I follow the energy generation circus. It is a mass of confusion, where a kid who sailed a sailboat somehow has cred as an energy engineer. Our politicians mouth off, clearly ignorant on any of the requisite science and engineering.
This post is unique relative to anything else I've read. It considers the costs in terms of energy in/energy out. It's an eyeopener. I've been saying for years that, if solar and wind are so economical, why do they have to be so massively subsidized? It doesn't take an engineering degree to see that we are being bamboozled yet again.
Unfortunately, subsidy-seekers have become very skilled at practicing their art. Here's one example of a well-heeled elite who admitted circa 2014 he is on the gravy train at taxpayer expense. (Buffett's father was a four-term U.S. Representative from Nebraska.) Multi-billionaire Warren Buffett explained the rationale for solar and wind generation in 2014:
"For example, on wind energy, we get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms. That's the only reason to build them. They don't make sense without the tax credit."
"Big Wind's Bogus Subsidies - Giving tax credits to the wind energy industry is a waste of time and money."
By Nancy Pfotenhauer, Contributor | May 12, 2014, at 2:30 p.m US News & World Report
This also shows the power of subsidy-seeker's lobbyists. I'll wager that very few people in Washington state below the poverty level own their residence. Owning a residence is usually a requirement to have a charging port installed at your residence, the only practical location to recharge an electric vehicle for long battery life.
To that end brutal ghettos or downtrodden neighborhoods are unlikely to have foo-foo charging stations. And if they did, they would be stripped for copper very quickly! Can't blame 'em.
Sad. The reason I support hybrid vehicles over EVs is the incredible energy density of gasoline. That fact cannot be legislated away. Less than seven 10,000 gallon tanker trucks full of gasoline equals the energy produced at the 2,078 MW Hoover Dam in one hour. 11.3 gallons of gasoline will move a 2024 Prius about 644 miles under optimum conditions. That's over twice the cruising range of a the greatest range Tesla Model "S" which can go up to 295 miles.
That's right Gene, it is hard to beat the direct burn of fossil in a car with it's higher energy density - a 90 % efficient electric motor still can't beat it.
Let's collaborate on an energy density article with K.T.
I have an 'ol readers digest version here, note how low Li is on the scale!
Yes, this is 100% true. Also, subsidies for rooftop solar end up going to wealthy communities. Because of the increased weight on the roof, homes in poorer communities with older roofs/ roofs with deferred maintenance issues often don't meet the structural integrity to install solar.
The whole California solar subsidy process is better described as a Ponzi scheme. Unless the residential installation includes large amounts of costly energy storage (e.g. multiple Tesla Powerwalls) the result of additional rooftop solar installations is increased curtailment of large-scale solar installations under CAISO control. Curtailment is expensive.
The amount of solar being curtailed as a consequence of overbuilding is absurd. CGNP estimated the curtailment cost in 2018 to be equal to the cost of exporting California's excess mid-day power to adjacent states. Assemblyman Brian Dahle discussed the billion-dollar per year cost in 2018 in his California SB 100 floor speech.
Year MWh Approximate Annual Cost ($)
2018 461,054 $1,000,000,000
2019 961,343 $2,090,000,000
2020 1,587,497 $3,440,000,000
2021 1,504,840 $3,260,000,000
2022 2,449,247 $5,310,000,000
2023 2,659,527 $5,770,000,000
2024 2,827,489 $6,130,000,000
Total 13,399,762 $27,000,000,000
To put the total January 2018-June 2024 curtailment of 13,339,762 MWh in context, Diablo Canyon's typical annual production is about 18,000,000 MWh. These multi-billion-dollar costs are shifted to California electricity ratepayers without solar installations, further driving up electricity prices.
I witnessed this curtailment when I observed a very large rural California solar installation with all of the panels facing away from the Sun in the late afternoon during the daily demand peak. A nearby smaller installation had the panels facing towards the Sun. I photographed both installations. Wind can also be curtailed.
The issue goes beyond EROEI. What is the cost of lost opportunities? The western Catskills mountains have been blasphemed by these giant whirling beasts. Has tourism been lowered, housing, etc? I suspect the societal and economic costs are higher than we think. I for one would never buy a house that looks like a factory because of installed panels.
"One of the great things about Substack is the ability to correspond and collaborate with experts in their respective fields. " Absolutely - I learn so much from substack, and really like being able to join the discussions.
Kinetic heat transfer processes of contiguous atmospheric molecules render surface BB impossible.
RGHE is bogus & CAGW is a scam!
FACTS & EVIDENCE:
FACT 1: Remove the Earth’s atmosphere or even just the GHGs and the Earth becomes much like the Moon, no water vapor or clouds, no ice or snow, no oceans, no vegetation, no 30% albedo becoming a barren rock ball, hot^3 (400 K) on the lit side, cold^3 (100 K) on the dark. At our distance from the Sun space is hot (394 K) not cold (5 K).
That’s NOT what the RGHE theory says.
EVIDENCE:
RGHE theory “288 K w – 255 K w/o = a 33 C colder ice ball Earth” 255 K assumes w/o keeps 30% albedo, an assumption akin to criminal fraud. 288 K is a surface measurement. 255 K is an equilibrium calculation at ToA.
Apples and potatoes.
Nikolov “Airless Celestial Bodies”
Kramm “Moon as test bed for Earth”
UCLA Diviner lunar mission data
JWST solar shield
ISS HVAC design for lit side of 250 F. (ISS web site)
Astronaut backpack life support w/ AC and cool water tubing underwear. (Space Discovery Center)
FACT 2: The GHGs require “extra” energy upwelling from a surface radiating as a Black Body.
EVIDENCE:
According to the K-T atmospheric power flux balance, numerous clones and SURFRAD the GHGs must absorb an “extra” 396/333/63 W/m^2 LWIR energy upwelling from the surface allegedly radiating as a Black Body. These graphics contain egregious arithmetic and thermodynamic errors.
FACT 3: Because of the significant non-radiative, i.e. kinetic, heat transfer processes of the contiguous participating atmospheric molecules the surface cannot upwell “extra” energy as a near Black Body.
EVIDENCE:
As demonstrated by experiment, the gold standard of classical science.
It's almost like there is an "equity" filter applied to energy generation these days, where the least energy dense and economical get a lift whilst the more efficient and dense get buried under regulations and hate campaigns. And you wonder in all this "great rearrangement" who is making the money on arbitrage?
We know from David Turver's analysis that the top 4 renewable energy producers in the UK combined made the same profit as British Gas but only supplied a tenth of power. Their profit to GW was astounding in its brazenness.
Ex. BlackRock has made astonishing sums over the last several years promoting and selling ESG investments. They are in everything from carbon capture to turbines. But of course remain deeply invested in fossil, but try and hide that sticky point.
This is a helpful introduction to EROEI - thank you. The remarks about distinguishing between energy investment and financial investment, and about the concept of exergy, when estimating it are particularly useful.
Unfortunately, EROEI by itself still leaves wriggle room for the determined "renewable energy" enthusiast to claim that "renewable energy" sources are viable when they are not. "Advances in technology will allow us to reduce energy inputs, increasing EROEI", they will claim.
Understanding why it won't requires understanding energy's more fundamental property of gradient, established by differences in energy density. It is the difference in energy type - atomic and chemical bonds vs. radiation - and hydrocarbon's property of compressing millions of years of sunlight collected over millions of square miles of territory - that produce the density contrast, and hence EROEI contrast - with wind and solar.
It is by understanding gradient that we understand why reducing wind turbine and storage manufacturing energy inputs and scaling them in their millions will never recreate a high energy gradient gas fired power station, any more than joining thousands of ski lift queues together will recreate a ski run. Couple that with the realisation that the wind turbine's manufacturing system only runs on high gradient energy, and the futility of "renewable energy" as a technology is evident. This insight is not offered by EROEI on its own.
Thank you for stopping by and for the subscription, K. T. and I are honored to have you onboard!
K. T. is an energy industry professional and I am a retired synthetic chemist and product development engineer, and we like to collaborate and combine perspectives. Uncle Gene of GreenNuke is onboard amoung others, and is super active in nuclear engineering and fights the good political fight. We do our best to stay with good 'ol 101 principals like you.
TC - I'm glad to have discovered you. My academic qualifications are (separately) in electrical and power systems engineering, petroleum engineering, and energy economics, but I've spent most of my time in industry in upstream international oil and gas operations management. I value your rigorous treatment of the subjects. Will keep in touch - do likewise.
Great to connect, the miracle of fossil fuels and modern society never fails to amaze me. A grounding in both synthetic organic and inorganic chemistries grounded that early on. I am a basic V=IR guy :-)
Check out the following, you may get a kick out of it:
Good article. I will question the claim that the minimal EROI for a functioning industrial civilization is 5-7. Charles Hall has put it at 14 for a modern socioeconomic system with education, health care, pensions, transportation, suburbs and arts & culture. I would put it even higher nowadays. Add endless wars of destruction, DEI, CRT, Wokeness, nutty scams of every description promoted by corrupt, idiot politicians and I suspect we need more like an EROI of 18 minimum. Which means the system is going to collapse if politicians in the West don't get their shit together.
I would add that CANDUs are at least 120 EROI, and MSRs upwards of 300 and Pyroprocessing of Spent Nuclear Fuel at 9000. At least that's what I've read.
Of course the megalomaniac, Globalitarian Misanthropists or what I like to call the Malthusian, Psychopathic Parasites, that actually run the West, out of Davos, Geneva & London, welcome the collapse of our industrial civilization. Replacing it with their goal of an EcoFascist NeoFeudal World Totalitarian Oligarchy.
I love that you put hard numbers to the various energy options. They say that the best disinfectant is sunlight, and you are putting direct sunlight on the EROEI fundamentals which the "climate cult" must hide in order to maintain their narrative. There is no place to hide from real EROEI, although real truth and real science don't seem to make much impact on "true believers". Keep up the good work! If enough people hear and understand that we are bound by the LAWS of Physics (not the "Talking Points of Physics" or the "Opinions of Physics") truth and sanity will eventually prevail. Good job!!!
I follow the energy generation circus. It is a mass of confusion, where a kid who sailed a sailboat somehow has cred as an energy engineer. Our politicians mouth off, clearly ignorant on any of the requisite science and engineering.
This post is unique relative to anything else I've read. It considers the costs in terms of energy in/energy out. It's an eyeopener. I've been saying for years that, if solar and wind are so economical, why do they have to be so massively subsidized? It doesn't take an engineering degree to see that we are being bamboozled yet again.
Thanks for stopping by and for your common sense and erudite comment, we appreciate it.
Thank you for your kind comment -- and yes, you are right. The subsidies are massive giveaways to companies who produce nothing of value.
Unfortunately, subsidy-seekers have become very skilled at practicing their art. Here's one example of a well-heeled elite who admitted circa 2014 he is on the gravy train at taxpayer expense. (Buffett's father was a four-term U.S. Representative from Nebraska.) Multi-billionaire Warren Buffett explained the rationale for solar and wind generation in 2014:
"For example, on wind energy, we get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms. That's the only reason to build them. They don't make sense without the tax credit."
"Big Wind's Bogus Subsidies - Giving tax credits to the wind energy industry is a waste of time and money."
By Nancy Pfotenhauer, Contributor | May 12, 2014, at 2:30 p.m US News & World Report
https://tinyurl.com/Buffett-Wind-Scam
Thanks for checking in Gene. The Treasury continues to be sucked dry and the 💵💵💰 presses now have to run 24x7.
But don't fear. If you are at or below poverty level in WA State, you can get massive subsidies for an EV:
https://www.commerce.wa.gov/growing-the-economy/energy/electric-vehicles/ev-instant-rebate-program/
This also shows the power of subsidy-seeker's lobbyists. I'll wager that very few people in Washington state below the poverty level own their residence. Owning a residence is usually a requirement to have a charging port installed at your residence, the only practical location to recharge an electric vehicle for long battery life.
Gene, ahhh a common sense point!
To that end brutal ghettos or downtrodden neighborhoods are unlikely to have foo-foo charging stations. And if they did, they would be stripped for copper very quickly! Can't blame 'em.
Sad. The reason I support hybrid vehicles over EVs is the incredible energy density of gasoline. That fact cannot be legislated away. Less than seven 10,000 gallon tanker trucks full of gasoline equals the energy produced at the 2,078 MW Hoover Dam in one hour. 11.3 gallons of gasoline will move a 2024 Prius about 644 miles under optimum conditions. That's over twice the cruising range of a the greatest range Tesla Model "S" which can go up to 295 miles.
That's right Gene, it is hard to beat the direct burn of fossil in a car with it's higher energy density - a 90 % efficient electric motor still can't beat it.
Let's collaborate on an energy density article with K.T.
I have an 'ol readers digest version here, note how low Li is on the scale!
https://tucoschild.substack.com/p/energy-density-and-why-we-need-nuclear
Yes, this is 100% true. Also, subsidies for rooftop solar end up going to wealthy communities. Because of the increased weight on the roof, homes in poorer communities with older roofs/ roofs with deferred maintenance issues often don't meet the structural integrity to install solar.
The whole California solar subsidy process is better described as a Ponzi scheme. Unless the residential installation includes large amounts of costly energy storage (e.g. multiple Tesla Powerwalls) the result of additional rooftop solar installations is increased curtailment of large-scale solar installations under CAISO control. Curtailment is expensive.
The amount of solar being curtailed as a consequence of overbuilding is absurd. CGNP estimated the curtailment cost in 2018 to be equal to the cost of exporting California's excess mid-day power to adjacent states. Assemblyman Brian Dahle discussed the billion-dollar per year cost in 2018 in his California SB 100 floor speech.
Year MWh Approximate Annual Cost ($)
2018 461,054 $1,000,000,000
2019 961,343 $2,090,000,000
2020 1,587,497 $3,440,000,000
2021 1,504,840 $3,260,000,000
2022 2,449,247 $5,310,000,000
2023 2,659,527 $5,770,000,000
2024 2,827,489 $6,130,000,000
Total 13,399,762 $27,000,000,000
To put the total January 2018-June 2024 curtailment of 13,339,762 MWh in context, Diablo Canyon's typical annual production is about 18,000,000 MWh. These multi-billion-dollar costs are shifted to California electricity ratepayers without solar installations, further driving up electricity prices.
I witnessed this curtailment when I observed a very large rural California solar installation with all of the panels facing away from the Sun in the late afternoon during the daily demand peak. A nearby smaller installation had the panels facing towards the Sun. I photographed both installations. Wind can also be curtailed.
Facing Away? No Way, Really?
Thanks for those details, Gene!
Fantastic, thank you.
Welcome Chris. K.T. did a great job and we plan more collaboration.
Love the graph by Weibach's group. It makes it so clear...
Classic, Old School reliable data.
Great material!
The issue goes beyond EROEI. What is the cost of lost opportunities? The western Catskills mountains have been blasphemed by these giant whirling beasts. Has tourism been lowered, housing, etc? I suspect the societal and economic costs are higher than we think. I for one would never buy a house that looks like a factory because of installed panels.
Thanks for stopping by RT, appreciate the comment.
TC
"One of the great things about Substack is the ability to correspond and collaborate with experts in their respective fields. " Absolutely - I learn so much from substack, and really like being able to join the discussions.
Thanks for reading, Al!
ABSTRACT:
Earth is cooler w atmosphere/WV/30% albedo not warmer.
Ubiquitous RGHE heat balance graphics don't + violate LoT.
Kinetic heat transfer processes of contiguous atmospheric molecules render surface BB impossible.
RGHE is bogus & CAGW is a scam!
FACTS & EVIDENCE:
FACT 1: Remove the Earth’s atmosphere or even just the GHGs and the Earth becomes much like the Moon, no water vapor or clouds, no ice or snow, no oceans, no vegetation, no 30% albedo becoming a barren rock ball, hot^3 (400 K) on the lit side, cold^3 (100 K) on the dark. At our distance from the Sun space is hot (394 K) not cold (5 K).
That’s NOT what the RGHE theory says.
EVIDENCE:
RGHE theory “288 K w – 255 K w/o = a 33 C colder ice ball Earth” 255 K assumes w/o keeps 30% albedo, an assumption akin to criminal fraud. 288 K is a surface measurement. 255 K is an equilibrium calculation at ToA.
Apples and potatoes.
Nikolov “Airless Celestial Bodies”
Kramm “Moon as test bed for Earth”
UCLA Diviner lunar mission data
JWST solar shield
ISS HVAC design for lit side of 250 F. (ISS web site)
Astronaut backpack life support w/ AC and cool water tubing underwear. (Space Discovery Center)
FACT 2: The GHGs require “extra” energy upwelling from a surface radiating as a Black Body.
EVIDENCE:
According to the K-T atmospheric power flux balance, numerous clones and SURFRAD the GHGs must absorb an “extra” 396/333/63 W/m^2 LWIR energy upwelling from the surface allegedly radiating as a Black Body. These graphics contain egregious arithmetic and thermodynamic errors.
FACT 3: Because of the significant non-radiative, i.e. kinetic, heat transfer processes of the contiguous participating atmospheric molecules the surface cannot upwell “extra” energy as a near Black Body.
EVIDENCE:
As demonstrated by experiment, the gold standard of classical science.
For the experimental write up see:
https://principia-scientific.org/debunking-the-greenhouse-gas-theory-with-a-boiling-water-pot/
CONCLUSION:
No RGHE, no GHG warming, no CAGW or mankind/CO2 driven climate change.
BSME CU ‘78
It's almost like there is an "equity" filter applied to energy generation these days, where the least energy dense and economical get a lift whilst the more efficient and dense get buried under regulations and hate campaigns. And you wonder in all this "great rearrangement" who is making the money on arbitrage?
We know from David Turver's analysis that the top 4 renewable energy producers in the UK combined made the same profit as British Gas but only supplied a tenth of power. Their profit to GW was astounding in its brazenness.
Thanks stopping by and your appreciated comments.
Ex. BlackRock has made astonishing sums over the last several years promoting and selling ESG investments. They are in everything from carbon capture to turbines. But of course remain deeply invested in fossil, but try and hide that sticky point.
https://tucoschild.substack.com/p/sustainable-esg-funds-secretly-invested
This is a helpful introduction to EROEI - thank you. The remarks about distinguishing between energy investment and financial investment, and about the concept of exergy, when estimating it are particularly useful.
Unfortunately, EROEI by itself still leaves wriggle room for the determined "renewable energy" enthusiast to claim that "renewable energy" sources are viable when they are not. "Advances in technology will allow us to reduce energy inputs, increasing EROEI", they will claim.
Understanding why it won't requires understanding energy's more fundamental property of gradient, established by differences in energy density. It is the difference in energy type - atomic and chemical bonds vs. radiation - and hydrocarbon's property of compressing millions of years of sunlight collected over millions of square miles of territory - that produce the density contrast, and hence EROEI contrast - with wind and solar.
It is by understanding gradient that we understand why reducing wind turbine and storage manufacturing energy inputs and scaling them in their millions will never recreate a high energy gradient gas fired power station, any more than joining thousands of ski lift queues together will recreate a ski run. Couple that with the realisation that the wind turbine's manufacturing system only runs on high gradient energy, and the futility of "renewable energy" as a technology is evident. This insight is not offered by EROEI on its own.
Anyone who wants to explore this further might enjoy my recent essay "The physics of Net Zero", available here: https://open.substack.com/pub/richardlyon/p/the-physics-of-net-zero
Keep up the good work - subscribed.
Hello Richard,
Thank you for stopping by and for the subscription, K. T. and I are honored to have you onboard!
K. T. is an energy industry professional and I am a retired synthetic chemist and product development engineer, and we like to collaborate and combine perspectives. Uncle Gene of GreenNuke is onboard amoung others, and is super active in nuclear engineering and fights the good political fight. We do our best to stay with good 'ol 101 principals like you.
K.T.
https://thejoulethief.substack.com/
Really liked your logical post:
https://open.substack.com/pub/richardlyon/p/the-physics-of-net-zero
Stay in touch.
TC
TC - I'm glad to have discovered you. My academic qualifications are (separately) in electrical and power systems engineering, petroleum engineering, and energy economics, but I've spent most of my time in industry in upstream international oil and gas operations management. I value your rigorous treatment of the subjects. Will keep in touch - do likewise.
RL
Cheers Richard,
Great to connect, the miracle of fossil fuels and modern society never fails to amaze me. A grounding in both synthetic organic and inorganic chemistries grounded that early on. I am a basic V=IR guy :-)
Check out the following, you may get a kick out of it:
https://tucoschild.substack.com/p/carbon-capture-green-grift-and-taxpayers
Good article. I will question the claim that the minimal EROI for a functioning industrial civilization is 5-7. Charles Hall has put it at 14 for a modern socioeconomic system with education, health care, pensions, transportation, suburbs and arts & culture. I would put it even higher nowadays. Add endless wars of destruction, DEI, CRT, Wokeness, nutty scams of every description promoted by corrupt, idiot politicians and I suspect we need more like an EROI of 18 minimum. Which means the system is going to collapse if politicians in the West don't get their shit together.
I would add that CANDUs are at least 120 EROI, and MSRs upwards of 300 and Pyroprocessing of Spent Nuclear Fuel at 9000. At least that's what I've read.
Of course the megalomaniac, Globalitarian Misanthropists or what I like to call the Malthusian, Psychopathic Parasites, that actually run the West, out of Davos, Geneva & London, welcome the collapse of our industrial civilization. Replacing it with their goal of an EcoFascist NeoFeudal World Totalitarian Oligarchy.
Guys
I love that you put hard numbers to the various energy options. They say that the best disinfectant is sunlight, and you are putting direct sunlight on the EROEI fundamentals which the "climate cult" must hide in order to maintain their narrative. There is no place to hide from real EROEI, although real truth and real science don't seem to make much impact on "true believers". Keep up the good work! If enough people hear and understand that we are bound by the LAWS of Physics (not the "Talking Points of Physics" or the "Opinions of Physics") truth and sanity will eventually prevail. Good job!!!
Hello Patrick, we greatly appreciate your comments and distillation !
Going back to 101 concepts coupled with a proper grounding in the basics has it's advantages.
K.T. rocked this one using her expertise and Occam's Razor!
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Occams-razor
Stop by again when you get a chance.
TC
excellent description
Thanks Andy! K. T. has a easy to read style and produces a good length of article.
I need to start shortening my longish tomes in the future!
Best,
TC