Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Science

Showing Original Post only (View all)

NNadir

(34,676 posts)
Sun Oct 29, 2023, 02:00 PM Oct 2023

The 2023 World Energy Outlook Has Been Released. 632 EJ, 15 EJ from Solar and Wind in 2022. [View all]

If you want to know why the planet was on fire in the Northern Hemisphere Summer This Year, it may be useful to look at the following table, Table A.1a on Page 264 of the 2023 World Energy Outlook published by the International Energy Agency (IEA).



As usual, the tables contain the usual soothsaying of the type that predicted energy nirvanas "by 1990," "by 2000," "by 2010," and "by 2020," heavily reliant on investment in so called "renewable energy."

The new "nirvana" is in qualified terms which now says that dangerous fossil fuel energy use will peak "by 2030," which is not to say that they will be as low as, say, 2022, only that soothsaying says they'll stop growing.

Solar and wind combined grew as fast as coal, by three Exajoules, except that combined solar and wind produced 15 Exajoules in 2022, whereas coal use rose to 170 Exajoules. In "percent talk," so often utilized to obscure the uselessness of the solar and wind industry in addressing climate change, coal produced 1133% as much primary energy as solar and wind.

The consumption of petroleum rose by 5 Exajoules from 2021 to 2022 to 187 Exajoules, 167% as fast as solar and wind in "percent talk."

Overall, world energy demand rose from 624 Exajoules to 632 Exajoules, by 8 Exajoules if one has not joined Greenpeace and can thus do simple math. In "percent talk," world energy demand grew 267% faster than solar and wind.

The reactionary "solar and wind will save us" fantasy was never, of course, about attacking fossil fuels, but was rather about attacking nuclear energy, which was alleged to grow "too slow" in comparison to solar and wind, although all the trillions of dollars that have been squandered on solar and wind and which will be squandered on solar and wind have not caused it to grow to the levels nuclear energy, its growth stopped in its tracks by appeals to fear and ignorance, reached in less than 25 years in the late 20th century, around 30 Exajoules.

We can lie to each other and to ourselves, but numbers don't lie. There is no evidence, none, that so called "renewable energy" will eliminate the use of dangerous fossil fuels.

And still we chant on, throwing good money after bad.

The IEA seems to be slowly coming to face reality. A new feature of the reports includes a discussion of critical metals, metals that will be needed to be mined, tearing the shit out of the planet for eternity, to make what is called in oxymoronic doublespeak, "clean energy."

The IEA soothsaying predicts that "by 2050" the nuclear energy output will rise to 48 EJ. If the rise in the use of nuclear energy proves to be that small, not much of the planet will be left to save.

As for the rosy scenarios in the soothsaying about biomass, the IEA seems not to have noticed that much of the world's biomass is burning in place where it grows, and that agriculture itself is badly threatened by extreme weather, droughts alternating with floods.

I trust you're having a pleasant Sunday.

3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Latest Discussions»Culture Forums»Science»The 2023 World Energy Out...»Reply #0