Net-Zero Reality Conclusions for USA

Link: https://ddears.com/2022/05/31/net-zero-reality-conclusions/ Please see link above for source text, embedded hotlinks, and comments.

Net-Zero Reality Conclusions Donn Dears May 31, 2022 (This is the last of five articles, using published data and simple logic, to demonstrate net-zero carbon is unattainable with wind, solar or nuclear, or a combination of these methods for power generation.)

Three alternative methods for achieving net-zero carbon by 2050 have been evaluated, and it’s clear none of them can achieve net-zero carbon for the United States.

The recent closure of the Palisades nuclear power plant in Michigan on May 20, reaffirms that nuclear is unable to contribute to achieving net-zero carbon.

Links to the articles supporting the following conclusions are listed below.

Wind Turbines If wind turbines are used in an attempt to eliminate fossil fuels, it will require building more than 995,141 new wind turbines rated 2.5 MW between now and 2050.

The most wind turbines ever installed in one year has been 5680 ● It will require installing 35,551 new wind turbines rated 2.5 MW every year between now and 2050 to achieve net-zero carbon. (This is six times more than have ever been installed in a year.) ● Building larger wind turbines rated 6 MW, or even 12 MW, will not resolve this issue even if larger units can be built for use on land.

Nuclear If nuclear power is used in an attempt to eliminate fossil fuels, it will require building more than 31 new nuclear power plants every year between now and 2050.

PV Solar

1

If utility PV solar is used in an attempt to eliminate fossil fuels, it will require building over 3,918,996 MW of new utility PV solar capacity before 2050.

The most utility PV solar capacity ever installed in one year will be 21,500 MW in 2022. ● It will require adding 139,964 MW per year between now and 2050 to achieve net-zero carbon.

Effect These calculations demonstrate it is virtually impossible to achieve net-zero carbon by 2050 using any of the above methods.

It’s also readily apparent that a combination of all three methods cannot achieve net-zero carbon by 2050.

Rooftop solar While NREL estimates there is a very large potential for small scale roof top PV solar, the most small scale PV solar ever installed, according to the EIA, was 4,500 MW in 2020. Most residential roof top installations are less than 0.1 MW so a vast number of homes would have to install roof top PV solar every year. It’s not likely that small scale PV solar can contribute significantly to achieving net-zero carbon by 2050.

Storage If storage was even possible, it would significantly increase the number of wind turbines and PV solar installations and increase the difficulty of achieving net-zero carbon by 2050.

Hydrogen Hydrogen has been proposed as the holy grail for resolving many of the above issues.

Using hydrogen to replace natural gas as the fuel for gas turbines would eliminate the need to use wind, nuclear or solar to replace the electricity currently being generated by natural gas power plants.

However, wind, nuclear, or solar would have to be used to generate the electricity needed by the electrolyzers to produce green hydrogen.

While there is high confidence that gas turbines can be modified to burn hydrogen, the amount of hydrogen required to generate the same amount of electricity isn’t as certain for several reasons.

2

For example, the BTU content of hydrogen is 325 BTU/cuft, while it is between 950 and 1037 BTU/cuft for natural gas.

Assuming it requires 50 kWh to produce 2.2 pounds of hydrogen from water using electrolysis, it will require 618,542 wind turbines to produce the hydrogen needed to power the gas turbine power plants. This is 1.7 times the number of wind turbines needed to merely replace existing gas turbine power plants with wind turbines.

In other words, hydrogen requires more wind turbines.

Hydrogen would also result in more PV solar installations when considering the PV solar alternative.

Hydrogen is not the holy grail promoted by the media.

In fact hydrogen is an energy loser.

The net, in net-zero It’s patently obvious that wind, nuclear and solar cannot replace fossil fuels. However, because it is so obvious, the proponents of radical climate change had to muddy the waters by adding the idea of storing CO2 somewhere, such as in forests, etc., to accommodate the inability of wind, nuclear or solar to achieve zero carbon.

Offsets to achieve net-zero is a nebulous concept fraught with the potential for manipulation, e.g., double counting and leakage. Recently, due to the threat of manipulation, Indonesia has prohibited using its forests for new carbon offsets.

Net-zero requires offsetting the vast quantities of CO2 not eliminated by wind, nuclear and solar, which is another hopeless task.

The real intent of net-zero is to obfuscate the obvious.

Conclusion Any reasonable person will conclude the United States can’t achieve net-zero carbon.

Efforts to replace fossil fuels with wind, nuclear or PV solar are an illusion that will harm all Americans.

The war on fossil fuels should be stopped now.

Use this link in a email to let others know about this article https://bit.ly/38ZVjDZ

3

Links for supporting documentation Wind turbine https://bit.ly/3FWNYkA Nuclear https://bit.ly/3ae2HvM PV Solar https://bit.ly/3PEnB7u Combined reality check https://bit.ly/3NGE1uo Hydrogen Special Report https://bit.ly/3ugzgz6

Easily destroyed solar panels by wind, hail, etc.

“America the Beautiful” - after extreme green politicians change the landscape.

4

Electric vehicle battery fire.

Thanks to Viv Forbes and The Saltbush Club - Australia

5