thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2022 at 3:47pm:



So tell us how cheap the infrastructure is. You know batteries (imported) as well as solar panels (imported) and Wind Turbines (imported).

lee wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2022 at 6:22pm:



Don't want to say eh?

philperth2010 wrote on Apr 4^th, 2022 at 11:12pm:



That is not infrastructure.

philperth2010 wrote on Apr 4^th, 2022 at 11:12pm:



Far cheaper than renewables. Each wind generator has to have its own copper wires. There needs to be tons of cement for for each wind turbine base. There needs to be heaps of steel for each turbine stand.

"The answer, according to the American Wind Energy Association, is that it takes somewhere in the range of 200 to 230 tons of steel to make a single wind turbine."

"The construction of 15- to 20-foot-deep concrete foundations to support all of the 328-foot-high towers with 2-MW turbines required 30,000 tons of cement."

(and that's only 2MW turbines)

And then there is the requirement for rare earths for the magnets etc.

And remember the EU is currently trying to ramp up other fossil fuel generation because the cost of gas is so high.

Then of course China is the biggest supplier of rare earths and solar panels They have a large population base and so have economy of scale in selling them.

Then of course you need transmission lines from where you have the panels/turbines.

Projected operating viability?  With China still building Coal plant?

"According to the IEA, it’s mainly China:

The rebound of global CO2 emissions above pre-pandemic levels has largely been driven by China. . . .  China’s CO2 emissions increased by 750 Mt over the two-year period between 2019 and 2021. China was the only major economy to experience economic growth in both 2020 and 2021. The emissions increase in China more than offset the aggregate decline in the rest of the world of 570 Mt between 2019 and 2021. . . .  With rapid GDP growth and additional electrification of energy services, electricity demand in China grew by 10% in 2021, faster than economic growth at 8.4%. The increase in demand of almost 700 TWh was the largest ever experienced in China. With demand growth outstripping the increase of low emissions supply, coal was called on to fill 56% of the rise in electricity demand."

https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2022-4-2-china-continues-to-laugh-at-we...

It seems a very long time.

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 5^th, 2022 at 2:51pm:



might eh?

lee wrote on Apr 5^th, 2022 at 2:53pm:


Yes, because human activity is increasing atmospheric CO2 concentrations to the highest levels in 3 million years ( I read yesterday), with potentially catastrophic consequences.

[The fact that concentrations have been higher in the distant past is no reason to discount current effects of high CO2].

You happy to proceed with business as usual?

It's nice to know we can actually 'afford' to save the planet, even if we have to suspend the free market, to transition to green ASAP, funded by central bank currency issuance.   

So interesting info -

"An energy system powered by clean energy technologies differs
profoundly from one fuelled by traditional hydrocarbon resources.
Building solar photovoltaic (PV) plants, wind farms and electric
vehicles (EVs) generally requires more minerals than their fossil fuel-
based counterparts. A typical electric car requires six times the
mineral inputs of a conventional car, and an onshore wind plant
requires nine times more mineral resources than a gas-fired power
plant. Since 2010, the average amount of minerals needed for a new
unit of power generation capacity has increased by 50% as the share
of renewables has risen.
The types of mineral resources used vary by technology. Lithium,
nickel, cobalt, manganese and graphite are crucial to battery
performance, longevity and energy density. Rare earth elements are
essential for permanent magnets that are vital for wind turbines and
EV motors. Electricity networks need a huge amount of copper and
aluminium, with copper being a cornerstone for all electricity -related
technologies."

"In a scenario that meets the Paris Agreement goals, clean energy
technologies’ share of total demand rises significantly over the next
two decades to over 40% for copper and rare earth elements, 60-
70% for nickel and cobalt, and almost 90% for lithium. EVs and
battery storage have already displaced consumer electronics to
become the largest consumer of lithium and are set to take over from
stainless steel as the largest end user of nickel by 2040."

[url]https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/24d5dfbb-a77a-4647-abcc-667867207f74/Th
eRoleofCriticalMineralsinCleanEnergyTransitions.pdf[/url

And any increase must be met by mining. As well as demand causing price hikes.

What gets me –


I know it’s more expensive to fabricate with aluminium
but surely it wouldn’t add that much to the price using mass production?
Advantages:
lower weight means more acceleration or
lower weight means a smaller engine with greater fuel economy –
might even double the range of the car with the same tank of fuel.

Low end cars – shopping basket cars -
that’s where light aluminium is needed.
I know there are problems in doing so.   e.g.
Australian design rules require a certain strength for areas such as doors
to be strong enough for a side impacts and
that usually requires steel struts.


But aluminium cars have never been available as ordinary cars.
It means Govts. were never serious about lowering emissions.
If so they could have halved the emission of cars in the last 40 years
by having smaller engines but still good performance.
It proves the multi- national companies run the world not our elected Govts.