Certain politicians are making promises about carbon dioxide emissions and the year 2050 – three full decades from now.
Certain adults are telling elementary school children that transforming the world’s energy system is easy peasy.
But that’s not the case. In an article titled, Net-Zero Carbon Dioxide Emissions By 2050 Requires A New Nuclear Power Plant Every Day, Roger Pielke Jr. delivers the harsh, mathematical truth.
Even if every person in the world thought that abandoning fossil fuels made sense, even if every last government was committed to such a plan, the sheer size of the task would remain. In Pielke’s words: “The scale…is absolutely, mind-bogglingly huge.”
In an entire year, a nuclear power plant is capable of producing 1 “million tons of oil equivalent” of energy – or 1 mtoe for short. Says Pielke:
In 2018 the world consumed 11,743 mtoe in the form of coal, natural gas and petroleum…there are 11,051 days left until January 1, 2050. To achieve net-zero carbon dioxide emissions globally by 2050 thus requires the deployment of >1 mtoe of carbon-free energy…every day, starting tomorrow and continuing for the next 30+ years. Achieving net-zero also requires the corresponding equivalent decommissioning of more than 1 mtoe of energy consumption from fossil fuels every single day.
Let us be honest and grownup here. The chances of this happening are remote.
Now let’s remember that many people insist nuclear power is off the table. We’re supposedly in the midst of a climate crisis caused by CO2 emissions, yet low-emissions nuclear power is forbidden.
Such people think we should rely on wind power, instead. According to Pielke’s calculations, that would require the construction of 1,500 wind turbines every single day from now until 2050.
Currently, the US consumes approximately 20% of the energy used across the globe. Its share of the 1,500 new wind turbines required daily would, therefore, be 300.
Despite years of massive subsidies designed to encourage wind energy investment, fewer than 10 turbines are currently installed in the US each day.
Surely even a child understands that ramping up from 10 turbines a day to 300 is a massive challenge that couldn’t possibly happen overnight. Even in an affluent country with a booming economy.
And please, let us also put aside fairy tales about wind power being environmentally friendly. As Mark P. Mills explained recently in the Wall Street Journal:
Building one wind turbine requires 900 tons of steel, 2,500 tons of concrete and 45 tons of nonrecyclable plastic. Solar power requires even more cement, steel and glass…
Those who “dream of powering society entirely with wind and solar farms” says Mills, are actually demanding “the biggest expansion in mining the world has seen.”
Read more at Big Pic News
All this nonsense about CO2 is based upon Junk Science and Politics this Zero emissions of CO2 by 2015 just like the ban on DDT all based upon Junk Science and Politics
My generation and the younger ones scare and anger me. They are actually convinced their lunacy is workable and wont cost the middle class and working poor anything to radically overturn our economy and institute inefficient central planning of our economy. These people are inflexible and stubborn and dangerous to our society.
The oceans warmed, and released CO2 (plant food) to the atmosphere.
When the oceans cool again, they will take up the CO2 and the planet will be colder and plants will have a lower concentration of food to grow.
What we need is weather control machine. Let’s all turn to socialism/communism so they will build that for us!
What the writer capably chronicles is the massive SCALE of our energy transition to replace fossil fuels. Folks are acting like all these advanced “clean” technologies are just sitting there on the “shelf”….NOT! Unfortunately, most Americans (functionally) are mathematically & scientifically illiterate, so sadly, they won’t begin to understand the realities until they no longer have electrical power or access to fuel. A reliable, stable energy system that has been built in the U.S over the past 120 years won’t be replaced overnight and the MATH as hi-lighted in this article clearly demonstrates that critical point. Drama & theater are pretty much worthless when you consider the PHYSICS required with energy imperatives…
Those who say we must end all uses of Fossil Fuels are total idiots their delusion is based upon a total lie and the junk science from the usial group of useful idiots and their rediculous ideology
The document explains the staggering scale of replacing electric power as currently used. However, this is an understatement. Our family uses propane and there are many millions of households and businesses that use natural gas. Electric use would have to go up to replace this fossil fuel use, so even more nuclear power plants or wind turbines would have to be built. Eliminating fossil fuels means no use of gasoline or diesel. The theory is this would be replaced by electric vehicles, so more CO2 free generating capacity would have to be built.
Eliminating fossil use would also mean no flying, no international cargo shipping, and no commercial fishing.
The first calculation is frightening enough but is itself a gross underestimate as there are at least 2billion people who have access to very littles energy now and they need to be allowed to develop to the level of at least europe…why not you selfish stupid bastards
We will continue to burn fossil fuels to maintain a decent standard of living. The socialists want to tax that fuel, maybe double or triple our cost. Kinda simple. Green energy hasn’t kept up to the world’s increased energy consumption, despite the enthusiasm and subsidies. The real question is in front of you when you vote. No such thing as free stuff. Theft is part that game.
Why do some people keep conflating alarmism with «socialism/comunism» and «central planning»?… China is a Socialist country, run by a Communist Party, and, apparently, they could not care less about «climate crisis» and alarmism… India is a conventional democracy, with central planning of their economy, and they also seem not to give a damn about «climate crisis» and alarmism…