IEA falsely claims it has done the "first comprehensive study of how to transition to a net-zero energy system by 2050 while ensuring stable and affordable energy supplies, providing universal energy access, and enabling robust economic growth." Check out @pwrhungry's expose.🧵
Green energy "models," @pwrhungry observes, ignore "myriad supply-chain problems...would come from attempting a massive increase in the use of solar panels, including the sourcing of polysilicon from China, and in particular, from Xinjiang province..."…
Green energy "models," @pwrhungry also observes, ignore "the difficulty inherent in trying to string the hundreds of thousands of miles of high-voltage transmission lines that will be needed to connect wind and solar projects in rural areas to distant cities."
"The latest example of this modeling make-believe was delivered last week by the International Energy Agency (IEA), which released a report that claims to provide a roadmap to achieving 'net-zero' emissions by 2050." --@pwrhungry
"many strategic and physical constraints...will limit, or rather prevent, any quick transition to renewables.... several Asian countries have already said they will ignore the IEA’s roadmap and continue investing in coal, oil, and natural gas extraction projects." --@pwrhungry
"Despite [$2T in spending from 2011-2018]...wind and solar energy still produced only 3% of world energy consumption in the year 2018...This raises pressing questions about what it would cost to make the transition to 100% renewable energies."…
"The new IEA report also contains nary a mention of how such an expensive effort will affect low- and middle-income consumers around the world. That’s a notable oversight given that about 800 million people around the world have no access to electricity." --@pwrhungry
"And as I point out in my recent book, 'A Question of Power: Electricity and the Wealth of Nations,' roughly 3 billion people on the planet live in countries where per-capita electricity use is less than what’s used by an average American refrigerator." --@pwrhungry
"Just as important as the cost problem, the IEA report completely ignores the cartoonish amounts of territory that will be needed to accommodate a major increase in wind and solar deployment." --@pwrhungry
"between 2005 and 2019, the average amount of wind installed annually around the globe was about 41 GW....the IEA is claiming that global annual additions should be nearly 10 times that figure. That begs the obvious question: where exactly will all those turbines be built?"
"backlash against Big Wind is growing in rural regions all around the world. Indeed, over the last six months alone, three counties in Iowa--the state that produces more electricity from wind than any other state--have either banned wind projects or issued moratoria on them."
"Some of the fiercest fights against Big Wind are happening in the bluest states. Good luck building a wind turbine in Vermont, home of Sen. @BernieSanders, the former presidential candidate and one of the Senate’s loudest proponents for renewable energy." --@pwrhungry
"In NY," so many communities are rejecting wind and solar projects that Gov. @andrewcuomo’s administration recently pushed through provisions that will strip local governments of their zoning and taxing authority so that the state can more easily issue permits..." --@pwrhungry
"In California, wind turbines are so difficult to site that most developers have simply given up trying to build new projects in the state." --@pwrhungry
"In Germany, where the government is pushing hard for its vaunted “Energiewende,” rural opposition has led to 'a dramatic decline in the number of new onshore wind farms.'" --@pwrhungry
Read @pwrhungry's full expose of the @IEA net-zero report here:…
Here's why the @IEA net-zero report is immoral:
Here's why everyone involved with the @IEA net-zero report should be fired:
Here's why government-dictated energy plans are always disastrous.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Alex Epstein

Alex Epstein Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @AlexEpstein

15 May
Bitcoin stands for honest money.

Thus it is sad to see many advocates of Bitcoin, in the name of deflecting "green" criticism, buy into the massive dishonesty that the parasitical solar/wind/offset "industry" has been perpetrating for years.

Some correctives...🧵
Q: Aren't solar and wind cheap?
A: Solar and wind are "unreliables" that depend on reliable fossil fuel, nuclear, and hydro infrastructure. They don't replace the cost of fossil fuels, they add to the cost of fossil fuels. More solar+wind = higher prices.
Here's how the "100% renewable" fraud works.…
Read 12 tweets
14 May
The Biden administration is using the recent hacking of the Colonial Pipeline to portray oil as an insecure fuel that needs to be replaced by electricity. In reality, Biden's scheme of mandatory EVs on a wind-and-solar-dependent grid would be catastrophically insecure.

The empty gas stations all over the East Coast in the wake of the hacking of the Colonial Pipeline have brought energy security to the forefront of our minds. Many wonder: How can we prevent this, or something worse, from happening again? The worst answer is: mandatory EVs.
It's important to note that even with the weeklong disruption of a pipeline that transports 105 million gallons of fuel daily, there has still been enough gasoline available to meet normal gasoline demand. The empty gas stations have come from media-induced panic-buying.
Read 18 tweets
12 May
As the great @MarkPMills points out in his @WSJopinion piece on the physical requirements of the promised "green energy" transition, "there are no plans to fund and build the necessary mines and refineries." Once again we see the inherent idiocy of government-dictated energy. 🧵
"The IEA finds that with a global energy transition like the one President Biden envisions, demand for key minerals such as lithium, graphite, nickel and rare-earth metals would explode, rising by 4,200%, 2,500%, 1,900% and 700%, respectively, by 2040." --@MarkPMills
"The world doesn’t have the capacity to meet such demand. As the IEA observes, albeit in cautious bureaucratese, there are no plans to fund and build the necessary mines and refineries. The supply of ETMs is entirely aspirational." --@MarkPMills…
Read 11 tweets
6 May
One of the most obvious opportunities the US is currently squandering is the export of LNG--liquefied natural gas. LNG can provide low-cost, reliable, clean natural gas around the world. But LNG's enormous potential is being strangled by irrational permitting policies.

Natural gas is an incredibly versatile fuel--providing low-cost, clean residential heating; low-cost, clean "industrial process heat"; and low-cost, highly controllable and reliable clean electricity.
While natural gas used to be so hard to get that the US imported it, thanks to fracking and other shale energy technologies, the US now has a virtually limitless supply of low-cost, reliable, versatile, clean natural gas.
Read 11 tweets
6 May
One of the most dangerous lies in the world today is the idea that unreliable solar energy, if combined with batteries, can power the world. And the most dangerous advocate of this lie is the brilliant Elon Musk--because he is so admired for his brilliance.

For years, Elon Musk has been claiming that solar panels plus batteries can power the world. Because Musk is a brilliant engineer, this claim seems credible. But as I will show by examining a recent version of this claim (pictured), it is deeply dishonest.
Musk says that "to power the whole Earth" we need just solar panels and "some batteries."

What is "some batteries"?

To store a mere three days worth of energy, to be prepared for weeks (let alone seasons) with lower-than-usual sunlight, takes 1330 terawatt-hours in batteries.
Read 9 tweets
30 Apr
The US is headed toward energy suicide, in large part because smart people are completely misrepresenting the capabilities of solar and wind energy. To counter this, I held a contest to answer some recent distortions by @elonmusk. Here are the winners. 🧵

Read 10 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!