Opinion Renewable energy has been a failure so far

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Article Archive

John Stossel: Renewable energy has been a failure so far​

John Stossel

Sat, March 26, 2022

The "Greens" promise renewables, solar and wind power, will replace fossil fuels. After all, the wind and sun are free, and they don't pollute.

Oops.

Now countries that embraced renewables are so desperate for power that they eagerly import coal, the worst polluter of all.

Do they apologize? No. Greens never apologize.

Germany was a leader in renewable energy, so confident in solar and wind power that they closed half their nuclear plants.

Oops.

That leaves Germans so short of power that Germans are now desperate to buy fossil fuels from Russia. Even worse, pollution-wise, high pollution coal now tops wind as Germany's biggest electricity source. That's really disgusting.
Then, even after putting all that soot in the air, Germans pay more than triple what Americans pay for electricity.

For my new video, I confront German-born environmentalist Johanna Neumann of Environment America, a group that lobbies for 100% renewable energy.
I point out that despite massive subsidies, her beloved renewables still provide just 12% of our power. She responds, "Saying renewables are not yet powering our utility grid is like critiquing a 2-year-old for not being able to run a marathon."
A 2-year-old? I don't want to meet that kid. Renewables have been subsidized for 40 years, not two.

"How we spend our taxes ought to be a reflection of our values," Neumann adds. "Americans ... love renewable energy."
Yes, I suppose we do. We like the idea of it. I put solar panels on my roof. I'd be a sucker not to. Massachusetts takes money from other state residents to give me a tax break on solar panels.

Still, in winter, when the sun is low, or my panels are covered by snow, I get nothing from my solar panels.

What kind of energy solution is that? People need energy when it's cloudy, too. They also need it when the wind doesn't blow.

"When the sun goes down ... offshore winds get cranked up," says Neumann.
No, they don't!

"The wind doesn't always come up when the sun goes down," I point out.

"Renewables are clearly better," Neumann replies.

She says we'll solve renewable energy's inconsistency by doing things like storing energy in batteries.

Well, yes, a battery that holds energy for weeks would make renewables work. But it doesn't exist.

"This is just a total fantasy, which is why nobody has done it anywhere, ever!" says Alex Epstein, author of "The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels."

Fossil fuels are moral, Epstein correctly points out, because human flourishing depends on them.

Abundant fossil fuels are especially important for poor people.

"Three billion people in the world still use less electricity than a typical American refrigerator. Are we going to allow them to have a modern life? Because that's going to depend on fossil fuels."

Even if climate change becomes a serious problem, fossil fuels reduce its harm by making us prosperous enough to afford protection against the climate.

"We have a 98% decline in climate-related disaster deaths over the last 100 years," Epstein points out.

A 98% drop in deaths. This is the amazing untold story of fossil fuels and their benefits. Because oil and natural gas so efficiently provide power, heat homes when it's freezing, pump water during droughts, etc., millions thrive, despite problems like climate change.

Thanks to fossil fuels, "We have this amazing productive ability," says Epstein. "That's the only reason we experience the planet as livable."

Global warming is a threat. Limiting fossil fuels now, without a capable alternative, will make it even harder to deal with the effects.

Unless someone invents a miracle battery or something else that makes sun and wind power practical, we need fossil fuels, desperately.

Poor people need them most.
John Stossel is creator of Stossel TV and author of "Give Me a Break: How I Exposed Hucksters, Cheats, and Scam Artists and Became the Scourge of the Liberal Media."
 
When the sun goes down ... offshore winds get cranked up," says Neumann.
No, they don't!

"The wind doesn't always come up when the sun goes down," I point out.

"Renewables are clearly better," Neumann replies.

She says we'll solve renewable energy's inconsistency by doing things like storing energy in batteries.

Well, yes, a battery that holds energy for weeks would make renewables work. But it doesn't exist.
She is talking about northern europe like all greens. Northern Europe can go 100% RE without big problems, there is always enough wind.
 
He’s still assuming it’s idiocy and not deliberate. Germany is a good case in point - they shuttered coal and nuclear plants and now have insufficient energy for their needs. This directly harms citizens and leads to political instability.
Any leader who actively curtails their country’s energy self sufficiency is a traitor.
All of this is working towards forcing people to accept lower standards of living and forcing political conflict.
Renewables are great, in specific local circumstances - you’ve got massive hydro or geothermal? You’d be daft not to use it. But power security is a massive issue, and the greens deliberate destruction of power security is just another way of destabilising the economy. The price of power affects everything - food, transport, home power bills, manufacturing, everything.
Our leaders are Neo-Malthusians pushing degrowth because they don't serve the public. They serve a small cadre of psychopathic oligarch thugs who want to murder seven billion people so that Earth can become their own personal playground where robots make a cornucopia of free wealth for them.
 
We are at the point in insulation technology that a home could be heated or cooled with an absolutely negligible amount of energy. Instead the West is churning out McMansions and also trying to be green.
 
It's almost like we use what we use for the majority of our stuff because it works....... the eclectic car actually came on the market at the same time the internal combustion one did, there's a reason why IC cars beat them in the marketplace and nobody was making meaningful volume production electric vehicles by the 1920's, there's a reason why they still struggle to displace IC today... they are NOT a better alternative from an economic standpoint. Never were. Never will be as long as there's gas left.

And you can't will your way to profit on good vibes.... reality doesn't care how much you want green energy to work, it won't as long as there's cheaper alternatives.

Green energy has long since ceased being about economics and is 100% a new-religion to people who push it out of a feeling that there will be a second coming of the unspoiled Earth if they just virtue signal hard enough with batteries and windmills.
 
Something I've noticed among normies is that this sentiment seems to be spreading among them as well, with very little pushback. I see lots of people that have large normie audiences talking about the issue and pushing nuclear power. I wonder if this is a result of the human brain just putting two and two together or if the governments of the world are planting the seeds for a nuclear energy push.
 
It's almost like we use what we use for the majority of our stuff because it works....... the eclectic car actually came on the market at the same time the internal combustion one did, there's a reason why IC cars beat them in the marketplace
Whale akshully

Electric cars came out ever so slightly first. There were some fits and starts with IC, with diesels and hot bulb motors being prevalent for a while. Diesel motors are expensive and finicky, comparatively, and hot bulbs just plain unreliable and inefficient.

For an incredibly brief period electric was the front runner, but once they figured out adding lead to gasoline stops preigntions and knock, it was game over.
 
Whale akshully

Electric cars came out ever so slightly first. There were some fits and starts with IC, with diesels and hot bulb motors being prevalent for a while. Diesel motors are expensive and finicky, comparatively, and hot bulbs just plain unreliable and inefficient.

For an incredibly brief period electric was the front runner, but once they figured out adding lead to gasoline stops preigntions and knock, it was game over.
Also, electric cars were only of use to urbanites (sound familiar?) a lot of the rural US didn't have access to the power grid at the time and a lot of US homesteads used coal or wood for heat and lamp oil for light.
 
At this point, there can really be no other conclusion. When you get down to it, power grids are an extremely simple algorithm. What's peak load? Can we generate that much? If not, spawn more overlords. That's it. That's the algorithm. So when a government sees that they can't generate enough power and they respond by lowering capacity, you have to assume malice. Stupidity can only explain so much. They actually want you to think that they're merely incompetent morons because it lets them get away with more.
Don't forget that you must construct additional pylons if you intend to increase power yield above a certain threshold - that means (hopefully) careful planning of infrastructure on a long-term basis.
 
Renewable Energy is not useless, it's because of the people's culture of constant energy usage from their lifestyles require so much energy that RE is unable to produce mass quantities of such. If people want Renewable Energy to be actually useful, maybe they can stop typing in their keyboards and actually make a change of lifestyle like lessening usage of their aircons over such.
Wind won't blow faster nor the Sun will shine harder either if you fart out of the top or bottom.
 
I don't get why people can't understand this. We know how much energy is in a photon. We can measure the number of photons that strike the Earth. We know the available surface area of the Earth. We know the current efficiency of solar panels. We know the patterns and historical trends of the wind. The math is the math. You can't run society on solar and wind alone. Combustion of fossil fuels absolutely dwarfs the energy output of renewable energy sources, and the output of nuclear energy absolutely dwarfs that of combustible fossil fuels.

They understand it perfectly. It’s just that “other people” should go green first, and they’ll do it last (if at all).
 
Something I've noticed among normies is that this sentiment seems to be spreading among them as well, with very little pushback. I see lots of people that have large normie audiences talking about the issue and pushing nuclear power. I wonder if this is a result of the human brain just putting two and two together or if the governments of the world are planting the seeds for a nuclear energy push.
It could also be a sneaky way to get grant money and further remove fossil fuel output from the equation in general. Notice that nobody is advocating for us to just go back to the 2010s status quo of simply pumping oil. We could literally do that until at least the 2070s and not worry about it but the thought of it could just as easily drop from people's heads if you just don't mention it.
 
It could also be a sneaky way to get grant money and further remove fossil fuel output from the equation in general. Notice that nobody is advocating for us to just go back to the 2010s status quo of simply pumping oil. We could literally do that until at least the 2070s and not worry about it but the thought of it could just as easily drop from people's heads if you just don't mention it.
See, the thing about that is while I don't doubt it and I understand the need for oil, especially in today's global climate, I would rather us not use all of it when we can save it for emergencies in the future. Plus, the nuclear energy solution isn't going to replace gasoline in cars, so a need for oil will always exist at least until we start building cars with mini-reactors built into them. That comes with its own problems though.
 
I made a Sim that lives in a tiny house off the grid. She has 2 windmills, 3 solar plates and solar shingles and she's always out of power.

All she has is a TV, radio, computer, stove and fridge.
 
This is more of a curiosity question than anything, but the idea of a solar collector built in LEO that converts and transmits the energy down to the planet via microwave is a fairly common theoretical "next step" in the field of advancing renewable energy. Besides the largest danger of a misdirected beam potentially setting fire to a small portion of the planet, are there any other particular reasons why this hasn't been put forward as a potential option (or at least, a mitigation of current power needs)?
 
Renewable energy is kind like the cure for cancer, if we dedicated all our resources to it (no corruption money and all), we could have it (or maybe we already do) but it will never happen.

Why?

Simple. Greed. For money AND power. You will be surprised at how many could have been saved through history by our many corporations and organizations. But they werent because there is money at TREATING the symptoms instead of fixing the problem. Once a problem is gone, its gone. It cant affect anyone.

Its like a big fire, sure, you COULD kill it with the water that you have....but because you want the money from the burnt victims, you will be more than glad to ignore that possibility.

Growing up is realising that a LOT of the problems we have currently are either caused or exacerbated by our rulling elites. Just look at Covid, in the end, it was a nothing burger if we kept calm and focused on actual facts and science. But no, big pharma and others could make a fortune off of that and so they did. Nvm it ruined countless lives, we are dealing with people with no moral compass, no human compassion, basically human looking demons. Now with the Ukraine war, its the turn of the military industrial complex to get its fortune.

Green energy and all that bullshit is no different. IF we were smart, we would build a bunch of nuclear facilities to keep the country running and others, then focus the rest on renewable energy since we bought ourselves a lot of time.

But why kill the flame when you can fan it and make it bigger under your control? The peasants will accept the truth that is packed to them and thats where it ends.
 
Last edited:
anyone complaining about renewable subsidies is braindead. the subsidies did exactly what they were supposed to: spur research and development to improve the technology. cost per kilowatt have collapsed over the past decade, to an astonishing degree.
1648332551473.png
same is true for wind. this is well ahead of projections. and they are still improving, there isn't stagnation yet.

batteries are on a similar track. massive drops in cost. we can't run the grid on 100% renewables yet because of a lack of storage capacity, but that won't be true forever.

the stupid thing isn't renewable subsidies, it's scrapping nuclear plants. sheer vandalism and spite to turn them off, I guess because "green" people want energy to be expensive. when renewables get really fucking cheap i wonder if we'll see these same people turn against them, because it brings us closer to a world of energy abundance where we don't have to use gay efficient lightbulbs and we can fly for cheap in electric supersonic aeroplanes. they want a world where you have to compost your own shit and eat in communal halls.
 
Last edited:
Renewable energy is kind like the cure for cancer, if we dedicated all our resources to it (no corruption money and all), we could have it (or maybe we already do) but it will never happen.

Why?

Simple. Greed. For money AND power. You will be surprised at how many could have been saved through history by our many corporations and organizations. But they werent because there is money at TREATING the symptoms instead of fixing the problem. Once a problem is gone, its gone. It cant affect anyone.

Its like a big fire, sure, you COULD kill it with the water that you have....but because you want the money from the burnt victims, you will be more than glad to ignore that possibility.

Growing up is realising that a LOT of the problems we have currently are either caused or exacerbated by our rulling elites. Just look at Covid, in the end, it was a nothing burger if we kept calm and focused on actual facts and science. But no, big pharma and others could make a fortune off of that and so they did. Nvm it ruined countless lives, we are dealing with people with no moral compass, no human compassion, basically human looking demons. Now with the Ukraine war, its the turn of the military industrial complex to get its fortune.

Green energy and all that bullshit is no different. IF we were smart, we would build a bunch of nuclear facilities to keep the country running and others, then focus the rest on renewable energy since we bought ourselves a lot of time.

But why kill the flame when you can flame it and make it bigger under your control? The peasants will accept the truth that is packed to them and thats where it ends.
funniest shit is all that money's going to be worthless soon
i hope the nanosecond big increase in green was worth it for the near permanent decline
 
Renewable Energy is not useless, it's because of the people's culture of constant energy usage from their lifestyles require so much energy that RE is unable to produce mass quantities of such. If people want Renewable Energy to be actually useful, maybe they can stop typing in their keyboards and actually make a change of lifestyle like lessening usage of their aircons over such.
As someone who lives in a hot humid state, you first
 
Renewable Energy is not useless, it's because of the people's culture of constant energy usage from their lifestyles require so much energy that RE is unable to produce mass quantities of such. If people want Renewable Energy to be actually useful, maybe they can stop typing in their keyboards and actually make a change of lifestyle like lessening usage of their aircons over such.
see this is what im talking about, the ideology of energy austerity has infected your brain. it has made you think that living at a comfortable temperature is an obscene luxury that has to be atoned for. the year is 2022 and a civilized human being should not have to turn off his air conditioning for reasons of "economy", no more than he should walk around in rags or live on stale bread.
 
Back
Top Bottom