eolmstead8137. I agree, as a demonstration of how some people try to manipulate data to make the gullible believe their suit-and-tie actually has merit.
@@RandyTWester OK, agreed, it is relevant. And useful for a laugh, as I indicated. Like a guy defending buggy-whips in 1895. Out of touch with modern reality. PVs are a good deal less that 1/4 of what they were 10 years ago.
@@alan2102X Of course, that's the answer! Because they're equally useful everywhere and everyone has the ability to install them. Except no, they aren't either of those things. You have to store energy for later use, batteries suffer from the cold if solar panels do not. Not everyone has the space or the latitude to install them in the first place. Personally I'd like to have it at least as a backup, but I can't install solar panels where I live. I'm scarcely the only one.
@@zanshikaijin2709 I did not say they are "equally useful everywhere". True, there's latitude. But anti-renewables zealots always ignore the fact that 80% of the world's population is well within the latitudes where solar is perfectly viable. Not to mention that solar is complemented beautifully at ANY latitude by wind: there's more wind in colder weather and when the sun is not shining. Further, even in northern latitudes, power can be transmitted from the south. This will be greatly facilitated by the global UHV grid that China has begun building. It will take a while, but at that point the whole latitude issue (not a strong one to begin with) will collapse completely. Hurry the day!
Even Arkansas is installing 300+ megawatts of solar to make clean power for the new U.S. Steel steel mill even though they have plenty of cheap coal while Texas can't keep the lights on in a snow storm or heat wave. China is about to collapse. Most of this tea party (pre-MAGA) partisan's positions have collapsed right along with it. Solar is now the cheapest power going. Electric cars are the cheapest to drive. In 10 years you won't be able to buy a new i.c.e. car. Man by the time you get 27 minutes into this video the guy is all about whining and crying like a snowflake I can't even finish watching this crap.
Once the climate emergency zealots realise that diffuse wind veins and solar boards only work at about one third of installed capacity, that they increase the excess reserve margin within the electricity grid, that they are parasitical on the electricity grid and that they are a self inflicted wound on the electricity grid, then all of this heavily subsidised, intermittent renewables nonsense will stop.
Yes, this video has aged nicely. My state, California, has outlawed gasoline powered vehicles after 2025, and today, even though we have the most renewable energy of any other state, we are not allowed to charge our electric vehicles on hot days!!! Our state government has absolutely no plans to improve the availability of electricity. MOST of our energy is actually coal generated energy purchased from other states so the books appear to be balanced, but they are NOT. It is all political double-talk.
Green energy is all bullshit ,it is all globalist nonsense. None of it works and climate change is all scare virus nonsense .I say get energy analysis reports and ul see just bullshit
This voice is so much needed today. Astonishing, how clearly predicted, that by following the environmentalism we will be paying for the energy as we do in 2022
It is an example of outdated and wrong predictions. You can see at 24:24 he is working with 395$ for solar allowing for only 10% efficiency improvement. However, in 2022 the levelized cost of both solar and wind cost is less than 50$!! that the cheapest sources of energy to date.
The Global Zionist Jews of Revelations 2 verse 9 plans to reduce population by 95% . Their goal is a total global population of 500 million people and they are impatient people .They dont see the great need for Electricity production in the future . Plus shutting down power helps to eliminate population . No water no massive crops , refrigeration, petroleum production , trucking , air-conditioning , hospitals . Essentially Global Warming is designed to make you and yours UNSUSTAINABLE and therefore you need o die and go away. Its going to get worse . We are in the Tribulation . Face it this is the Antichrist Time .
This is the problem, good people just want to accomplish great things, be left alone to live fulfilling lives for themselves and their loved ones. They have zero interest in controlling people and telling them what to do. Politics and governments attract (for the most part) the absolute worst in society. We need more decentralised forms of government so that the parasites can’t leech off of good people. Essentially reduce government to the absolute barebones minimum at local levels to prevent the monstrosity that all federal and global institutions have become.
and I would add, this means every single one of us should get involved at our most local levels the best we can, even if it’s just a little bit. It’s our complacency and the idea that “somebody else will take care of it” that has led us to this nightmare of a society where now censorship, child mut1l@t10n (and more..), green tyr@nny etc.. are being implemented and forced upon us.
What relevance or point are u bringing in the fact ur an engineer! What's that got to do with the price of bread? Wow ur in software who fucking cares! The ego of u humans is getting unbearable
@@odoggow8157 The point had nothing to do with ego little man. The point WAS to stress to all the geniuses that grew up after every bit of human knowledge was placed at their fingertips who are constantly telling me to "move out of the way, we're transitioning", that some of us have lived the reality and KNOW their computer modeling isn't going to work. So P!ss off.
It had nothing to do with ego bro, it was an attempt at heading off the last person that told me to "get out of the way old man we're switching over." Guess it doesn't work either way cause someone's there to either make an assumption that I don't know what I'm talking about or in your case.... Screw it. Doesn't matter that much to me now anyway. In 20 years I'll be in my way out and all the fools of today will have thoroughly enslaved themselves to the elite.
@@bartsmit8334 So THOSE are my only two options? "Deny" or misuse statistics and arithmetic in order to fool everyone into thinking wind, solar and batteries are gonna do anything other than create an environmental nightmare for the sole purpose of staying in power while taking complete control over the energy sector? (Cause govt does things so well). We used to have this thing called the TRUTH. (That's the 3rd option btw). I'll stick with that. Regardless, I don't have any answers. I just know green energy isn't it. I'd be quite happy to shut everything off tho. Before they bit of human knowledge was placed at everyone's fingertips, people used to be able to think. Now you're all screwed as AI's slowly take your free will.
Makes one wonder how the "algorithm" decided 10 years later that this video should be offered up? It's the first I've seen this in my TH-cam list and I've been researching and consuming the CAGW content for more than 10 years. Could this have anything to do with Elon Musk getting set to take charge?
Good to keep on hand to give to people who are terrified of climate demise. Besides, has ANY GOV'T ENTITY EVER made a science-based debate presentation on the pros and cons of this ideology?? How can a person make a rational decision about this issue without a deep, well-reasoned understanding of the issue??
Enjoyed listening to this very bright and eloquent man. Also interesting where he was coming from re stewardship. That the green movement is anti-nuclear shows how little they really care about CO2 emissions..
Someone stated that our largest CO2 emissions come from sanitary landfills. Interesting to think that CO2 is the indicator of physical wealth (it takes excess to discard).
@@RandyTWester And they can make Electricity from burning it to power Generators. Every Landfill in this Country can, & should have that capacity. Not to mention ,but I will, that it's cleaner than Oil or Coal. And don't be fooled into thinking that excess solar for example will not be bought from your supplier. So what's wrong with making use of trash to make more Electricity? And the Energy grid cannot handle demand now! But you listen to the propaganda from our Government??? CO2 is produced more by China than any other Country.
Very interesting video. In the past ten years EVS have become an important, but statistically insignificant part of our vehicle mix. This has occurred because advertisers, media and government have pushed for these vehicles which are " zero emissions. " The government has done a great job of convincing the public that they produce no emissions at all while ignoring the fact that most of the electricity used to charge the batteries comes from fossil fuels. They have also heavily subsidized both the manufacturers and buyers in order to get more EVS on the road. These efforts, however, were not enough so various governments have begun to mandate only EV sales at some future date, thus forcing EVS to be the vehicles of the future. I smell a rat! Whenever the government mandates anything, there are ulterior motives. I don't think that saving the planet from global warming or human-caused climate change is the primary reason. There is big money to be made from selling CO2 offset credits, leases and licensing for minerals used in EV batteries and more. Follow the money.
All freight train locomotives are Diesel-Electric hybrids, and have been for 70 years. But industry apologists still insist that hybrids are weak. More propaganda.
Agree. EVs are the next cash cow for the motor industry and the Tech behind the power units is largely owned and controlled by the same companies that provide the petrol. If the govt wanted "green" cars they would legislate removal of the old cars and a maximum car to passenger weight ratio. Why have something weighing two tonnes to move a person weighing 0.2 tonnes?!? However. They are the beginning of the way forward.
Al Gore set up a "climate credit exchange" right after he published his book. Of course, the "exchange" was set up so that he and his cronies would rake in millions on the commissions from the buying and selling of these credits! And the new proposals are exactly like that...Millions for the elites, poverty for us. Govt grifters.
they are mandating it because no one wants to be at the mercy of a EV, a plug and a power failure. CO2 is needed by our planet for everything green to live. If you want to kill the planet continue to elminate CO2. Wake up to the fact that we are the CO2 that democrats want to elminate, they are already mutilating the children so that they can not reproduce and killing as many babies as possible up to moment of birth. And then saying its ok to let those survivors die unaided. 4 Democrat governors willingly put COVID into resthomes killing thousands of elderly, and now are refusing to fix social security so that more thousands of elderly die. Wake up, the future is dependent on C02 and elminating democrats.
Wind reached parity with natural gas in 2010. Solar reached parity with natural gas in 2015. Today, both are cheaper than natural gas by 30%. The Texas grid was protected from blackouts during the last heatwave by solar output. Renewables have saved Texans billions over the last several years. The downside is renewables are a distributed power supply. This costs billionaires in land rental fees so they don't make as much.
Cost per MW of generation obviously has changed, so the $ are different, but the point he omitted is capacity factor. Solar has a capacity factor of 25%, wind is similar, while nuclear capacity factor is over 90%, so to get the same energy to the grid, you have to install 4 times the generating capacity to put the same energy to the grid, so the cost of installation is times 4. Nuclear and renewables both provide about 20% of US generation, but the installed generation of nuclear is 1/4 that of solar.
Well, yes. Solar plus backing storage is still cheaper to install than coal is to run. The capacity factor for solar and wind depends on location. In NM, solar is going to work better than it will in Seattle. NM has around 350 sunny days per year. In Seattle it is a chore to keep the ferns out of the lawn (at least that is what I have heard). In the Rio Grande valley in NM, one wind turbine was erected as an experiment as requested by a local tribe. It failed because the area is in a wind shadow. But in Texas and Oklahoma there are wind farms turning out power almost all the time.
@@johnmcleodvii Yes it does depend on location, but they aren’t any being build up north for that reason. The capacity factor comes from EIA and is national average. Capacity factor for solar can’t get much above 25%, because of it’s only efficient at 100% capacity for about 6 hours a day, slightly more in the summer because of longer days in the northern hemisphere. During night solar generates nothing. In order to have storage you have have generation capacity. That is where capacity factor is significant. To put 1000 MW gas, coal or nuclear plant can put 24,000 MW to the grid in a 24 day. A 1000 MW will put 600 MW to the grid in the same period due to 25% capacity factor. Note that utilities run nuclear at 100% all day long, and raise and lower coal and gas plants to match demand, so coal and gas plants have a far less capacity factor than they used too, but they are capable at running 100% also. So, to put 24,000 MW of solar to the grid in a day, you need to install 4000 MW of sonar, put 600 MW to the grid and put the other 18,000 MW into storage for use when solar is off line or below capacity. So you need to multiply to solar construction costs by 4, and add in storage costs for 3/4 of the generated. There are various sources out there that determine LCOE, I just grabbed the one on Wikipedia. Solar Fixed $830/KW Battery Storage $1,380/KW Advanced Nuclear $6000/KW Combined Cycle (C or G) $1,000/KW Coal w/SO2 & NOx $3,500 - $3,800/KW All those sources has the ability to put 100% capacity to the grid in a 24 period except solar. So using 1 KW generating capacity, you need to install 1 KW of nuclear, coal and gas and each will put 24 KW to the grid in 1 day. For solar you need to install 4 KW of generation and storage capacity for 3/4 of generation or storage for 16 KW. Solar - $840/KW x 4 KW = $3,320 Storage - $1,380 x 18 = $24,840 The cost of solar storage is therefore $28,170/KW to put 24 KW of power to the grid in one day. Solar is 4.5 times more expensive than nuclear, 28 times more expensive than combined cycle, and 6.5 times more expensive than coal, and solar has a design life of 30 years, the other sources can run for 60 years.
A complicating factor which seems to be rarely discussed is the "availabilty factor" of different energy sources. For instance, electricity must be produced to match demand where your home (gas or oil) heating system is close to only burning fuel on demand.
17:00 Growing a penny into a quarter requires a lot of growth percentage wise but at the end we still don't have enough to buy anything. In order to replace fossil fuels withe renewable energy will require massive investments that we don't have.
That's where u mericans have destroyed civilization! U grow food or products, those that grow money are what is wrong with the world! Nothing but freeloading off others hard labour and time
@@paulleverington3453 nah they weren’t wasted at all. If you strive for good grades, one thing college is good for is building your study skills when you first get a spark for learning.
That's because people like you talk conservative, yet you buy all the TV commercial crap that funds the left. Want to meet the enemy? GO LOOK IN THE MIRROR!
@@Inalienablerights15 You sound just like the Chinese youth who screamed abuse at those deemed to be capitalist by the demented Mao. A bit like the US Antifa mob today.
Still relevant today. What I don’t hear today though is what and where will all the clothing, shoe, medical, sport, etc industries do without petroleum based products. So much is made from plastic and synthetic materials. Can you imagine going back to just cotton or linen clothing? Glasses being made with only metal and real glass? How heavy some objects will become if not made of plastic? Cars made of all metal again? Most people don’t realize how much our lives would change or regress.
Excellent, revealing presentation on energy and industrial revolution improvements to human life and the environment. Very importantly, are copies of the charts used available?
Excellent speaker, great talk. The world is more dependent now on hydrocarbons than it was in 2012 when he spoke. Wind and solar are not cheaper, in fact they’re much more expensive and the burden to pay for them rests on the shoulders of our children’s children.
Wind and solar are much cheaper. You just don't notice the investment in oil and gas except in the climate crisis and the endless increase in oil and gas prices.
Yes, thank you, but our Politician's betrail goes much deeper than that, The BIG PICTURE of their Global Government (a large part of which is mass migration to help destroy sovereignty, but most importantly create chaos that only a Global Government can control), this is succeeding in all UN member countries, UN agendas 21 and 2030 CLIMATE CHANGE SCAM< are being pushed by our TRAITOR POLITICIANS. LNP or LABOR/Gang-greens doesn't much matter which UN-controlled Party is in control, we voters just give them each a turn to betray us for their UN Masters>>>>>understandable our young Australian voters say---But isn’t Agenda 21 an old dead agreement from 30 years ago? No, it is not an old ‘dead’ agreement. It is an agreement that is being kept very much alive by all three levels of government in Australia. Although it was introduced to the Commonwealth parliament way back in 1992, successive governments and Councils have been undemocratically implementing it ever since The Commonwealth considered AG21 of such importance that their commitment to this UN program was renewed in 2012 at the Rio +20 Conference which was attended by then Prime Minister Julia Gillard. Details of that commitment were recorded in the outcomes document from Rio +20 entitled, The Future We Want”: When Australia signed up at Rio+20 courtesy of Julia Gillard, we also signed up for the next stage, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG’s) and the post-2015 agenda which is both a continuation of and expansion of, Agenda 21: Who is responsible for implementing or enforcing Agenda 21 in Australia? As then Environment Minister Ros Kelly in the Keating government pointed out when Agenda 21 was introduced to parliament on 26th May 1992, the Commonwealth is the driver of AG21, and assumes ultimate responsibility: In matters of national significance, the States are required to comply with the dictates of the Commonwealth regarding international agreements, hence various provisions of Agenda 21 have become firmly entrenched in State laws. As previously mentioned, this process was further strengthened by the introduction of the 1992 Intergovernmental Agreement on the Environment (IGAE) and the National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD). The IGAE, which was signed by the Prime Minister, all State Premiers, and the President of the Local Government Association of Australia, enabled the Commonwealth to consolidate its environmental powers over the States and local Councils. Is Agenda 21 a bipartisan issue? Yes. Agenda 21 has long been supported by both major political parties and the Greens. Unlike the ALP and the Greens, however, the Coalition did not declare Agenda 21 in their official policy platform even though it has long been supported by the highest levels of the Liberal Party. Is Agenda 21 democratically based, were the people given an electoral choice? No, it is not democratically based and the people were given no choice. The Australian citizens remain ignorant of the depth of the betrayal by past and present Politicians over the past 30 years, the ALP and the Greens show their indifference to the Australian people as they increase their borrowing to spend on UN agenda 21 and UN agenda 2030 implemented onto the Australian people 7 years ago, to create a GLOBAL GOVERNMENT of the WEST by 2030
You mean corrupt Governments in Congress et al who are there too long and pass bills for those projects they have invested in and will line their own pockets with dividends? Huge dividends? REGARDLESS OF IF IT BENEFITS THE EVERYDAY CITIZEN? Like the RINO"S in the Republican party?
Yes, but our Politician's betrail goes much deeper than that, The BIG PICTURE of their Global Government (a large part of which is mass migration to help destroy sovereignty, but most importantly create chaos that only a Global Government can control), this is succeeding in all UN member countries, UN agendas 21 and 2030 CLIMATE CHANGE SCAM< are being pushed by our TRAITOR POLITICIANS. LNP or LABOR/Gang-greens doesn't much matter which UN-controlled Party is in control, we voters just give them each a turn to betray us for their UN Masters>>>>>understandable our young Australian voters say---But isn’t Agenda 21 an old dead agreement from 30 years ago? No, it is not an old ‘dead’ agreement. It is an agreement that is being kept very much alive by all three levels of government in Australia. Although it was introduced to the Commonwealth parliament way back in 1992, successive governments and Councils have been undemocratically implementing it ever since The Commonwealth considered AG21 of such importance that their commitment to this UN program was renewed in 2012 at the Rio +20 Conference which was attended by then Prime Minister Julia Gillard. Details of that commitment were recorded in the outcomes document from Rio +20 entitled, The Future We Want”: When Australia signed up at Rio+20 courtesy of Julia Gillard, we also signed up for the next stage, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG’s) and the post-2015 agenda which is both a continuation of and expansion of, Agenda 21: Who is responsible for implementing or enforcing Agenda 21 in Australia? As then Environment Minister Ros Kelly in the Keating government pointed out when Agenda 21 was introduced to parliament on 26th May 1992, the Commonwealth is the driver of AG21, and assumes ultimate responsibility: In matters of national significance, the States are required to comply with the dictates of the Commonwealth regarding international agreements, hence various provisions of Agenda 21 have become firmly entrenched in State laws. As previously mentioned, this process was further strengthened by the introduction of the 1992 Intergovernmental Agreement on the Environment (IGAE) and the National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD). The IGAE, which was signed by the Prime Minister, all State Premiers, and the President of the Local Government Association of Australia, enabled the Commonwealth to consolidate its environmental powers over the States and local Councils. Is Agenda 21 a bipartisan issue? Yes. Agenda 21 has long been supported by both major political parties and the Greens. Unlike the ALP and the Greens, however, the Coalition did not declare Agenda 21 in their official policy platform even though it has long been supported by the highest levels of the Liberal Party. Is Agenda 21 democratically based, were the people given an electoral choice? No, it is not democratically based and the people were given no choice. The Australian citizens remain ignorant of the depth of the betrayal by past and present Politicians over the past 30 years, the ALP and the Greens show their indifference to the Australian people as they increase their borrowing to spend on UN agenda 21 and UN agenda 2030 implemented onto the Australian people 7 years ago, to create a GLOBAL GOVERNMENT of the WEST by 2030
Variation on the joke I always liked... the short version. A very pias man lived in a home and a hurricane flooded his town. As the water began to rise a large truck from the nation guard told him...get I and we'll get you to safety. The man rolied5... no, God will save me The water rose so much he had to climb to his roof. A man in a boat came by and said.. get in...I'll save you. No the man replied... God will save me. As the water rose even more, he clung to the chimney. A helicopter shouted down game the rope and we'll save you! The man shouted back NOOOOOO... GOD WILL SAVE MEEEEEEE The water rose and sadly, the pias man drown and died. The pias man went to heaven. He met God. He said God, I prayed and prayed. I spread your word, I lived you unconstitutionally. You let me drown! Where were you when I needed you most? God looked at the man with a furrowed brow. Where was I God said with a stern voice? I sent you a truck, a boat and a helicopter!!! Moral of that joke... God is in all of us and works through us. And, everything we need to save ourselves is already within us. Now, I'm not a very religious person but.., I love a good joke...lol. Cheers!
Here's one for the "radical" environmentalists. The Prime Minister of India once said, "My country will lower its carbon footprint when my people have the same standard of living as the people in the West". That's well over a billion people. Never mind the rest of the developing world, that's billions more. We could produce half the carbon we produce now but the entire developing world will never be on the same page. We've done all we can do to stop "global warming" without destroying our way of life and standard of living. We already see the damage the radical energy policies of the Biden administration has done to our country. Enough is enough, one country of 330 million people cannot "save" the world.
Here in Nevada, I can produce unreliable Solar for about $70 per MWH. To make it Nevada reliable, I need another $50. That equation in Europe would cost three times to 5 times that amount, because of much less sun shine and summer to winter shift.
@@troyhonda71 It is a complicated system. Solar and wind are a lot cheaper to produce but the energy can't be stored making it more difficult to use. But many electrical networks can often handle a larger uncertainty if purely run on stable energy. There are also other factors such as subsidies for oil etc. making it cheaper.
@@myphonyaccount What "subsidies"? The oil and gas industries do not have "subsidies", they have depletion allowances, to allow for a depleting asset to replace itself, so we will always have enough. Look up the definition of a subsidy...EBT, Section 8, welfare, crop insurance, etc, are subsidies.
At 24:27 -- your chart of total investment costs per mWh needs to include hydro. It is the pinnacle of insanity when proposals are afoot to remove hydro facilities in favor of wind turbines. Hydro plants can have a lifetime in the hundreds of years. Wind blades require replacement every 20-25 years. The total energy generated by a wind turbine is insufficient for the costs incurred in its replacement. Additionally, the net affect of wind turbines is to alter convective and vertical advective air flows which are the fundamental elements that define climate. Wind turbines have an effect on climate and the large off-shore towers have the greatest impact. Prediction: once we begin to see wide-spread catastrophic failure in wind turbines due to breakdowns in the blades, the Scientists will inform us that these turbines are adversely affecting the climate and need to be taken down / replaced with yet another government-mandated scam.
I disagree on the biggest polluter . Shipping is the biggest . How many gallons of diesel does an ocean liner burn per knotical mile .How many ships in each Navy . few are Nuclear.10/16/22 Let's go Brandon .! ?
They've torn out most of the water turbines. I realize there's maintenance involved with them but pretty much clean energy on any river in our country.
Natural Gas appliances have efficiencies around 90-99% Thermal generators have efficiencies around 33%. The fastest way to drop carbon production besides hydro and solar heating (well placed windows and shudders) is to convert the major power using electrical appliances to natural gas appliances, furnaces hot water heaters dryers and stoves. Well placed windows and shudders. Provide a up to 500watts rms per m² over a 24 hour period of free heating fall, winter and spring. Shudders reduce heat load during the summer. Improving property value. Plesent, economical and provides light during daylight hours. No extra infrastructure required.
@@nanettethompson705 Yes, obvious common sense, grade 7 or 8 physics. It's what the woke joke environMENTAL people should have come up with. I used to own a property with a natural gas furnaces built in 1972, efficiency is 80%. 50 years old. Another property with a boiler built in 1994, also 80%. A Camry Hybrid usually will have a lower carbon footprint in most places than a Tesla because there's coal power plants power a Camry Hybrid. And the money saved could buy a natural gas furnaces hot water heaters dryers and stoves.
Unfortunately Prof. Andrew has not properly vetted his numbers or assumptions. There are so many errors in this work it is hard to know where to start. As a fellow Christian, I find research like this to be disheartening. Just one point to address as a simple illustration - at 25 minutes in, the estimable Prof puts the cost of solar production per MW at $400 compared to Natural Gas at $83.09. His numbers are off by generations in the technology calendar. The current LCOE of residential solar generation is placed at $106 per MW including financing costs. This number is before any incentives are applied - just the straight open market cost of doing business. Commercial and utility scale have now dropped as low as $82 per MW.
+ethan desota HE'S A LAWYER, A LAW PROFESSOR!! He knows NOTHING about the physics or energy, and he is clearly incapable of conceiving a restructuring of society to use less. He is a functionalist economist, his concerns are trapped within the paradigm of continued growth and profit, and he cannot conceive of a world where nobody wants to drive 100 miles a day at 70 mph. He can't conceive of not being "important" enough to abuse the natural world. He probably thinks he wouldn't want to LIVE in a world where he has to raise a dozen chickens. He's an idiot.
You do know that the costs of your solar power generation is being paid for by me with criminally enforced taxation to subsidize the company that manufactures your solar panels. Be happy that I have dealt with the small minded my entire life and decided that you are not worth my mental energy to even remember.
The Professor hit the nail on the head! Listening to what he said about 10 years ago and seeing what is indeed going on, he saw the future. Great lecture, I look forward to seeing your other videos! God Bless you and your family!
We are grossly misinformed about power generation and power use. We don't need nuclear steam Fossil fuels wind solar panels or hydroelectric power plants..
With less than $20 worth of parts, (plus a $200 oscilloscope), anyone can verify for themselves, that the energy synthesis of the bifilar toroid technology used by the Stan Meyer water fueled car, works. Video title: Physicist Steven Jones shows evidence for 8x over unity: circuit and measurements TH-cam channel name: Shameka Loeffler Meyer - Water as Fuel - Technical Brief Search terms: *orion Stan Meyer Full Data pdf* Where does the energy come from? A dipole absorbs energy from the vacuum and radiates it as observable energy. C. S. Wu, "Experimental Test of Parity Conservation in Beta Decay," Phys. Rev., Vol 105, 1957, p. 1413.
They are promising a cleaner future. This includes new, infurstructure, regulations, fees, fines, inspections, taxes. Once this is all in place, the rest will be put off or forgotten because of war or some other reason.
Time has given us resources that are cheap and clean and easy to use". "Our debates are about trade offs not a replacement fuel or cleaner fuel sources" they cost more pollute more and can't meet the needs fossil fuels do.
How can all of us get this guy to a hearing in Congress. To explain this to the policy makers or politicians that the US and the rest of the world would benefit from a new perspective on energy. That we need all sources of energy to continue the development of human kind. I wish this gut would be able to shout louder than the environmentalists. Please share this with others. Please.
Graduate from the school of meaningless factoids ignoring the PROBLEM: Big Oil PROFITS paying for our elected representatives to get elected. get a fucking clue and wake the fuck UP numbnuts.
@@mrunning10 OK smart guy, what do you suggest we should be using instead of fossil fuel over the next at least 50 + years? Are you stupid enough to answer wind and solar that is also paying off elected officials?
@@erth2man Over the next 500 years numbnuts. When a business PhD like Morriss stands up and talks he ain't talking climate or change, he's talking PROTECTING THE FUCKING MONEY FOR OIL AND GAS. It took 450 years of humanity releasing CARBON and it will take another 450 years to suck it back up to less than zero to return the Keeling Curve to where it should be. Ever in your life hear of the Keeling Curve? Not on Fox “News” And you won't hear working solutions that we have NOW on fucking Fox "News" or from this Oil -paid-for Morris bozo. 1. 200 helium bed atomic piles on our coastlines cracking seawater into hydrogen and feeding the grid. (yes an airliner and your car's gas tank will increase in size by about a third) PROBLEM FUCKING SOLVED. 2. another 100 helium bed atomic piles powering the carbon capture plants catalytic conversion running 24/7 PROBLEM FUCKING SOLVED 3. Whoa! Oil & Gas companies do something VERY WELL! And it's called....wait for it....DRILLING. GEO-THERMAL will supply ALL of the planet. PROBLEM FUCKING SOLVED. 4. Take all of those 12,000 fucking ocean platforms drilling for oil and mount water turbines on them. PROBLEM FUCKING SOLVED. 5. ONE solar farm per city in stationary orbit, transmitting, via microwave, into ONE receiving farm. (away from migratory bird paths and airliners). PROBLEM FUCKING SOLVED. 6. and by the way Solar and Wind DO fucking WORK. (got 21 panels on my roof last week, about 1/4 of my electricity for fucking FREE --> could THAT be why the oil and gas brainwashing YOU don't like solar or wind???)
@@mrunning10 There is nothing wrong with solar or wind power.... other than it won't be able to supply anywhere near all that we need. If you think you have all the answers to what we should be using for our energy needs, good for you. Understand however that if politicians aren't getting paid off, you will not be allowed to access any of it. I won't be wasting any time arguing with a climate change religious zellot because you know it all so have a great indoctrinated life.
@@erth2man You MUST work for Oil Or Gas or Coal. OK for our politicians to take their MONEY but not wind, solar, or nukes? "indoctrinated?" "religious?" Huh? PHYSICS zealot, yep! Party On Dude! Living the Life au'Carbon!
Relative cost of green fuel is now much much closer to petrol. The capital and environmental cost of petrochemical fuel not factored into his equation. His comments about cylindra and others are true, but the borrowed cost from future generations of continuing with petrochemicals is vastly higher.
I've seen green energy, it is very bright when it fails.. nothing like a 100k Christmas tree. This gentleman already realized that green energy isn't so green. Coal and oil ,will always be used, the first to get rid of it will be the first in the dark.
Well, that aged pretty well. Modern technologies have caught up somewhat, but much of the underlying public choice analysis is still quite solid. The last example however demonstrates not the wisdom of leaving the solutions to the market, but the need for regulation and oversight. High octane fuel was produced with the addition of tetraethyllead (TEL), making "leaded" gas. This was done to make the high octane fuel inexpensive, but the adverse health effects of prolonged lead exposure were very well understood at the time. Today avgas is the only fuel that still contains lead.
There are several ways to raise octane, even ethanol raises octane of gasoline. Nonleaded high octane fuel is sold everywhere I go. Lead was to protect engine valves and now the valves are made of harder metal so lead is not needed. I don’t know why, but lead is still added to aviation fuel. Most of us don’t have airplanes so the overall amount of pollution from the aviation fuels is not much.
@@bradleybunk6463 You missed my point. At 40:35 Professor Morriss says, "That innovation, which happened totally in the private sector, saved the world from the evils of Nazism. And that is, I think, an example of what we get, the innovation we get, when we leave the energy industry alone." Leaving the energy industry alone got us leaded fuels, even though the horrific effects of chronic exposure to elevated levels of lead were very well known decades before WWII. I have no particular objection to Professor Morriss' position that, as Bernard de Mandeville put it, "Public goods come from private vices." The profit motive of the private sector will do more to advance clean energy technology than will government taxes and subsidies. But this is not an argument for libertarian laissez-faire. Government still has a vital role to play, especially in the protection of public health.
Interesting observation - there will be a massive increase in demand for energy. No matter how much more efficient we make devices efficient the demand will increase. So unless all hope of stopping world warming is abandoned an alternative source of energy is needed. Fusion?
In high school in the 1970s I can remember the smog at football camp in Riverside, California. I can also remember only being able to put gas in my truck every other day. Today, no one even talks about pollution from cars. My truck today, essentially, only puts out carbon dioxide. But gas is so damn high, it might at well only be available every third day. Is something wrong with this picture?
If Electricity, is 50% tax. Will the government really let it go? Where did I come up with the 50% tax number: They tax the land that infrastructure sits on, like it's gold, before you ever have to pay taxes, on the part of your bill, thats paying for taxes. If EVERYONE, was able to generate energy, without the grid, then the government would have a meltdown. we're still paying taxes for the war of 1812. The government never can give up a revenue stream.
The religious elements are off-topic, but he has some interesting things to say about energy and economics. We have paid for the building of "green" things like wind turbines, electric cars, and other things that seem to work according to the laws of physics, without regard for the laws of economics. The basic problem with all "green" things is that they're more expensive. This point might not be obvious even to scientists. A scientist can measure the density, hardness or fracture toughness of a piece of steel, but none of these experiments will reveal how much a ton of the stuff will cost. Energy systems must obey the laws of physics AND economics. A failure to obey either will cause the energy system to fail. These failures take the form of something simply not working at all, for the case of physics, or abandonment of projects or bankrupting of companies when subsidies are eventually pulled, for the case of economics.
+Shawn Grannell The "laws of economics" SHOULD be that these rich assholes can't destroy the world!! There are no "laws of economics", the rich simply steal whatever they want by buying congressmen who make laws tailored to make them rich and steal from the rest of us. No one needs to go back to being a "hunter gatherer", that is no longer even possible as it takes too much acreage per person, but permaculture home, vertical and and community gardening, solarizing and annualized geothermally stored heat gain for bermed and insulated homes, and re-organizing society so that people work close to home, these can permit a technological society that runs on very little energy. No one has to "return to the trees" or any such thing. What we now know how to do technically cannot be unlearned. We are now able to live a sustainable organized frugal life and still have the best advantages of our technology. We only need organize it to use much less energy and we can have virtually the same advantages, we just won't be able to be stupid anymore. Our homes can heat and cool themselves, easily. Any physicist knows how. We do NOT need to commute 100 miles to work anymore. We do NOT have to leave all the street lights on all night anymore if nobody is there. We do NOT have to regard the capacity to flip a switch and command nature to be other than it is merely to show off our power. We are better than that. We can wait to do laundry till the sun shines and the wind blows, merely by planning ahead a bit. We can plan what we need to eat instead of running to the store 5 miles away in a two-ton vehicle for two items. We can have computer sign-up for items and have them delivered to everyone on our block several times a day. We can wear warmer clothes if need be. We can bury our homes in the ground and insulate them. We can insulate the ground around our homes to allow natural geologic thermoclines to rise to meet our needs for warmth. We can catch all the rain and decide for ourselves where it should go or be stored. We can live in communities immune to forest fires because the forest is elsewhere and we have made the space between our homes a small food forest of trellises and nut and berry crops. We can raise each other's chickens and give them our scraps. We can have workshops shared by the community to make all the things we want and only have raw materials delivered. We can keep warehouses of things we don't use for anyone else who wants them. We can recycle everything we use. All these ideas and many more can make the earth a paradise and use very little energy to do it. There is no reason to continue each one of us being stupidly independent and wasteful, when we can need and help one another. The politics of the waste we have been indulging in are mostly the politics of loneliness and greed born of pig-ignorant resentment. We can do away with that. Most of what people don't want to give up is their fear and loneliness, because they are afraid they're the only one.
@@rstevewarmorycom is that why all of Europe (except france) are in fear of blackouts coming this winter due to lack of energy? Why is the UK suffering from energy bills that are 1000$? You do realize that solar power batteries are also bad for the environment right? Every battery is, the label's even warn you to not throw away batteries in the trash for this reason. Solar, wind, and hydrogen technology just isn't there yet to provide what the world uses. To power the Netherlands for example would need a really big wind farm offshore - one big enough to meet most of the Netherlands’ energy needs. Currently that it would require a vast network of 34,300 wind turbines spread over 12,000 square kilometres of the North Sea. (For comparison: a natural-gas project that yields a comparable amount of electricity would need a few hundred wells and a couple of processing plants and power stations, taking up a few square kilometres in total.) That's for when it's windy, what happens when there isn't any wind?
@@TheGrowlingAraknid Gee, I'm a physicist from the solar industry, everything you just said is one shit-sucking LIE after another. When there is less sun, there is wind at night, they complement each other. Denmark is nearly carbon free. Who pays you to lie this way? France is shutting down reactors one after another and going wind and solar to replace them.
QUESTION: WHAT PERCENTAGE OF FOSSIL FUELS CONTAIN FOSSILS? ANSWER: ABSOLUTELY ZERO MEANING: FOSSIL FUEL IS A MISNOMER. YOU CAN'T MAKE FUEL FROM FOSSILS.
Morriss has good credentials and is well qualified to speak on energy. We need this type of visionary leadership which is sorely lacking in government then and now. The people that should be listening aren't. I'd like to think citizen journalism via TH-cam helps promote awareness. A BIG thanks to content creators. When the mind is ready a teacher appears. My view is all our energy sources (fossil, hydro, nuclear, solar & wind) will be players on our energy landscape. Extreme positions and demonizing any single source is asking for trouble. Each has its pros and cons which need to be factually evaluated to find the best mix. Energy also needs to work economically and choices shouldn't create collateral damage, pain and suffering. The notion of green energy is a fantasy as all forms of it come with environmental impacts. I'm hoping the pioneers in thorium molten salt reactors succeed in crafting this technology into practical systems that help quench the world's energy appetite. It's sad that 3 Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima have dominated people's perceptions of nuclear power. While France's 100% safety record with nuclear power goes untold. The waitress remembers only the bad customers which is an unfortunate part of human nature. The Biden administration has waged war on the fossil fuel industry. We're going to need this fuel for a time to keep America running and standing strong. It would be nice to attract the best and brightest minds to America for R&D efforts to find solutions to complex energy problems. Instead our government is spending billions of taxpayer dollars on incomplete solutions founded on inaccurate data that aren't ready for prime time. I wish us well moving forward and suggest guarded optimism. So many promises and so little deliverables.
@@sfrahm1 I too remember the Solyndra fiasco back in a time when more people were naive. Perhaps the landscape is changing towards knowledge and awareness. We can hope but there is good cause for skepticism . Mark Mills has some good commentary on energy. The best and brightest minds need to come together to find solutions to tough energy problems. Copenhagen Atomics is one company that's doing R&D. When politics and emotions are the only things driving policies, we're not going to see the BIG picture. At the end of the day, if we can educate people with facts we increase our chances of finding solutions that work both economically and environmentally. Like most engineering designs, it will be the art of balancing tradeoffs since nothing is perfect. We won't meet our growing global energy demands with just solar panels and wind farms. IMHO, we must consider nuclear power.
@@muniac_llc Wind and solar panels are the absolute worst options, environmentally with solar panels being a toxic time-bomb, we have no idea how to deal with. The main problem we face is the false assertion of CO2 being a demonic greenhouse gas, a delusion that has become a death cult. We need more CO2 not less, although the use of coal is a pretty bad choice, though Solar panels are possibly far worse. Man made CO2 is but nothing compared to what the earth volcanoes emit, which is but a drop in the ocean from CO2 emitted by the worlds ocean. CO2 is not very powerful greenhouse gas. Water vapour is thousands of times more potent a greenhouse gas, which I guess would be clouds and water vapour in our atmosphere. I won't even start on the whole Solar minimum and maximum and its impact on our climate, which has and always will change. Alex Epstein is a philosopher and author of ‘The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels’ and ‘Fossil Future’, and makes a far better case for fossil fuels.
This should be made mandatory viewing for all activist groups that are opposed to the use of oil and gas as energy sources! The vast number of protesters are from a christian based background and this presentation is by a christian Professor! It is not on political grounds he delivers it but on economic ones! He only makes an initial reference to the climate in that we are all environmentalists, in as much that we all live in the same world and have to look after it in the best way possible. He also pointed out that we were supplied with all the ingredients to make our lives better, ie Coal, Oil, Gas, Wind, Solar, Water & Nuclear! giving MAN the ability to use all of them for the benefit of all! The Planet has the ability to cope with everything man can do both good & bad!
11:20 "The largest source of air pollution is burning biomass in homes". Why does the US shred our forests into wood pulp and ship it to Europe as renewable biomass?
He should be investing Alage bio fuel. It can be mass produces in wastewater, it can absorb CO2 ( help solve climate change) and be grown anywhere. So it absorbs green house gasses we make, grows better in sewage water(Stops dumping of unclean water), can be mass produced anywhere. I believe that is what he energy future is
@@bradleybunk6463 the fuck you going on about "saving our civilization" for? Just eat a pudding cup and say a prayer and go to bed bro you've been up too long
Liked the presentation , but just a wee quibble: it was not just the improvement in the quality of aircraft fuel that made the RAF competitive with the Luftwaffe. The vast improvements in the Rolls Royce Merlin was a deciding factor. A cursory look at the evolving power to weight ratio tells the story.
Right now around the world, we have idiot greenies trying to push us into buying electric vehicles, not thinking that the average working class person doesn't have the money flowing in to take out a loan to buy one of those EV's, let alone, buy one outright. They fail to also see that electric vehicles won't tow a caravan very far without having to recharge every so often. I want to drive my car say from Adelaide to Sydney via some towns. I don't want to be charging my car for ages when I can fill my car in less than 10 mins...maybe only 7 mins depending on the size of the tank. I want to get to a destination on my time, and that allows time to look around....not time dependent on charging a car. "Oh, but you can walk around the town, while your car is charging". Nope...I prefer me to be present. I prefer to fuel the car then go to a coffee shop for twenty mins, not waiting in that twenty or maybe 30 mins charging, when I could be sitting in that town I am getting petrol at, havint a coffee in a nice cafe, and then driving around that town...then get moving to my next destination. The greenies haven't thought it through, without being brainwashed themselves. They'd rather be dictatorial towards us to satisfy their flawed political ideals. They have an agenda. My daughter is buying a new car. I said as a joke..."I thought you would buy a new EV?" She replied, with a smile "Yeah...funny dad, piss off, I want a car that won't run up my power bills". We both had a great laugh, well my son in law couldn't stop laughing". I don't doubt electric vehicles will improve with age, and be able to drive halfway to Sydney from Adelaide, or even from Perth, on a single charge, or maybe on two charges, towing a heavy caravan, but not in my lifetime..I will be either gone, or in a nursing home. EV's are great for suburban work. Even petrol at the price it is...I am going to keep using my well mechanically maintained and fuel efficient for the type of car it is. I'm not against modern technology but I am a realist.
The most important fact being ignored. If you are a fossil fuel exporting nation, renewable energy bad. If you are a fossil fuel importing country renewable energy good, do not need exports to pay for it. The is also a snow problem, snow free in winter and renewable energy works really well, snow and renewable energy suffers. Of course matters not, what statements are being made, will have zero impact on the China Green Yuan growing lead over a failing US Petro Dollar (those fossil fuel sources are not cheap, they are not clean and they are not easy to use, they are really quite toxic and dangerous). Offshore wind power, with desalination and aquaculture, all benefit no harm except to the profits of fossil fuellers. Better Nuclear reactors better than fossil fuels for snow bound regions. Delete at will, makes zero difference.
O course green energy is just an expression Energy is a physical definition, not an object that reflects green light and absorbs blue and red light . Same with Hydrogen, an odorless, invisible gas, green Hydrogen, what nonsense.
@@terryharris3393 That is the point the code is there to insinuate a moral category, and totally unnecessary for technical discussions which depend on avoiding any and all confusions, also avoiding to use the proper terms, laziness perhaps, but disqualifying in who negotiates technical specifications with legal consequences, especially when dealing with international partners, with translaters present tell a german industrial, you want to buy bugs. They will laugh about it but avoid any negotiation with such an ass further more , a waterreservoir storing potential energy is never green, the wind farm is not green, The most green you see is the rejected spectrum of the light absorbed by chlorophyll, after 2 bands in the blue and 2 in the red, wasted energy. If it is green the plants synthesize glucose, cellulose polymer out of the hated, miss understood co2 in the air, to be exact for every gram of glucose, 1.47 gram co2 must be absorbed by the plant. glucose is turned into corn then used as fuel eventually as renewable fuel nothing green about it other than wasted energy. How dumb, when you talk to the indians in Bolivia who grow, the corn, nice and yellow, they will avoid that half-witted Gringo. Short for greenhorn. But don't take my ranting personally, just seen to many accidents where missunderstanding is a cause of aircraft collisions, and the use of elevation is not to be confused with the indicated altitude on the aircraft's altimeter. Strong winds over hills reduce the outside pressure and the altimeter indicates a higher altitude, with the resulting controlled flight into terrain, in IMC flight, all these are correct and precise terms in aviation
@@arturoeugster7228 No, it does not "insinuate a moral category", it is just a verbal shorthand referring to environmental issues/qualities. That being said, it is also true that there are moral implications to at least some of our acts pertaining to energy resources. For example, the ~9 million humans who die every year from air pollution (mostly fine particulate) caused by fossil fuel burning. Most of us would regard a massive annual death toll like that to be a moral issue, to be dealt with as soon as humanly possible.
Of course it matters - pollution kills. How does cheap energy benefit you if you die before the age of 50 due to air pollution and toxic metals in the water supply? I am totally against the Green hype - (which is actually designed to impose totalitarianism) - but to say that it "doesn't matter" how energy is generated is ridiculous.
@@Philcopson Well, thanks for your opinion. But energy, above ALL else, has to be cheap. In an ideal world, I would agree with you. But it isn't an ideal world, so we just have to get energy for the poorer howsoever it comes. So in that case, it doesn't matter how you generate it. The average life expectancy in the Central African Republic is...52. You could make their lives longer by several means, but that would come at an increase in costs...and that (with all due respect to you) is what you're missing. These people don't have any riches, so energy has to be cheap.
Spot on and timeless! Anthropocentric climate change and the politics that go with that model are increasing the price of energy now. Our current administration and policies have caused the price of oil to skyrocket! Hopefully, we’ll vote for better government management before it’s too late 10/13/22.
The color black absorbs light, so that's not the issue. But did you know that each one of those panels costs $30 to recycle? "Clean, green's" dirty little secret.
Ultimately when it comes to energy,how much does it cost and how reliable is it...You know ,24/7/365....It has to be available at all times, Shale natural gas and oil...
![[Live สด] การออกรางวัลสลากกินแบ่งรัฐบาล งวดวันที่ 16 ธันวาคม 2567](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dNTiBBthKgQ/mqdefault.jpg)
This video should be required for every politician, every high school child, and hopefully every parent and single adult.
eolmstead8137. I agree, as a demonstration of how some people try to manipulate data to make the gullible believe their suit-and-tie actually has merit.
After 10 years this presentation is more relevant now than when delivered.
Lol. After 10 years this presentation is comically irrelevant. Jeezuz.
After 10 years, solar photovoltaic panels are 1/4 the cost and natural gas generation cost has doubled. So it's historically relevant.
@@RandyTWester OK, agreed, it is relevant. And useful for a laugh, as I indicated. Like a guy defending buggy-whips in 1895. Out of touch with modern reality.
PVs are a good deal less that 1/4 of what they were 10 years ago.
@@alan2102X Of course, that's the answer! Because they're equally useful everywhere and everyone has the ability to install them.
Except no, they aren't either of those things.
You have to store energy for later use, batteries suffer from the cold if solar panels do not. Not everyone has the space or the latitude to install them in the first place.
Personally I'd like to have it at least as a backup, but I can't install solar panels where I live. I'm scarcely the only one.
@@zanshikaijin2709 I did not say they are "equally useful everywhere".
True, there's latitude. But anti-renewables zealots always ignore the fact that 80% of the world's population is well within the latitudes where solar is perfectly viable. Not to mention that solar is complemented beautifully at ANY latitude by wind: there's more wind in colder weather and when the sun is not shining.
Further, even in northern latitudes, power can be transmitted from the south. This will be greatly facilitated by the global UHV grid that China has begun building. It will take a while, but at that point the whole latitude issue (not a strong one to begin with) will collapse completely. Hurry the day!
Growing corn for ethanol is a huge swindle.
It takes more energy to grow the corn than you get back in Ethanol The by product is good to feed cattle though
Look into how much carbon was released from the soil from clearing the extra land to grow the corn.
@@stemtosternms4438 The CO2 content is another issue, but yes, it fails on that, too.
Use pig shit...
@@georgedavidson1221 That hasn't been true for decades. Ethanol, for all its good and bad, has been a net energy profit for a long time.
10yrs ago and much of what he says rings true.
Even Arkansas is installing 300+ megawatts of solar to make clean power for the new U.S. Steel steel mill even though they have plenty of cheap coal while Texas can't keep the lights on in a snow storm or heat wave. China is about to collapse. Most of this tea party (pre-MAGA) partisan's positions have collapsed right along with it. Solar is now the cheapest power going. Electric cars are the cheapest to drive. In 10 years you won't be able to buy a new i.c.e. car. Man by the time you get 27 minutes into this video the guy is all about whining and crying like a snowflake I can't even finish watching this crap.
Once the climate emergency zealots realise that diffuse wind veins and solar boards only work at about one third of installed capacity, that they increase the excess reserve margin within the electricity grid, that they are parasitical on the electricity grid and that they are a self inflicted wound on the electricity grid, then all of this heavily subsidised, intermittent renewables nonsense will stop.
lol. The exact opposite is true, if you bother to pay attention to facts.
Yes, this video has aged nicely. My state, California, has outlawed gasoline powered vehicles after 2025, and today, even though we have the most renewable energy of any other state, we are not allowed to charge our electric vehicles on hot days!!! Our state government has absolutely no plans to improve the availability of electricity. MOST of our energy is actually coal generated energy purchased from other states so the books appear to be balanced, but they are NOT. It is all political double-talk.
@@alan2102X You are the one that is ignoring all the facts. You should read his book: it is copiously annotated.
It is good to hear the voice of reason among so many leftist lunacies. What people hate and are afraid of most is freedom and truth.
+Cherubini88 He's a dipshit, and obviously you're a dipshit.
Man. You were one of the only ones brave enough to speak what ended up being right. You're awesome
Green energy is all bullshit ,it is all globalist nonsense. None of it works and climate change is all scare virus nonsense .I say get energy analysis reports and ul see just bullshit
Unfortunately, we haven't progressed out of this lunacy. We're headed over a cliff with it.
@@TheGrowlingAraknid it was always right. It's been a scam for over 30 years. There was never a shred of truth behind the gw bs.
This voice is so much needed today.
Astonishing, how clearly predicted, that by following the environmentalism we will be paying for the energy as we do in 2022
It is an example of outdated and wrong predictions. You can see at 24:24 he is working with 395$ for solar allowing for only 10% efficiency improvement. However, in 2022 the levelized cost of both solar and wind cost is less than 50$!! that the cheapest sources of energy to date.
Dis he predict the gas price slide currently in progress?
@@kc4cvh
X
@@mordin999 Thank you for correcting his misconceptions.
The Global Zionist Jews of Revelations 2 verse 9 plans to reduce population by 95% . Their goal is a total global population of 500 million people and they are impatient people .They dont see the great need for Electricity production in the future . Plus shutting down power helps to eliminate population . No water no massive crops , refrigeration, petroleum production , trucking , air-conditioning , hospitals . Essentially Global Warming is designed to make you and yours UNSUSTAINABLE and therefore you need o die and go away. Its going to get worse . We are in the Tribulation . Face it this is the Antichrist Time .
This lecture is 10yrs ago and is still on target today.
This guy should be Secretary of Energy or Transportation.
Too smart for that
@@georgedavidson1221 - truth my friend!🙌🏻
He doesn't check off any diversity boxes
This is the problem, good people just want to accomplish great things, be left alone to live fulfilling lives for themselves and their loved ones. They have zero interest in controlling people and telling them what to do.
Politics and governments attract (for the most part) the absolute worst in society. We need more decentralised forms of government so that the parasites can’t leech off of good people. Essentially reduce government to the absolute barebones minimum at local levels to prevent the monstrosity that all federal and global institutions have become.
and I would add, this means every single one of us should get involved at our most local levels the best we can, even if it’s just a little bit.
It’s our complacency and the idea that “somebody else will take care of it” that has led us to this nightmare of a society where now censorship, child mut1l@t10n (and more..), green tyr@nny etc.. are being implemented and forced upon us.
I’m surprised youtube hasn’t censored this yet. Excellent presentation sir.
Good question.must have been bored and left.
The presentation is such a fact less and obsolete cocktail of half truths and misinformation that it is good for a good laugh, nothing more.
@@redbaron6805 are you speaking of Al Gore? 😅😂🤣🤣😂😂
Enjoy your fear porn.
@@stanleymcomber4844 Don't worry, when you grow up and pass 4th grade, this will all be apparent to you...
@@redbaron6805 give me the other half of the truths. Dispute what the guys stating and cite your sources.
After 25 years as an electrical/software engineer, the green energy scam really p'sses me off!
What relevance or point are u bringing in the fact ur an engineer! What's that got to do with the price of bread? Wow ur in software who fucking cares! The ego of u humans is getting unbearable
@@odoggow8157 The point had nothing to do with ego little man. The point WAS to stress to all the geniuses that grew up after every bit of human knowledge was placed at their fingertips who are constantly telling me to "move out of the way, we're transitioning", that some of us have lived the reality and KNOW their computer modeling isn't going to work. So P!ss off.
So what is your solution for the climate change problem? Or do you simply deny it?
It had nothing to do with ego bro, it was an attempt at heading off the last person that told me to "get out of the way old man we're switching over." Guess it doesn't work either way cause someone's there to either make an assumption that I don't know what I'm talking about or in your case.... Screw it. Doesn't matter that much to me now anyway. In 20 years I'll be in my way out and all the fools of today will have thoroughly enslaved themselves to the elite.
@@bartsmit8334 So THOSE are my only two options? "Deny" or misuse statistics and arithmetic in order to fool everyone into thinking wind, solar and batteries are gonna do anything other than create an environmental nightmare for the sole purpose of staying in power while taking complete control over the energy sector? (Cause govt does things so well). We used to have this thing called the TRUTH. (That's the 3rd option btw). I'll stick with that. Regardless, I don't have any answers. I just know green energy isn't it. I'd be quite happy to shut everything off tho. Before they bit of human knowledge was placed at everyone's fingertips, people used to be able to think. Now you're all screwed as AI's slowly take your free will.
Makes one wonder how the "algorithm" decided 10 years later that this video should be offered up? It's the first I've seen this in my TH-cam list and I've been researching and consuming the CAGW content for more than 10 years. Could this have anything to do with Elon Musk getting set to take charge?
What is CAGW? Thank you.
Elon Musk to the rescue. 🙂🙏
I sure hope he is, but I do take your point. 🇺🇸
@@susan638 ~ Citizens Against Government Waste, me thinks.
@@ShunyamNiketana Anthropogenic Global Warming, except I don't know what the C stands for here.
That was a brilliant presentation. If only we could get Washington DC to adopt these principles.
Its against their scarcity narrative. When in actual figures show that it would take over a 1000 yrs to even worry about petroleum decline.
DC is paid to represent big oil and coal.
The people of Washington are making too much money on it..
You can’t expect something like that from a corrupt Biden administration!
Good to keep on hand to give to people who are terrified of climate demise.
Besides, has ANY GOV'T ENTITY EVER made a science-based debate presentation on the pros and cons of this ideology?? How can a person make a rational decision about this issue without a deep, well-reasoned understanding of the issue??
Enjoyed listening to this very bright and eloquent man. Also interesting where he was coming from re stewardship. That the green movement is anti-nuclear shows how little they really care about CO2 emissions..
Interesting fact is that Greenpeace was notoriously pro-nuclear when it was first founded.
Someone stated that our largest CO2 emissions come from sanitary landfills. Interesting to think that CO2 is the indicator of physical wealth (it takes excess to discard).
@@bradleybunk6463 Not CO2, methane. And they can spot the methane from satellites.
That's because it's propaganda
@@RandyTWester And they can make Electricity from burning it to power Generators. Every Landfill in this Country can, & should have that capacity. Not to mention ,but I will, that it's cleaner than Oil or Coal. And don't be fooled into thinking that excess solar for example will not be bought from your supplier. So what's wrong with making use of trash to make more Electricity? And the Energy grid cannot handle demand now! But you listen to the propaganda from our Government??? CO2 is produced more by China than any other Country.
Very interesting video. In the past ten years EVS have become an important, but statistically insignificant part of our vehicle mix. This has occurred because advertisers, media and government have pushed for these vehicles which are " zero emissions. " The government has done a great job of convincing the public that they produce no emissions at all while ignoring the fact that most of the electricity used to charge the batteries comes from fossil fuels. They have also heavily subsidized both the manufacturers and buyers in order to get more EVS on the road. These efforts, however, were not enough so various governments have begun to mandate only EV sales at some future date, thus forcing EVS to be the vehicles of the future. I smell a rat! Whenever the government mandates anything, there are ulterior motives. I don't think that saving the planet from global warming or human-caused climate change is the primary reason. There is big money to be made from selling CO2 offset credits, leases and licensing for minerals used in EV batteries and more. Follow the money.
All freight train locomotives are Diesel-Electric hybrids, and have been for 70 years. But industry apologists still insist that hybrids are weak. More propaganda.
Agree. EVs are the next cash cow for the motor industry and the Tech behind the power units is largely owned and controlled by the same companies that provide the petrol.
If the govt wanted "green" cars they would legislate removal of the old cars and a maximum car to passenger weight ratio.
Why have something weighing two tonnes to move a person weighing 0.2 tonnes?!?
However.
They are the beginning of the way forward.
Al Gore set up a "climate credit exchange" right after he published his book. Of course, the "exchange" was set up so that he and his cronies would rake in millions on the commissions from the buying and selling of these credits! And the new proposals are exactly like that...Millions for the elites, poverty for us. Govt grifters.
they are mandating it because no one wants to be at the mercy of a EV, a plug and a power failure. CO2 is needed by our planet for everything green to live. If you want to kill the planet continue to elminate CO2. Wake up to the fact that we are the CO2 that democrats want to elminate, they are already mutilating the children so that they can not reproduce and killing as many babies as possible up to moment of birth. And then saying its ok to let those survivors die unaided. 4 Democrat governors willingly put COVID into resthomes killing thousands of elderly, and now are refusing to fix social security so that more thousands of elderly die. Wake up, the future is dependent on C02 and elminating democrats.
Wind reached parity with natural gas in 2010. Solar reached parity with natural gas in 2015. Today, both are cheaper than natural gas by 30%. The Texas grid was protected from blackouts during the last heatwave by solar output. Renewables have saved Texans billions over the last several years. The downside is renewables are a distributed power supply. This costs billionaires in land rental fees so they don't make as much.
Cost per MW of generation obviously has changed, so the $ are different, but the point he omitted is capacity factor. Solar has a capacity factor of 25%, wind is similar, while nuclear capacity factor is over 90%, so to get the same energy to the grid, you have to install 4 times the generating capacity to put the same energy to the grid, so the cost of installation is times 4.
Nuclear and renewables both provide about 20% of US generation, but the installed generation of nuclear is 1/4 that of solar.
Do u like wasting ur time stating what is known by most rational minds!
@@odoggow8157
Most advocates for renewables don’t know that, but then again you did say rational minds.
Well, yes. Solar plus backing storage is still cheaper to install than coal is to run. The capacity factor for solar and wind depends on location. In NM, solar is going to work better than it will in Seattle. NM has around 350 sunny days per year. In Seattle it is a chore to keep the ferns out of the lawn (at least that is what I have heard). In the Rio Grande valley in NM, one wind turbine was erected as an experiment as requested by a local tribe. It failed because the area is in a wind shadow. But in Texas and Oklahoma there are wind farms turning out power almost all the time.
@@johnmcleodvii
Yes it does depend on location, but they aren’t any being build up north for that reason.
The capacity factor comes from EIA and is national average. Capacity factor for solar can’t get much above 25%, because of it’s only efficient at 100% capacity for about 6 hours a day, slightly more in the summer because of longer days in the northern hemisphere. During night solar generates nothing.
In order to have storage you have have generation capacity. That is where capacity factor is significant. To put 1000 MW gas, coal or nuclear plant can put 24,000 MW to the grid in a 24 day.
A 1000 MW will put 600 MW to the grid in the same period due to 25% capacity factor. Note that utilities run nuclear at 100% all day long, and raise and lower coal and gas plants to match demand, so coal and gas plants have a far less capacity factor than they used too, but they are capable at running 100% also.
So, to put 24,000 MW of solar to the grid in a day, you need to install 4000 MW of sonar, put 600 MW to the grid and put the other 18,000 MW into storage for use when solar is off line or below capacity.
So you need to multiply to solar construction costs by 4, and add in storage costs for 3/4 of the generated.
There are various sources out there that determine LCOE, I just grabbed the one on Wikipedia.
Solar Fixed $830/KW
Battery Storage $1,380/KW
Advanced Nuclear $6000/KW
Combined Cycle (C or G) $1,000/KW
Coal w/SO2 & NOx $3,500 - $3,800/KW
All those sources has the ability to put 100% capacity to the grid in a 24 period except solar.
So using 1 KW generating capacity, you need to install 1 KW of nuclear, coal and gas and each will put 24 KW to the grid in 1 day.
For solar you need to install 4 KW of generation and storage capacity for 3/4 of generation or storage for 16 KW.
Solar - $840/KW x 4 KW = $3,320
Storage - $1,380 x 18 = $24,840
The cost of solar storage is therefore $28,170/KW to put 24 KW of power to the grid in one day.
Solar is 4.5 times more expensive than nuclear, 28 times more expensive than combined cycle, and 6.5 times more expensive than coal, and solar has a design life of 30 years, the other sources can run for 60 years.
A complicating factor which seems to be rarely discussed is the "availabilty factor" of different energy sources. For instance, electricity must be produced to match demand where your home (gas or oil) heating system is close to only burning fuel on demand.
17:00 Growing a penny into a quarter requires a lot of growth percentage wise but at the end we still don't have enough to buy anything. In order to replace fossil fuels withe renewable energy will require massive investments that we don't have.
That's where u mericans have destroyed civilization! U grow food or products, those that grow money are what is wrong with the world! Nothing but freeloading off others hard labour and time
Since it costs less to install a GW of solar with backing storage than it does to run a coal plant for a year, this is no longer true.
The last 10 years have shown that his projections were spot on.
One of the best talks on energy I have ever heard. Well done sir!!
Utube . A funny thin happened to me on the way to the new green deal . its good and funny .
In my case, it's the best presentation. And, this many years later still so spot on accurate and relevant!
The economic reality has changed completely in the last 10 years.
Brilliant presentation. All world leaders should be forced to watch it.
They'd just ignore it or tell YT to quash it.
100% 😇😇😇🥰🥰🥰
I swear you get a better education reading books and watching lectures on your own than a four year college.
Those in education are often not qualified to identify what is real from fiction but generally a rational mind can yes.
You did 4 years of college? If not how would you know?
@@paulleverington3453 more like 3.5 but yeah. I never finished because I have 4 kids and went straight to work.
Well I hope you got something out of those three and a half years and don't feel they were wasted
@@paulleverington3453 nah they weren’t wasted at all. If you strive for good grades, one thing college is good for is building your study skills when you first get a spark for learning.
"The Climate Fix" by Roger Pielke and "Power Hungry" by Robert Bryce are 2 other good books on the topic.
Excellent presentation of the facts, thank you for sharing 🙏
I like that he said whatever new technology would not be invented by the government! 😅 So true!
Are these red hat "MAGA facts" like injecting bleach to cure Covid-19?
This video needs more views, 84k too low for such a gem
It’s 142,077 at 08:08 PST (California). Algorithms.🤯
This guy is seriously impressive. Like his humour too😄
TH-cam suppression
Indeed; dated (now) but as principled, practical and applicable as when first delivered. Thank you Professor Morriss.
He never factored subsidies for gasoline and nuclear
What a refreshing lecture to hear in 2022 when the Western World is doing "The Great Leap Backwards".
Is there a transcript of the video?
That's because people like you talk conservative, yet you buy all the TV commercial crap that funds the left. Want to meet the enemy? GO LOOK IN THE MIRROR!
@@Inalienablerights15 You sound just like the Chinese youth who screamed abuse at those deemed to be capitalist by the demented Mao. A bit like the US Antifa mob today.
Still relevant today.
What I don’t hear today though is what and where will all the clothing, shoe, medical, sport, etc industries do without petroleum based products. So much is made from plastic and synthetic materials. Can you imagine going back to just cotton or linen clothing? Glasses being made with only metal and real glass? How heavy some objects will become if not made of plastic? Cars made of all metal again?
Most people don’t realize how much our lives would change or regress.
10 years on and how right he was
Spot on.
LOVE common sense approach to energy needs in a modern world
10 years later and they are still doing the same things he warned against
Love common sense in everything!
Solar power is already the greatest energy source we have. Not practical ?
A Christian lawyer and common sense aye OK idiota
@@nadogrl Christian don't have common sense! That's a full oxymoron
Excellent, revealing presentation on energy and industrial revolution improvements to human life and the environment. Very importantly, are copies of the charts used available?
It's a shame ..grown adults need this to understand why we need all kinds of energy. Like I was in high school again
A great topic delivered by a great lecturer.
This is like the guy who said "the horseless carriage has no future" a century ago.
Obnoxious,beating the obvious to death
Yup, some times in very polluted cities like L.A, the exhaust from a turbo charged car is cleaner that the air around it!
Yes, welcome to LA , where you can see how bad you feel!
Excellent speaker, great talk. The world is more dependent now on hydrocarbons than it was in 2012 when he spoke. Wind and solar are not cheaper, in fact they’re much more expensive and the burden to pay for them rests on the shoulders of our children’s children.
Wind and solar are much cheaper. You just don't notice the investment in oil and gas except in the climate crisis and the endless increase in oil and gas prices.
Why should the oil industry be subsidized ?
Thank God there are people who stand up and tell the FACTS.
Not this Oil & Gas paid-for clown.
Yes, thank you, but our Politician's betrail goes much deeper than that, The BIG PICTURE of their Global Government (a large part of which is mass migration to help destroy sovereignty, but most importantly create chaos that only a Global Government can control), this is succeeding in all UN member countries, UN agendas 21 and 2030 CLIMATE CHANGE SCAM< are being pushed by our TRAITOR POLITICIANS. LNP or LABOR/Gang-greens doesn't much matter which UN-controlled Party is in control, we voters just give them each a turn to betray us for their UN Masters>>>>>understandable our young Australian voters say---But isn’t Agenda 21 an old dead agreement from 30 years ago? No, it is not an old ‘dead’ agreement. It is an agreement that is being kept very much alive by all three levels of government in Australia. Although it was introduced to the Commonwealth parliament way back in 1992, successive governments and Councils have been undemocratically implementing it ever since The Commonwealth considered AG21 of such importance that their commitment to this UN program was renewed in 2012 at the Rio +20 Conference which was attended by then Prime Minister Julia Gillard. Details of that commitment were recorded in the outcomes document from Rio +20 entitled, The Future We Want”: When Australia signed up at Rio+20 courtesy of Julia Gillard, we also signed up for the next stage, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG’s) and the post-2015 agenda which is both a continuation of and expansion of, Agenda 21: Who is responsible for implementing or enforcing Agenda 21 in Australia? As then Environment Minister Ros Kelly in the Keating government pointed out when Agenda 21 was introduced to parliament on 26th May 1992, the Commonwealth is the driver of AG21, and assumes ultimate responsibility: In matters of national significance, the States are required to comply with the dictates of the Commonwealth regarding international agreements, hence various provisions of Agenda 21 have become firmly entrenched in State laws. As previously mentioned, this process was further strengthened by the introduction of the 1992 Intergovernmental Agreement on the Environment (IGAE) and the National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD). The IGAE, which was signed by the Prime Minister, all State Premiers, and the President of the Local Government Association of Australia, enabled the Commonwealth to consolidate its environmental powers over the States and local Councils. Is Agenda 21 a bipartisan issue? Yes. Agenda 21 has long been supported by both major political parties and the Greens. Unlike the ALP and the Greens, however, the Coalition did not declare Agenda 21 in their official policy platform even though it has long been supported by the highest levels of the Liberal Party. Is Agenda 21 democratically based, were the people given an electoral choice? No, it is not democratically based and the people were given no choice. The Australian citizens remain ignorant of the depth of the betrayal by past and present Politicians over the past 30 years, the ALP and the Greens show their indifference to the Australian people as they increase their borrowing to spend on UN agenda 21 and UN agenda 2030 implemented onto the Australian people 7 years ago, to create a GLOBAL GOVERNMENT of the WEST by 2030
@@mrunning10As opposed to Soros paid, climate alarmist shills?
Very educational lecture. He clearly explains how it’s human nature that deals with problems. It’s certainly not corrupt governments.
Who do you think forms governments? The Lizard People?
Mostly the worst people available
You mean corrupt Governments in Congress et al who are there too long and pass bills for those projects they have invested in and will line their own pockets with dividends? Huge dividends? REGARDLESS OF IF IT BENEFITS THE EVERYDAY CITIZEN? Like the RINO"S in the Republican party?
Yes, but our Politician's betrail goes much deeper than that, The BIG PICTURE of their Global Government (a large part of which is mass migration to help destroy sovereignty, but most importantly create chaos that only a Global Government can control), this is succeeding in all UN member countries, UN agendas 21 and 2030 CLIMATE CHANGE SCAM< are being pushed by our TRAITOR POLITICIANS. LNP or LABOR/Gang-greens doesn't much matter which UN-controlled Party is in control, we voters just give them each a turn to betray us for their UN Masters>>>>>understandable our young Australian voters say---But isn’t Agenda 21 an old dead agreement from 30 years ago? No, it is not an old ‘dead’ agreement. It is an agreement that is being kept very much alive by all three levels of government in Australia. Although it was introduced to the Commonwealth parliament way back in 1992, successive governments and Councils have been undemocratically implementing it ever since The Commonwealth considered AG21 of such importance that their commitment to this UN program was renewed in 2012 at the Rio +20 Conference which was attended by then Prime Minister Julia Gillard. Details of that commitment were recorded in the outcomes document from Rio +20 entitled, The Future We Want”: When Australia signed up at Rio+20 courtesy of Julia Gillard, we also signed up for the next stage, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG’s) and the post-2015 agenda which is both a continuation of and expansion of, Agenda 21: Who is responsible for implementing or enforcing Agenda 21 in Australia? As then Environment Minister Ros Kelly in the Keating government pointed out when Agenda 21 was introduced to parliament on 26th May 1992, the Commonwealth is the driver of AG21, and assumes ultimate responsibility: In matters of national significance, the States are required to comply with the dictates of the Commonwealth regarding international agreements, hence various provisions of Agenda 21 have become firmly entrenched in State laws. As previously mentioned, this process was further strengthened by the introduction of the 1992 Intergovernmental Agreement on the Environment (IGAE) and the National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD). The IGAE, which was signed by the Prime Minister, all State Premiers, and the President of the Local Government Association of Australia, enabled the Commonwealth to consolidate its environmental powers over the States and local Councils. Is Agenda 21 a bipartisan issue? Yes. Agenda 21 has long been supported by both major political parties and the Greens. Unlike the ALP and the Greens, however, the Coalition did not declare Agenda 21 in their official policy platform even though it has long been supported by the highest levels of the Liberal Party. Is Agenda 21 democratically based, were the people given an electoral choice? No, it is not democratically based and the people were given no choice. The Australian citizens remain ignorant of the depth of the betrayal by past and present Politicians over the past 30 years, the ALP and the Greens show their indifference to the Australian people as they increase their borrowing to spend on UN agenda 21 and UN agenda 2030 implemented onto the Australian people 7 years ago, to create a GLOBAL GOVERNMENT of the WEST by 2030
Variation on the joke I always liked... the short version.
A very pias man lived in a home and a hurricane flooded his town.
As the water began to rise a large truck from the nation guard told him...get I and we'll get you to safety.
The man rolied5... no, God will save me
The water rose so much he had to climb to his roof.
A man in a boat came by and said.. get in...I'll save you.
No the man replied... God will save me.
As the water rose even more, he clung to the chimney. A helicopter shouted down game the rope and we'll save you!
The man shouted back NOOOOOO... GOD WILL SAVE MEEEEEEE
The water rose and sadly, the pias man drown and died.
The pias man went to heaven. He met God.
He said God, I prayed and prayed. I spread your word, I lived you unconstitutionally. You let me drown! Where were you when I needed you most?
God looked at the man with a furrowed brow.
Where was I God said with a stern voice? I sent you a truck, a boat and a helicopter!!!
Moral of that joke... God is in all of us and works through us. And, everything we need to save ourselves is already within us.
Now, I'm not a very religious person but.., I love a good joke...lol.
Cheers!
To a pious man, death is not a thing to fear.
@@callmelegendawight8298 No, I imagine one that passed up 3 chances to live wasn't thinking all that much about it was he
@@callmelegendawight8298 I drive a Toyota Pious. 🙏🏻
@@tacey01 Cute. 🤣🤪🤣🤪 👍
@@callmelegendawight8298 So why did he call on God not to let him die?
Excellent Speaker and enlightening information
Speaker, not doer. Talker, not good old boy, common sense, get your hands dirty worker who MAKES renewable energy work.
=Yes true but just look at his resume this man is intelligent par excellence!
carbon is not pollution, oil is not a "fossil", it's a mineral produced by geologic activity
My God, there ARE people on this planet who actually BELIEVE that.
Here's one for the "radical" environmentalists.
The Prime Minister of India once said, "My country will lower its carbon footprint when my people have the same standard of living as the people in the West".
That's well over a billion people. Never mind the rest of the developing world, that's billions more.
We could produce half the carbon we produce now but the entire developing world will never be on the same page.
We've done all we can do to stop "global warming" without destroying our way of life and standard of living.
We already see the damage the radical energy policies of the Biden administration has done to our country.
Enough is enough, one country of 330 million people cannot "save" the world.
Here in Nevada, I can produce unreliable Solar for about $70 per MWH. To make it Nevada reliable, I need another $50. That equation in Europe would cost three times to 5 times that amount, because of much less sun shine and summer to winter shift.
Is that 70$ per megawatt hour??. I was trying to figure out what that works out per month. I draw about 2000kwh a month
Translated into UK terms (because that's where I am) that would be about £25 per DAY.
@@fredneecher1746 that’s expensive in USA dollars for 30 days that’s $832 a month. For that 2000kwh I pay about $525 a month
@@johnhardasnails7464 67 kwh a day. That's a lot of electricity. The average household uses about half that much power.
@@johnhardasnails7464 That's around $.26/kwh which seems rather high.
10 years later and this is still correct. No new improvements in green energy.
green energy is cheapest alternative today, much cheaper than fossils
@@lordzeshen if they were cheaper everyone would be switching over to them immediately, yet we do not. Money talks...
@@troyhonda71 It is a complicated system. Solar and wind are a lot cheaper to produce but the energy can't be stored making it more difficult to use. But many electrical networks can often handle a larger uncertainty if purely run on stable energy. There are also other factors such as subsidies for oil etc. making it cheaper.
So we made it to about 90% of all new energy without anything new? lol
Blink of eye needs energy. Excellent discussion to understand how it works.
Thank you! What an excellent explanation of a very important subject!
Outdated information. Never factored subsidies for gasoline and nuclear.
@@myphonyaccount What "subsidies"? The oil and gas industries do not have "subsidies", they have depletion allowances, to allow for a depleting asset to replace itself, so we will always have enough. Look up the definition of a subsidy...EBT, Section 8, welfare, crop insurance, etc, are subsidies.
22:00 car == freedom never has there been a better equivalence between a concrete object and an abstract concept.
At 24:27 -- your chart of total investment costs per mWh needs to include hydro. It is the pinnacle of insanity when proposals are afoot to remove hydro facilities in favor of wind turbines. Hydro plants can have a lifetime in the hundreds of years. Wind blades require replacement every 20-25 years. The total energy generated by a wind turbine is insufficient for the costs incurred in its replacement. Additionally, the net affect of wind turbines is to alter convective and vertical advective air flows which are the fundamental elements that define climate. Wind turbines have an effect on climate and the large off-shore towers have the greatest impact. Prediction: once we begin to see wide-spread catastrophic failure in wind turbines due to breakdowns in the blades, the Scientists will inform us that these turbines are adversely affecting the climate and need to be taken down / replaced with yet another government-mandated scam.
Wind turbines do not alter the climate of the entire planet, dumbass. LOL
I disagree on the biggest polluter . Shipping is the biggest . How many gallons of diesel does an ocean liner burn per knotical mile .How many ships in each Navy . few are Nuclear.10/16/22
Let's go Brandon .! ?
That was a great lecture.
Propaganda, written by scared industrialists and parroted by industry shills like this moron.
Great pro-industry propaganda.
@@Inalienablerights15 “Pro-industry”
That’s relative, isn’t it?
Any industry subsidized by government is “pro-industry”, genius.
This is like the guy who said "the horseless carriage has no future" a century ago.
Nice to see someone who looks at what we have been given to use !!
Given by the sun idiota
Thanks 😊 🙏 again professor Andrew Morriss. Very helpful, enjoyable and TRUTHFUL.
And outdated
@@myphonyaccount Explain how that is applicable?
They've torn out most of the water turbines. I realize there's maintenance involved with them but pretty much clean energy on any river in our country.
They did that here in Rockford. They use to have turbine on Rock River.
How much energy do we save if we mandated that all clothes must be replaced with solar clothes driers (clotheslines)?
If the truth hurts, bear it.
Christians deny most truths
Don't embrace change. Embrace improvement. I hope that is clear. Thank you.
Does anybody know where I can find that wealth throughout history graph online and the research that went into it? Thanks.
Useess statistics are usless statistics, u can make any side of an argument using the exact same statistics! Statistics are not evidence of anything
"Most of the debate.... is occurring without reference to facts"
Yeah but that's how u religious lunatics role
Natural Gas appliances have efficiencies around 90-99% Thermal generators have efficiencies around 33%. The fastest way to drop carbon production besides hydro and solar heating (well placed windows and shudders) is to convert the major power using electrical appliances to natural gas appliances, furnaces hot water heaters dryers and stoves.
Well placed windows and shudders. Provide a up to 500watts rms per m² over a 24 hour period of free heating fall, winter and spring. Shudders reduce heat load during the summer. Improving property value. Plesent, economical and provides light during daylight hours. No extra infrastructure required.
That sounds like good common sense, well said !
@@nanettethompson705 Yes, obvious common sense, grade 7 or 8 physics. It's what the woke joke environMENTAL people should have come up with. I used to own a property with a natural gas furnaces built in 1972, efficiency is 80%. 50 years old.
Another property with a boiler built in 1994, also 80%.
A Camry Hybrid usually will have a lower carbon footprint in most places than a Tesla because there's coal power plants power a Camry Hybrid. And the money saved could buy a natural gas furnaces hot water heaters dryers and stoves.
Unfortunately Prof. Andrew has not properly vetted his numbers or assumptions. There are so many errors in this work it is hard to know where to start. As a fellow Christian, I find research like this to be disheartening. Just one point to address as a simple illustration - at 25 minutes in, the estimable Prof puts the cost of solar production per MW at $400 compared to Natural Gas at $83.09. His numbers are off by generations in the technology calendar. The current LCOE of residential solar generation is placed at $106 per MW including financing costs. This number is before any incentives are applied - just the straight open market cost of doing business. Commercial and utility scale have now dropped as low as $82 per MW.
+ethan desota HE'S A LAWYER, A LAW PROFESSOR!! He knows NOTHING about the physics or energy, and he is clearly incapable of conceiving a restructuring of society to use less. He is a functionalist economist, his concerns are trapped within the paradigm of continued growth and profit, and he cannot conceive of a world where nobody wants to drive 100 miles a day at 70 mph. He can't conceive of not being "important" enough to abuse the natural world. He probably thinks he wouldn't want to LIVE in a world where he has to raise a dozen chickens. He's an idiot.
How's it feel knowing time proved him right
Good to know that Solar works at night, and Wind when the wind isn't blowing.
@@rstevewarmorycom You should be made to clear solar panels of snow in Winter.
You do know that the costs of your solar power generation is being paid for by me with criminally enforced taxation to subsidize the company that manufactures your solar panels. Be happy that I have dealt with the small minded my entire life and decided that you are not worth my mental energy to even remember.
Start to finish engaging topic and knowledgeable, too! Thank You for posting this which was well worth watching.
Too bad it's outdated
The Professor hit the nail on the head! Listening to what he said about 10 years ago and seeing what is indeed going on, he saw the future. Great lecture, I look forward to seeing your other videos!
God Bless you and your family!
Nothing he said aged well
What a great lecture, too bad politicians can’t understand it.
We are grossly misinformed about power generation and power use. We don't need nuclear steam Fossil fuels wind solar panels or hydroelectric power plants..
With less than $20 worth of parts, (plus a $200 oscilloscope), anyone can verify for themselves, that the energy synthesis of the bifilar toroid technology used by the Stan Meyer water fueled car, works.
Video title: Physicist Steven Jones shows evidence for 8x over unity: circuit and measurements
TH-cam channel name: Shameka Loeffler
Meyer - Water as Fuel - Technical Brief
Search terms: *orion Stan Meyer Full Data pdf*
Where does the energy come from? A dipole absorbs energy from the vacuum and radiates it as observable energy. C. S. Wu, "Experimental Test of Parity Conservation in Beta Decay," Phys. Rev., Vol 105, 1957, p. 1413.
They are promising a cleaner future. This includes new, infurstructure, regulations, fees, fines, inspections, taxes. Once this is all in place, the rest will be put off or forgotten because of war or some other reason.
12 years later this message is still Gold
"God has given us resources that are cheap and clean and easy to use".
"Our debates are about trade offs"
Time has given us resources that are cheap and clean and easy to use".
"Our debates are about trade offs not a replacement fuel or cleaner fuel sources" they cost more pollute more and can't meet the needs fossil fuels do.
How can all of us get this guy to a hearing in Congress. To explain this to the policy makers or politicians that the US and the rest of the world would benefit from a new perspective on energy. That we need all sources of energy to continue the development of human kind. I wish this gut would be able to shout louder than the environmentalists. Please share this with others. Please.
Now that wind and solar are more economically feasible,: fossil fuels do not have an advantage like they once did …
This lecture should be mandatory for every high school student to see in order to graduate.
Graduate from the school of meaningless factoids ignoring the PROBLEM: Big Oil PROFITS paying for our elected representatives to get elected.
get a fucking clue and wake the fuck UP numbnuts.
@@mrunning10 OK smart guy, what do you suggest we should be using instead of fossil fuel over the next at least 50 + years? Are you stupid enough to answer wind and solar that is also paying off elected officials?
@@erth2man Over the next 500 years numbnuts.
When a business PhD like Morriss stands up and talks he ain't talking climate or change, he's talking PROTECTING THE FUCKING MONEY FOR OIL AND GAS.
It took 450 years of humanity releasing CARBON and it will take another 450 years to suck it back up to less than zero to return the Keeling Curve to where it should be. Ever in your life hear of the Keeling Curve? Not on Fox “News” And you won't hear working solutions that we have NOW on fucking Fox "News" or from this Oil -paid-for Morris bozo.
1. 200 helium bed atomic piles on our coastlines cracking seawater into hydrogen and feeding the grid. (yes an airliner and your car's gas tank will increase in size by about a third) PROBLEM FUCKING SOLVED.
2. another 100 helium bed atomic piles powering the carbon capture plants catalytic conversion running 24/7 PROBLEM FUCKING SOLVED
3. Whoa! Oil & Gas companies do something VERY WELL! And it's called....wait for it....DRILLING. GEO-THERMAL will supply ALL of the planet. PROBLEM FUCKING SOLVED.
4. Take all of those 12,000 fucking ocean platforms drilling for oil and mount water turbines on them. PROBLEM FUCKING SOLVED.
5. ONE solar farm per city in stationary orbit, transmitting, via microwave, into ONE receiving farm. (away from migratory bird paths and airliners). PROBLEM FUCKING SOLVED.
6. and by the way Solar and Wind DO fucking WORK. (got 21 panels on my roof last week, about 1/4 of my electricity for fucking FREE --> could THAT be why the oil and gas brainwashing YOU don't like solar or wind???)
@@mrunning10 There is nothing wrong with solar or wind power.... other than it won't be able to supply anywhere near all that we need. If you think you have all the answers to what we should be using for our energy needs, good for you. Understand however that if politicians aren't getting paid off, you will not be allowed to access any of it. I won't be wasting any time arguing with a climate change religious zellot because you know it all so have a great indoctrinated life.
@@erth2man You MUST work for Oil Or Gas or Coal. OK for our politicians to take their MONEY but not wind, solar, or nukes?
"indoctrinated?" "religious?" Huh? PHYSICS zealot, yep!
Party On Dude! Living the Life au'Carbon!
This was an excellent lecture and you've made even better points!
Thank you,
MARANATHA ☝️✝️🌄
@ Walter Debnam. Yes, Maranatha, Lord come quickly. We need a revival across our country
@ Walter Debnam. Yes, Maranatha, Lord come quickly. We need a revival across our country
@ Walter Debnam. Yes, Maranatha, Lord come quickly. We need a revival across our country
@ Walter Debnam. Yes, Maranatha, Lord come quickly. We need a revival across our country
@ Walter Debnam. Yes, Maranatha, Lord come quickly. We need a revival across our country
Still a great presentation 10 years later. Wonder if he has grandkids yet?
Outdated
Relative cost of green fuel is now much much closer to petrol.
The capital and environmental cost of petrochemical fuel not factored into his equation.
His comments about cylindra and others are true, but the borrowed cost from future generations of continuing with petrochemicals is vastly higher.
I've seen green energy, it is very bright when it fails.. nothing like a 100k Christmas tree. This gentleman already realized that green energy isn't so green. Coal and oil ,will always be used, the first to get rid of it will be the first in the dark.
And by the looks of it, it's a race between USA & Canada. Followed by all Western countries.
Yes, it's inappropriate to ask our children to pay. But they are not asking.
Great job.
Well, that aged pretty well. Modern technologies have caught up somewhat, but much of the underlying public choice analysis is still quite solid. The last example however demonstrates not the wisdom of leaving the solutions to the market, but the need for regulation and oversight. High octane fuel was produced with the addition of tetraethyllead (TEL), making "leaded" gas. This was done to make the high octane fuel inexpensive, but the adverse health effects of prolonged lead exposure were very well understood at the time. Today avgas is the only fuel that still contains lead.
There are several ways to raise octane, even ethanol raises octane of gasoline. Nonleaded high octane fuel is sold everywhere I go. Lead was to protect engine valves and now the valves are made of harder metal so lead is not needed. I don’t know why, but lead is still added to aviation fuel. Most of us don’t have airplanes so the overall amount of pollution from the aviation fuels is not much.
@@bradleybunk6463 You missed my point. At 40:35 Professor Morriss says, "That innovation, which happened totally in the private sector, saved the world from the evils of Nazism. And that is, I think, an example of what we get, the innovation we get, when we leave the energy industry alone." Leaving the energy industry alone got us leaded fuels, even though the horrific effects of chronic exposure to elevated levels of lead were very well known decades before WWII.
I have no particular objection to Professor Morriss' position that, as Bernard de Mandeville put it, "Public goods come from private vices." The profit motive of the private sector will do more to advance clean energy technology than will government taxes and subsidies. But this is not an argument for libertarian laissez-faire. Government still has a vital role to play, especially in the protection of public health.
@@warnerwinborne Agreed. Oversight and regulation, but not government innovation because that is not subject to the democracy of the marketplace.
Interesting observation - there will be a massive increase in demand for energy. No matter how much more efficient we make devices efficient the demand will increase. So unless all hope of stopping world warming is abandoned an alternative source of energy is needed. Fusion?
In high school in the 1970s I can remember the smog at football camp in Riverside, California. I can also remember only being able to put gas in my truck every other day. Today, no one even talks about pollution from cars. My truck today, essentially, only puts out carbon dioxide. But gas is so damn high, it might at well only be available every third day. Is something wrong with this picture?
This is the kind of guy that Brandon should use to make the right decisions. Of course he is beholden to Saudi Arabia and Russia obviously
And China! Junior is all over Shi Jing Ping.
As are u if u live in a house or drive a car !
If Electricity, is 50% tax. Will the government really let it go? Where did I come up with the 50% tax number: They tax the land that infrastructure sits on, like it's gold, before you ever have to pay taxes, on the part of your bill, thats paying for taxes. If EVERYONE, was able to generate energy, without the grid, then the government would have a meltdown. we're still paying taxes for the war of 1812. The government never can give up a revenue stream.
The religious elements are off-topic, but he has some interesting things to say about energy and economics.
We have paid for the building of "green" things like wind turbines, electric cars, and other things that seem to work according to the laws of physics, without regard for the laws of economics. The basic problem with all "green" things is that they're more expensive. This point might not be obvious even to scientists. A scientist can measure the density, hardness or fracture toughness of a piece of steel, but none of these experiments will reveal how much a ton of the stuff will cost.
Energy systems must obey the laws of physics AND economics. A failure to obey either will cause the energy system to fail. These failures take the form of something simply not working at all, for the case of physics, or abandonment of projects or bankrupting of companies when subsidies are eventually pulled, for the case of economics.
+Shawn Grannell The "laws of economics" SHOULD be that these rich assholes can't destroy the world!! There are no "laws of economics", the rich simply steal whatever they want by buying congressmen who make laws tailored to make them rich and steal from the rest of us.
No one needs to go back to being a "hunter gatherer", that is no longer even possible as it takes too much acreage per person, but permaculture home, vertical and and community gardening, solarizing and annualized geothermally stored heat gain for bermed and insulated homes, and re-organizing society so that people work close to home, these can permit a technological society that runs on very little energy.
No one has to "return to the trees" or any such thing. What we now know how to do technically cannot be unlearned. We are now able to live a sustainable organized frugal life and still have the best advantages of our technology. We only need organize it to use much less energy and we can have virtually the same advantages, we just won't be able to be stupid anymore.
Our homes can heat and cool themselves, easily. Any physicist knows how. We do NOT need to commute 100 miles to work anymore.
We do NOT have to leave all the street lights on all night anymore if nobody is there. We do NOT have to regard the capacity to flip a switch and command nature to be other than it is merely to show off our power. We are better than that. We can wait to do laundry till the sun shines and the wind blows, merely by planning ahead a bit. We can plan what we need to eat instead of running to the store 5 miles away in a two-ton vehicle for two items.
We can have computer sign-up for items and have them delivered to everyone on our block several times a day. We can wear warmer clothes if need be. We can bury our homes in the ground and insulate them. We can insulate the ground around our homes to allow natural geologic thermoclines to rise to meet our needs for warmth. We can catch all the rain and decide for ourselves where it should go or be stored.
We can live in communities immune to forest fires because the forest is elsewhere and we have made the space between our homes a small food forest of trellises and nut and berry crops. We can raise each other's chickens and give them our scraps.
We can have workshops shared by the community to make all the things we want and only have raw materials delivered. We can keep warehouses of things we don't use for anyone else who wants them. We can recycle everything we use.
All these ideas and many more can make the earth a paradise and use very little energy to do it. There is no reason to continue each one of us being stupidly independent and wasteful, when we can need and help one another. The politics of the waste we have been indulging in are mostly the politics of loneliness and greed born of pig-ignorant resentment. We can do away with that. Most of what people don't want to give up is their fear and loneliness, because they are afraid they're the only one.
@@rstevewarmorycom how's that going six years later?
@@TheGrowlingAraknid
The world is now following my advice, and, the best places to live, even moreso!
@@rstevewarmorycom is that why all of Europe (except france) are in fear of blackouts coming this winter due to lack of energy? Why is the UK suffering from energy bills that are 1000$? You do realize that solar power batteries are also bad for the environment right? Every battery is, the label's even warn you to not throw away batteries in the trash for this reason.
Solar, wind, and hydrogen technology just isn't there yet to provide what the world uses.
To power the Netherlands for example would need a really big wind farm offshore - one big enough to meet most of the Netherlands’ energy needs.
Currently that it would require a vast network of 34,300 wind turbines spread over 12,000 square kilometres of the North Sea. (For comparison: a natural-gas project that yields a comparable amount of electricity would need a few hundred wells and a couple of processing plants and power stations, taking up a few square kilometres in total.)
That's for when it's windy, what happens when there isn't any wind?
@@TheGrowlingAraknid
Gee, I'm a physicist from the solar industry, everything you just said is one shit-sucking LIE after another. When there is less sun, there is wind at night, they complement each other. Denmark is nearly carbon free. Who pays you to lie this way? France is shutting down reactors one after another and going wind and solar to replace them.
Why doesn't US Department of Energy have information about
Restoration Recovery Time Projections?
Can anyone tell me what that is?
Brother in Christ. Glad to hear you!!
QUESTION: WHAT PERCENTAGE OF FOSSIL FUELS CONTAIN FOSSILS?
ANSWER: ABSOLUTELY ZERO
MEANING: FOSSIL FUEL IS A MISNOMER. YOU CAN'T MAKE FUEL FROM FOSSILS.
Morriss has good credentials and is well qualified to speak on energy. We need this type of visionary leadership which is sorely lacking in government then and now. The people that should be listening aren't. I'd like to think citizen journalism via TH-cam helps promote awareness. A BIG thanks to content creators. When the mind is ready a teacher appears. My view is all our energy sources (fossil, hydro, nuclear, solar & wind) will be players on our energy landscape. Extreme positions and demonizing any single source is asking for trouble. Each has its pros and cons which need to be factually evaluated to find the best mix. Energy also needs to work economically and choices shouldn't create collateral damage, pain and suffering. The notion of green energy is a fantasy as all forms of it come with environmental impacts. I'm hoping the pioneers in thorium molten salt reactors succeed in crafting this technology into practical systems that help quench the world's energy appetite. It's sad that 3 Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima have dominated people's perceptions of nuclear power. While France's 100% safety record with nuclear power goes untold. The waitress remembers only the bad customers which is an unfortunate part of human nature. The Biden administration has waged war on the fossil fuel industry. We're going to need this fuel for a time to keep America running and standing strong. It would be nice to attract the best and brightest minds to America for R&D efforts to find solutions to complex energy problems. Instead our government is spending billions of taxpayer dollars on incomplete solutions founded on inaccurate data that aren't ready for prime time. I wish us well moving forward and suggest guarded optimism. So many promises and so little deliverables.
Mostly agree!!
But quit calling it "fossil" fuels.
That nomenclature was a LIE.
@@hotdjdwray - You'll find this ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuel ) informative on fossil fuel. My research source for whatever it's worth.
I clearly remember the Solendra debacle. We are entering another round of that kinda stuff on steroids.
@@sfrahm1 I too remember the Solyndra fiasco back in a time when more people were naive. Perhaps the landscape is changing towards knowledge and awareness. We can hope but there is good cause for skepticism . Mark Mills has some good commentary on energy. The best and brightest minds need to come together to find solutions to tough energy problems. Copenhagen Atomics is one company that's doing R&D. When politics and emotions are the only things driving policies, we're not going to see the BIG picture. At the end of the day, if we can educate people with facts we increase our chances of finding solutions that work both economically and environmentally. Like most engineering designs, it will be the art of balancing tradeoffs since nothing is perfect. We won't meet our growing global energy demands with just solar panels and wind farms. IMHO, we must consider nuclear power.
@@muniac_llc Wind and solar panels are the absolute worst options, environmentally with solar panels being a toxic time-bomb, we have no idea how to deal with. The main problem we face is the false assertion of CO2 being a demonic greenhouse gas, a delusion that has become a death cult. We need more CO2 not less, although the use of coal is a pretty bad choice, though Solar panels are possibly far worse. Man made CO2 is but nothing compared to what the earth volcanoes emit, which is but a drop in the ocean from CO2 emitted by the worlds ocean. CO2 is not very powerful greenhouse gas. Water vapour is thousands of times more potent a greenhouse gas, which I guess would be clouds and water vapour in our atmosphere. I won't even start on the whole Solar minimum and maximum and its impact on our climate, which has and always will change. Alex Epstein is a philosopher and author of ‘The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels’ and ‘Fossil Future’, and makes a far better case for fossil fuels.
This should be made mandatory viewing for all activist groups that are opposed to the use of oil and gas as energy sources! The vast number of protesters are from a christian based background and this presentation is by a christian Professor! It is not on political grounds he delivers it but on economic ones! He only makes an initial reference to the climate in that we are all environmentalists, in as much that we all live in the same world and have to look after it in the best way possible. He also pointed out that we were supplied with all the ingredients to make our lives better, ie Coal, Oil, Gas, Wind, Solar, Water & Nuclear! giving MAN the ability to use all of them for the benefit of all! The Planet has the ability to cope with everything man can do both good & bad!
10 years ago. Yet government regulations have increased exponentially! Windmills, Solar panels,, electric cars, when will it end? Get government out.
I've just gone green, I chopped down 5 trees today to heat my home for my family, they grow, I feel great thinking we are not using natural gas
Thanks for bringing this to us again.
11:20 "The largest source of air pollution is burning biomass in homes". Why does the US shred our forests into wood pulp and ship it to Europe as renewable biomass?
The largest contact between humans and the air pollutant would be in homes, but the largest emissions would be outside of homes.
burning wood in homes. electric and gas stoves pollute homes less.
He should be investing Alage bio fuel. It can be mass produces in wastewater, it can absorb CO2 ( help solve climate change) and be grown anywhere. So it absorbs green house gasses we make, grows better in sewage water(Stops dumping of unclean water), can be mass produced anywhere. I believe that is what he energy future is
>
That sounds like a terrific technology! How many millions of barrels has the company you organized produced in the nine years since you posted this?
@@SeattlePioneer I know. One. It costs 10,000 USD.
It may be CO2 that saves our civilization. It’s not not a pollutant, but another resource to manage.
@@SeattlePioneer we have produced 10 million.
@@bradleybunk6463 the fuck you going on about "saving our civilization" for? Just eat a pudding cup and say a prayer and go to bed bro you've been up too long
Liked the presentation , but just a wee quibble: it was not just the improvement in the quality of aircraft fuel that made the RAF competitive with the Luftwaffe. The vast improvements in the Rolls Royce Merlin was a deciding factor. A cursory look at the evolving power to weight ratio tells the story.
This Guy is a
genius ! !
No nobi geniuses believe in reality not dellusions
WE WERE BETTER OFF IN PRE-HISTORY. LETS REACH THEIR LEVEL OF CONTENTMENT IN CIVILIZATION.
Green Energy, an Impractical solution to an Imaginary problem.
He would be banned by Big Tech, arrested by the FBI and shunned by his peers today.
Right now around the world, we have idiot greenies trying to push us into buying electric vehicles, not thinking that the average working class person doesn't have the money flowing in to take out a loan to buy one of those EV's, let alone, buy one outright. They fail to also see that electric vehicles won't tow a caravan very far without having to recharge every so often. I want to drive my car say from Adelaide to Sydney via some towns. I don't want to be charging my car for ages when I can fill my car in less than 10 mins...maybe only 7 mins depending on the size of the tank. I want to get to a destination on my time, and that allows time to look around....not time dependent on charging a car. "Oh, but you can walk around the town, while your car is charging". Nope...I prefer me to be present. I prefer to fuel the car then go to a coffee shop for twenty mins, not waiting in that twenty or maybe 30 mins charging, when I could be sitting in that town I am getting petrol at, havint a coffee in a nice cafe, and then driving around that town...then get moving to my next destination. The greenies haven't thought it through, without being brainwashed themselves. They'd rather be dictatorial towards us to satisfy their flawed political ideals. They have an agenda.
My daughter is buying a new car. I said as a joke..."I thought you would buy a new EV?" She replied, with a smile "Yeah...funny dad, piss off, I want a car that won't run up my power bills". We both had a great laugh, well my son in law couldn't stop laughing".
I don't doubt electric vehicles will improve with age, and be able to drive halfway to Sydney from Adelaide, or even from Perth, on a single charge, or maybe on two charges, towing a heavy caravan, but not in my lifetime..I will be either gone, or in a nursing home. EV's are great for suburban work. Even petrol at the price it is...I am going to keep using my well mechanically maintained and fuel efficient for the type of car it is. I'm not against modern technology but I am a realist.
Not only what u say is true but let market drive progress not government bullshit, then the progress will be real not government foolishness
@@maryfries2147 I certainly won't let greenies drive my market thinking...hehe.
The most important fact being ignored. If you are a fossil fuel exporting nation, renewable energy bad. If you are a fossil fuel importing country renewable energy good, do not need exports to pay for it. The is also a snow problem, snow free in winter and renewable energy works really well, snow and renewable energy suffers.
Of course matters not, what statements are being made, will have zero impact on the China Green Yuan growing lead over a failing US Petro Dollar (those fossil fuel sources are not cheap, they are not clean and they are not easy to use, they are really quite toxic and dangerous).
Offshore wind power, with desalination and aquaculture, all benefit no harm except to the profits of fossil fuellers.
Better Nuclear reactors better than fossil fuels for snow bound regions.
Delete at will, makes zero difference.
So how is that renewable energy system working for Germany at the moment?
I wonder how Prof Morriss feels 10 years later and more money spent on the false promise of Green Energy.
O course green energy is just an expression
Energy is a physical definition, not an object that reflects green light and absorbs blue and red light .
Same with Hydrogen, an odorless, invisible gas,
green Hydrogen, what nonsense.
Do you really not understand that “green” is code for renewable, not about the color of something without mass or form?
@@terryharris3393 That is the point the code is there to insinuate a moral category, and totally unnecessary for technical discussions which depend on avoiding any and all confusions,
also avoiding to use the proper terms, laziness perhaps, but disqualifying in who negotiates technical specifications with legal consequences, especially when dealing with international partners, with translaters present
tell a german industrial, you want to buy bugs. They will laugh about it but avoid any negotiation with such an ass
further more , a waterreservoir storing potential energy is never green, the wind farm is not green, The most green you see is the rejected spectrum of the light absorbed by chlorophyll, after 2 bands in the blue and 2 in the red, wasted energy. If it is green the plants synthesize glucose, cellulose polymer out of the hated, miss understood co2 in the air, to be exact for every gram of glucose, 1.47 gram co2 must be absorbed by the plant. glucose is turned into corn then used as fuel eventually as renewable fuel nothing green about it other than wasted energy. How dumb, when you talk to the indians in Bolivia who grow, the corn, nice and yellow, they will avoid that half-witted Gringo. Short for greenhorn.
But don't take my ranting personally, just seen to many accidents where missunderstanding is a cause of aircraft collisions, and the use of elevation is not to be confused with the indicated altitude on the aircraft's altimeter. Strong winds over hills reduce the outside pressure and the altimeter indicates a higher altitude, with the resulting controlled flight into terrain, in IMC flight, all these are correct and precise terms in aviation
Bolivia alta tierra donde en las montañas blancas tiene su trono el cóndor, y no come nada verde.
@@arturoeugster7228 No, it does not "insinuate a moral category", it is just a verbal shorthand referring to environmental issues/qualities. That being said, it is also true that there are moral implications to at least some of our acts pertaining to energy resources. For example, the ~9 million humans who die every year from air pollution (mostly fine particulate) caused by fossil fuel burning. Most of us would regard a massive annual death toll like that to be a moral issue, to be dealt with as soon as humanly possible.
Energy has to be cheap. Without energy, life can be brutal and short. It doesn't matter how we generate it, as long as it's cheap.
Of course it matters - pollution kills. How does cheap energy benefit you if you die before the age of 50 due to air pollution and toxic metals in the water supply? I am totally against the Green hype - (which is actually designed to impose totalitarianism) - but to say that it "doesn't matter" how energy is generated is ridiculous.
@@Philcopson
Well, thanks for your opinion. But energy, above ALL else, has to be cheap. In an ideal world, I would agree with you. But it isn't an ideal world, so we just have to get energy for the poorer howsoever it comes. So in that case, it doesn't matter how you generate it. The average life expectancy in the Central African Republic is...52. You could make their lives longer by several means, but that would come at an increase in costs...and that (with all due respect to you) is what you're missing. These people don't have any riches, so energy has to be cheap.
Spot on and timeless! Anthropocentric climate change and the politics that go with that model are increasing the price of energy now. Our current administration and policies have caused the price of oil to skyrocket! Hopefully, we’ll vote for better government management before it’s too late 10/13/22.
Totally agreed!
For years I've wondered if solar panels were reflecting heat back into the atmosphere.
Each shiny, dark solar panel can get up to 140°f.
The color black absorbs light, so that's not the issue. But did you know that each one of those panels costs $30 to recycle? "Clean, green's" dirty little secret.
Ultimately when it comes to energy,how much does it cost and how reliable is it...You know ,24/7/365....It has to be available at all times, Shale natural gas and oil...
Friendly correction - It should read 24/7/52 or 24/365.
Fabulous presentation 🎉