Fossil Fuels are a Hell of a Lot More Sustainable Than Wind and Solar

[Thiel]

Reality folks. So called green technologies are more raw material intensive than fossil fuels.

What we can all agree on is that much more energy will be needed in the future. If anyone thinks we can mine enough rare earth metals and use only marginal sources like wind and solar is dreaming. We need all sources-fossils, hydro-electric, nuclear, geothermal and wind and solar.

[Anonymous]

The NDP likes to promote the lie that oil and gas receive unfair subsidies that no other industry does. Their voters are stupid and gobble up the bullshit.





https://westernstandardonline.com/2022/03/climate-science-group-says-subsidies-for-oil-and-gas-sector-simply-untrue/

The idea of oil and gas industry subsidies is a "repeated lie," said Michelle Stirling, communications manager at Friends of Science Society (FoS).



FoS is a non-profit organization that offers insights on climate science and related energy policies for the public and policymakers, according to its website.



Stirlings spoke to the Western Standard after NDP leader Jagmeet Singh called out the Trudeau government for handing out $14 billion in subsidies to the oil and gas industry annually.



Following the release of the federal government's Emissions Reduction Plan on Tuesday, Singh shared a petition in a tweet calling on Canadians to join him in pushing Trudeau to end fossil fuel subsidies by the end of 2022 and move towards subsidizing renewable energy.



"These environmental groups claim these subsidies exist, but it's simply untrue," said Stirling and pointed to an International Monetary Fund (IMF) paper published in 2019.



"There are no subsidies for the oil and gas sector in Canada. It is just a repeated lie."







The idea of oil and gas industry subsidies is a "repeated lie," said Michelle Stirling, communications manager at Friends of Science Society (FoS).



FoS is a non-profit organization that offers insights on climate science and related energy policies for the public and policymakers, according to its website.





Stirlings spoke to the Western Standard after NDP leader Jagmeet Singh called out the Trudeau government for handing out $14 billion in subsidies to the oil and gas industry annually.



Following the release of the federal government's Emissions Reduction Plan on Tuesday, Singh shared a petition in a tweet calling on Canadians to join him in pushing Trudeau to end fossil fuel subsidies by the end of 2022 and move towards subsidizing renewable energy.



"These environmental groups claim these subsidies exist, but it's simply untrue," said Stirling and pointed to an International Monetary Fund (IMF) paper published in 2019.





The IMP paper concludes governments around the world were subsidizing fossil fuels by $5.2 trillion USD annually.



"These groups continually refer to this report, but we have released a review of that report called Deception vs. Reality: The Misleading Debate About Energy 'Subsidies' that talks about the failed logic behind those IMF claims," said Stirling.



"There are no subsidies for the oil and gas sector in Canada. It is just a repeated lie."





Stirling also referenced the 2021, 2022 edition of the federal government's Energy Fact Book and the claim by the government that "Energy is not a major contributor to Canada's income, especially outside Alberta."



"While the energy sector GDP in Alberta in 2020 was the highest in Canada at $59.6 billion, it was significant in all provinces, including notably Ontario ($15.6 billion), Quebec ($12.0 billion), British Columbia ($11.8 billion) and Saskatchewan $10.5 billion)," said a summary of claims from the Energy Fact Book on the FoS website.



FoS extracted several claims from the fact book, but debunked many with cited facts, including the claim that "renewable energy accounts for a large share of Canada's primary energy production."



"Of Canada's primary energy consumption in 2019, crude oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids accounted for 71% of the total, uranium 16%, coal 5%, hydro 5%, and other renewables (biomass, wind and solar) 3%," said the summary.



"Excluding uranium, fossil fuels accounted for 76% of Canada's total primary energy supply in 2019, biofuels and waste 4%, and wind and solar 1%."



Stirling said environmental groups often call export and development loans given to oil and gas sector companies subsidies, "but they aren't," she said.



"They are loans that are paid back with interest. They also try to roll in some deferred cost issues within the tax act and classify that as a subsidy, but those deferred costs are included in the same structure for all other companies. They pay tax on any profits under this structure like all other corporations."



Stirling said the Emissions Reduction Plan "isn't really a plan."



"This 'plan' doesn't explain how these amazing reductions are going to be made and how we are going to rebuild equal infrastructure and income from other sources outside oil and gas," said Stirling.



"There are big ideas, big goals, and big targets that are legally binding, yet, there is no talk of the unicorns and magical thinking we'll need to make this happen. It's, in fact, a dangerous plan that is not grounded in reality."



Stirling also called attention to the federal government welcoming more than 400,000 immigrants into Canada in 2021.



"Every person brings a carbon footprint," said Stirling.



"The idea of meeting these emission targets and inviting nearly half a million new people into the country are two competing and contrary goals. It's just impossible."



Stirling also pointed to a 2019 interview between TVOntario reporter Steve Paikin and Chris Ragan, the inaugural director of McGill University's Max Bell School of Public Policy, where he also teaches core macroeconomic and microeconomic policy courses.

[Anonymous]

By now most folks know Justine's carbon tax goes up twenty five percent tomorrow. What they probably don't know is thay federal taxes on booze go up tomorrow too. But, don't worry, it won't affect MP's-they gave themselves a big fat raise and it coincides with the day they rob us.



https://tnc.news/2022/03/31/not-a-joke-on-april-1st-taxes-on-gasoline-and-alcohol-increase-mps-get-a-raise/



Canadians may think it is some sick April Fool's Day prank, but taxpayers can expect to pay more at the gas pumps and for alcohol on Friday, while politicians in Ottawa give themselves a hefty pay raise.



Even with fuel prices breaking records across the country, the Trudeau government's carbon tax will increase to approximately 11 cents per litre of gasoline, 13 cents per litre of diesel and 10 cents per cubic metre of natural gas.



According to the Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF), the carbon tax increase will cost families an additional $8.40 to fuel up a minivan.



Canadians can also expect to pay more for beer, wine and spirits when the "alcohol escalator tax" increases federal excise taxes on alcohol on Apr. 1.



Historically high inflation rates and crippling taxes have increased the cost of goods and services for consumers. But as Canadians look for ways to reduce spending, politicians in Ottawa won't have to worry about making ends meet.



On Apr. 1, MPs are giving themselves a raise – in addition to their six-figure salaries.



The CTF estimates the generous pay raise will result in an extra $7,400 for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and an additional $3,700 for every backbench MP.



Currently, Trudeau's base salary is $371,600, and each cabinet minister will be paid $274,000 annually. The numbers do not include all of the other additional benefits cabinet members and the prime minister receive.



CTF federal director Franco Terrazzano is calling on the Trudeau government to cancel the upcoming tax hikes.



"The joke is on taxpayers and it isn't funny as our members of Parliament pocket a pay raise while emptying our wallets with higher carbon and booze taxes," said Terrazzano.



"Canadians are struggling with higher prices on everything and the least our MPs could do is cancel the cruel April Fools' Day joke and end the tax hikes."

[Anonymous]

Wind, solar and hydrogen cannot compete with fossils, nuclear or hydroelectric.



Fossil Fuels v Renewable Energy



Solar power certainly has a future in sunnier climates. But even in India, for instance, the government have realised that they cannot run an electricity grid purely on intermittent power. Even their ambitious plans only project that a 11% of their energy will be coming from wind and solar by 2040.



And it is of course intermittency which is the overriding problem here. You can forget about batteries and other forms of storage, as these can typically only supply power for an hour or two. This is useless when the wind stops blowing for days and weeks on end.



Hydrogen is usually wheeled out as the answer to all of our problems, replacing gas needed to back up wind farms as well as heat our homes. However, even the Committee on Climate Change accept that most of the bulk of our hydrogen will have to be made by steam reforming natural gas.



This process is not only expensive, it also wastes a lot of the gas input. In other words, you need more gas to produce hydrogen than you would need if you just burnt the gas itself in the first place. Worse still, steam reforming emits carbon dioxide, so you need to bolt on a carbon capture system adding yet more cost.



All in all, hydrogen made this way would be double the cost of gas in energy terms. But, crucially, you would still need as much natural gas as you do now, and more. Far from replacing fossil fuels, hydrogen increases our reliance on them.



The alternative is green hydrogen, which is made by electrolysis. It is usually suggested that surplus wind power is used for this. However, the amounts of hydrogen which could be produced this way would be tiny, as well as extremely costly given the intermittency of the process.



The bottom line is that we will still need gas, and lots of it, to back up a renewable heavy grid. Indeed, the more renewable capacity we build, the more backup we need.

https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2022/03/31/fossil-fuels-v-renewable-energy/

[Anonymous]

I subscribe to Alez Epstein newsletter. The brother is brilliant. The planet would be unlivable without fossil fuels.



What if reducing and eliminating fossil fuels is the biggest THREAT to our planet?

https://www.theblaze.com/shows/you-are-here/what-if-reducing-and-eliminating-fossil-fuels-is-the-biggest-threat-to-our-planet



With climate change being a current topic of debate, many people believe fossil fuels are destroying the planet and ruining the climate. In reality, fossil fuels are why modern society has been able to develop to its current state. In this episode of "You Are Here," Elijah and Sydney, joined by Alex Epstein, discuss the necessity of fossil fuels in the future and their beneficial role.



Alex explains that when we approach energy, the environment, and our climate, we must look at the entire context and consider both the benefits of fossil fuels and the adverse side effects.



The benefits of fossil fuels, Alex explains, should be measured by the planet's livability without them. He says that the earth is not a naturally livable place. Instead, it's a deficient and dangerous place. Only when we use machines to help us be productive is the planet prosperous and abundant and safe to inhabit.



Many modern machines that help us be productive only work if you have low-cost, reliable energy and can scale that energy to reach billions of people in thousands of places. According to Alex, fossil fuels for the foreseeable future are the only way to get that energy where it needs to go.



"There's simply nothing that can come close," Alex said. "Nuclear comes closest, but interestingly, it's demonized and criminalized by the same people against fossil fuels."



Alex believes the discussion should not be about solutions, but rather a change in method of thinking to look at the best way to make the world livable.



People think climate change is the current largest threat to our planet. But Alex says the reduction and elimination of fossil fuels is the biggest threat to our planet because we rely on low-cost energy for the world to be livable.



Alex points to a current problem we are seeing as fertilizer and fuel prices go up. It causes the cost to produce food to become too expensive. Our eight billion people depend on low-cost food production to feed their families. When the agriculture industry cannot afford to grow food, people starve.



Watch the video to hear more from this interesting conversation. Can't watch? Download the podcast here.

[Anonymous]

Elon Musk is a little different than his fellow woke billionaires.

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1510485792296210434

[Anonymous]

Over the next three decades, over $26 trillion will need to be invested to meet projected global oil and gas demand. Getting responsibly produced Canadian energy to world markets should be a priority.

[Anonymous]

True Dope approved the Bay du Nord project about 500 kilometers off the coast of Newfoundland. It will produce about 200,000 barrels per had and generate C$3.5 billion in government revenue and create thousands of jobs in Newfoundland.



It's the sensible decision, especially today. However, we all know if this was a pipeline from Alberta, it would never see the light of day. Newfoundland votes Liberal by the way.

[Anonymous]

True Dope approved the Bay du Nord project about 500 kilometers off the coast of Newfoundland. It will produce about 200,000 barrels per had and generate C$3.5 billion in government revenue and create thousands of jobs in Newfoundland.



It's the sensible decision, especially today. However, we all know if this was a pipeline from Alberta, it would never see the light of day. Newfoundland votes Liberal by the way.

I read that today too. Good news for Canada, and for Europe which is where that oil will go. It's a frickin slap in the face to Alberta and Saskatchewan.

[Anonymous]

Energy Policy: Germany and the U.K. — Two Bad Examples

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/energy-policy-germany-and-the-u-k-two-bad-examples/



under Merkel, "the indispensable European," Germany opted for the Energiewende, a policy that gave it soaring energy prices, a dangerous dependency on Russia, and didn't do much, if anything, for the climate.



In Britain, the Tories embarked on a headlong pursuit of reaching net-zero greenhouse-gas emissions without giving much thought about how this goal could be implemented without wrecking the economy. (To be fair, in doing so they were cheered on by most of the British political establishment.) And no, this effort was never going to do much for the climate, either. To combine recklessness, incompetence, and pointlessness in this fashion took quite some doing, but the Conservatives did it.



Germany is now having something of a rethink, although the country still (other than accepting an economic crisis) has no clear way of getting out from under Putin's thumb for now.



The Brits too have been looking again at where they stand and as, the Spectator's Ross Clark reports, the U.K.'s new Energy Security Strategy "puts energy security at the heart of the debate over energy and environmental policy, where it always should have been."

[cc]

ON TV now - Joe Manchin came up to meet with Kenny to talk publicly about mutual help on energy, carbon capture etc. 



In fact he invited Canada to send a delegation to US to discuss how to work together for mutual benefit .. with the right people, like senate Energy Committee



Joe is so knowledgeable on energy - A great discussion!!



Might be replays on Alberta news,  Fash

[Anonymous]

ON TV now - Joe Manchin came up to meet with Kenny to talk publicly about mutual help on energy, carbon capture etc. 



In fact he invited Canada to send a delegation to US to discuss how to work together for mutual benefit .. with the right people, like senate Energy Committee



Joe is so knowledgeable on energy - A great discussion!!



Might be replays on Alberta news,  Fash

[Anonymous]

ON TV now - Joe Manchin came up to meet with Kenny to talk publicly about mutual help on energy, carbon capture etc. 



In fact he invited Canada to send a delegation to US to discuss how to work together for mutual benefit .. with the right people, like senate Energy Committee



Joe is so knowledgeable on energy - A great discussion!!



Might be replays on Alberta news,  Fash

If the democRATs ran on a Joe Manchin platform, they'd win this year's elections.

[Anonymous]

ON TV now - Joe Manchin came up to meet with Kenny to talk publicly about mutual help on energy, carbon capture etc. 



In fact he invited Canada to send a delegation to US to discuss how to work together for mutual benefit .. with the right people, like senate Energy Committee



Joe is so knowledgeable on energy - A great discussion!!



Might be replays on Alberta news,  Fash

Unfortunately, no replacement for the Northern leg of KXL as long as a Dem is in the White House.

[Anonymous]

Life without oil and petroleum products.

**Facebook Video - won't load or even show a link?** -DjB

Code Select Expand

https://www.facebook.com/OilSandsAction/videos/5744412952251871/