Why are decision makers assuming electrical energy is the wave of the future? They assume electricity is highly efficient and can be derived from so-called renewable sources. They are immeasurably wrong about both.

It's important to be able to add and subtract when dealing with electricity, because electricity is much less efficient than other sources of energy, while incompetents assume otherwise. A large percent of electrical energy is lost every time it is touched, and there are a lot of energy-losing processes involved.

The power mongers who took over the subject pick a number which looks good in one situation and apply it to another situation which creates waste, fraud and abuse.

An example is assuming a charge-up for an electric vehicle costs a small fraction of a fill-up with gasoline. Those numbers were produced when coal power was producing the electricity for toasters. When California adds 3-5% renewables to the equation, the cost is the same for an electric charge and a tank of gas, while 3-5% is only the starting point for the expectation placed on renewables.

incompetents look at price and translate the result into engineering technology. The two concepts don't mix. Incompetents assume price is an indicator of technological worth. They couldn't be dumber.

One of the biggest mistakes they are making at this time is to assume they can put utility scale "renewables" (solar and wind) where the exploits are located (deserts for solar and sea coasts for wind) and reap big rewards. Where these concepts have been tried, they create bankruptcy at the expense of taxpayers and ratepayers.

The primary problem is that transmission lines are so expensive and destructive to the environment that they cost more than the investment in the source of the energy. Germany cannot get its off-shore wind energy to the southern part of Germany. Moving the electricity from deserts to cities will be even more impossible.

But the deciders cannot learn from existing mistakes. One reason is because they don't see the mistakes as mistakes. They are looking at immediate exploitations, not the interests of the public. They get paid cost-plus, which means spend any amount of money and get an extra percent for profit, all paid for by the persons who have nothing to say about it—the taxpayers and ratepayers. Or they can bankrupt some dupes who guaranteed the loans and walk away with profits.

These results are a manifestation of the social deterioration that occurred as conservatives took over the world in 1981. Liberals were solving problems for the good of society—a deplorable concept to conservatives. For example, liberals realized during the 1970s that more water needed to be made available; so they were considering moving icebergs into bays and piping melted ice from the Arctic.

When conservatives took over everything, they re-aligned social purposes upon their own exploitations including partying and fighting wars. After 40 years of squandering, they decided to solve the problems through fake technology which rips off the public to monger power.

You might think renewable energy and electrification are green projects, and green is liberalism. Wong. Green is a subversion of liberalism, and conservatives love the waste, fraud and abuse of it. The lower classes pay the heaviest price, and no attempt is made to correct for it.

How Electrical Energy Loss Occurs