The renewable energy transition is failing

Asia Times ^

[cymbeline]

“You would know these people were serious if they would support nuclear energy”

I agree. Maybe substitute ‘smart’ for ‘serious’.

[Qwapisking]

And not just the west...but all of the “extra” people on the planet that are of no use to the elite class. If only, somehow, those “extra” people infesting the planet could be turned into maybe fertilizer? No...BATTERIES! Sure looking like the French had the best idea to deal with the elite class. Rolling heads into baskets. Somewhere, somehow some decisions need to be made. Either the elitist class will eliminate the lower class OR..... not pretty but pretty simple.

[FLT-bird]

Its not even a question of intelligence. They plainly do not mean what they say. Maybe the naive true believers/kids actually buy into this nonsense. Its obvious those at the top in governments, the WEF, the UN, major corporations, believe none of it. Its just a money making as well as political and economic power enhancing scam for them.

[Not_Who_U_Think]

And so, we are telling the developing world, “Shame you’re late to the party - all the champagne is gone.”

But not to worry, we’ll be glad to sell you beer.

[DocRock]

You have to cut down the rain forest to mine those rare earth minerals to save the rain forest. Duh...

[EEGator]

France gets it.

Nuclear, NatGas, oil, and coal should be the base for all advanced countries.
Wind, solar, and hydro are regional helpers but should never be base load.

[GaltAdonis]

"...cut down the rain forest to mine those rare earth minerals to save the rain forest..."

.

And after they mine the rare earth minerals they can convert
all of they former mining land to grassland that can be
used to graze all of the cattle that will fart out more
CO² that would help the rain forest grow more lush!

.

/SISDaC - Scientific Ignorance Stupidity Dumbness and Confusion

[GaltAdonis]

The renewable energy transition can't be said to have definitively
'failed' until the news reports of thousands of motorists
freezing to death in the wintertime gridlocks of dead electric
vehicles on the Interstates.

Wait for it - it's coming.

[FarCenter]

Man can change climate, even if he can't control it.

The amount of oil burned each day would cover 20 square miles to a depth of a foot. In a year, that's 20 square mile to a depth of 365 feet. It's a lot of carbon.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has been measured at the top of Mauna Kea in Hawaii for many years. The upward trend of CO2 is undeniable.

The upward trend of global temperature is harder to measure, but the best measurements are consistent with a rise due to the increase in CO2.

All that is science. What is not science are the various projections of ecological, economic, and social harm of various types in the future. This is what used to be known as "futurism", and it has a scientific component but it is also based on modeling, economics, etc. that include many assumptions and estimates.

I can't see that a warming of 3 degrees C would be such a big problem. It corresponds to a shift of about a half of a hardiness zone.

[DownInFlames]

With 8 billion on the earth, what do you expect?

[joshua c]

replacing gas cars is not the plan

it is ban the gas cars then

shut up and get on the bus

[joshua c]

climate control is real

they pretend to control the climate in order to control you

[fretzer]

>Optimistic assessments of the materials challenge suggest there are enough global reserves for a one-time build-out of all the new devices and infrastructure needed

Prof Simon Michaux disagrees

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBVmnKuBocc

[MileHi]

After all, it is the rich countries that have been responsible for the great majority of past emissions (which are driving climate change currently);

Pure nonsense.

[hinckley buzzard]

Disappointing from Asia Times. I thought they were better than this dreck.

[marktwain]

The upward trend of global temperature is harder to measure, but the best measurements are consistent with a rise due to the increase in CO2.

They are also consistent with other potential causes, such as solar forcing and solar wind/cloud formation effects.

The upward trend of global temperature is also consistent with previous rises in global temperature (without man added CO2), at least within the difficulty of measuring global historical temperatures.

Man can change climate, even if he can't control it.

The first question is: How much over what time?

The second question is: Is it harmful?

The third question is: What is the best way to deal with it, if it is harmful?

The models cannot answer any of those questions with any semblance of repeatability or credibility.