"...residents in Saxony were told that they could only use hot water for showers between specific hours of the day. "
This is oddly reminiscent of the chaos in Rumania at the end of the Ceaucescu regime in 1989. Because the country could not afford to buy the needed quantity of bunker oil from the Gulf States, Rumania had to cut back electricity supplies to all householders. They were limited to about 8 hours a day of power. The emergency only ended with the overthrow and execution of the Ceaucescus. (The lesson here is that politicians who allow their citizens to be indefinitely shorted of electricity will meet an unpleasant and final termination.)
Rumania's response was to redouble its efforts to complete and start up its two nuclear power reactors at Cernavoda which had been unreasonably delayed by the Ceaucescu regime. Thanks to this, today, Rumania produces about 17-18 per cent of its electricity from nuclear power, whereas in 1990 it was producing zero.
So Zion is right that deindustrialization is not inevitable. It can be overcome by the determination of its citizens. Rumania did despite truly dreadful circumstances. But for those who refuse to learn the lessons of history, the future is one of industrial shutdowns, mass migration of both businesses and populations, economic collapse, and, in the case of truly stubborn, ideologues in power, overthrow by ballots or bullets.
So, Greens of Germany, you have a choice. Continue down the road to your political extinction or reform yourselves and your idiotic antinuclear policies. And a word of advice: Yuri Andropov has been dead for 40 years. You have no good reason to still be doing what he wanted.
Yes indeed. They did it by doing precisely the opposite of what the Green-Socialist governing alliance in Germany has been doing.
And it's not alone in the Balkan nations. Bulgaria had to shut down two of its six reactors at Kozloduy, as it was claimed they were old, unsafe and poorly maintained. It gets about 1/3rd of its electricity from its remaining two reactors. It intends to build two more to get its nuclear share of electricity over 50%. It has much the same energy situation as Rumania, some low grade coal deposits, no oil or gas and dependent on imported fossil fuel.
Bulgaria also is ignoring German Green policy prescriptions.
Great, in-depth, and thoughtful article. I always learn something new reading your posts. I appreciate the insight into what’s going on in Vietnam and Switzerland.
Excellent article and one that makes complete sense. When I read your articles and those of other similarly minded scientists, I'm at a loss as to how the facts and figures portrayed are never challenged by the 'greens.' Maybe because they're uncomfortable to face up to? Renewables is word (like green) that seems to have magical properties. It's often quoted as being cheaper than FF and the bringer of numerous well paid jobs. That's as maybe but without reliable baseload generation we will have blackouts and a grid likely to malfunction. The only reliable baseload generation apart from FF is nuclear. (Unless like Norway you have hydropower in abundance) Renewables have a big part to play but with under and over production on a daily basis they cannot work without either FF or nuclear. Wonder if France will be happy to keep supplying the UK with electrical energy in the future and keep our lights on?
Excellent writing! I believe that society at any level of organization from nation to individual should be responsible for and permitted, even financially supported, to develop, provide, and maintain a diverse variety of sustainable energy sources. We need to start thinking smaller, leaner, and more sustainable. For example home wind generators, which in many jurisdictions are blanket denied under community zoning regulations, should be reevaluated and reconsidered. Wind, solar, nuclear, and other technology should be aggressively pursued by higher levels of spatial organization. Any negative externalities should be identified and mitigated in order to provide and maintain sufficient and efficient power.
I tend to agree with you in part. However, there is one negative externality of energy sources which cannot be mitigated: footprint. Land is the one truly non-renewable resource. And the problem here is that wind and solar use huge amounts of it to produce any significant amount of electricity at all.
And if the concern is the emission of greenhouse gases, then it is immediately apparent that, with reliable nuclear power, there is no need for extensive use of wind or solar at all.
Exactly so. Farmland is for growing food. Undeveloped landscape is for wildlife, not for cluttering up with thousands of bird-slicers and butchering birds and bats by the millions. Western Europe (and now large parts of the United States) are simply insane to ignore the anti-naturalism of so-called renewable energy.
Good thought - to bring this down to an individual level, at least for those who can afford it - not just larger scale. Sorry to hear some areas have denied home wind generators. You may be interested in learning of David Miller's project for developing an affordable home wind generator. He's crowdfunding Seraph Power. https://www.linkedin.com/in/davidbmiller75
GHE theory fails because of two erroneous assumptions: 1. near Earth space is cold & w/o GHE would become 255 K, -18 C, ball of ice & 2. radiating as a 16 C BB the surface produces “extra” GHE energy aka radiative forcing (nee caloric).
Both
Are
Just
Flat
Wrong
!!!
Without the atmosphere, water vapor and its 30% albedo Earth would become much like the Moon, a barren rock, hot^3 400 K on the lit side, cold^3 100 K on the dark.
“TFK_bams09” GHE heat balance graphic & its legion of clones uses bad math and badder physics. 63 W/m^2 appears twice (once from Sun & second from a BB calculation) violating both LoT 1 and GAAP. 396 W/m^2 upwelling is a BB calc for a 16 C surface for denominator of the emissivity ratio, 63/396=0.16, “extra” & not real. 333 W/m^2 “back” radiating from cold to warm violates LoT 1 & 2. Remove 396/333/63 GHE loop from the graphic and the solar balance still works.
Kinetic heat transfer processes of the contiguous atmospheric molecules (60%) render a terrestrial BB (requires 100%) impossible as demonstrated by experiment, the gold standard of classical science.
Since both GHE & CAGW climate “science” are indefensible rubbish alarmists must resort to fear mongering, lies, lawsuits, censorship and violence.
“ without scientific reasoning informing political decision-making, we risk inviting both metaphorical darkness in the absence of logic and literal darkness when the lights go out.”
"...residents in Saxony were told that they could only use hot water for showers between specific hours of the day. "
This is oddly reminiscent of the chaos in Rumania at the end of the Ceaucescu regime in 1989. Because the country could not afford to buy the needed quantity of bunker oil from the Gulf States, Rumania had to cut back electricity supplies to all householders. They were limited to about 8 hours a day of power. The emergency only ended with the overthrow and execution of the Ceaucescus. (The lesson here is that politicians who allow their citizens to be indefinitely shorted of electricity will meet an unpleasant and final termination.)
Rumania's response was to redouble its efforts to complete and start up its two nuclear power reactors at Cernavoda which had been unreasonably delayed by the Ceaucescu regime. Thanks to this, today, Rumania produces about 17-18 per cent of its electricity from nuclear power, whereas in 1990 it was producing zero.
So Zion is right that deindustrialization is not inevitable. It can be overcome by the determination of its citizens. Rumania did despite truly dreadful circumstances. But for those who refuse to learn the lessons of history, the future is one of industrial shutdowns, mass migration of both businesses and populations, economic collapse, and, in the case of truly stubborn, ideologues in power, overthrow by ballots or bullets.
So, Greens of Germany, you have a choice. Continue down the road to your political extinction or reform yourselves and your idiotic antinuclear policies. And a word of advice: Yuri Andropov has been dead for 40 years. You have no good reason to still be doing what he wanted.
Good to hear about the nuclear turnaround in Romania.
Yes indeed. They did it by doing precisely the opposite of what the Green-Socialist governing alliance in Germany has been doing.
And it's not alone in the Balkan nations. Bulgaria had to shut down two of its six reactors at Kozloduy, as it was claimed they were old, unsafe and poorly maintained. It gets about 1/3rd of its electricity from its remaining two reactors. It intends to build two more to get its nuclear share of electricity over 50%. It has much the same energy situation as Rumania, some low grade coal deposits, no oil or gas and dependent on imported fossil fuel.
Bulgaria also is ignoring German Green policy prescriptions.
Great, in-depth, and thoughtful article. I always learn something new reading your posts. I appreciate the insight into what’s going on in Vietnam and Switzerland.
Excellent article and one that makes complete sense. When I read your articles and those of other similarly minded scientists, I'm at a loss as to how the facts and figures portrayed are never challenged by the 'greens.' Maybe because they're uncomfortable to face up to? Renewables is word (like green) that seems to have magical properties. It's often quoted as being cheaper than FF and the bringer of numerous well paid jobs. That's as maybe but without reliable baseload generation we will have blackouts and a grid likely to malfunction. The only reliable baseload generation apart from FF is nuclear. (Unless like Norway you have hydropower in abundance) Renewables have a big part to play but with under and over production on a daily basis they cannot work without either FF or nuclear. Wonder if France will be happy to keep supplying the UK with electrical energy in the future and keep our lights on?
Excellent writing! I believe that society at any level of organization from nation to individual should be responsible for and permitted, even financially supported, to develop, provide, and maintain a diverse variety of sustainable energy sources. We need to start thinking smaller, leaner, and more sustainable. For example home wind generators, which in many jurisdictions are blanket denied under community zoning regulations, should be reevaluated and reconsidered. Wind, solar, nuclear, and other technology should be aggressively pursued by higher levels of spatial organization. Any negative externalities should be identified and mitigated in order to provide and maintain sufficient and efficient power.
I tend to agree with you in part. However, there is one negative externality of energy sources which cannot be mitigated: footprint. Land is the one truly non-renewable resource. And the problem here is that wind and solar use huge amounts of it to produce any significant amount of electricity at all.
And if the concern is the emission of greenhouse gases, then it is immediately apparent that, with reliable nuclear power, there is no need for extensive use of wind or solar at all.
Excellent point. I hate to see our farmland and landscape cluttered with 1000s of acres of solar and wind plantations.
Exactly so. Farmland is for growing food. Undeveloped landscape is for wildlife, not for cluttering up with thousands of bird-slicers and butchering birds and bats by the millions. Western Europe (and now large parts of the United States) are simply insane to ignore the anti-naturalism of so-called renewable energy.
Good thought - to bring this down to an individual level, at least for those who can afford it - not just larger scale. Sorry to hear some areas have denied home wind generators. You may be interested in learning of David Miller's project for developing an affordable home wind generator. He's crowdfunding Seraph Power. https://www.linkedin.com/in/davidbmiller75
Wonderful and original contribution, Zion, as usual. Keep it up!
GHE theory fails because of two erroneous assumptions: 1. near Earth space is cold & w/o GHE would become 255 K, -18 C, ball of ice & 2. radiating as a 16 C BB the surface produces “extra” GHE energy aka radiative forcing (nee caloric).
Both
Are
Just
Flat
Wrong
!!!
Without the atmosphere, water vapor and its 30% albedo Earth would become much like the Moon, a barren rock, hot^3 400 K on the lit side, cold^3 100 K on the dark.
“TFK_bams09” GHE heat balance graphic & its legion of clones uses bad math and badder physics. 63 W/m^2 appears twice (once from Sun & second from a BB calculation) violating both LoT 1 and GAAP. 396 W/m^2 upwelling is a BB calc for a 16 C surface for denominator of the emissivity ratio, 63/396=0.16, “extra” & not real. 333 W/m^2 “back” radiating from cold to warm violates LoT 1 & 2. Remove 396/333/63 GHE loop from the graphic and the solar balance still works.
Kinetic heat transfer processes of the contiguous atmospheric molecules (60%) render a terrestrial BB (requires 100%) impossible as demonstrated by experiment, the gold standard of classical science.
Since both GHE & CAGW climate “science” are indefensible rubbish alarmists must resort to fear mongering, lies, lawsuits, censorship and violence.
“ without scientific reasoning informing political decision-making, we risk inviting both metaphorical darkness in the absence of logic and literal darkness when the lights go out.”
Remember “Whole Earth Discipline”?