Professor Spits Dummy on Green Energy Story

Professor David HoodThis article was published in our Aussiewatch newsletter 3rd Dec 2014 attracting 64 (s0 far) replies in agreement with one decenter who suggested –  You should be charged with crimes against humanity for publishing Gang Green Engineering.

The author Professor David Hood AM to make such a  statement reflects on his ability to research facts outside his  passion.

You form an opinion regarding the article and the professors response, feel free to comment on this post.

Viv Forbes is a very qualified geologist with vast knowledge concerning climate.

 

The article

gang-green-engineering

There is an incessant chorus from the green gospellers glorifying “renewable” energy and warning disbelievers that continued use of carbon fuels will damn the world to eternal fires of global warming.

Their ire is focused on carbon dioxide, one very minor but beneficial atmospheric gas which is accused of causing more of everything bad: pollution and extreme weather, droughts and floods, snowstorms and hurricanes, malaria and mosquito’s, icebergs and glacier retreat, heat waves and blizzards, declining polar bears and multiplying cane toads.

We are told that using “renewable” energy will prevent all these disasters and produce cheap “clean” electricity. Four points are relevant:

First, carbon dioxide produced by burning coal, oil, gas, diesel, petrol or wood is not a pollutant in the atmosphere, not the key driver of global warming or climate change, but a boon to all plants (and thus all life). It is clean and green. There is thus no environmental or climate justification for punitive taxes on carbon dioxide, or for really silly stuff like emissions trading or carbon capture and burial.

Second, wind and solar power have a role in remote or mobile applications and in domestic hot water generation, but are an unreliable and high cost addition to grid power. Because of their intermittent and unpredictable supply characteristics, the large areas of land required to collect significant energy, and their need for back-up generators or huge batteries, they can seldom compete in a fair market with coal, gas, nuclear or hydro power. Nothing anyone can do will change these natural characteristics.

Third, those who wish to use “renewable” energy or to become independent of the grid are free to do so, and this should continue. But green energy should not be molly-coddled with subsidies from taxpayers or other users, nor protected by extra taxes on carbon energy, taxpayer loans, mandated market shares or propped up prices.

Finally, there is one killer point that has recently emerged.

Google has long supported green energy and had a dream to power all of their energy-hungry computers and air-conditioned data centres with “renewables”. It was revealed recently by their own technical advisers that this dream is a delusion. The fatal flaw discovered is that wind/solar energy may not reduce life-time emissions of carbon dioxide and is unlikely to ever be cheaper than coal. The data collected shows that renewables will barely generate sufficient energy over the life of the facilities to recover the energy used to manufacture, construct and maintain those facilities.

Most so called “renewable” energy relies on the sun, and is better referred to as “in-exhaustible”. But at any point on Earth, wind/solar is more accurately called “intermittent energy”. And to build plants to extract electricity from the sun using wind or solar collectors is a zero-sum game or worse – they may not produce enough energy to recoup the energy cost of replacing those facilities.

Wind/solar energy thus fails its central justification – it is not renewable.

Viv Forbes,
Rosewood Qld Australia
forbes@carbon-sense.com

For those who would like to read more:

Google Green tried hard to make green energy work:
http://www.google.com/green/energy/

But Google Engineers now say renewable energy won’t work:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/11/22/shocker-top-google-engineers-say-renewable-energy-simply-wont-work/

http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewables/what-it-would-really-take-to-reverse-climate-change

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/11/22/Renewable-energy-so-useless-that-even-greenie-Google-gave-up-on-it

Troubles at world’s largest solar plant: production down, gas usage up:
http://breakingenergy.com/2014/10/29/at-ivanpah-solar-power-plant-energy-production-falling-well-short-of-expectations/

The Catch22 of Energy Storage:
http://bravenewclimate.com/2014/08/22/catch-22-of-energy-storage/

 

The Professor’s Reply

—– Original Message —–

From: David HOOD

To: news@sosnews.org

Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2014 12:31 AM

Subject: Gang Green Engineering

 

Hi SOS News,     What a load of lies you publish.    You should be charged with crimes against humanity for publishing Gang Green Engineering.     First off, you are insulting the many honest and very professional engineers working in the solar and wind, and allied clean energy industries.    Now to the article itself, my comments are embedded in red therein:

 

There is an incessant chorus from the green gospellers glorifying “renewable” energy and warning disbelievers that continued use of carbon fuels will damn the world to eternal fires of global warming.     It is not “green gospellers glorifying, and warning disbelievers”,  it is respected and highly qualified scientists telling the truth from their peer reviewed research, and evidence.

Their ire is focused on carbon dioxide, one very minor but beneficial atmospheric gas which is accused of causing more of everything bad: pollution and extreme weather, droughts and floods, snowstorms and hurricanes, malaria and mosquitos, icebergs and glacier retreat, heat waves and blizzards, declining polar bears and multiplying cane toads.      CO2 is minor and beneficial, BUT only in the right concentration in our atmosphere.   See attached review of the science and try to refute that.

We are told that using “renewable” energy will prevent all these disasters and produce cheap “clean” electricity. Four points are relevant:

First, carbon dioxide produced by burning coal, oil, gas, diesel, petrol or wood is not a pollutant in the atmosphere, not the key driver of global warming or climate change, but a boon to all plants (and thus all life).  It is clean and green. There is thus no environmental or climate justification for punitive taxes on carbon dioxide, or for really silly stuff like emissions trading or carbon capture and burial.   Blatant misinformation – see attached article.

Second, wind and solar power have a role in remote or mobile applications and in domestic hot water generation, but are an unreliable and high cost addition to grid power.  Because of their intermittent and unpredictable supply characteristics, the large areas of land required to collect significant energy, and their need for back-up generators or huge batteries, they can seldom compete in a fair market with coal, gas, nuclear or hydro power. Nothing anyone can do will change these natural characteristics.   They are competing and will become more and more competitive in a very short time.     They are a growing proportion of the world’s energy source.   Look at Ivanpah in the US – 377Mw of installed, 24/7 concentrated solar thermal electricity (http://www.ivanpahsolar.com).  Look at the ever growing PV installations around the world, and watch the dropping price of battery storage as Elon Musk builds the largest battery manufacturing facility in the world.   Get real and get with the clean future.
Third, those who wish to use “renewable” energy or to become independent of the grid are free to do so, and this should continue. But green energy should not be molly-coddled with subsidies from taxpayers or other users, nor protected by extra taxes on carbon energy, taxpayer loans, mandated market shares or propped up prices.     And, coal fired energy was never subsidised when it started up?   For 50 or more years it was built and supported with taxpayers money, and then governments sold off our assets to private overseas companies that have pushed up prices to increase their profits.  And the coal miners are still subsidised to the extent of $9.5 billion per year through tax breaks and diesel allowances, etc.  Go throw some rubbish in your street and see if you can get away with polluting the environment.  Fossil fuel burning is the only industry in the world that is allowed to put its waste free into our common environment (the atmosphere)…..  A price on carbon emissions is inevitable, get used to it, and it will show the real price of energy from dirty sources.
Finally, there is one killer point that has recently emerged.

Google has long supported green energy and had a dream to power all of their energy-hungry computers and air-conditioned data centres with “renewable’s”. It was revealed recently by their own technical advisers that this dream is a delusion. The fatal flaw discovered is that wind/solar energy may not reduce life-time emissions of carbon dioxide and is unlikely to ever be cheaper than coal. The data collected shows that renewable’s will barely generate sufficient energy over the life of the facilities to recover the energy used to manufacture, construct and maintain those facilities.   Where did this rubbish come from?   Where is your reference?   Don’t publish drivel unless you source it with a credible reference.

Most so called “renewable” energy relies on the sun, and is better referred to as “in-exhaustible”. But at any point on Earth, wind/solar is more accurately called “intermittent energy”. And to build plants to extract electricity from the sun using wind or solar collectors is a zero-sum game or worse – they may not produce enough energy to recoup the energy cost of replacing those facilities.  Again utter rubbish.  Show me the reference and the calculations to support this.

Wind/solar energy thus fails its central justification – it is not renewable.     “Thus fails…..” ?    You have not proven anything.    You can’t deduce a conclusion without any sensible argument.    It’s all anecdotes and unsubstantiated drivel from someone with his head well buried in the sand.

 

Viv Forbes

 

Have a nice day, and please listen to the science.      Cheers,    David.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather