Beyond parody. Halving household electricity consumption

The  bad news about aiming for zero emissions is that the cost of electricity will rise about 40 per cent by 2050 but the good news is that households’ power use will halve.  This comes from the Australian National University and ClimateWorks Australia, described as an independent climate advisory group. Independent of what? Read more if you can get through the gate at The Australian.

The 2014 paper found demand for coal and oil would fall but there would be significant growth in gas, carbon forestry, and uranium and lithium mining industries.

“The analysis shows job creation in the renewable electricity generation sector is double the job losses from the coal-fired electricity generation sector,” the ­report says.

Agricultural emissions would rise 20 per cent and ­demand for beef would slow “as a result of increases in beef prices in a decarbonised world”.

Labor adopted a net zero emissions by 2050 target last week but has not detailed its plan on how to get there.

Will the ALP be more forthcoming with their plan than the committee in Great Britain that did not reveal the details of their plan to go zero? And the cost. I wonder why?  Think big!

The cost of reaching the government’s “Net Zero” target will be astronomical for the UK economy. That’s according to analysis by two new reports published by the Global Warming Policy Foundation.

The reports find that decarbonising the electricity system and domestic housing in the next three decades will cost over £2.3 trillion pounds. The final bill will surpass £3 trillion, or £100,000 per household, once the cost of decarbonising major emitting sectors like manufacturing, transport and agriculture are included.

CHOKE POINT  UPDATE

Monday Feb 25. Not a sceenshot so it will change. At 9am (Sydney time) the wind was delivering less than one GW, 13% of plated capacity and 3.5% of demand (25GW).  I check daily at 9am and 6.30pm and I don’t recall any time in the last week when wind topped 10% of plated capacity. Mostly it was under 5%. 

Don’t get over-excited about South Australia despite the beatup of their RE industry in a colour supplement to The Weekend Australian. They can produce about half of the Australian windpower  but last  night it was not enough for their own power consumption. Most  of their power was coming from local gas and they were also taking power from Queensland and Tasmania via  NSW and Victoria.

Fun times ahead.

JO NOVA’S LATEST. More RE installed in Australia but no reduction in emissions. Anything Germany can we, we can do as well or better!

BONUS1994 to 2019 Chicago and Perth mean annual temperature

A source would be helpful, this came from someone who sends out batches of  original material every week  and they said these numbers were assembled from official sources.

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

21 Responses to Beyond parody. Halving household electricity consumption

  1. a happy little debunker

    but the good news is that households’ power use will halve

    The sun don’t shine half the time, so that is easily explained – Ruinables.

  2. Cactus

    I had an idiot warmy argue with me and say that the Renewables industry created more jobs per MWh than fossil fuelled power stations. I just laughed and said, you have just highlighted how inefficient they are. The goal of any essential input into an economy is to have the minimum possible jobs involved in its manufacture.

  3. Roger

    “The analysis shows job creation in the renewable electricity generation sector is double the job losses from the coal-fired electricity generation sector,” the ­report says.

    And presumably every job thus created will have to be subsidised by the tax payer.

  4. DaveR

    Cloud Cuckoo Land. ‘Intelligent lefties’ forcing poverty on the nation.

  5. liliana

    idiot warmy argue with me and say that the Renewables industry created more jobs per MWh than fossil fuelled power stations.

    I have always found this argument to be so idiotic that I can’t understand why people keep repeating it as if it is a good thing. All these jobs will be a cost impost that doesn’t currently exist which means the cost of electricity will continue to go up.
    I think most of those caught up in the hubris of renewables haven’t really thought through the reality of a world without reliable electricity. Especially the yoooth supporting the ‘green deal’ type scenario’s. They have experience nothing but good times, comfort and abundance. I suggest that any supporter of the green deal first spend a couple of years living with the masses in a corrupt third world shi..le

  6. Ben

    How are we going to halve our electricity usage when everyone will be charging their new electric cars off the grid every night? They never think about the amount of energy in petrol and diesel that will have to be replaces by ruinables.

  7. Scott Osmond

    Indeed. With many countries planning to ban the sale of internal combustion engines by 2035/40 the need for the electricity grid to upscale massively is at hand. Only 2 solutions. 1 drop the whole idea. 2 let the price of electricity grow so high that only the important people can aford cars. The peasants will just have to cycle or wait for substandard public transport.
    My money is on revolution before that happens.

  8. duncanm

    Ben
    #3334305, posted on February 25, 2020 at 11:49 am
    How are we going to halve our electricity usage when everyone will be charging their new electric cars off the grid every night? They never think about the amount of energy in petrol and diesel that will have to be replaces by ruinables.

    not only that – people will want to charge at home when their solar panels are producing zip.

  9. Gorgiasl

    Love it.

    Growth in the Uranium and Lithium mining industries.

    This is Australia – Uranium, the most climate friendly fuel of all has been demonised by the ALP, the Greens and the very people who are making this projection. Lithium mining will never get off the ground in a big way here (granted a few bit players will get off the ground) because of the vast, low-cost brine resources in Chile, Bolivia and Peru.

    As for power demand halving – show me the evidence to support that – better still, look at the irreversible trend of the past 100 years

    Wankers

  10. Tim Neilson

    As for power demand halving – show me the evidence to support that – better still, look at the irreversible trend of the past 100 years

    You’re right.

    Demand won’t halve.

    But supply will. They’ll achieve that. You can take that to the bank.

  11. Fisky

    Oh dear. I can see the CCP are blaming America for manufacturing the virus. Is this their way of obliquely admitting that this thing was in fact created in a lab?

  12. classical_hero

    Fantasy land and a dream world were the basic laws of physics don’t apply. Environmentalists don’t really care for the environment but for control.

  13. IainC

    Apropos the previous post on expensive fags leading to criminal supply chains, can we expect a similar rise in black market electricity and meat?
    Much discussion revolves around domestic electricity usage, as though that were the dominant energy sink for the economy. The problem is that the amount of energy of all types used per capita is far larger than anybody realizes. Ones total domestic electricity use in kW-h, what most people assume comprises most of your “energy use per day”, is only a small fraction of the average for the entire economy divided by the number of people (20-25%). Small changes to lifestyle like low wattage bulbs or energy efficient dishwashers, even if everybody followed, would mean virtually no difference to the total energy the economy as a whole uses per day, and therefore the total energy we need to replace by RE if we are forced to go down that path too quickly by hysterical activists. An equal amount of energy as the current grid supplies is needed for transportation, currently provided almost entirely by fossil fuel combustion, meaning that moving to EVs will require a vast new supply of electrons. I urge you to check out a very informative book by David J C MacKay (Sustainable energy without the hot air, UIT Cambridge), who goes into these matters in detail, along with potential solutions (not mainly wind and solar, funnily enough).

  14. cohenite

    The lesson of Spain has been long forgotten:

    6. This came at great financial cost as well as cost in terms of jobs destroyed elsewhere in the economy.
    7. The study calculates that since 2000 Spain spent €571,138 to create each “green job”, including subsidies of more than €1 million per wind industry job.
    8. The study calculates that the programs creating those jobs also resulted in the destruction of nearly 110,500 jobs elsewhere in the economy, or 2.2 jobs destroyed for every “green job” created.
    9. Principally, the high cost of electricity affects costs of production and employment levels in metallurgy, non-metallic mining and food processing, beverage and tobacco industries.
    10. Each “green” megawatt installed destroys 5.28 jobs on average elsewhere in the economy: 8.99 by photovoltaics, 4.27 by wind energy, 5.05 by mini-hydro.
    11. These costs do not appear to be unique to Spain’s approach but instead are largely inherent in schemes to promote renewable energy sources.

    https://docs.wind-watch.org/Calzada-Spain-jobs-renewables.pdf

  15. John A

    DaveR

    ‘Intelligent lefties’

    Pics or a retraction, please.

    At least the Irish Rovers explain why you’ll never see a unicorn ‘to this very day’.

    🙂

  16. Lee

    On a similar thread on Andrew Bolt’s blog there were these ludicrous gems and false analogies from Peter:

    1. Australia set a target to win WW11 but did not schedule the costs in advance – just wanted to win the war (climate war).

    Apples and oranges.
    In any case, Australia didn’t plan on WWII, and no country can plan on war costs before the potential event, unlike costing “fighting climate change.”
    He (and leftists generally) never do cost benefits analysis on things like AGW, unless their name is Bjorn Lomborg (who most leftists despise or ignore, precisely because of that).

    2. Germany and England are doing it. Why can’t Australia?

    Germany, whose economy is on the verge of disaster, owing to renewables?
    England, where the cost of 100% reliance on renewables has been calculated at trillions?

  17. grumpy

    @ Lee

    Germany and England can also easily import nuclear derived electricity from France. I can’t see us doing the same from Indonesia, PNG or NZ.

  18. Lee

    Agreed, Grumpy, Australia is an island in every sense.

    For isolated Australia – of all places – particularly given our vast resources of uranium, our absolute refusal to go nuclear is stupidity and ignorance on steroids.

  19. Squirrel

    The climate change control feaks will be pinning their hopes on “demand management” – which is code for paying more for less, and which will doubtless involve all sorts of gimmicky gadgets (“smart meters”, touch screens and assorted other techno-b/s).

    The thicker punters will be sucked in by the gadgets, and the media will be full of puff-pieces promoting that stuff, but when reality bites, the media will shift to stories showing bewildered twits sitting at the kitchen table with a pile of terrifying utility bills.

  20. Fat Tony

    The final bill will surpass £3 trillion, or £100,000 per household,

    So basically, England will go broke and turn into a 3rd world shit hole.

    At least all the goat-botherers and spear-throwers will feel at home.

  21. Proessor Fred Lenin

    God help the puppet governments when there is no power to charge mobile phones ,no petrol to pwere your Luxury chauffeur driven limos ,no fuel for planes to take the SJW s to climate conferences , no aircon in the luxury hotels the politically aware concerned frequent ,the deprivation will cause panic its not as if they were not entitled to these things .

Comments are closed.