Climate has been continuously changing for more than four billion years. Joe Biden claims he will stop that by merely eliminating carbon dioxide emissions in the United States, mainly by eliminating fossil-fuel generated electricity and switching to wind and solar power.
In an ADI article I wrote in May, 2019, (The Enormous Costs of Wind and Solar Electricity Generation) I show that replacing fossil-fuel generated electricity with solar power would require solar farms with a footprint of 525,312 square miles. If all electricity was supplied by wind generation, it would require wind farms with a total footprint of 1,808,166 square miles. That would have an enormous impact on wildlife habitat and agriculture. On the other hand, if all electricity was supplied by nuclear generation, it would require nuclear stations with a footprint of just 4,619 square miles. Read the May article for more information and see a map of wind and solar footprints. By the way, if the plan to reduce U.S. carbon dioxide emissions to “net-zero” by 2050 is fully implement, it would cut the global increase in temperature by 0.083 to 0.173 degrees C by 2100, a number barely distinguishable from zero. Is that worth the effort?
An interesting article by H. Sterling Burnett shows states that switched to renewable power suffered higher costs of electricity and lagging growth of their economy. (Read more)
See an interactive map and tables which show electricity rates by U.S. state here. These data show that the more a state switches to wind and solar power to cut emissions, the slower that state’s economy is going to grow and the higher electricity rates are.
Experience in Europe shows that the more installed solar and wind capacity per capita a country has, the higher the price people pay for electricity. (Read more)
See also: The Fortuitous Link Between CO2 Emissions and Economic Growth. This video segment discusses the proven fundamental link between CO2 emissions and economic growth. As countries have embraced and increased their production of fossil energy, their citizens have been amply rewarded with increased economic development and prosperity. The real story is that there is no upcoming climate catastrophe and CO2 emissions and fossil energy should be celebrated for enhancing life and improving the standard of living for humanity and the natural world, and they will continue to do so as more fossil fuels are used in the future.
For a short primer on climate, see: A Review of the state of Climate Science
For a primer on renewable energy see:
Note to readers:
Visit my blog at: https://wryheat.wordpress.com/
Index with links to all my ADI articles: http://wp.me/P3SUNp-1pi
Index also on ADI: https://arizonadailyindependent.com/columnist-jonathan-duhamel/
My comprehensive 30-page essay on climate change: http://wp.me/P3SUNp-1bq
A shorter ADI version is at https://arizonadailyindependent.com/2013/08/01/climate-change-in-perspective/