There is no possibility that enough renewable energy will be available to have a significant impact on climate change for decades, if then.

Leading energy authorities agree that renewable energy could contribute 5 percent of the global energy mix by 2035.

We are currently witnessing environmentally conscious zealots who are not doing the critical thinking to view things objectively.

They are being led by a media that is constantly in violation of the commandment, “thou shalt not bear false witness.”

There is no grace in the secular media. It is filled with intentional wickedness, slander, misleading statements and untruths for the purpose of forming and indoctrinating the thoughts of the population with the liberal agenda.

Liberals, i.e. progressives, have no capacity for shame.

Renewable energy needs to be looked at as a possible long term energy source. Market-demand will drive deployment of renewables, possibly by the second half of this century.

The current, impractical and expensive, way to combat climate change will do more harm than good. Very large costs associated with the unreliability of renewable energy are being conveniently overlooked.

A wide range of additional infrastructure will be required because of climate variability. Some of the factors that need to be considered are:

• Energy intensive storage capacity

• Economically and politically complex supergrids capable of distributing electricity from wherever it is being generated

• Overcapacity requiring spikes to be grounded

• Low efficiency and low capacity

The data needed to accurately estimate the costs associated with the intermittency of renewable energy is not available.

The developed world is made up of a highly complex society that places very high demands on the quality of energy resources.

Another point that needs to be considered is Energy Return on Investment (EROI). The EROI currently provided by wind and solar are not capable of sustaining the most basic civilizations. Decades of R & D will be required before renewable energy reaches the point it can support our complex society.

At the current penetration rates (87 percent fossil fuels and 1.5 percent for non-hydro renewables) the negatives for fossil fuels is greater than the renewables.

However, if the number of solar panels and wind turbines were rapidly increased, energy storage superstructures sprouted up everywhere and cables criss-crossed the country in 250 foot wide cleared channels, renewable energy would appear much less green. Vast chunks of nature impacted by renewable energy infrastructure would rival those of coal today. E-waste from decommissioned panels, batteries and turbines would be a major concern.

If we reach a point in time where renewables supply the majority of our energy, the negative externalities of renewables will be greater than those of fossil fuels.

A rapid expansion in renewable energy would quickly increase the cost of electricity, along with the price of virtually everything else.

Cheap and abundant fossil energy; whether in solid, liquid or gaseous form, has facilitated virtually all innovations that have increased the standard of living and life expectancy. Removing these fuels before we have viable alternatives would have a detrimental effect on society.

Despite these logical arguments, renewable energy advocates will still believe that renewable energy is capable of replacing fossil fuels.

You know, the “elitists” who like to overlook the facts when they spew their nonsense; those who dwell on the extreme fringes of American society.

These folks will lie, cheat, defraud and steal to advance their extreme causes … causes that are proven time and time again to be dismal failures.

If we would just turn everything over to them, we would all live in Utopia, and everything would be perpetual rainbows and unicorns.

 

Joseph P. Smith is the owner of Pyro-Chem Corporation in South Point and has worked in the energy industry for more than three decades. He can be reached by email at joepsmith@zoominternet.net