Comments by "LRRPFco52" (@LRRPFco52) on "Why Rising Capital Costs Could Kill Greentech || Peter Zeihan" video.

 @tomcrouchman Solar and wind are cheaper? Who's telling you this erroneous information?
4
@phoenixnom5500 Moore's Law applied to microelectronics transistor density, not power generation. There should be a test before you're allowed to post in the comments sections in these videos to filter out the uneducated.
4
@Alopen-xb1rb Government offshores business via punitive regulations and taxation. Companies actually prefer to hire local and build long-term legacies that provide goods, services, and employment.
3
Conformity to hype trends and no math or analytical skills should ban you from the comments section.
2
@thomasherrin6798 This is simply incorrect. Moore's theory only applied to transistor density in microelectronics, never power generation.
2
Go look at the progress chart of PV materials and read your statements again, understanding that the only materials showing notable increases in PV efficiency are extremely expensive (GaA), and are critical for other sensitive industries. China has also placed an export ban on them in the Semiconductor trade war.
1
@allenaxp6259 "In development" and "at scale" often mean "never going into production".
1
@themomaw What they don't tell you is local power companies zero out your contribution to the grid every year in many places so the returns don't materialize. Solar is a freaking scam in practice in that scenario. My BIL found that out the hard way.
1
@lightningwight4154 The most common PV cells on the market are Chrystalline Silicon (95%). When introduced in 1977, they were 14% efficient. 46 years later, they're only 26.4% efficient and have been stuck there since 2017, totally flat. Thin film Gallium Arsenide has shown to be the most promising, but it's extremely expensive and China just cut off Gallium exports because Gallium is critical in high quality semiconductor technology. Most of what I see being discussed in the solar and wind power conversations is based on false claims made by people with no scientific background.
1
Without oil, you have nothing. These climate change and renewable energy talking points are a quick way to lose credibility among those of us who have studied energy markets for decades. They're a scam.
1
@gruffelo6945 Are you talking about Gallium Arsenide single wafer PV cells? Those have shown the most promise, but GaA is extremely expensive and is in high demand for defense semiconductor applications, satellites, and telecom. China also put an export ban on Gallium and Germanium after we cut off ASML machines to them. 95% of the PV market is stuck in stupid Chrystalline Si cells, which have zero growth in efficiency over the last 8 years.
1
@martykincaid1700 Human contribution to essential, life-supporting CO2 into the atmosphere is somewhere between 0.3-3.0% of overall environmental sources, with no demonstrated causal relationship between global temps. Global temps are cyclical and driven by much larger factors, including geothermal heating of the oceans from magma underneath the deep sea crust layers. The entire claims about climate change related to human activity are demonstrably false, as explained in excruciating detail by a large panel of actual climatologists and atmospheric researchers.
1
He has done many research papers and presentations on the UK since 2000. Latest assessment is the UK is waking up to the fact that they are a middle power at best, and their survival and economic security is entwined with the US rather than mainland Europe.
1