© Version 2 (1)
August 23, 2022
By: Ken Gregory, P.Eng.
See full pdf document here.
Executive Summary
Many governments have made promises to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by replacing fossil fuels with solar and wind generated electricity and to electrify the economy. A report by Thomas Tanton estimates a capital cost of US$36.4 trillion for the U.S.A. economy to meet net zero emissions using wind and solar power. This study identifies several errors in the Tanton report and provides new capital cost estimates using 2019 and 2020 hourly electricity generation data rather than using annual average conditions as was done in the Tanton report. This study finds that the battery costs for replacing all current fossil fuel fired electricity with wind and solar generated electricity, using 2020 electricity data, is 111 times that estimated by the Tanton report. The total capital cost of electrification is herein estimated, using 2020 data, at US$290 trillion, or 13.5 times the U.S.A. 2019 gross domestic product. Overbuilding the solar plus wind capacity by 18% reduces overall costs by 17% by reducing battery storage costs. Allowing fossil fuels with carbon capture and storage to provide 60% of the electricity demand dramatically reduces the total costs from US$290 trillion to US$20.5 trillion, which is a reduction of 92.9%. Battery storage costs are highly dependent on the year’s weather and the seasonal shape of electricity demand.
1 Version 2 utilized the ratio of the efficiencies of internal combustion vehicles to electric vehicles. The factor of 0.21, was not considered in the Tanton Report. The battery efficiency was reduced from 90% to 80% which increased the battery storage by 2.0%. The cost of carbon capture and storage was increased by 11%.
I see the costs for the US, but what about Canada, both in dollars and related to GNP?
Robert Lyman had done this report based on Tanton’s original work, and estimated a percentage of costs for Canada. https://blog.friendsofscience.org/2020/11/29/ballparking-the-cost-of-electrification/ However, while reviewing this and the Tanton work for another report, and having done these reports on wind and solar for Alberta, Ken found the error and redid Tanton’s analysis. True Cost of Wind and Solar for Alberta https://blog.friendsofscience.org/2021/04/25/the-true-cost-of-wind-and-solar-electricity-in-alberta/ and “What You Really Need to Know about Renewables (That the Pembina Institute Won’t Tell You) https://blog.friendsofscience.org/2021/10/20/what-you-really-need-to-know-about-renewable-energy-that-the-pembina-institute-wont-tell-you-parts-a-and-b/ At this point an updated Canadian analysis has not been done as there are many parameters in Canada that are different than the US. However, Robert’s original report certainly shows how ridiculous the decarbonization scheme is.
Fact 1: Remove the Earth’s atmosphere or even just the GreenHouse Gases and the Earth becomes much like the Moon, no water vapor or clouds, no ice or snow, no oceans, no vegetation, no 30% albedo becoming a barren rock ball, hot^3 (400 K) on the lit side, cold^3 (100 K) on the dark. At our distance from the Sun space is hot (394 K) not cold (5 K).
That’s NOT what the Radiative GreenHouse Effect theory says.
EVIDENCE:
RGHE theory “288 K w – 255 K w/o = a 33 C colder ice ball Earth” 255 K assumes w/o keeps 30% albedo, an assumption akin to criminal fraud.
Nikolov “Airless Celestial Bodies”
Kramm “Moon as test bed for Earth”
UCLA Diviner lunar mission data
Int’l Space Station HVAC design for lit side of 250 F. (ISS web site)
Astronaut backpack life support w/ AC and cool water tubing underwear. (Space Discovery Center)
Fact 2: The GHGs require “extra” energy upwelling from a surface radiating as a black body.
EVIDENCE:
According to the K-T atmospheric power flux balance, numerous clones and SURFRAD the GHGs must absorb an “extra” 396/333/63 W/m^2 LWIR energy upwelling from the surface allegedly radiating as a black body. These graphics contain egregious arithmetic and thermodynamic errors. See https://youtu.be/0Jijw7-YG-U
Fact 3: Because of the significant non-radiative, i.e. kinetic, heat transfer processes of the contiguous participating atmospheric molecules the surface cannot upwell “extra” energy as a black body.
EVIDENCE:
As demonstrated by experiment, the gold standard of classical science.
For the experimental write up see:
https://principia-scientific.org/debunking-the-greenhouse-gas-theory-with-a-boiling-water-pot/
CONCLUSION:
No RGHE, no GHG warming, no CAGW or mankind/CO2 driven climate change.
Fact 1: Remove the Earth’s atmosphere or even just the GreenHouse Gases and the Earth becomes much like the Moon, no water vapor or clouds, no ice or snow, no oceans, no vegetation, no 30% albedo becoming a barren rock ball, hot^3 (400 K) on the lit side, cold^3 (100 K) on the dark. At our distance from the Sun space is hot (394 K) not cold (5 K).
That’s NOT what the Radiative GreenHouse Effect theory says.
EVIDENCE:
RGHE theory “288 K w – 255 K w/o = a 33 C colder ice ball Earth” 255 K assumes w/o keeps 30% albedo, an assumption akin to criminal fraud.
Nikolov “Airless Celestial Bodies”
Kramm “Moon as test bed for Earth”
UCLA Diviner lunar mission data
Int’l Space Station HVAC design for lit side of 250 F. (ISS web site)
Astronaut backpack life support w/ AC and cool water tubing underwear. (Space Discovery Center)
Fact 2: The GHGs require “extra” energy upwelling from a surface radiating as a black body.
EVIDENCE:
According to the K-T atmospheric power flux balance, numerous clones and SURFRAD the GHGs must absorb an “extra” 396/333/63 W/m^2 LWIR energy upwelling from the surface allegedly radiating as a black body. These graphics contain egregious arithmetic and thermodynamic errors. See https://youtu.be/0Jijw7-YG-U
Fact 3: Because of the significant non-radiative, i.e. kinetic, heat transfer processes of the contiguous participating atmospheric molecules the surface cannot upwell “extra” energy as a black body.
EVIDENCE:
As demonstrated by experiment, the gold standard of classical science.
For the experimental write up see:
https://principia-scientific.org/debunking-the-greenhouse-gas-theory-with-a-boiling-water-pot/
CONCLUSION:
No RGHE, no GHG warming, no CAGW or mankind/CO2 driven climate change.
Limited battery lifetime means they have to be replaced. What’s the cost per year, not the total cost to do it once? Using Euan Mearn’s optimistic estimate of 390 Wh/W, 1,700 GWe total average demand, $0.578 before installation from Tesla’s catalogue, and five year lifetime, I got FOUR TIMES TOTAL USA GDP EVERY YEAR! And that’s with the most optimistic estimates.