31/08/2021
The same experts our Liberal rely upon have been proven entirely wrong when they say we can get to NET ZERO by 2035??? $
"As Stanford University professor Mark Jacobson shows in his book 100% Clean, Renewable Energy and Storage for Everything, global energy demand could be met by using 0.2% of available land area for solar, and 0.5% for spacing between onshore wind turbines."
So all we have to do is cover almost 1% of ALL of the land on Earth with wind and solar energy power generation. They say we can do that overnight, but in reality we would have to build the entire production capacity twice by 2035 because the lifetime for them is 15 years. By 2050 we would have to rebuild it over entirely three times...
“Net-Zero Carbon Dioxide Emissions By 2050 Requires A New Nuclear Power Plant Every Day”
So the math here is simple: to achieve net-zero carbon dioxide emissions by 2050, the world would need to deploy 3 Turkey Point nuclear plants worth of carbon-free energy every two days, starting tomorrow and continuing to 2050. At the same time, a Turkey Point nuclear plant worth of fossil fuels would need to be decommissioned every day, starting tomorrow and continuing to 2050.
I’ve found that some people don’t like the use of a nuclear power plant as a measuring stick. So we can substitute wind energy as a measuring stick. Net-zero carbon dioxide by 2050 would require the deployment of ~1500 wind turbines (2.5 MW) over ~300 square miles, every day starting tomorrow and continuing to 2050.
$
https://www.forbes.com/sites/rogerpielke/2019/09/30/net-zero-carbon-dioxide-emissions-by-2050-requires-a-new-nuclear-power-plant-every-day/
The world, and the United States, are not moving towards net-zero carbon dioxide emissions and in fact, every day, we are moving in the opposite direction. Auctions of promises for emissions reductions don’t actually reduce emissions. Technology reduces emissions.
