{"id":286300,"date":"2023-11-03T12:06:08","date_gmt":"2023-11-03T11:06:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=286300"},"modified":"2023-11-03T12:06:11","modified_gmt":"2023-11-03T11:06:11","slug":"why-dr-evans-is-wrong","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=286300","title":{"rendered":"Why Dr Evans is wrong"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

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

\u201c[Kelly] claims building wind\/solar\/storage electricity system would entail costs equivalent to HS2 (let\u2019s say ~\u00a3100bn) \u201cevery year, forever\u201d Right: Royal Society actually says it\u2019d cost \u00a3410bn *in total*, which is\u2026not the same thing. Oops!\u201d<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

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

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

From Net Zero Watch<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By Andrew Montford<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

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

Simon Evans of Carbon Brief is known as the man behind the ludicrous claim that wind power is nine times cheaper than gas, a farrago of disinformation that is debunked in short order here<\/a>. (Short version \u2013 he took gas-fired prices at the top of the market, messed up by taking them in Euros rather than in sterling, and then compared to preposterous figures for wind costs).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Today Dr Evans has declared<\/a> that Michael Kelly has got it all wrong on electricity storage in an article<\/a> in the Telegraph today. Unfortunately, this set of arguments is no less ludicrous than the last.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

His beef is twofold. Firstly, he says indignantly that the Royal Society has said we can<\/em> get all our energy from wind and solar. But this is to refute a case that Professor Kelly didn\u2019t make; he restricted his remarks to saying, in effect, that a renewables\/storage grid would be very expensive.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And it is the costs that are at the centre of Dr Evans\u2019 other beef:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201c[Kelly] claims building wind\/solar\/storage electricity system would entail costs equivalent to HS2 (let\u2019s say ~\u00a3100bn) \u201cevery year, forever\u201d Right: Royal Society actually says it\u2019d cost \u00a3410bn *in total*, which is\u2026not the same thing. Oops!\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

It\u2019s hard to know where to start with this. Firstly, as David Turver has noted<\/a>, the Royal Society figures are based on assumptions that vary between extremely optimistic, and incorrect:<\/p>\n\n\n\n