Not rushing to net zero. Answering the question you were afraid to ask

ARE WE THERE YET?

Quiet in the back seat! Be patient, we are getting there

Renewables 2021: Global Status Report will tell you everything you wanted to know about our achievements in getting rid of fossil fuels. In fact it will tell you a lot more than you wanted to know if you were after a short answer to the question from the back seat HOW LONG THEN?

You can read 371 pages about it  here Advance of RE Worldwide

Or  you can get the short answer in this image

As the Manhatten Contrarian explains, if you want to get the story in a couple of pages, around the non-western world investment in fossil fuels is going gang busters and the steep increase in new coal capacity in China resulted in the first annual increase in global coal capacity since 2015. As usual, public finance from China funded by far the largest amount of coal capacity in other countries, followed by funding from Japan, the Republic of Korea, France, Germany and India, nearly all of which was directed towards developing and emerging countries.

People in the developing countries are moving out of “other renewables” [aka animal dung] but not into “modern renewables”, oh no, they want real power. And so worldwide   the total amount of fossil fuels consumed went up dramatically —  close to 20% in the decade when we were supposed to be rapidly reducing usage and indeed setting the world on the path to complete elimination of these things.

Meanwhile in London, Paris, New York, Canberra…

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

18 Responses to Not rushing to net zero. Answering the question you were afraid to ask

  1. OldOzzie says:

    Welcome to the Chinese Communist State of VictoriaStan under Dictator Dan and his Public Health Cronies

    New Harvard Data (Accidentally) Reveal How Lockdowns Crushed the Working Class While Leaving Elites Unscathed

    The picture painted is one of working-class destruction.

  2. Ubique says:

    A shot across BoJo’s eco-extremist bows. Enough of the dirigisme Boris, pull your head in.

  3. Arky says:

    Or another way to say it is this:
    Via “free trade” and “renewables” we have moved our industries from Western countries with environmental, labour and legal standards to other parts of the globe which have therefore moved out of the third world into rapidly developing industrial powers while retaining most of the lack of standards we are still encumbered with.
    It’s only going to get worse for us.
    But if you care about crediting the CCP with lifting a billion people out of poverty, it’s all good dude.

  4. RobK says:

    From the linked report:
    With the atmospheric concentration of CO2 rising to record levels even as emissions have fallen, it has become increasingly clear that a structural shift is needed to reach long- term climate and development goals.
    The desperation of a failing model eludes them.

  5. Bruce of Newcastle says:

    So after spending trillions of dollars of taxpayer money we’ve gone from 80.3% fossil fuels in 2009 to 80.2% in 2019?

    Can we be classified “mostly harmless” now?

  6. Boambee John says:

    Bruce of N

    And that is 80.2% of a noticeably larger total!

    At the present rate, the world might reach “net zero” about 2199.

  7. Bad Samaritan says:

    BoN (1.22pm) the % is of interest, but the actual amount of energy consumed is more important since the alleged aim is reduce that.

    Coal; then 260 units….now 310 units
    Renewables: then about 20-25 units, now about 35-40 units.

    Coal streaking ahead in actual consumption. was about 235 units more, now about 270 units more. What a monumental scam!

  8. Arky says:

    Our energy industries will collapse.
    It’s going to come clear over the next decade that without the geologists, engineers and physicists will won’t be able to keep our current production up, nevermind invest in these pie in the sky alternatives.
    You are going to see the next stage of offshoring: The skills.
    You want manufactured products? China.
    Next step: You want a reactor? You want a grid that actually copes with renewables? China.
    Because China will have all the engineers and physicists.

  9. TonyfromOz says:

    The total power generated by coal fired power for the whole of the World is 8736TWH.
    At the end of 2020 China broke through the barrier of more than half of that total, eg, the generated power from coal fired sources in China is more than the whole of the rest of the World’s coal fired power combined.
    Now, China generates 4631TWH just from coal fired power.
    The WHOLE of the rest of the World generates 4105TWH from coal fired power.
    So China is at 53% and the rest of the World 47%.
    However, because they are using the most recent coal fired technology, China emits LESS Co2 for its 53% that the rest of the World emits from its lesser percentage.
    For some perspective on the difference, it’s 526TW.
    The total power generated (and then consumed) from every source in Australia is 204TWH.
    Oh, and a TWH, TeraWattHour. Your power bill is measured in KWH, KiloWattHours, and ONE TWH is the same as 1,000,000,000KWH
    New tech coal fired power is all about an increase in Thermal Efficiency, higher temperature and higher pressure Steam, and the coal is being burned more efficiently. Every One percent increase in that thermal efficiency results in a TWO percent reduction in the emissions of CO2. The current World average efficiency for coal fired power is 34%. The latest tech coal fired power, Advanced UltraSuperCritical operates at 49% efficiency, hence a 30% reduction in CO2 on a MWH equivalency basis.
    And that’s why China’s coal fired power, while much larger in generated power than the whole of the rest of the World combined emits less CO2.
    Tony.

  10. Lawrie says:

    Starving the lower paid and rewarding the already well off is a great way to foment class warfare. Was it done on purpose?

    The constant call for lower emissions but banning nuclear is also a sign that consciously or not our politicians are trying to neuter us and render us ripe for China to pick. We are governed by imbeciles who are advised by the ill educated.

  11. Professor Fred Lenin says:

    What happens if you remove the leaders from the lemmings rushing toward their doom over the cliff ? Hopefully they walk back to a sensible place .
    There is the answer to the climate scam ,remove the suicidal leaders aqnd restore sanity
    National PatrioticPopulism is the answer Globalism is Slavery .

  12. The Sheriff says:

    Hopefully the rumour of a Barnaby leadership challenge this week is true and he can start fighting back against this rubbish

  13. Texas Jack says:

    Mr Morrison, who met with Bank of England governor Andrew Bailey in London, said financial markets “were already there” on climate change.

    “Why do we think that emissions fell during the last US administration by 13 per cent? It’s because the corporate sector, the financial sector in the US is going that way, it’s already happening.

    “What financial markets simply want is clear, consistent information to base judgments on regarding the risks of investments. Central banks don’t want to make judgments about climate change and what companies or countries are doing.

    “They just want to make … decisions based on clear facts and information. They can make their own assessment about those risks, but the information has to be there in a clear and standardised way and so that helps the functioning of financial markets.”

    Mr Morrison said the building blocks of a carbon neutral economy come from understanding how financial markets and companies are working and how the energy and trade markets are working.

    Mr Morrison said at energy roundtables he participated in London and Paris, the feedback was that Australia was the “perfect place” to build low-emissions technologies.

    “Because you’ve got so much space. Which means solar, which means wind, which means you can convert it.

    “You can convert those natural assets we have into that form, so the only question is can you do it? Can you do it at the right price? Can you distribute it? Can you do it at scale?”

    No rush? Morrison is every bit as bad as Matt Kean, only more devious. Kean hasn’t shielded his stupid ideas from plain sight (he got them passed on the floor of the NSW Parliament).

    Our only hope is Barnaby. Barnaby – if you’re reading this – your country needs you ASAP.

  14. Tel says:

    Build back bamboozled!

  15. Boambee John says:

    Can you do it at the right price? Can you distribute it? Can you do it at scale?”

    In answer to ScoMo’s questions, NO, NO, and NO.

  16. FlyingPigs says:

    Global Warming and the dangers of increased CO2 are created by Political Science.

  17. Gerard says:

    According to a recent JP Morgan energy report, renewables make up just 5% of electricity supply world wide – conflicting with the above analysis.
    But electricity represents just 18% of all energy consumed. Doing the calculations, this suggests renewables represent just 1% of total energy consumed. (Hydro obviously excluded).
    This represents a very small start to ‘decarbonisation’.
    How much will ‘Net Zero’ cost?

  18. Rafe Champion says:

    It is hard to get different sets of numbers to agree because sometimes hydro is counted as renewable. And there can’t possibly be accurate figures for the “other/old fashioned” renewables that are big in the Third World, like twigs and animal dung.

Comments are closed.