual admiration club.
I absolutely loved Rule 3. Quoting Mein Kampf is spot on. I noticed the EU has deployed the disinformation regime against Meta and Tik Tok for not policing the correct story about the current Mideast war. The State will grind on mercilessly. Another excellent piece.
Thank you, Bruce. It was not a little unpleasant to see EU tactics described so well and learn where the description comes from.
Great post, Irina! It's truly bizarre how "The Science™" has been completely swallowed up by those who are actually against intellectual inquiry.
Climate Science, heck all the environmental sciences, have been corrupt since Dr. James Hansen's stagecraft-show to Congress in 1988, and Medical Science suffered the same fate in 2020.
I'm constantly reminded how Galileo was ostracized when his correct theory of a Heliocentric Galaxy ran afoul of the Geocentric crowd's orthodoxy.
He would likely recognize our times as close to his own, were he to suddenly appear....
Thank you! Yes, bizarre and not a little unsettling.
As a retired Petroleum Engineer & high school Math teacher, I am reminded of a comment I made numerous times in my working life. This was especially true when talking to peddlers that bring in new gizmos that are going to revolutionize the oil & gas industry. Generally, after a cursory review I would say, "This isn't scalable which means the Math doesn't work." Great article as usual, Irina!
Thank you! What does math matter when there are Climate Targets, though. :D
Brilliant. Govt message machines and minions deployed around the world. A little disinformation here. Misinformation there. Eyes wide open to the charade of the century. Sad state of affairs. We fight on. Keep up the good work.
Absolutely brilliant and spot-on.
What you describe sounds so much like Collectivism, Utopianism.
For example, no questions are allowed in collectives. Collectives cannot abide questions or challenges.
Spot on, as always Irina. I guess the big question is how the Climateers will respond when the physics intrudes on all their beautiful plans. perhaps they will blame the religious right as it would then be God's fault that all of their genius failed, and they wouldn't feel it necessary to recognize their own culpability in the mess.
They'll just blame climate change.
Wait, $600 Billion a year just in transmission? And that is a doubling? So that means we are spending $300 Billion a year already?
If that is being used to string lines to new customers then great. I guess we all know however that most of this is being used to string lines to “generators” in the middle of nowhere...
That's what Birol and the Birolettes say.
These Grifters still pushing the Hydrogen scam. The most difficult fuel to store. Most leaky fuel. Most difficult to transport. Expensive especially if Green Hydrogen. Very dangerous, prone to leaks which can be ignited in a wide range of concentration in air from 4% to 74%. Even a lightning strike a mile away can ignite it. The absurdity of Hydrogen fuel is explained here:
The Unfortunate Truth About Toyota's Hydrogen V8 Engine, Engineering Explained:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJjKwSF9gT8
Think about this - we only need hydrogen as a storage medium to fix the problems of intermittent power sources like wind and solar, and the low energy density of batteries.
Absent all that, there would be no need for hydrogen at all. We could have EVs and nuclear/hydro/geothermal power to charge them.
Anyone that has worked with hydrogen in a lab knows it's terrible stuff.
Another brilliant article Irina.
Sadly you’re preaching to the choir and those who really need saving aren’t listening... what will it take, I wonder?
Well, I keep hoping it's not just the choir reading my rants, maybe starting to ask questions. Always hoping, me. :D
Absolute, complete, and tragic failure. Decades and trillions of $ wasted to no effect.
Which is already happening unfortunately.