By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley
Douglas Pollock will be known to many readers here as a frequent and popular speaker at Heartland conferences. After years of studying the effect of reliability on power grids around the world, Douglas has discovered a truly fascinating scientific result.
He looked at countries like the UK, where their governments have gone further in bringing their economies down to third world status with policies that have remained unchanged from any other country’s. is different. The direct consequence of this weakness is that the UK currently suffers from the most expensive electricity prices in the world.
The manufacturing industries we once led the world died or moved abroad before Communist-led China, India, and Russia. Manufacturing now accounts for just 8% of Britain’s already booming GDP. The world’s workshop has become its workplace.
Industries large and small are going to the bottom of the wall at a record pace, destroyed by the relentlessly skyrocketing electricity prices whose root cause is the forced and senseless closure of thermal power plants. Coal has long been depreciated and it was feasible in the past to only produce electricity at low cost. $30 per MWh, and their replacement by subsidized solar and wind farms that produce intermittent and unreliable electrical energy for up to $11,500 per MWh.
Furthermore, this catastrophic industrial and economic collapse was intentionally caused by a former Conservative “government” that had long abandoned meaningless economic realism and market ideals. the freedom of Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan.
However, it is strange that the frenzied destruction of ugly pig-like windmills, devastation of wildlife, destruction of landscapes for the British people does not reduce the amount of CO2 we produce by electricity.2 emissions.
More and more windmills and solar panels are industrializing and destroying our formerly green and pleasant land. However, the share of the nation’s electrical energy contributed by untrustworthy people remains stubbornly below 25%. Douglas Pollock wondered why.
He consulted widely among experts with rank in grid management, but no one knows why grids like Germany and UK, which have unreliable installed capacity greater than 25 % of total electricity production, cannot get their average annual contribution from wind power, in particular, above 25%. That’s right, on some days wind can generate around two-thirds of Britain’s electricity. But on average – a big mule, as they say in the casinos in Puerto Rico – wind and solar contributions are stuck at 25% of the total grid output.
So Douglas scratched his head and thought about it. After a lot of research and more thought, he discovered something was wrong. It was a subtle but serious mistake that none of the untrustworthy supporters noticed.
Douglas’ argument is a beautiful and simple example of the rational application of mathematical principles to derive an extremely important but unexpected and hitherto completely ignored result. Read it slowly and carefully. Admire its elegant and undeniable simplicity.
Allow His the average hourly demand met by a given grid, in MWh/h, Let ris the average of the nameplate power actually generated by renewables – their average power factor. After that, the nameplate capacity is set to minimum OLD of renewable energy will be required to meet hourly demand His equal to H/ r.
Accordingly, the minimum installed nameplate capacity WOMEN < OLD of the renewable energy needed to generate the fof the total grid output actually contributed by renewables – the renewable energy share – is equal to f C, It’s also f HOUSE / r before.
Now here comes the magic. Renewable energy section f, of course, reach the maximum fmaximum where the hourly needs His equal to WOMEN. In that event, WOMENis equal to H old theory and also to fmaximum H/ r beforewhereby H is equal to fmaximum H/ r.
By dividing both sides by HShows fmaximum / r equals 1, fmaximum necessarily equal to r.
And that’s it. In a word, the maximum possible share of the total grid contributed by untrusted people turns out to be equal to the average share of the nameplate capacity those trusted people can reach. be realistic in the conditions of the real world.
For onshore wind, that power factor r is a disappointingly low 25%. For offshore wind, one can get 30%. The reason is that many times the wind is not blowing at all, and at times the wind is blowing too hard for the turbine to turn safely.
Douglas Pollock’s stellar and unexpected results mean a pathetic low performance factor r in fact is also the basic limit fmaximum about the contribution that unreliability can make to the grid without large-scale static battery backup which is extremely costly and logistically impossible.
That means wind and solar cannot contribute more than about a quarter of the total electricity demand on the grid, unless there is a backup battery. However, as Professor Michaux’s 2021 1000-page paper on the Geological Survey of Finland has determined, there’s nothing quite like enough engineering metals to provide backup batteries for entire power grids around the world. gender.
Just for the first 15 years of static backup battery generation for the global grid, the Professor calculates that one would need an amount of vanadium equivalent to the current total annual output of vanadium in 67,000 years, to name a few. except one of the scarce engineering metals will be required in extraordinary quantities. In 15 years, another 67,000 years of production will be needed, because batteries have a short lifespan, as anyone who uses a cell phone knows their costs. So power banks are simply not an option on a global scale, even if it is affordable.
Now look at Douglas Pollock’s stunning results for the destructive Communist-climate narrative. First, it is simple. Even a zitty teenager in high school can understand it. Second, it shows that even if global warming is a problem rather than a net gain, there’s really nothing we can do about it, except sit down. back and enjoy the sun. Third, it shows that the climate Communists, when they put all their eggs in the electric basket, had a basket in hand.
As for the impending, mandatory replacement of gasoline-powered cars with electric vehicles will not only place a huge additional load on the grid – which most grids are completely unprepared for – but and since the battery adds 30% more weight to a typical buggy than a real car, the entire transportation industry would waste 30% more energy than it does now. And that power is supposed to come from the already overloaded grid, powered by unreliable equipment that can only provide a quarter of the grid’s total capacity in any case.
It got worse. In the United Kingdom, the “government”, in a last-ditch attempt to destroy the British economy, is ordering every household with a perfectly good oil-fired boiler to have it demolished within a two-year period and replace it. replaced by soil or air. -source heat pump, will provide less heat at a much greater cost. And where will the electricity for the heat pumps come from? From the grid, that’s where.
The bottom line is, because a lot more electricity is required than current to achieve nut zero, and because the Pollock limit means that only about a quarter of the grid electricity can be supplied by people who don’t. reliably, the overall effect of zero-nut efforts would be to increase global emissions dramatically, because, as Douglas unequivocally demonstrated, the impossible – even even when it’s completely desirable, it’s not – it’s impossible.
Nut zero was then a prominent example of Monckton’s Law, which states that any attempt by governments to intervene in the free market to pursue one political goal or another will have tends to lead to an outcome that is exactly the opposite of what has been achieved. – however pious – intended.
Related
