Based on popular perceptions of fusion, flying cars and other promises of the past, it is reasonable to understand the cynicism for renewable energy.
The public may even come to see wind and solar as capable of outcompeting fossil fuels on their own and therefore undeserving of government subsidies and helpful regulations.
Gasp! We absolutely cannot have that. Peoples utility bills would skyrocket! All the careful lying and misdirection we’ve accomplished over the years would completely unravel. Keep those subsidies in place! Hey-Hey, Ho-Ho, un-subsidized power generation has got to go!
The public is just so innumerate, and so vulnerable to snake oil salesmen. Wind and solar power are ridiculously inadequate, and environmentally disruptive. There is only one power source competitive with fossil fuels, and it starts with E = mc^2.
This sort of criticism is tantamount to sour grapes whining.
If someone had told you 20 years ago where solar and wind would be today you’d likely have called them insanely optimistic.
And don’t say it’s all an illusion due to subsidies. Saudi Arabia is going to install $50 B in renewable electric capacity in the next few years. There’s no one to subsidize them; they are doing it for cold hard economic reasons: to save money over producing electricity using fossil fuels. That’s right: renewables are cheaper than fossil fuel electricity in the heart of one of the most fossil fuel rich parts of the planet.
Unless the dramatic cost declines in renewables (and storage) abruptly end, they are going to sweep the planet. Other energy sources are ultimately going to relegated to niches or museums. At each stage you will be able to draw another line in the sand and say “look, renewables can’t do that”, but then that line will be crossed.
. There’s no one to subsidize them; they are doing it for cold hard economic reasons: to save money over producing electricity using fossil fuels. That’s right: renewables are cheaper than fossil fuel electricity in the heart of one of the most fossil fuel rich parts of the planet.
SA thinks oil is running out and are trying to transition their economy away from relying on oil revenues. Building some solar farms isn’t part of a contest of merit between oil and solar.
Who are building these solar farms? Are there any connection to the Saudi royal family? I wouldn’t be surprised if the entire program was one controlled by their government and the royal family.
And why wouldn’t they try solar while living in the middle of a desert?
The bids for these are being tendered by the Saudi government, so ultimately yes it’s the royal family. The point I was making was there’s no higher government authority for them to be leeching subsidies off of here. They are doing this because they think it be financially beneficial going forward. There is also a considerable amount of wind in the mix btw (and they are also planning two nuclear reactors, which is not included in that $50B figure.)
A lot of people are still stuck in the mindset that renewable energy is boutique bullshit from granola-chewing hippies. But the cost declines have made that view obsolete. Now, bankers and financiers all over the world are putting billions of dollars into it. They are not doing this for ideological reasons.
Solar is now the cheapest form (going by levelized cost) of new electric capacity in 58 developing countries, including India and China. The markets there and elsewhere are large and growing rapidly. This will continue to push solar down its experience curve, which means the cost declines we have seen will almost certainly continue.
There are obstacles to full “renewablization” of the world economy (need for energy storage, the need to displace liquid fuels in transportation, feedstocks for chemicals and smelting), but the economic impetus toward it will continue to grow, even if one totally ignores CO2 externalities.
Yeah, yeah, and yeah again, we know, he heard that all forms of electric power are subsidized inasmuch as the gummint is the insurer of last result of nuclear plants and so on.
But the large overt subsidies — if solar and wind is now cost competitive with fossil (it is, isn’t it?), we can end all of those subsidies along with the renewable mandates, today, now?
Mr. Trump can end all of the Climate Change research and we won’t be made at him because renewables have reached a kind of critical mass and will take off, whether or not we are scolded about them?
All of these statements:
“They are doing this because they think it be financially beneficial going forward. There is also a considerable amount of wind in the mix btw (and they are also planning two nuclear reactors, which is not included in that $50B figure.)
A lot of people are still stuck in the mindset that renewable energy is boutique bullshit from granola-chewing hippies. But the cost declines have made that view obsolete. Now, bankers and financiers all over the world are putting billions of dollars into it. They are not doing this for ideological reasons.
Solar is now the cheapest form (going by levelized cost) of new electric capacity in 58 developing countries, including India and China. The markets there and elsewhere are large and growing rapidly. This will continue to push solar down its experience curve, which means the cost declines we have seen will almost certainly continue.”
Sound like a lot of wishful thinking:
“They are doing this because they think it be financially beneficial going forward. ”
You have no idea why they are doing this. Pure conjecture on your part.
“A lot of people are still stuck in the mindset that renewable energy is boutique bullshit from granola-chewing hippies. ”
I don’t accept the premise that solar ISN’T boutique bs……
“But the cost declines have made that view obsolete. ”
Prove it. If solar were so great everyone would be scrambling to put them on their roofs. They aren’t: The market says otherwise.
“Now, bankers and financiers all over the world are putting billions of dollars into it. ”
Are they? What bankers? What financiers? How much of total energy investment are these bankers and investors putting into solar? Do they put into fossil too?
How many? If there’s one in the US and one in China you can use the term “all over the world” but that’s a loaded term intending to signify that a large number are investing in solar.
Who is?
How many?
“They are not doing this for ideological reasons.”
How do you know? You don’t.
None of the “facts” you’ve stated in those paragraphs can be taken at face value. Unless you are moonbat in which case the science is settled….
Solar is just fine if you can accept a power grid with regular 3rd world style rolling blackouts.
The point I was making was there’s no higher government authority for them to be leeching subsidies off of here.
Yup, nothing higher than the King and his family. Is this solar project a way for them to make money or just to generate electricity?
The price they pay for electricity now doesn’t reflect a true market cost of the oil they burn, so they probably aren’t worried about solar making a profit but just having a means other than burning oil to generate electricity.
They are doing this because they think it be financially beneficial going forward.
You are probably right that they can make more money selling oil on the open market than they will selling electricity generated from it at subsidized prices. Just because they have a lot of oil, doesn’t mean they have to sell it to themselves for cheaper than they can sell it to someone else.
Not many countries burn oil to generate electricity. In 2014 only 5% of the world’s electricity came from oil, so apparently there are several cheaper alternatives.
SA doesn’t have a lot of options to generate electricity so solar could make sense for them.
Alright, who gave the kid a beer?
SA may be able to use them profitably, though. Ironically because a cloudless desert is a niche environment for the things, though premature aging and dust storms may be a problem.
“And don’t say it’s all an illusion due to subsidies. Saudi Arabia is going to install $50 B in renewable electric capacity in the next few years. There’s no one to subsidize them; they are doing it for cold hard economic reasons: to save money over producing electricity using fossil fuels. ”
Yeah right. Talk to us after they’ve been installed for a decade or so where sandstorms, relentless sunlight (it is a niche location by the way – it’s not like that in the Northeast US), and after the Iranians launch just a very few conventional weapons, or infiltrate just a few squads and level the farms.
It doesn’t make “cold hard economic reasons” until they’ve been installed, operating, and serviced for a good while.
“heart of one of the most fossil fuel rich parts of the planet.”
It was. Dunno if fracking would help.
75% of their electricity comes from burning oil though.
Strategically, it makes sense to have a more diverse way of generating electricity. After reaping the world for so long, would they want to be in the position of importing coal? They don’t have much of an economy to support that.
Wodun,
A perfectly reasonable rationale for building solar. My point was that it most certainly is NOT for the reasons Paul says.
Few places on Earth are better suited for solar energy than Saudi Arabia. That makes the return on investment in solar a much more viable option for them than in most other places. Even there, if they’re planning on using photovoltaic cells, they won’t have any electricity at night without an extensive and expensive energy storage system.
Where I’m located, it’s heavily overcast today. Solar panels would produce only a tiny fraction of their rated capacity, most likely under 10%. When I lived in Colorado, solar was much more viable than here because we got so much more sunshine and, due to the high altitude, the sun was more intense. The wind was steadier in many place of Colorado than here, too. We do get a significant percentage of our electricity from hydropower but due to our climatic conditions, almost none from wind or solar. Our best source for electricity is a nuclear power plant about 20 miles from here.
Too bad we don’t have a nuclear power plant that can fit on a cargo freighter, then we could sit a few off the coast of SA and get some money back.
Based on popular perceptions of fusion, flying cars and other promises of the past, it is reasonable to understand the cynicism for renewable energy.
The public may even come to see wind and solar as capable of outcompeting fossil fuels on their own and therefore undeserving of government subsidies and helpful regulations.
Gasp! We absolutely cannot have that. Peoples utility bills would skyrocket! All the careful lying and misdirection we’ve accomplished over the years would completely unravel. Keep those subsidies in place! Hey-Hey, Ho-Ho, un-subsidized power generation has got to go!
The public is just so innumerate, and so vulnerable to snake oil salesmen. Wind and solar power are ridiculously inadequate, and environmentally disruptive. There is only one power source competitive with fossil fuels, and it starts with E = mc^2.
This sort of criticism is tantamount to sour grapes whining.
If someone had told you 20 years ago where solar and wind would be today you’d likely have called them insanely optimistic.
And don’t say it’s all an illusion due to subsidies. Saudi Arabia is going to install $50 B in renewable electric capacity in the next few years. There’s no one to subsidize them; they are doing it for cold hard economic reasons: to save money over producing electricity using fossil fuels. That’s right: renewables are cheaper than fossil fuel electricity in the heart of one of the most fossil fuel rich parts of the planet.
Unless the dramatic cost declines in renewables (and storage) abruptly end, they are going to sweep the planet. Other energy sources are ultimately going to relegated to niches or museums. At each stage you will be able to draw another line in the sand and say “look, renewables can’t do that”, but then that line will be crossed.
. There’s no one to subsidize them; they are doing it for cold hard economic reasons: to save money over producing electricity using fossil fuels. That’s right: renewables are cheaper than fossil fuel electricity in the heart of one of the most fossil fuel rich parts of the planet.
SA thinks oil is running out and are trying to transition their economy away from relying on oil revenues. Building some solar farms isn’t part of a contest of merit between oil and solar.
Who are building these solar farms? Are there any connection to the Saudi royal family? I wouldn’t be surprised if the entire program was one controlled by their government and the royal family.
And why wouldn’t they try solar while living in the middle of a desert?
The bids for these are being tendered by the Saudi government, so ultimately yes it’s the royal family. The point I was making was there’s no higher government authority for them to be leeching subsidies off of here. They are doing this because they think it be financially beneficial going forward. There is also a considerable amount of wind in the mix btw (and they are also planning two nuclear reactors, which is not included in that $50B figure.)
A lot of people are still stuck in the mindset that renewable energy is boutique bullshit from granola-chewing hippies. But the cost declines have made that view obsolete. Now, bankers and financiers all over the world are putting billions of dollars into it. They are not doing this for ideological reasons.
Solar is now the cheapest form (going by levelized cost) of new electric capacity in 58 developing countries, including India and China. The markets there and elsewhere are large and growing rapidly. This will continue to push solar down its experience curve, which means the cost declines we have seen will almost certainly continue.
There are obstacles to full “renewablization” of the world economy (need for energy storage, the need to displace liquid fuels in transportation, feedstocks for chemicals and smelting), but the economic impetus toward it will continue to grow, even if one totally ignores CO2 externalities.
Yeah, yeah, and yeah again, we know, he heard that all forms of electric power are subsidized inasmuch as the gummint is the insurer of last result of nuclear plants and so on.
But the large overt subsidies — if solar and wind is now cost competitive with fossil (it is, isn’t it?), we can end all of those subsidies along with the renewable mandates, today, now?
Mr. Trump can end all of the Climate Change research and we won’t be made at him because renewables have reached a kind of critical mass and will take off, whether or not we are scolded about them?
All of these statements:
“They are doing this because they think it be financially beneficial going forward. There is also a considerable amount of wind in the mix btw (and they are also planning two nuclear reactors, which is not included in that $50B figure.)
A lot of people are still stuck in the mindset that renewable energy is boutique bullshit from granola-chewing hippies. But the cost declines have made that view obsolete. Now, bankers and financiers all over the world are putting billions of dollars into it. They are not doing this for ideological reasons.
Solar is now the cheapest form (going by levelized cost) of new electric capacity in 58 developing countries, including India and China. The markets there and elsewhere are large and growing rapidly. This will continue to push solar down its experience curve, which means the cost declines we have seen will almost certainly continue.”
Sound like a lot of wishful thinking:
“They are doing this because they think it be financially beneficial going forward. ”
You have no idea why they are doing this. Pure conjecture on your part.
“A lot of people are still stuck in the mindset that renewable energy is boutique bullshit from granola-chewing hippies. ”
I don’t accept the premise that solar ISN’T boutique bs……
“But the cost declines have made that view obsolete. ”
Prove it. If solar were so great everyone would be scrambling to put them on their roofs. They aren’t: The market says otherwise.
“Now, bankers and financiers all over the world are putting billions of dollars into it. ”
Are they? What bankers? What financiers? How much of total energy investment are these bankers and investors putting into solar? Do they put into fossil too?
How many? If there’s one in the US and one in China you can use the term “all over the world” but that’s a loaded term intending to signify that a large number are investing in solar.
Who is?
How many?
“They are not doing this for ideological reasons.”
How do you know? You don’t.
None of the “facts” you’ve stated in those paragraphs can be taken at face value. Unless you are moonbat in which case the science is settled….
Solar is just fine if you can accept a power grid with regular 3rd world style rolling blackouts.
The point I was making was there’s no higher government authority for them to be leeching subsidies off of here.
Yup, nothing higher than the King and his family. Is this solar project a way for them to make money or just to generate electricity?
The price they pay for electricity now doesn’t reflect a true market cost of the oil they burn, so they probably aren’t worried about solar making a profit but just having a means other than burning oil to generate electricity.
They are doing this because they think it be financially beneficial going forward.
You are probably right that they can make more money selling oil on the open market than they will selling electricity generated from it at subsidized prices. Just because they have a lot of oil, doesn’t mean they have to sell it to themselves for cheaper than they can sell it to someone else.
Not many countries burn oil to generate electricity. In 2014 only 5% of the world’s electricity came from oil, so apparently there are several cheaper alternatives.
SA doesn’t have a lot of options to generate electricity so solar could make sense for them.
Alright, who gave the kid a beer?
SA may be able to use them profitably, though. Ironically because a cloudless desert is a niche environment for the things, though premature aging and dust storms may be a problem.
“And don’t say it’s all an illusion due to subsidies. Saudi Arabia is going to install $50 B in renewable electric capacity in the next few years. There’s no one to subsidize them; they are doing it for cold hard economic reasons: to save money over producing electricity using fossil fuels. ”
Yeah right. Talk to us after they’ve been installed for a decade or so where sandstorms, relentless sunlight (it is a niche location by the way – it’s not like that in the Northeast US), and after the Iranians launch just a very few conventional weapons, or infiltrate just a few squads and level the farms.
It doesn’t make “cold hard economic reasons” until they’ve been installed, operating, and serviced for a good while.
“heart of one of the most fossil fuel rich parts of the planet.”
It was. Dunno if fracking would help.
75% of their electricity comes from burning oil though.
Strategically, it makes sense to have a more diverse way of generating electricity. After reaping the world for so long, would they want to be in the position of importing coal? They don’t have much of an economy to support that.
Wodun,
A perfectly reasonable rationale for building solar. My point was that it most certainly is NOT for the reasons Paul says.
Few places on Earth are better suited for solar energy than Saudi Arabia. That makes the return on investment in solar a much more viable option for them than in most other places. Even there, if they’re planning on using photovoltaic cells, they won’t have any electricity at night without an extensive and expensive energy storage system.
Where I’m located, it’s heavily overcast today. Solar panels would produce only a tiny fraction of their rated capacity, most likely under 10%. When I lived in Colorado, solar was much more viable than here because we got so much more sunshine and, due to the high altitude, the sun was more intense. The wind was steadier in many place of Colorado than here, too. We do get a significant percentage of our electricity from hydropower but due to our climatic conditions, almost none from wind or solar. Our best source for electricity is a nuclear power plant about 20 miles from here.
Too bad we don’t have a nuclear power plant that can fit on a cargo freighter, then we could sit a few off the coast of SA and get some money back.