Lomborg on getting our climate priorities straight

Some doubt about the value of sun and wind!

Many policies focus on solving global warming by investing in solar and wind, but over the coming quarter-century, these technologies will contribute only marginally to the solution. Moreover, they are not competitive now and will be mostly inefficient for at least 25 years.

The International Energy Agency estimates that just 0.5 percent of the world’s energy comes from solar and wind, and even with the Paris agreement, this will increase to only 2.4 percent by 2040. It also estimates that the world is spending about $90 billion on solar and wind subsidies this year, and that even by 2040, they will still need about the same support. That’s not sustainable.

This entry was posted in Global warming and climate change policy, Rafe, Terrorism. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Lomborg on getting our climate priorities straight

  1. Just Interested

    From the Paywallian:
    Greens leader Richard Di Natale has blamed an over-reliance on coal and energy policy failures for the Tasmanian bushfires and the increased risk of bushfires near his family home.

    “Coal is the reason we’re here the reason we are seeing these record breaking conditions we have these massive fires in Tasmania,” he told Sky News.

    Seriously. He said it.

    Oh, they also reported this:

    “I just said goodbye to my wife and kids we live in a bushfire prone area we had to execute our fire plan today and that’s happening more and more frequently. The reason we’re in this position is because we’re digging up coal we’re polluting the atmosphere and we’re making climate change worse.”

    Senator Di Natale has a family farm in Victoria’s Otway Ranges.

    The poor man. He clearly can afford to be a Green.

  2. Leo G

    Greens leader Richard Di Natale has blamed an over-reliance on coal and energy policy failures for the Tasmanian bushfires and the increased risk of bushfires near his family home.

    Over-reliance on policy failures seems to be a mandatory clause in Australian governments’ coal and energy policies.

  3. Tim Neilson

    Leo G
    #2917138, posted on January 25, 2019 at 2:02 pm

    Well parsed Sir!

  4. cohenite

    I and a few others have been arguing this for years. I remember having a meeting with the senior staff at MACGEN, as it was then, back in 2009 when it still owned Liddell and Bayswater and offering the opinion that the facts about the lunacy of alarmism and the ridiculous idea that renewables could power anything were so obvious that this whole bullshit would be dead and buried in a year. The manager of MACGEN said it would be at least a decade before the public and the pollies woke up.

    He was a smarter man than me.

  5. cohenite

    The International Energy Agency estimates that just 0.5 percent of the world’s energy comes from solar and wind, and even with the Paris agreement, this will increase to only 2.4 percent by 2040.

    And after you remove hydro the main renewable energy source is burning wood.

    People who advocate renewables should be in jail.

  6. Rafe

    Wood and dung used for cooking indoors cause millions of premature deaths in the Third World. And they are spooked by a trace of plant food in the outdor air.

  7. gbees

    Lomborg is a good man but he is still deluded in that he states he believes CO2 is causing climate change. You’d think someone with econometrics talent would have been across the models used in the catastrophic global warming (aka climate change) movement and have alreday determined them to be total junk. So is he trying to avoid being called a ‘denier’ by taking that stance? If so he’s deluded if he thinks that will get him off the hook.

  8. Turtle

    Lomborg is a good man but he is still deluded in that he states he believes CO2 is causing climate change. You’d think someone with econometrics talent would have been across the models used in the catastrophic global warming (aka climate change) movement and have alreday determined them to be total junk. So is he trying to avoid being called a ‘denier’ by taking that stance? If so he’s deluded if he thinks that will get him off the hook.

    But that’s why he’s useful. He starts with the same assumptions as the full retard warmies and then shows that renewables are bullshit. That’s a good thing. I’m sure he has his doubts.

  9. David Brewer

    Lomborg:

    Many policies focus on solving global warming by investing in solar and wind, but over the coming quarter-century, these technologies will contribute only marginally to the solution. Moreover, they are not competitive now and will be mostly inefficient for at least 25 years.

    It’s taken him a long time to wake up to this. Here’s what he said in 2001 in The Skeptical Environmentalist, page 285:

    However, we also found that renewable sources such as wind and solar energy are decreasing rapidly in price, with wind almost competitive and solar energy competitive within two or three decades.

    Yet 18 years later we are still “at least” 25 years away from either of them being “competitive”.

    But what Lomborg still doesn’t get is that the price per megawatt hour is completely irrelevant when solar and especially wind are such low quality products. In fact in many ways, the cheaper they become, the bigger the problem they cause, as they undercut coal, oil and nuclear whenever they are working, destroying the economics of those sources, and putting them out of business. Result: blackouts, brownouts, controlled shutdowns and astronomical prices for electricity during increasingly frequent crisis periods.

  10. yon toad

    Lomborg is the genuine article but I disagree with his acceptance of the alarmist AGW religion. Any religion that has Al Gore and the bible of scientific consensus at its core has got to be questioned – follow the money rather than the faith. Imagine if the so called scientific consensus had been accepted in Galileo’s day – earth would still be the centre of the universe.

Comments are closed.