How passing the reconciliation bill will destroy American energy, part 1

The reconciliation bill’s goal of 80% "clean electricity" by 2030, which has still not been abandoned, would mean going from 10% unreliable solar+wind to a catastrophic 50% solar+wind in 8 years.

THREAD
Now that the disastrous Clean Electricity Performance Program is gone from the reconciliation bill, many think our grid is safe. Not true. Dem leaders are still committed to the CEPP's goal of "80% clean" through other means, saying "there's more than one way to skin a cat."
The reconciliation bill still contains many provisions to pursue the goal of "80% clean electricity" by 2030--including a 10-year increase of the solar and wind subsidies that have already made American electricity far less reliable and affordable.
energytalkingpoints.com/wind-productio…
"80% clean electricity by 2030" is a misleading goal, because it implies that many sources of energy are allowed. In reality, because nuclear in the US is virtually criminalized and hydro is opposed as well, 80% clean electricity means >50% solar and wind.
Right now about 40% of American electricity is "clean," with unreliable solar and wind providing about 10%. Given nuclear and hydro realities in the US, 80% "clean" by 2030 means quintupling unreliable solar and wind, from 10% to 50% of our electricity in 8 years!
Every area of the world that has tried using significant amounts of unreliable solar and wind has had major cost and/or reliability problems. In the US, we have had big electricity price increases and huge reliability problems even at 10% solar and wind.
Not only are there high power prices in CA (<20% generated solar+wind), Germany (>33% solar+wind), and Denmark (~50% solar+wind)--but these places would be far worse if not for an ability the US can't have: the ability to import and export huge amounts of electricity.
Tiny Denmark not only has ultra-expensive electricity, it can only function at all with ~50% solar+wind because it imports power from neighbors when the wind dies down. In 2019 it imported 50% as much power as it generated. Imagine the US trying to do that with Canada and Mexico!
Denmark also depends on large neighbors to be able to handle its excess electricity when there is too much wind for Denmark's electricity needs. In 2019 Denmark exported 30% as much power as it generated. Can Canada and Mexico absorb an erratic 30% of the power we generate?
Germans, to get 37% of their electricity from solar+wind, have doubled their prices--now 3X US prices. And they can only get away with 37% because they have neighbors to bail them out when solar/wind fall short. The US as a whole has no such neighbors.
Germany is currently starving for more Russian coal and gas, at skyrocketing prices, in expectation of a cold winter and with more nuclear capacity shutdowns looming by end of the year. They're paying the price for listening to solar+wind propagandists.
In California, where I live, we get <20% of our electricity from domestic wind and solar--and we have skyrocketing prices along with disastrous shortages and blackouts. And it would be far worse if we didn't import 30% of our electricity from neighbors.
energytalkingpoints.com/california-bla…
During TX's February cold spell, wind and solar disappeared when they were needed the most. Its expensive batteries, which couldn't even store minutes worth of electricity, didn’t help, either. What would they have done under the 50% solar and wind??!!
No place in the world gets a large share of its electricity from solar and wind without huge imports from its neighbors' reliable--not solar+wind--power plants. For the US, which cannot import a lot of electricity, the reconciliation bill's 50% solar+wind is catastrophic.
The facts are clear. 10% solar and wind in the US is disastrous. 50+% solar and wind would guarantee unaffordable prices, constant shortages, frequent blackouts--and the fleeing of industry and jobs, once companies realize the US no longer has low-cost, reliable electricity.
Our government's push for mandating 50+% unreliable solar and wind plays perfectly into the hands of China. China has a clear strategy of running its economy on 84% fossil fuels, while encouraging us to run on unreliable solar and wind—that is made using Chinese fossil fuels.
The claim that the US pursuing 50% solar+wind will lower global CO2 emissions is a joke. As China illustrates, the developing world will continue to use more and more fossil fuel because that is by far the lowest-cost way for it to get reliable energy.
energytalkingpoints.com/co2-emissions/
Anyone who cares about CO2 emissions must recognize that the only non-carbon energy source that has a chance of outcompeting fossil fuels and lowering global emissions is nuclear energy. Nuclear is incredibly safe, incredibly reliable, and can be generated anywhere in the world.
Any policy serious about CO2 emissions needs to recognize the severe deficiencies of wind/solar and make nuclear decriminalization priorities number 1, 2, and 3. Instead, the reconciliation bill does nothing to decriminalize nuclear and actually extends anti-nuclear subsidies!
Summary: The reconciliation bill's goal of "80% clean electricity by 2030" requires a catastrophic 50% unreliable solar+wind, while continuing and worsening the criminalization of nuclear. We must scrap this threat to American energy and create a bill to liberate American energy.

• • •

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!

PDF

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

19 Oct
As the Clean Electricity Performance Program dies, many are pushing a carbon tax to replace it. Bad idea. A carbon tax would raise energy prices and make every US industry less competitive. The only rational approach to lowering emissions is liberating nuclear and natural gas.🧵
Any policy toward CO2 must recognize that CO2 emissions are a global issue--and that global emissions are rising because of the developing world's increasing use of fossil fuels. The US causes less than 1/6 of global emissions—and falling.
eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/d…
The developing world overwhelmingly uses fossil fuels because that is by far the lowest-cost way for them to get reliable energy. Unreliable solar and wind can’t come close. That’s why China and India have hundreds of new coal plants in the pipeline.
docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d…
Read 18 tweets
18 Oct
COP 26, the largest "climate conference"--aka fossil fuel elimination conference--since the Paris Climate Accords, is starting to fall apart as countries seek *more* fossil fuel.

Let's make sure this genocidal conference totally falls apart. Here's the necessary ammunition.🧵
The alleged basis of UN Climate Conferences and their fossil fuel elimination commitments is the idea of "climate crisis." But this is a pseudoscientific idea based on a denial of our fossil fueled mastery of climate. Here's a full explanation:
energytalkingpoints.com/climate-crisis/
The alleged scientific credibility of the genocidal UN Climate Conference comes from the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Here's how the IPCC is fundamentally distorted by anti-human religion.
Read 12 tweets
15 Oct
Great news: Joe Manchin is standing up to the Administration's insane insistence—during an energy crisis involving shortages of fossil fuels—on cutting emissions 40-50% by 2030. That means minimum 50% unreliable solar+wind. Manchin could literally save our country from ruin.
Here's why the centerpiece of this Administration's efforts to radically cut CO2 emissions, an 80% "Clean Energy Standard," is a disaster.
Here's the definitive refutation of the idea that the US can rapidly get to "80% clean electricity" because other countries have.
Read 4 tweets
14 Oct
Awesome: Latino landscaping company owner Miguel Rojas trashes California's supposedly Latino-friendly new ban on gasoline lawnmowers and leaf-blowers:
"This is just going to hurt us....Maybe the writers of this should mow a lawn a few times before judging what’s best for us."
👇
"It should really come down to preference. My crews prefer different things, sometimes based on the neighborhood. Some like gas, some like electric, some don’t care. But now they’re trying to get us not to use certain ones? That’s idiotic."
californiaglobe.com/articles/lands…
"And one of them is saying that this is for Latinos. This is just going to hurt us, as electric ones don’t last as long due to the battery life. And we wear masks and other protective equipment, so we’re fine using the gas ones." --Latino landscaping company owner Miguel Rojas
Read 5 tweets
13 Oct
Introducing the ultimate source of intellectual ammunition for pro-human, pro-freedom people on energy, environmental, and climate issues: the (free) Energy Talking Points @substack newsletter.

alexepstein.substack.com

Please share this far and wide.

Previews 👇
My talking points on the "other countries have 80% clean electricity" argument for reconciliation.
alexepstein.substack.com/p/talking-poin…
My talking points on the recent California spill.
alexepstein.substack.com/p/talking-poin…
Read 6 tweets
13 Oct
Skyrocketing natural gas and coal prices are not a failure of the fossil fuel industry, but the total failure of *anti-fossil fuel policies*, which falsely promised that if we dramatically restricted fossil fuel energy production, green energy could easily replace it.

THREAD
There is no physical reason that the natural gas and coal industries can't meet rising demand. The world has hundreds of years' worth of gas deposits and thousands of years worth of coal deposits. But governments radically restrict the freedom to utilize those deposits.
There is no technical or economic reason the natural gas and coal industries can't meet demand. These industries have gotten radically more capable and efficient in the last two decades--especially natural gas with fracking. But governments radically restrict their freedom.
Read 12 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!

:(