Comments by "" (@pwillis1589) on "Renewable energy 'pipe dream' comes 'crashing down'" video.

Factually incorrect. At the time of the blackouts in Texas last winter renewables only accounted for approx 12% of energy production in Texas. The primary cause of the blackout was that lack of winterized natural gas and coal production. Even nuc generation was affected. Texas had also removed itself from the national grid to avoide regulation. Yes some wind turbines failed, and obviously solar won't work in snow, however there is a simple solution to that problem as wind turbines in Antarctica and in Northern Canada work perfectly in freezing temperatures.
2
It was only for minutes but for a brief moment in time on Sunday 22 Aug solar energy in Australia 9427MW out produced coal 9315MW. At one point on Sunday 57% of energy production was renewable. When I was born it was almost 100% coal. As a species we can achieve amazing things, look to the future.
1
@wilsonrawlin8547 Just plain wrong, current studies have solar wind and nuclear all with significantly lower carbon emissions than coal and gas. Don't worry yourself this is common mistake as you fail to take into account the hidden indirect carbon and energy footprint of fossil fuels and or place the incorrect price on carbon, these studies also take into account CCS out to 2050. This is not a left or right argument it is a fact based reality. Coal 1000g carbon per kilowatt hour, 450 for gas, 44 solar, 11 wind, and Nuc wins the day at 9. I can't objectively comment on your conspiracy theory of deceptive politics and PC spin as that is a bit vague, but happy to discuss with further detail.
1
@wilsonrawlin8547 Jeez I am sorry I just changed my mind up is down right is wrong all because you say with all the evidence of nil zero Zac nothing that "physics proves it". I have read widely on the subject and yes I can find a blog by an ExxonMobil executive that says gas is the greatest. I provided data you just unable to accept it.
1
@toolegittoquit_001 Sorry I didn't realise you are the font of all statistical knowledge. Next time I read a graph I will contact you for approval.
1
@wilsonrawlin8547 The role of renewable energy in the global energy transformation. Doif Gielen, Ricardo Gorini.
1
@toolegittoquit_001 All mocking aside what exactly of the data I provided do you object to, or consider nonsense? This data was taken from NEMlog which is operated by the National Electricity Market.
1
@soberpickle8195 80% of the crystalline silicon, the electric junction box, glass, plastics, and as you already mentioned the aluminium. ECOACTIV, Canterbury, Victoria. Everything we construct requires resources, however I have read studies that show carbon emissions over the full term or life of the particular renewable are considerably less than fossil fuels, except for nuclear. Nuclear gets expensive due to its regulation costs. I understand your point about anything that consumes resources is not truely renewable, so when I refer to renewables I speak of Hydro, solar, wind, geo-thermal, not coal and gas. Yes at the moment fossil fuel is being used to construct renewable infrastructure but as more and more renewable energy production comes on line it will be renewable energy building renewable infrastructure so less and less carbon emissions. Waste batteries are definitely a problem, however there are companies in Australia that recycle them. I have read articles and studies that show although electric vehicles do cost more and produce more carbon at manufacture Over the term of its use electric work out cheaper and cleaner. You seem to be very doom and gloom, but the future is bright, thanks for your questions.
1
@wilsonrawlin8547 Yes I have no understanding of how anthropogenic climate change and renewable energy became a left/right political thing. Science is and PC is not.
1
@wilsonrawlin8547 You have the memory of a goldfish. I admitted in my first reply to you all energy production has carbon emissions. The reality is last Sunday in South Australia for the entire day 100% of energy production was wind and solar. I never implied, suggested or claimed fossil fuels will not be part of the energy mix so that was just a strawman fallacy you tried to through in there because as usual when your opinions fail, you try any fallacious argument you can think of.
1
Yes it can. Solar and wind can be used to make hydrogen which burns clean and can power both an internal combustion engine or a jet turbine.
1
@aaa7189 John's statement was factually incorrect and all I merely pointed out was his error and why. I mentioned nothing about timelines, the green new deal, or what any bodies chief of staff said. Your reply is just a non sequitur and fallacious by nature.
1
@aaa7189 I clearly pointed that out in my first reply. You created a strawman argument as I mentioned nothing in my comment about the issues you raised which bear no relation to the original argument of powering different engines hence a non sequitur. Both a strawman and non sequitur are logical fallacies in argumentation. I was talking about powering engines and your reply was about the green new deal. It's just nonsensical.
1