What is complicated is the manner in which the true costs of wind and solar power plants (WASPPs) are successfully hidden from the general public and politicians. There are 'not complicated' reasons why, for every day we are told WASPPs get cheaper and cheaper, our electricity bills go higher and higher. The video made great play about the labour intensity of WASPPs and the same applies to 'material intensity' for every unit of electricity WASPPs generate. What that means is that the capital costs of WASPPs are enormous and, when it comes to WASPPs being able to supply low-carbon, 24/7/365 electricity, so is the cost of green hydrogen fuel for backup gas turbines. To supply 24/7/365 electricity now, WASPPs need to have the same generating capacity of natural gas-powered turbines available for when 'the Sun don't shine and the wind don't blow' and that happens a lot (ask Texas). And by 2050, when electricity supply has to be decarbonised, all that turbine capacity has to be powered by green hydrogen fuel. The P2G2P infrastructure to do this is idiotically inefficient. In the UK, the Government is likely to commit to 80% of electricity generation from WASPPs by 2050. Starting now, the cost is £31.83 billion per year. But because the lifespan of WASPPs is just 25 to 30 years, by 2050, the first ones built will have to be scrapped off and replacement ones operational. So the £31.83 billion cost carries on every year - FOREVER! By contrast advanced nuclear power plants (NPPs), like the Rolls-Royce small modular reactor (SMR) will be operational this decade and by 2030 could be factory produced to reach the target by 2050 at an equivalent cost of just £8.41 billion per year. And these NPPs don't require any assistance from backup gas turbines; they produce low-carbon, 24/7/365 electricity over a 60 years lifespan, with a near certain lifespan extension to 80 years. One way or another, these costs insinuate themselves into our electricity bills. The insane £31.83 billion per year for WASPPs will add £1,145 per year onto the electricity bills of every UK household. That will drive more of the poor and underprivileged into the eat-or-heat category and will kill many, many thousands more each year, freezing to death in cold homes: colin-megson.medium.com/by-2050-the-cccs-sixth-carbon-budget-calls-for-635-twh-year-of-despatchable-electricity-from-d1cac83a213
Look, I've documented a lot for this video, and I did not find nothing about any of these costs you are talking about. Quite the opposite, renewables will lower the energy bills, right now the cost is rising due to the fact that the majority of our energy comes from fossil fuels.
"The sun does not shine at night" is an explanation that is too simplistic. Fossil fuels will be replaced by a combination of renewable energy sources, and the development of baterries with a higher storage capacity will play an important role
This article you posted on Medium, is it your own research or you used other sources? If it is your own have you published it in a peer review journal? If you just made reseach, can you share your sources?
For a channel named not complicated you did a surprisingly decent job of explaining a fairly complicated topic.
Thank you
I am looking forward to watching another informative video on this channel. l hope you will come back strong.
using this video for my essay thanks
I am glad to help
GREAT BREAKDOWN!!!
Thank you❤️
Anytime
What is complicated is the manner in which the true costs of wind and solar power plants (WASPPs) are successfully hidden from the general public and politicians. There are 'not complicated' reasons why, for every day we are told WASPPs get cheaper and cheaper, our electricity bills go higher and higher.
The video made great play about the labour intensity of WASPPs and the same applies to 'material intensity' for every unit of electricity WASPPs generate. What that means is that the capital costs of WASPPs are enormous and, when it comes to WASPPs being able to supply low-carbon, 24/7/365 electricity, so is the cost of green hydrogen fuel for backup gas turbines.
To supply 24/7/365 electricity now, WASPPs need to have the same generating capacity of natural gas-powered turbines available for when 'the Sun don't shine and the wind don't blow' and that happens a lot (ask Texas). And by 2050, when electricity supply has to be decarbonised, all that turbine capacity has to be powered by green hydrogen fuel. The P2G2P infrastructure to do this is idiotically inefficient.
In the UK, the Government is likely to commit to 80% of electricity generation from WASPPs by 2050. Starting now, the cost is £31.83 billion per year. But because the lifespan of WASPPs is just 25 to 30 years, by 2050, the first ones built will have to be scrapped off and replacement ones operational. So the £31.83 billion cost carries on every year - FOREVER!
By contrast advanced nuclear power plants (NPPs), like the Rolls-Royce small modular reactor (SMR) will be operational this decade and by 2030 could be factory produced to reach the target by 2050 at an equivalent cost of just £8.41 billion per year. And these NPPs don't require any assistance from backup gas turbines; they produce low-carbon, 24/7/365 electricity over a 60 years lifespan, with a near certain lifespan extension to 80 years.
One way or another, these costs insinuate themselves into our electricity bills. The insane £31.83 billion per year for WASPPs will add £1,145 per year onto the electricity bills of every UK household. That will drive more of the poor and underprivileged into the eat-or-heat category and will kill many, many thousands more each year, freezing to death in cold homes:
colin-megson.medium.com/by-2050-the-cccs-sixth-carbon-budget-calls-for-635-twh-year-of-despatchable-electricity-from-d1cac83a213
Look, I've documented a lot for this video, and I did not find nothing about any of these costs you are talking about.
Quite the opposite, renewables will lower the energy bills, right now the cost is rising due to the fact that the majority of our energy comes from fossil fuels.
"The sun does not shine at night" is an explanation that is too simplistic.
Fossil fuels will be replaced by a combination of renewable energy sources, and the development of baterries with a higher storage capacity will play an important role
The costs you are talking about are huge, and I think everyone would have know about them by now.
Could you tell me where did you get them
This article you posted on Medium, is it your own research or you used other sources?
If it is your own have you published it in a peer review journal?
If you just made reseach, can you share your sources?
Do you have any financial ties with Rolls-Royce, because from your article it seems so
Excellent information
That you for your appreciation
@@NotComplicatedVideos wlcm
It would make the planet green but would hijack a lit of space
That space could still be used, at least with wind turbines.
Soooo no sources?
I will publish the sources sometime in the future. Unfortunately I kinda gave up on this channel so this is why it will take longer
0:10 0:21
0:10