Shopping Cart  
Science Home
 Wine Glass  
HOME The Sociology of Corruption

Why Renewable Energy Will Never Work

Renewable doesn't mean unlimited supply. Wind and solar are so dilute that not enough can be scraped up. It's slim pickings already. Most of it is too slow, too dark.

Electricity is a specialty product which will not scale up to the transportation level. A massive increase in electric lines and infrastructure would be required. There is no space for it within cities.

The British covered their country with obnoxious windmills and only ended up with 15% of their electricity. Now they are building nuclear plants. The Germans are building coal plants.


The Problem

The stated goal is to produce 100% carbon free, renewable energy and power self-driving, electric vehicles with it.

The result is physically impossible, but promoters are not saying there are boundaries or what they would be. They need to absolutize to avoid an explanation of complexities which they have no ability to evaluate.


The simple facts:

1) Solar is going nowhere, because it is only used in the South West.

2) Windmills are going nowhere, because each one costs a fortune, and long lines cost even more.

3) Neither are going anywhere, because disruptive variations cannot be managed and they waste resources trying.

4) Renewable doesn't mean unlimited supply. The low hanging fruit is gone already.

5) Solar and wind are very dilute. Concentrating dilute energy is very inefficient. It takes huge amounts of metal. Electrons have to be surrounded by a lot of metal or chemicals.

6) You couldn't cover the planet with enough wires to make it work. The electrical infrastructure would have to be multiplied by several thousand to produce 100% renewable energy, even if it were possible. There wouldn't be enough space between transmission towers for anything else.

The Fracking Problem

Solar only gets sun power for a few hours per day. It must have 100% back up for most of the day. The back up is said to require natural gas electric turbine generators, because only they can be started and stopped easily. But natural gas is only available through fracking or imports. Before fracking, there was a shortage of natural gas. Fracking is expensive and only exists while OPEC is doing Americans the favor of holding oil prices artificially high. With oil producers increasing output in Iran, Iraq, Libya and elsewhere, OPEC is not easily holding the price up. When the price of oil drops, fracking stops, the energy moguls will be building coal plants like there was no tomorrow and solar will be unusable.

The Efficiency Problem

Electricity is very inefficient, because it is lost to heat in every device and wire. Fossil fuels are six times electricity, while electricity produces more CO2. It means electricity is less than one sixth as efficient as fossil fuels. Even if renewables could get rid of the CO2, the inefficiency of electricity would produce overwhelming clutter—in fact, so much clutter than no one gets past 15% wind or solar, even without electric vehicles adding to it.

Break Time

If these statements don't look credible because too many persons are saying the opposite, we need to take a look at the difference. First and foremost, who are these other persons? They are activists and journalists who have never studied an iota of science or engineering.

They are assuming there will be an electric take-over of the energy and transportation systems, because scientists have improved the chemistry of solar cells. That doesn't wash. Scientists have improved the fabric of shoes, which is about as relevant.

The contrivers are omitting the fact that long transmission lines cost more than producing the energy, while solar energy would have to be shipped from the southwest to the other forty five states to get where they claim energy is going. Wind energy would also have to be shipped long distance.

Skipping over the transmission lines, in addition to back up systems, shows the ignorance and contrivance of the promoters of the cause. Real scientists and engineers used to explain the absudities, but activists flushed them down the drain and substituted in their ignorant claims.

Causes seem to do that in the minds of persons who have not learned the discipline of correct evaluation. It includes too many scientists, so you can always find a few to promote any cause, while journalists determine which ones prevail and how much lying to do about the percent who are on their side.

There are a lot of ignorant scientists who should have never been scientists. Journalists and activists bring them to the surface and suppress the others. That doesn't mean activists have science on their side.

If electric vehicles are carbon free, why aren't light bulbs?

Social criticism gets more and more difficult, as the subject matter gets more and more unreal. Getting unreal is how criticism is evaded. The more unreal, the more impossible criticism becomes.

For this reason, social fantasies are going off the charts. A group of connected fantasies are being contrived around global warming, renewable energy, carbon free electric vehicles, self-driving vehicles and going to Mars.

To criticize such fantasies requires mowing down a lot of developed verbiage. Doing so is not allowed. All criticism must be superficial and trivial.

The problem is that the contrivers get by with it. Significant social criticism is not being allowed, while contrivers get more and more unreal.

The specific examples of how this works are very clear. Renewable energy is a contrived absurdity, as demonstrated in Europe, where Germany is building new coal plants, and England is building a new nuclear reactor, because their economies cannot survive more renewables. They have 25% renewables (15% solar and wind), while the price of their electricity is 8 to 10 times what it costs with coal.
Solar and wind require too much infrastructure

Solar energy can never be relevant on a large scale for two major reasons. One: Solar will never be used on a significant scale outside southwestern US, where there is low overcast and bad weather. Two: Six hours per day of high intensity radiation (one fourth of the time) will never be significant. Backup systems gain almost nothing but more expense from solar disruption for six hours per day.

Increasing the time by turning with the sun increase the required surface area proportionately, while less light gets through the longer path through the atmosphere.

Wind power has similar problems. Wind can stop blowing for days at a time. A backup system of 100% is required. Having that system sit around unused is extremely wasteful. Wind changes so fast that backup systems need to be always on.

Transmission lines are required for wind and utility-scale solar. Transmission lines generally cost as much or more than the production costs for the energy, and they lose energy along the lines.

For short lines, a minimum of 20% loss is built in; for longer lines it is 50%. The reason is because there is resistance in the metal which creates heat as a loss of energy. To reduce the resistance by half requires twice as much metal. To reduce loss from 20% to 10% would require two lines instead of one. To reduce loss on long lines from 50% to 25% would require two long lines instead of one.

This is why there is a shortage of transmission lines in the US. The distances that must be covered are too large. It's a losing battle between energy loss and massive lines. It doesn't pay. Explanations of Energy Efficiency

The metals which make transmission lines expensive are refined with coke, which comes from coal.

Energy storage systems which convert to other forms of energy lose about 60% transforming in, and another 60% transforming back to electricity. Salvaging 40% of 40% is 16% recoverable.

Environmental damage and human disturbance are usually unacceptable for both solar and wind energy, even on a small scale. Scaling up would be prohibitive.

Solar and wind run into a barrier around 15% of electrical power, because electrical systems cannot tolerate more than 15% fluctuations, and backup systems are not perfect enough to remove fluctuations. No one can get past the 15% barrier with solar and wind combined beyond obfuscation over numbers and diversions.

The 36% wind energy in Iowa is not an exception. The lines are connected to a larger area which reduces the real average, while much of the energy goes into ethanol production. With only 5.6% of the electrical generation from natural gas, what does Iowa do when the wind stops? It shows that the wind energy which is used for normal electrical purposes is a small part of the surrounding systems which it is integrated into—certainly a lot less than 15%.

Explanations of Energy Efficiency

Not Enough Space


Home Page
Science Errors
Sociology of Corruption
Home Page
Science Errors
Sociology of Corruption