{"id":268354,"date":"2023-07-19T18:46:58","date_gmt":"2023-07-19T16:46:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=268354"},"modified":"2023-07-19T18:47:01","modified_gmt":"2023-07-19T16:47:01","slug":"true-spiked-a-rapid-energy-transition-will-increase-human-suffering","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=268354","title":{"rendered":"True, Spiked, A Rapid Energy Transition Will Increase Human Suffering"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From ClimateRealism<\/a><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By\u00a0Linnea Lueken<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

A recent article posted on British magazine\u00a0spiked<\/em>\u00a0(stylized in lower case) describes the hurdles and realities of the so-called rapid energy transition away from fossil fuels. The article correctly points out that the infrastructure and standards of living in developed countries depend entirely on fossil fuels, and to reach net zero emissions would involve likely unacceptable sacrifices, and human suffering.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\u00a0spiked<\/em>\u00a0article, titled \u201cThe human cost of Net Zero<\/a>,\u201d written by Ralph Schoellhammer, quickly points out that despite decades of climate alarmism and a push to abandon fossil fuels, the proportion of fossil energy to other sources has not changed much.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Schoellhammer writes that \u201c[f]or all the talk of the advances made in renewable energy,\u00a0the proportion of our electricity production reliant on fossil fuels<\/a>\u00a0has barely changed over the past 40 years. In that time, only nuclear power has declined as a\u00a0source of electricity<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is true for electricity, but it\u2019s also the case for energy consumption in general that fossil fuels are not seeing a global decline in the share of energy they make up. Globally, according to data on global primary energy consumption\u00a0from Our World in Data<\/a>, coal, oil, and natural gas make up the bulk of the energy mix. (See figure below)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

As global energy demand increases, consumption of fossil fuels likewise increases.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The ideal of Net Zero emissions by 2050 could be met, writes Schoellhammer, but the rapid \u201cabandonment of fossil fuels that this demands would inflict misery and hardship on billions of people.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When energy issues begin to arise, Schoellhammer points out that even green leaders like Germany retreat back to burning lignite\u00a0coal<\/a>\u00a0to keep the lights on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On that note, as recently covered by\u00a0Climate Realism<\/em>,\u00a0here<\/a>, companies like Exxon Mobil are beginning to admit that the International Energy Agency\u2019s idealized scenario where the world will reach net-zero emissions by 2050 \u201chas little bearing in reality.\u201d The Exxon spokesman said that it\u2019s \u201chighly unlikely that society would accept the degradation in global standard of living required to permanently achieve a scenario like the IEA NZE.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Grid officials in the United States seem to\u00a0agree<\/a>, with Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Commissioner Mark Christie warning that the United States is \u201cheading for potentially very dire consequences, potentially catastrophic consequences,\u201d in terms of our grid because of a shortfall of power supply as shortsighted politicians demand the closures of fossil fuel power plants.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The renewables that climate alarmists like those at the IEA are most fond of pushing are wind and solar, which also are extremely unreliable when they are needed most, like during extreme weather events, at night, or when the sun is simply behind clouds or when the wind dies down.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Climate Realism<\/em>\u00a0points out the intermittency and high economic and environmental costs of wind and solar makes it unlikely they make up a significant portion of the world\u2019s energy mix\u00a0here<\/a>,\u00a0here<\/a>, and\u00a0here<\/a>, for instance, in the near future. The reality is that intermittent sources of energy, and even some proposed solutions like using\u00a0hydrogen<\/a>\u00a0electrolysis combined with solar for energy storage, have serious logistical problems.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sources like wind and solar are also expensive, despite what proponents claim. As explained in\u00a0Energy at a Glance:\u00a0<\/em>Solar Power Reliability and Costs<\/em><\/a>, and\u00a0Wind Costs and Generation<\/em><\/a>, while their levelized costs may be reported as comparable with other generation technologies, the price begins to increase as the capacity factors, repair\/replace\/removal costs, and extra infrastructure requirements are taken into account, including the burden of an intermittent power source on the grid itself.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Schoellhammer points out that the world depends on products like cement, steel, plastics, and ammonia for fertilizers and industrial uses, none of which could be produced without fossil fuels, and without which, modern infrastructure could not continue to exist.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cIn fact, every step of the proposed energy transition is itself\u00a0dependent on fossil fuels<\/a>. You cannot build a wind turbine without lubricants from oil, a concrete foundation and copious amounts of steel. Just as you cannot make solar panels without polysilicon, a component that\u00a0is immensely energy intensive to produce<\/a>\u00a0because it requires temperatures beyond 1,150 degrees Celsius.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

While it is true that renewables can generate electricity, the question of \u201chow many wind turbines would it take to build a wind turbine\u201d \u2013 from mining the materials to manufacturing to transportation and installation\u2013 is not so easily answered with renewables themselves. As Schoellhammer correctly indicates in the\u00a0spiked<\/em>\u00a0piece, mining and industry run on diesel fuel and coal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Climate Realism<\/em>\u00a0concurs with Schoellhammer\u2019s analysis on the importance of fossil fuels to agriculture, and has reported on the subject\u00a0here<\/a>,\u00a0here<\/a>, and\u00a0here<\/a>, for instance, especially when it comes to fossil-fuel derived fertilizers. Sri Lanka is the best contemporary case study on what happens when synthetic fertilizers are banned, and the short answer is:\u00a0famine<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pointing out the reality behind the fantasy of net-zero by 2050 is a vitally important to making sure the public are aware that there is no such thing as free energy, and especially not fossil fuel free energy, without crippling the standards of living in both the developed and developing world. Schoellhammer deserves praise for shining a light on the continued vitality of fossil fuels to modern civilization, and\u00a0spiked<\/em>\u00a0for publishing this truth, especially as other media groups\u00a0actively support<\/a>\u00a0climate alarmism and the push for net-zero.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Linnea Lueken<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Linnea Lueken is a Research Fellow with the Arthur B. Robinson Center on Climate and Environmental Policy. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

While she was an intern with The Heartland Institute in 2018, she co-authored a Heartland Institute Policy Brief “Debunking Four Persistent Myths About Hydraulic Fracturing.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n
Linnea Lueken<\/a><\/blockquote>