IEA debunks media lies - world will triple renewable energy capacity by 2030

IEA debunks media lies - world will triple renewable energy capacity by 2030
👇👇 Buy something and support The Electric Viking Store 👇👇
shop.theelectricviking.com/
Size guide and other help for the store 👇
theelectricviking.com/the-ele...
🔔 Subscribe and hit the notification bell! ► / @electricviking
Join me on Patreon ► / theelectricviking
Join as a member in The Electric Viking KZbin►
/ @electricviking
Members-only videos (see videos before anyone else)►
• Members-only videos
👇 Please donate here for Shanna (Viking's wife) if you can 👇
gofund.me/ef6650d7
See what happened to Shanna:
• Stage 4 can go to hell...
The Electric Viking on other platforms:
Rumble ► rumble.com/c/TheElectricViking
Facebook page ► / theelectricvikingfb
Facebook group ► / theevfbgroup
Twitter ► / theevking
Instagram ► / theelectricvking
Pinterest ► / theelectricviking
Telegram ► t.me/theelectricviking
TikTok ► / theelectricviking
👇 See more about me 👇
• You've been asking; he...
👇 My Bali trip 👇
• I went to Indonesia an...
👇 Video about My Skateboard 👇
• EASIEST & cheapest way...
👇 Subscribe to my kids channel 👇
tinyurl.com/subscribetojackan...
See more videos:
In 2014 Tony Seba said Nuclear would be obsolete by 2030 - he was right
• In 2014 Tony Seba said...
NEW report reveals the insane cost of Nuclear compared to renewable energy
• NEW report reveals the...
Fossil fuels shattered as battery power continues breaking records in California
• Fossil fuels shattered...
Batteries + solar smash records in California and fossil power plants suffer
• Batteries + solar smas...
Renewables break records in California; experts predict end of fossil fuels
• Renewables break recor...
Experts predict global fossil fuel giants will lose billions & struggle to survive
• Experts predict global...
Audi's CEO says fossil car demand will crash in 2026, making ICE expensive
• Audi's CEO says fossil...
California hits 100% renewable energy as solar and wind smash fossil fuels
• California hits 100% r...
The world’s largest solar and battery power plant has 1.9 million panels
• The world’s largest so...
Record solar drives electricity prices down 50% in states using less fossil fuels
• Record solar drives el...
Scientists unveil genius solar tower that generates power 24 hours a day
• Scientists unveil geni...
Massive solar farm being built to charge the worlds biggest battery
• Massive solar farm bei...
Alarm Raised: Are China's Cyber Hackers Using Solar Panels to Spy on You?
• Alarm Raised: Are Chin...
Breakthrough paves way for mass-production of ultra-efficient perovskite solar
• Breakthrough paves way...
EV's covered in solar imminent as Perovskite solar cells set new world record
• EV's covered in solar ...
Australia Begins Installing Power Pole Batteries for Excess Solar Storage
• Australia Begins Insta...
The largest wind project in the Western Hemisphere starts construction
• The largest wind proje...
US firm unveils small 'safe' nuclear reactor that powers 300,000 homes
• US firm unveils small ...
A commercially viable solar cell set a NEW efficiency world record
• A commercially viable ...
Wind & solar send electricity prices below zero for 1 week in Australia
• Wind & solar send elec...
China has enough wind & solar to power nearly 1 billion houses
• China has enough wind ...
VW increase ELECTRIC car sales worldwide by 44% in Q1 2023
• VW increase ELECTRIC c...
The 5 best electric cars unveiled at the Shanghai motor show
• The 5 best electric ca...
Model Y is best selling car in Europe and the United States in Q1
• Model Y is best sellin...
#iea #renewableenergy #solarenergy #capacity #media
👇Reference to the news/charts & videos used in this video:
electrek.co/2024/06/03/global...
This channel may use some copyrighted materials without specific authorization of the owner; but content used here falls under the “Fair Use” Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976.
Allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.
Contact us for any copyright issues. If you want a credit of any footage we are using, please let us know.
Website: theelectricviking.com/contact/
Email: [e-mail]

[@andoser7836]

The fossil fuels industry is worth $ 13 trillion a DAY where do you think the FUD is coming from? Love your work Sam

[@franklong6269]

Hmmm, not sure where you got your numbers, but I doubt that they are accurate. THINK for a moment. It has taken the US over 250 years to accumulate a 33 trillion dollar debt and the US is the richest nation the world has ever seen. It is not possible for any industry to earn a "trillion dollars a day even if we consider global earnings." What you fail to understand is how much money the fossil fuel industry loses in research, testing, drilling test wells, exploration, dealing with environmental issues and more. There are a LOT of "fossil fuel industry" businesses that have gone bankrupt. The fossil fuel industry is not inherently evil. The environmental Democrats who have brainwashed your mind with lies are.

[@frankcoffey]

One of the issues for traditional fuel plants is there is no way to reduce costs. The cost of operating these plants can only keep going up. Renewables started out expensive and there is still a lot of cost takeout that is achievable. It's the same with ICE vs EVs all the cost reduction for ICE has already happened and it's going up and the EVs are just going down.

[@fredflinstone8628]

There will be a last gasp for fossil fuels just like in 2021/2022 in the US when coal actual grew. This is because there is an input fuel cost for legacy generation and that input fuel costs go down when the demand for that fuel goes down...thus making that solution relatively cheaper. The same is going to happen for NG and specifically LNG where capacity is being increased significantly. Those sunk capital costs are happening now and the marginal production and operating costs are going to be low for several decades. As the world becomes awash in more NG than it needs the price will drop even further and installed dispatchable backup power will compete favorably with renewables + battery storage. The shift is inevitable but countries are going to continue to operate legacy plants because the capital cost is already sunk and their operating cost is going to go down as fuel input cost goes down. Everyone is going to continue operate legacy as long as the cost curve, represented as total cost to ratepayers, makes sense. This is exactly why coal had a recovery in the US in 2021/2022 after getting decimated in the previous 10 yrs. Don't get me wrong, it is last gasp stuff, but don't underestimate how long it will take. New capacity is becoming a slam dunk because of capital cost/efficiency gains for renewables, but replacing legacy capacity is a different story.

[@bobwallace9753]

@@fredflinstone8628 All you are actually saying is that change doesn't plot out as a smooth graph line. There will be some "ups and downs", but the overall slope leads to a fossil fuel free future for the planet. How fast? If we look at other technology shifts, faster than almost anyone would expect.

[@RayJohnson1980]

@@bobwallace9753 unless your name tony seba and can see quite clearly

[@unclefatbloke]

@@fredflinstone8628 ''input fuel costs go down when the demand for that fuel goes down'' - are you insane?! Reduced demand has a direct and inevitable effect on cost & price, because costs do NOT also go down! Costs can only go down with increased demand = overheads are distributed over additional volume. Reduced volume = costs are spread over less 'product' = product price MUST goes up! Fossil fuel companies will NOT be able to reduce prices because of increased costs, so they will have a choice to accept lower margins, but I think they will simply increase prices and accept that they are in a dying industry!

[@beatreuteler]

@@fredflinstone8628 It is easlily possible that it will take longer, as you write, but the most important thing, also as you write correctly, it will happen.

[@Brutus4048]

I really hope your optimism will come to fruition!!!!

[@RayJohnson1980]

your opinion? i think he is right

[@drazenrevelo2191]

It’s a fact and it’s happening as we speak.

[@SeanNewhouse-mv9ez]

Thumbs up​@@RayJohnson1980

[@lifeisneverthesame910]

​@@drazenrevelo2191in Indonesia solar PV is very expensive.

[@yggdrasil9039]

6:20 True you don't have to wait 7 years for a new coal plant to be built. You just have to wait 10 years for a wind farm to get approved by the NSW planning department, while they consult the air

[@sd70cal]

don't agree with your assessment of it only taking 7 years to approve a new coal plant, but taking the existing problematic path is not what made America the innovation leader it is.

[@markwilliamson9199]

A poor farmer in Kenya a couple of years ago said ”a dictator can’t turn off the Sun”. Another reason to have distributed solar

[@RayJohnson1980]

agreed, also when crops and livestock are not doing so well cost wise then solar can make up the short fall also

[@beatreuteler]

@@RayJohnson1980 Yes, plus, where the sun is too strong to grow crops, Agri-PV can shade the ground so food can be grown better below.

[@bobwallace9753]

Kenya is one of the places where rural people are using micro-solar setups. The average cost of connecting a rural household to the grid is around $5,000, a cost that would never be recovered by the utility company. For a modest monthly payment for 12 months or so a family can own a small solar setup that will provide them lights, phone charging, and run a radio.

[@ForbiddTV]

A dictator with nuclear weapons could turn off the sun.

[@beatreuteler]

@@ForbiddTV Nope. Not forever.

[@livingladolcevita7318]

Hi Sam I live in chilly cloudy Wales and I have a 3.2Kw array with 11 Kw battery. My bill for last month was £2 and change for actual electricity and £15 for standing charge, the cost of the equipment etc. I know it will be more in winter but hey I'm not complaining.

[@ingo_8628]

Your batterie is kWh, not kW.

[@RayJohnson1980]

i ask is a micro wind turbine a option? and extra battery capacity? to make more money and be self sufficient?

[@livingladolcevita7318]

no shit Sherlock

[@jonevansauthor]

@@RayJohnson1980 micro wind turbines aren't really much use for normal usage. Turbines need massive swept area to be more efficient e.g. very big blades. So solar is better in almost every respect but yes, people are trying to make commercially useful products for houses that use wind. Also, solar is much quieter and while no-one serious cares about the appearance of wind turbines, we do all genuinely care about them creaking and groaning on top of every house in the street. I haven't yet see a viable small scale one - small scale hydro if you happen to have a stream is much more likely but hardly anyone does and it's fraught with problems and fish have to live.

[@beatreuteler]

@@RayJohnson1980 Micro wind is a waste of money if that is what you asked. It actually doesn't make sense to try to be self sufficient. Try to become 85% or at best 90% using solar and a battery. On doubt, make the solar generator larger, not the storage.

[@jhunt5578]

The Conservatives in the UK have plans to broaden oil drilling, whilst Labour wants to go for renewables. I dont know how it's even a disagreement at this point.

[@glyngreen538]

Though Labour still talk about new nuclear too. I hope that gets abandoned in favour of renewables.

[@patdbean]

Nuclear, is low CO2. Not zero , but neither is wind once the you take In to account all the CO2 from building the wind farms. ​@@glyngreen538

[@brendanpells912]

Between 17-21 December 2022 wind & solar met 4.7% of UK grid demand. This was due to a high pressure system sat over the British Isles bringing light winds, bitterly cold temperatures and, of course, short daylight hours and low sun elevation. Even if you tripled wind and solar capacity that would only bring it up to meet 14.1% of today's demand, never mind future demand which is projected to rise. It is laughable to think we will be able to manage without nuclear and gas-fired generation.

[@bobwallace9753]

@@brendanpells912 Which means the UK will not likely be a standalone grid but will pull renewable energy from other parts of the region when there's a local lull.

[@patdbean]

@@bobwallace9753 if wind generation is low in the UK it will most likely also be low in mainland Europe. While nuclear is far to costly to have sitting around doing nothing half the time. So until long term storage is cost-effective , it will be gas, gas and more gas.

[@cookingonthego9422]

I agree ff are not competitive anymore

[@pr7049]

Big question is why a country like Australia situated in sun belt is not in the forefront to implement solar power.

[@Leonardo555ZZZZ]

Cost is enormous , land demand is enormous , storage cost is enormous and the fact that solar power produces no power for well over half the day, every day.

[@mickydee26]

​@Leonardo555ZZZZ cost is far cheaper than coal power. Any sheep paddocks can be part covered with PV and probably benefit the soil. Grid level batteries pay for themselves quickly. Policies of the previous government put us way behind

[@jamesgreig5168]

The Size of Australia and distributing the power makes it very expensive and not viable. It has to be a careful mix including nuclear.

[@ForbiddTV]

Fossil fuel peaker plants will be essential if the Greenies continue on this disastrous ruinables path.

[@mickydee26]

Batteries are far cheaper than fossil fuel peaker plants

[@ForbiddTV]

@@mickydee26 Maybe on your planet. Here the price of the capacity of constructing and operating a fossil fuel peaker plant is far cheaper than batteries or other energy storage methods.

[@williamupdike4863]

One of the few channels that actually makes sense, is always a relief to watch/listen to. I have paid attention to climate change, climate science, EVs, for a very long time, decades. With respect to S curves, Wright's law, a bit of common sense and basic understanding of business, yes......renewables and EVs should be the norm by 2030. Would still be very concerned that we still could be 2C above baseline by then.............no time to celebrate.............buy a bicycle, or an EV, get better footwear, yell at a few politicians and oil people....for God's sake, please hurry!

[@jamesgreig5168]

1. Cost of electricity in California is amongst the dearest. 30cents (US) 2. 47% is from natural gas. 3. All these panels will need to be replaced every 15 to 25 years. 4. Renewables bringing down power costs is simply a lie. Most nations that have introduced significant renewables have seen prices go up. 5. Cheapest prices are where a careful mix of energy forms is used. Especially when they incorporate nuclear. The dearest component of renewables is storage. You don't need that when nuclear is in the mix.

[@ForbiddTV]

Well actually with nuclear some peaker plants will still be required. Nuclear is an excellent base load, but cannot ramp up or down quick enough to satisfy the fluctuating peak demands of the grid.

[@stevennelson7518]

No electric bill for 15 years. What are you waiting for? Solar panel cost have dropped 90%.

[@PyroShields]

The upfront cost of solar. If you're planning at keeping your house than yes but if not than no.

[@BMWHP2]

7 years ago, my 2500Wp solar panels incl. inverter and labor cost €4.200. Today, the same set 2500Wp with inverter and work will cost me €5.800. Tell me again that the prices came down 90%

[@huckleberryfinn6578]

@@BMWHP2 What are you smoking? 2.5kW panels with inverter costs today circa $1000(at least here in Germany).

[@thiesclausen4868]

​@@huckleberryfinn6578 The Americans don't have the good and cheap stuff from China.

[@orionbetelgeuse1937]

@@huckleberryfinn6578 a simple google search would show that you are smoking paint. without work and wiring a good system is $4800

[@sustainablelivingnl773]

It’s so refreshing to hear good news in the morning while I’m sipping on my cup of coffee.

[@ForbiddTV]

A coffee you won't be able to enjoy it we ever do get to 100% ruinables.

[@paul1979uk2000]

In historic context, we are getting so close to being able to produce all out energy needs and to be able to store it, even at a localised level, which I suspect will push most of us to want to go gridless to have more control over what we produce and use, as well as the cost, after all, for all the talk of how much renewable energy is going onto the grid, consumers don't feel like they are benefitting from it in lower bills, which kinda holds back renewable deployment, but gridless or attached to the grid but producing your own energy, you're in control of the energy you produce and the cost. Over the next 2 to 3 decades, maybe sooner, we are going to have a revolution in the energy sector, I suspect most of us will produce our own energy on-site and probably won't need to be connected to the grid, especially once battery tech is better and cheaper and we have a good mix of solar and wind power at a local urban level. That we are getting some downbeat reports or underselling of renewable energy, that doesn't surprise me, the fossil industry is big and they will protect their profits by any means they can and renewable energy is a major threat to them. In any case, I still find it remarkable about all the debates around renewable energy, it's clear that it works and works well, it's a cheap long term form of clean energy, the only issues it has is that we need a buffer of storage energy, but that's quickly developing with better battery tech and other storage innovation, as renewable energy continues to get better and cheaper, and the same for energy storage, it's going to be everywhere that I think it will supple all the energy we need and more. I also think that by 2030 onwards, many countries will supple 100% of their electrical needs and likely export energy, they are also pushing more towards an electrical system with EV cars and heat pumps, meaning, there's going to be far more demand for electricity and far less for oil and gas, this will set off a chine reaction as more countries do it, others will follow until eventually the entire world is clean energy, but I think as tech advances, I don't think it will be grid energy that wins out, it's likely going to be gridless because that gives the owner far more control on what they produce, use and on the cost, that would also have massive savings if we don't have to maintain the grid network, which I think I heard cost around 40% of the entire cost of energy, which if true, that's a lot of money to be saved just there. One last note, I also think renewable energy will be a game changer for developing countries, especially on the African continent, after all, once you can produce enough clean energy for your needs, it's going to be much easier to produce clean water and food, that will open up the door for them to develop in other areas, we'll all benefit from clean renewable energy but developing countries stand to benefit a lot more.

[@davidkendall2272]

Seba has been spot on correct in his disruptive technology predictions regarding electric transportation and renewable energy adoption. He is the MAN, and has a proven track record and you will be proven right IMHO.

[@frankmynard6325]

I got from another site as to why IEA has been out. If fossils (fuel companies) are supplying say 100gW in energy their efficiency losses are so bad that replacing 33% with renewables is enough. This is why coal & oil inevitably lose. I

[@russellgraham5120]

All smoke and mirrors and pretty much double the lies 💩💩💩

[@lakeline6317]

There is no reason, other than the lobbying from the Fossil Fuel Industry, that the ODEC countries achieve at least 50% of Renewable Energy by 2030 and at least 80% by 2040. This is not just about saving the environment, going green makes economic sense.

[@RayJohnson1980]

problem is money and lobbyist and politicians

[@beatreuteler]

@@RayJohnson1980 At least for your personal action and possibly investment: How does Lobby etc. influence that?

[@alefernaqwe]

Should focus more on reducing inflation, if you import fossils its a lot of currency going out of the country, vs a bunch of salaries of locals maintaining the energy production at home

[@Preciouspink]

We continue to need more energy and utilize all the capacity we can create. Fusion and all the renewables that are being invented (and deployed)will try to meet current demands and future demands of ai and cyrpto. Here in North America re-shoring of previously overseas production and manufacturing will put still further demand for energy.

[@bobwallace9753]

Fusion is not real, at this point in time. If we do manage to control fusion adequately to generate electricity no one has figured out how to make the cost competitive. It's just another way to boil water like expensive coal and expensive fission.

[@tomconrad7091]

You are half right. Can fusion compete? What are the cost curves for nuclear power? How long does it take to construct a nuclear power plant? How much security is required at a nuclear reactor? Unlike most on social media I think you make some valid points, but we need to move quickly to secure our future and all sides need to review their cost curves.

[@rodmitchell831]

Great stuff Sam

[@electricviking]

Glad you enjoyed it

[@jhunt5578]

Has rethink x changed its estimates based on the electricity demand of AI compute?

[@bobwallace9753]

Look at what companies are spending on chips to build their supercomputers. Don't you suspect they will be spending money on wind, solar, and storge to assure a supply of affordable electricity? If you're building a supercomputer, you aren't dumb.

[@jhunt5578]

@bobwallace9753 Microsoft built their data centre next to a nuclear power plant. And Open AI invested into nuclear fusion. The point to be considered is that there is going to be higher demand for electricity than Rethink X previously thought.

[@KevinLyda]

I switched to an all-electric home from 2018 to 2021. The last year I used fossil fuels for my car, cooking and home heating, i used 60-70 MWhs of energy (petrol, heating oil and electricity). I now only use electricity for energy - 16-17 MWhs a year. Moving off fossil fuel powered systems will reduce the amount of energy we need to generate.

[@willeisinga2089]

You hit the Nail. Nobody talks about this.

[@wotireckon]

Yep; the Sankey diagram says it all. Under fossil fuels, ⅔ of energy is wasted.

[@agabkk]

Yes, great respect for your precise observation and prediction, Sam. Plus game changer on solar energy will help this revolution. We will see together!

[@tomorr9100]

Mate love your work, I try to catch everything you produce, have learnt a lot. Regarding coal you could possibly be a little clearer when you talk about the phase out of coal.....may need to differentiate between Metallurgical and Thermal...as it turns out Thermal Coal is the low hanging fruit ...not sure on exact figures for Australia but Metallurgical coal accounts for between 40 to 50% of production and while there is a lot of promising research work going on it would seem that we are going to be stuck with a need for the stuff for another 20 years at least...

[@donwhyte9855]

Would be interesting to know what effect the shift to renewables and low/zero carbon transportation and industry is having on global GHG levels.

[@stephencullum8255]

Watching it happening in my own back yard. At the power plant site I retired from , 5 miles away and just down the road from where I live , about a mile. Solar farms are popping up like mushrooms after a rain storm. As batteries get cheaper fossil fuel generation is going to be priced out. Heck I have a little over an acre of land and thinking about specking out if solar with battery can get me off the grid and maybe even charge an electric car.

[@ForbiddTV]

You are buying into Greenie hype. You won't be able to get off the grid with solar and batteries.

[@filippoleombruno8624]

In Australia I am forever debating people on why we will never have nuclear power, it's really bizarre

[@nathanielbyrne1132]

You're still ruled by Rupert Murdoch

[@Leonardo555ZZZZ]

Tripling from a low base is easy , but fossil fuels will continue to supply the majority of global energy demand in coming decades. The cost of installing and continually replacing wind and solar , combined with the huge cost of storage and the increased costs of transmission , will ensure that the global domination by fossil fuels will continue.

[@ForbiddTV]

Yeah if they ever try to eliminate fossil fuels we are doomed.

[@mickydee26]

Huh? Wind and solar are significantly cheaper than fossil fuel power. Have been for a few years already. And grid level storage pays for itself quickly

[@ForbiddTV]

@@mickydee26 Actually wind and solar is even more expensive than nuclear when real numbers are used. And we have no grid level storage capable of sustaining the grid for the long periods that ruinables fall flat.

[@SanePerson1]

The IEA has been lowballing renewable energy deployment since at least the mid-2000s - it's amazing. In the early stages of the geometric progression of renewable energy deployment, the IEA would update the their projection in cluding their big miss for the year just ended and every year and they'd make the future growth linear - every single year! BTW, so far India has been deploying coal like crazy - it's as if they can't look at the cost curves.

[@beatreuteler]

Cost is just a part of the game. If India would copy China's growth plan for solar there would be a dramatic shortage in solar panel production capacity worldwide. In my opinion, in India solar growth will explode just as soon as some other markets start to gradually saturate.

[@tomcraver9659]

For "superpower" to happen, wind/solar/battery not only has to get cheaper, but it has to get cheaper than continuing to use EXISTING natural gas power plants idled by W/S/B. A natural gas plant used only 10% of the time (to cover days not fully covered by some level of W/S/B build-out) presumably can last longer, meaning the average yearly replacement cost expense is much lower. Even if we insist that we stop using natural gas, and required the plants to use synthetic gas made from captured CO2 and water and renewable energy - maybe only 30% efficient round trip energy storage from electricity back to electricity - the cost of storing energy as fuel in a big tank is quite cheap compared to battery costs, so even that approach might be cheaper.

[@ForbiddTV]

With ruinabels it's guaranteed we will have to keep using natural gas. No way around it if we still want a grid.

[@ForbiddTV]

So by 2030 we will no longer have cheap electricity, will have energy rationing and have massive rolling blackouts. A pretty grim future you lay out.

[@michaelmcnaughton1535]

Oh wow. Triple capacity in 6-years. The could be a substantial fraction of the increase in demand meanwhile. Finally free of fossil fuelled energy.

[@ForbiddTV]

Don't be excited, the more ruinables we get the closer we are to disaster, especially since the Greenies think they are going to stop fossil fuel use.

[@jonisolis9645]

Wow, some good news. We so need that!

[@ForbiddTV]

The bad news is if they actually accomplish this it will mean an end to the grid.

[@snodgee]

We are going to need it as AI and data centres will use to to 35% of our electricity by 2030 , google are supposed to be building a new AI data centre that would use nearly all of the power created by a nuclear power plant

[@digitalzips]

Dream on mate, it's all bunk unless they invent something spectacular.

[@ForbiddTV]

It seems this whole channel is delusional in respect of ruinables.

[@markrowland1366]

That's 8 Terawats. More than is available now from all suppliers

[@aaronsinspirationdaily4896]

Energy superpower FTW! What happens when energy is abundant, cheap and easily accessible? A great book, “The Theory of Everyone” by Michael Murthankrishna, covers how fundamental and important this has been for the flourishing of all life on earth, not just humans. The impact on humanity has been profound and will continue to be critical. This renewable bridge will carry us to the next level needed for humanity to take the next giant leap.

[@paul1979uk2000]

The amount of energy we produce is a big factor in controlling our pace of development in all areas. You are right that once we get to the stage of producing more energy than we need, that's going to push us onto the next stage of development, but any amount of energy we produce, we'll always find a way of using it, it will just allow us to do far more than is realistically possible today, which potentially sends the human race into the next level of development, and there's a fair chance of this happening over the next 2 to 3 decades in many countries around the world, maybe even sooner than that.

[@Treebeard1671]

You keep saying “the media” as if there’s only one. Love your show.

[@walking_in_the_shade]

'the media' is is a collective term.

[@sergiotonetti3657]

tank you SAM

[@kamra99a]

Doctor Google says: "After the permitting spree of the past year, China currently has 243 GW of new coal power plants under construction, or permitted for construction. When plants currently announced or in the preparation stage but not yet permitted are included, this number rises to 392 GW of capacity at 306 different coal power plants."

[@lkrnpk]

I have not looked at Chinese coal output bug just cause there are more cosl plants does not mean they all generate at 100% capacity… In Latvia we have big gas plant that mostly sits idle in summer as we import renewables instead, we need it in winter when it works with heating in combined cycle and helps stabilise the grid. Same in China, could be they are needed as baseline for when there are less renewable energy available, and with batteries getting cheaper and more renewables, they will go away relatively fast too… or will be utilized at 10% capacity or sth

[@beatreuteler]

I agree to @lkrnpk and would like to add that in spite of the ambituous coal power build plan in China, the share coal has on China's electricity mix is shrinking every year. This is due to the fact that wind and solar combined have a faster growth pace than coal!

[@beatreuteler]

People 50 and beyond do not need to look for a new job even if they work in the coal industry today. UNtil coal is fully down they will reach retirement age. However for all younger people, I agree with the Viking, it is better to look for a job i the solar and/or wind industry.

[@brendanpells912]

How is Australia going to replace the income it receives by exporting coal and gas?

[@fenrirgg]

When no one buys Australian coal and gas the world will be different, everyone will want emu eggs: the next big export of Australia. I would buy Australian emu eggs 🇦🇺🥚 today tbh

[@bobwallace9753]

Sell kangaroo and rabbit meat....

[@marcsimmonds5483]

By not importing oil?

[@allenhill4578]

Its not like we will have a choice. Buyers will eventually disappear. We either take action now or suffer the consequences later.

[@geraldbutler5484]

@@marcsimmonds5483This is the big one! Self sufficiency in energy is the holy grail. Huge savings and no worries about being cut off.

[@jensstubbestergaard6794]

Triple is not what is going to happen. Since the millennium the annual growth in global installed solar power capacity has been 37%. Last year that amounted to 444GW new solar power capacity. Tripling happens in just 43 months because on average 37% annually breaks down to 2.6% growth monthly.

[@mnhsty]

Time for the US to drop the ridiculous tariffs on Chinese green energy products. We’re missing out on a lot of GDP growth, and not really saving many jobs in the medium term.

[@paul1979uk2000]

I think there needs to be a balance approach but I don't see the US changing its tune on China, being that the US is fearful of a rising China that I suspect the US will get tougher on them. The EU and the rest of the world will likely strike a middle ground with China that's more practical, but as for the US, they are going all in like they did on Japan as they feared them rising in the 80's.

[@mnhsty]

@@paul1979uk2000 There is still so much to gain and little to lose by importing subsidized goods from China. If even sanctions are ineffective toward Russia or Iran, how much less effective must petty tariffs be with China.

[@josegonzalez-wi4uy]

thanks we need v2g and v2h

[@leroyessel2010]

@EirexTech is cavitation breakthrough for turning any type of water into hydrogen gas at $0.25 KG has no decentralized competition

[@leroyessel2010]

Cavitation for any type of water or contaminated waste plastic will produce the lowest cost hydrogen gas and synthetic fuels by EirexTech a 5YR old Canadian company worth investigating.

[@Carl_in_AZ]

🔌🔌The next two weeks of record-breaking heat in California will show everyone Solar and Wind are here to stay. It will also prove that politics and not EVs created stress on the grid.🔌🔌

[@markmiller8903]

How long will it take to recover your cost of solar?

[@bobwallace9753]

@@markmiller8903 Is that an issue? The actual issue is how much less will electricity cost from a RE fed grid. And how much we'll save via avoided fossil fuel pollution.

[@sd70cal]

@@markmiller8903 I think I saw where battery installation was going to have a 3 year payback.

[@justinr9753]

Wasn't no record heat when you had smog, it was 85F top.

[@beatreuteler]

Typically, when recovery time of investment is named for below 15 years, someone is not looking at the investnment correctly. Example here in Switzerland, typical recovery time for battery storage is infinite. say: It will never be recovered in full. Actually with dropping storage prices, that may however change! But even then, revcovery for storage at best is below the liefetime. However for a PV without storage a recovery time becomes reslistic more and more below 15 years. It used to be 25 years a couple of years ago with lower electricity cost from the grid.

[@christopherfry2844]

My suspicion is that as renewables reduce the cost of electricity in Australia, our gold plated poles and wires will go platinum. Those who own the grid will think that they alone should benefit. With panels and batteries getting cheaper, Australians should be thinking of going off grid. (Stupid but necessary.)

[@JoeyBlogs007]

Not entirely surprising, becuase the profit margins on renewables are likely much higher, especially solar and battery storage. i.e. given minimal operating costs due to no or at least very few mechanical moving parts and thus very low operational maintenance. Wind less so, however still likely relatively loweer maintenance than fossil fuel energy generation. Unlike coal fired and nuclear power stations with turbines and generators.

[@sheilah4525]

Desperation and refusal to accept reality often leads to outlandish claims. The slow dawning OF reality does not impact us all equally. Some always cling to the beliefs of a previous period, and insist the tide is going in a direction other than observed. Please continue to be on the wrong train, if you choose, but as more and more realize we can build a less polluting vehicle, we also now know that if we replaced every ICE on the planet, AS OF THREE YEARS AGO, BY 2100, that would STILL HAVE NO APPRECIABLE EFFECT ON PREDICTED TEMPERATURE. In other words, re-wiring the world for EVs to save the planet, even ignoring issues relating to child slave labor, the environmental damage, the fossil fuel usage to CHARGE the EVs AND THEIR RANGE/QUALITY ISSUES, IS A FOOL’S ERRAND and they STILL REMAIN EXPENSIVE AND OFFER NO OVERALL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENT TO DATE OR PROMISE ANY, EVER! ATOP THIS, the CLAIMED notion this will be achieved in any significant way by 2030? LAUGHABLE. Nothing personal, but given FACTUAL REALITY, this otherwise capable fellow’s message sounds as “UP TO DATE AND FACTUALLY BASED”, THAT HE REMINDS ME OF SOMEONE ABOARD TITANIC, INSISTENTLY YELLING “STAY ON BOARD! THIS SHIP IS UNSINKABLE!” Folks, the EV obsession is already “DOWN BY THE BOWS” and it AIN’T RISING BACK UP.

[@christopherj2231]

Tony, Tony I love you.

[@TheExumRidge]

We need a atrium reactor.

[@TheTruth-dy8ze]

The electric Viking has been getting too much shock treatment to make rational statements. It’s actually twisted his mouth to the right.

[@Banmuyuan]

That’s what they say about the over capacity of China.

[@MrDisasterboy]

The largest per capita increase in renewable energy for human society in history, was probably domestication of animals. But I take the point, for industrial society. 🙂

[@jonevansauthor]

Fair play but also fire - that must have been a big one ;) And tea. Tea must have been a huge increase ;)

[@undercoveraca]

I'm hoping a positive unintended consequence of US tariffs on Chinese EVs, solar and batteries is that China floods developing country markets with these items at low cost. Developing country uptake of renewables is one of the biggest barriers to our climate goals and as long as Xi is focussed on supporting Chinese manufacturing prices will continue to fall - but they will have to find new markets as well as installing their renewables in China. Imagine if Indonesia turns away from coal to renewables etc.

[@MaxLett]

What the ==== is a PIKA plant?

[@stanmitchell3375]

Electric energy can be converted to ammonia

[@freedom8480]

Dude!

[@mpmpm]

You are forgetting the best option for renewables: geothermic energy. That doesn't take a lot of space. Just dig 3..4 km deep holes.

[@ForbiddTV]

You are forgetting that geothermal isn't practical inmost of the world, that's why it's not everywhere. The best option is actually nuclear.

[@alaasadek2908]

Hello Sam Could you please do a research on the price of lfp batteries? Here in Egypt the boys are selling the kwh for over $130. When I called China the kwh is less than $40! I researched and found that China is restricting the export of these batteries to say Egypt. Certainly to the US. So tell us what China will do. I heard that China will subsidies 3rd world countries to switch to renewable energy. Do you think this is true? Best regards from Egypt.

[@beatreuteler]

$130 is a very very good price. Here in Switzerland, 2 years ago I paid about $700 for a 2nd life!

[@willm5814]

I put solar on my home - just love driving my car on sunshine!

[@ForbiddTV]

You aren't powering your car from solar on your home. Your roof isn't big enough and you don't have enough money to build a system that could power your EV.

[@willm5814]

⁠think again bro, I installed my own energy monitoring system - I’m regularly producing greater than 110 kwh per week - that’s more than I need for my shiny new Tesla Model Y - that’s with an undersized system of only 5.7 KW - on a sub-optimal location on my house in the middle of a forest (because the morons that run our community think solar panels look awful - I think they believe it’s just wrong to harvest the sun’s energy 😂)

[@ForbiddTV]

@@willm5814 You just displayed you lack of a system, or knowledge of them altogether. A 5.7kW system is not only small, but it isn't enough to charge a Tesla, unless of course you don't ever drive it. Even my largest system of 15kW wouldn't charge a Tesla except in the Summer when I usually have some excess electricity.

[@willm5814]

@@ForbiddTVyou’re making me laugh, I wrote my engineering thesis on the topic in ‘81 - installed my first off-grid system in ‘98 - My system 5.7 kw it covers all off my driving in my MY - you’re just going to have to deal with that 😂

[@ForbiddTV]

@@willm5814 Why don't you look up how many kWh it takes to charge up a Model Y and try your lie again. Then try it on someone who doesn't have many alternative energy systems over the last 40 years and four EV's before the first Tesla was ever produced.

[@chillfluencer]

Triple? Make this 30 times as much as now.

[@franklong6269]

Renewable technology simply isn't ready to supply the world's energy. Solar requires energy storage, and we don't have efficient energy storage at this time. Wind is intermittent, even in the best circumstances. So, it requires energy storage also. There are a LOT of energy storage experiments being tested right now, but none of them is mature. Further, we can't build enough lithium-ion batteries to provide sufficient backup to the major energy grids of the world. We simply don't even begin to have the capacity. Additionally, it is questionable that we have enough rare earth materials to provide battery backup on such a massive scale. There are two major developments that are occurring that will dominate the world's energy system: 1. The development of solid-state batteries will transform the automotive industry. Initially, they will have 50% more range, charge in less than 10 minutes, have superior longevity and operate much more efficiently in extreme cold and hot weather. Right now, several companies are building different versions of solid-state batteries, which they will sell to various industries. At least one or two companies are ramping up for mass production of their solid-state battery versions. As the solid-state battery industry matures, it will change the world, but it still won't provide a massive shift to replacing fossil fuels used in utility power plants. The demand for solid-state batteries will be obscene when they start to come out, and it will take years for companies to even begin to meet that demand. 2. Small Nuclear Reactors (SMR) are being developed by dozens of companies. Various prototype versions have been built, but the challenge is developing an SMR that can be mass-produced, has intrinsic safety protections that don't depend on human beings, and can be easily transported via 18-wheel trucks or heavy-load helicopters. Successful SMRs also must be easy to install and repair, possibly using modular parts that can be "plugged in" without taking the entire reactor apart. Several countries have built SMRs over the last 60 years and NASA is designing SMRs for space travel and spaceship propulsion. However, NASA is notoriously inefficient and stupid, so it will be private industry that will solve the SMR problems. The rewards to those companies who are able to design an SMR that can be mass-produced, easily transported, easily repaired, reliable, easily installed and intrinsically safe are incalculable. Imagine being able to buy a 100 Megawatt SMR that can be transported in a normal semi-truck, set up in six months instead of 10 years, and costs $150 million. It will have built-in safeguard shut-downs that don't depend on human monitoring. They won't require massive amounts of water to cool, and many designs use spent uranium waste that comes from traditional power plants. They will be so safe that they can be installed inside cities, which will make connecting them to existing grids dirt cheap. SMRs have the potential to provide dirt-cheap, clean energy whose only negative is that they produce nuclear waste. However, the waste they produce is not high-level waste and it is much easier to dispose of than waste from traditional nuclear plants. Unlike solar and wind, SMRs can produce energy 24 hours a day and they will easy to backup with redundant SMRs. So, a major city may be powered by 10 SMRs located strategically to connect to the grid, and utilities will buy three or four "spare SMRs and install them in key points so that if one of the 10 SMRs goes down, a spare SMR immediately comes on line. These two energy solutions are happening as I write this and they will change the world. Solar and wind will continue to grow, but they will never exclusively power nation's power grids because there are no cheap, efficient storage options on the horizon. Further, they are highly suspectable to hurricanes, floods, tornadoes, earthquakes and other disasters. SMRs can be built underground in concrete bunkers that protect them from disasters. I am all for wind and solar power. I will be installing a solar system on my home soon, God willing. But by themselves, they are not the panacea that "green" environmentalists envision. We are not going back to the Garden of Eden, where everyone will eat granola and sing Kumbaya all day long ad nauseum. However, with SMRs, we can have a clean, safe, cheap, reliable, disaster-proof energy supply. With solid-state batteries, we can power electric vehicles more efficiently and cheaply than gas or diesel. So people will WANT to buy EVs, and leftist governments like Australia's insane, woke, socialist dictatorship government won't have to FORCE its citizens to adopt EVs. Let's all join together and give capitalism a magnificent shout of glory, because it will be capitalism that will deliver cheap clean energy and EVs with 1000-mile ranges that mentally deranged environmentalists are obsessed with. Isn't that ironic? Conservative capitalism will be the engine that fulfills the green dreams of mentally unstable green environmentalist activists and organizations. Conservatives across the world are the only adults in the room and nations are waking up and getting rid of their woke, leftist leaders. All of the nations that are kicking the butts of liberal, leftist, and socialist leaders out of office are now PROSPERING and succeeding. Hopefully, Australia, the EU citizens and the UK will learn this very simple lesson and summarily kick their suicidal leftish dictator leaders out of office. One can only hope that common sense will prevail. Otherwise Russia and China will be ruling these countries in the next 30 years.

[@davestagner]

I keep hearing the word “can’t” around storage. I do not think that word means what you think it means. Now, here’s why your SMR fantasy won’t work. The problem is that nuclear (including SMR) can’t just be shut off and turned on at will. They really need to run as base load. But as base load, they have to compete with solar overproduction, which drives grid costs to zero. So you have to pay operational costs for electricity you can’t sell. I’m not a conservative so I don’t understand economics, but this seems bad to me. Next problem: The utility of storage is not created equal. There’s a lot of stuff about how we need MONTHS of storage and that’s impossible… but enough storage to run 24/7 on sunny summer days? That’s not months, that’s hours. And every one of those hours eats into potential profitable operations for SMRs or any other base load type plant. One might start thinking that base load isn’t the solution - it’s the problem. So what we need isn’t SMRs for base load, it’s something that can be easily turned on and off, but can run for a while if needed to back up the solar+batteries. That sounds a lot like gas plants to me - which already exist. Sure, it’s not ideal, but if we can eliminate 90% of the fossil fuel, it’s still a hell of a lot of progress, while still having the gas plants when needed. And finally “which already exists” is KILLING your SMR fantasies, because THEY DON’T ACTUALLY EXIST. We’re probably at least 10 years out from getting even the start of a SMR industry, much less enough to really change things. So you’re not competing with nasty coal, you’re competing with all the solar and batteries that will be built in the next 10-20 years, that will be clean and already paid for. Again, not a conservative so I don’t understand economics, but it seems to me it might be hard sell something expensive in this context.

[@franklong6269]

@@davestagner /Wow your ignorance on this subject is just off the charts. We DO have SMRs in aircraft carriers and submarines. We will soon have 15 MW -30 MW SMRs in space. Russia operates SEVERAL SMRs and just commissioned a 50 MW SMR. That you don't understand that simple fact disqualifies everything else you say.

[@davestagner]

@@franklong6269 When I say SMR, I mean it in the sense you initially did - small modular reactors for the power grid. Sure, they technically exist for military ships and submarines, but those would not exactly be economical for commercial power grid. “We will soon have” SMRs in space is a way of saying we don’t have SMRs in space (and probably shouldn’t, considering what’s inside a reactor and what would happen if/when it returns to Earth). But yeah, sure, you’re right, we already have SMRs. Just not on the power grid in any meaningful way. So what about the rest of my critique, that you ignored? That base load power plants are incompatible with an intermittent renewable-dominated grid? That what little advantage they do have would be eaten away by batteries? That we’re at least a decade out from any significant progress at all on real-world deployment, and two decades out from the sort of terawatts-per-year growth we are currently seeing with solar? That in the 20 years it would take to achieve real scale, we’ll have added 20 more years worth of clean, cheap renewable energy and storage to compete with? These are all valid concerns that have nothing to do with whether SMRs are “real” or not. C’mon, man. Stop wimping out on the EASY part, and answer the HARD part. You didn’t even try.

[@ForbiddTV]

@@davestagner Actually SMR's have been built and used for many decades. Six countries are using them in ships since the 50's.

[@ForbiddTV]

@@davestagner They are built in two years or less, for millions not billions.

[@robertneilson3819]

Geothermal 20 km straight down feasible by new laser drill

[@Guvament_bs]

I posted a comment suggesting that another similar site, which I named should be checked out, as it has different sources and conclusions. That comment was pulled. I wonder why.

[@jsanders100]

I doubt Sam did that, he doesn’t read the comments much

[@Guvament_bs]

@@jsanders100 he knows his main competition and sites that have contradictory information to his. Perhaps it was put in an algorithm. After this I will give another reply with the name.

[@Guvament_bs]

@@jsanders100 the site is mguy

[@Guvament_bs]

​@@jsanders100 I posted a name and it was pulled. So I am now positive.

[@tasmanianbadger]

G’day. Much as it pains me, coal will be needed for a long time. 770kgs of coking coal is needed per ton of steel made. A large percentage of Australia’s coal is for metallurgical purposes - not just power generation. There are alternatives to using coal to make steel… but it’s unlikely to transition at the same kind of rate that electricity generation is. Otherwise, this report is very much your usual level of solid and reliable. Btw… at least once ya gotta do a whole episode while wearing a viking helmet. Don’t say anything about it. Don’t touch it. Don’t do anything to draw attention to it… then sit back and enjoy the chaos in the comments. It’s good to be an Aussie. 🦘🦘🦘

[@johnfrancis4401]

Sam in the SUN BELT your observations make undeniable common sense. But in densely populated Northern Europe, Canadian cities, and Northern Asia where winters last 4 or 5 months, and where the infrastructure in inadequate, where the weather can be cloudy and calm we need FOSSIL FUELS for another 30 years albeit at reducing levels. - until the renewables and batteries can take over.

[@perperers2502]

That was true 10 years ago, but with current prices solar panels are being installed everywhere here in Sweden. Maybe a little slowdown currently due to low electricity demand and exceptionally low price for electricity on Nordpol. We haven't used fossil fuels for electricity in Scandinavia, other than for standby backup, for many years. Also the combinantion of wind and solar is perfect in Northern Europe. The winter is windy and the summer sunny.

[@minsapint8007]

Bravo China fo its amazing pogress in renewables.

[@user-tp6ci6cv1m]

Follow the money . how much do you get to peddle false information.

[@bepscamr152]

By renewables. Do you mean china??

[@BMWHP2]

7 years ago, my 2500Wp solar panels incl. inverter and labor cost €4.200. Today, the same set 2500Wp with inverter and work will cost me €5.800. Tell me again that the prices came down?

[@mojotavy3532]

Inflation alone on £4200 from 7 years ago would be £5423 today. I agree though, not 70% cheaper.

[@chrishaberbosch1029]

You do not have a 2.5 Mw array.

[@BMWHP2]

@@chrishaberbosch1029 it is a 2500Wp panel set, delivering around 2500kWh of energy per year

[@BMWHP2]

@@chrishaberbosch1029 No, just 9 x 275Wp with a total of around 2500kWh per year.

[@malkum61]

China was/is a massive importer of oil so they have a significantly greater incentive to go solar/wind/batteries and stop those imports. Energy independence gives your economy strategic advantages.

[@larryc1616]

Of course no country wants to pay for imported fossil fuels. Goodbye Russia and Saudi Arabia! 🙂 🍿

[@bobwallace9753]

China has had to import oil for vehicle fuel and has suffered very serious urban air pollution from ICEVs. Those factors, combined, are likely very much drivers of China moving quickly to RE and EVs.

[@sarchizm]

You can hear the extreme right screaming "what about the birds & whales???"

[@Leonardo555ZZZZ]

Extremely right environmentalists who actually care about the environment and the damage caused by huge areas of land with wind turbines and solar panels installed on previously pristine lands and oceans.

[@neildolan7177]

We have only tackled the low hanging fruit. Wide spread adoption will be more difficult.

[@bobwallace9753]

Not really. Already the cost of unsubsidized wind and solar are lower than buying fuel for paid off gas and coal plants. We've now reached the point at which market forces will drive the switchover.

[@user-jb2om7cm8m]

'Capacity' being the key word here. Gas, oil, coal plants can run at 90% capacity day or night, rain or shine, 24/7 365 days a year. Solar and wind run at 0% of capacity , every time the sun goes down or the wind stops blowing..

[@malkum61]

Nonsense, battery storage captures the daytime solar excess for night time use. Plus last time I looked it does not stop being windy at night time.

[@markbennett6658]

You’re clearly not paying attention - As Sam says over capacity of renewables (200% of maximum demand) coupled with battery storage stops the lights going out and is massively cheaper, cleaner and more efficient than extracting and burning fossil fuels.

[@user-jb2om7cm8m]

@@malkum61 ? the wind can stop any time- but more often at night, falling off just as peak demand starts. If battery storage made economic sense, that would be great for any power plant. Run them at night at low capacity and release for the morning peak. That way you could build much smaller power plants.... But you have to produce energy on demand or spend a fortune on inefficient battery storage. This is why alternative energy requires such eye watering levels of subsidy.

[@user-jb2om7cm8m]

@@markbennett6658 Is still 0% of capacity being generated unless the sun is shining or the wind is blowing. We need SUSTAINABLE energy, energy production that can be sustained, when the sun goes down, the wind stops blowing, and subsidies run dry.

[@rattusfinkus]

@@user-jb2om7cm8m Gencost has done the numbers on system costs and renewables win over fossil and nukes. Gencost doesn't even factor in the fact that we can drastically change our usage behaviour with power pricing and V2G. It will only get cheaper than current estimates.

[@anthonyg638]

🤣

[@planetsmoothcoaster]

My dear Sam! I am Mr. Roarke, your host. Welcome to Fantasy Island!

[@billdale1]

Correction: you, sir, are the deluded. Even if Sam's prediction is off by a few percent, the point is that ANYONE could see that solar and battery storage have been shooting fast and high into a magnificent S- curve, and there is NOTHING to slow it down... what possibly could? A "renaissance" of coal plants that magically reduce their costs to LESS than the cost of SOLAR?! LOL... Yes, sir, you are indeed the one trapped in Wonderland.

[@litestuffllc7249]

IEA is the liar. With basic Math skills you can prove EVs & renewable tech - as they are now - based on lithium will not be a major part of transportation or power to the planet in 6 years. World Lithium production is 169,000 tons even if all were devoted to EVs you could only make 12 million cars or 1 million Semi Trucks a year. Since 2018 total WORLD BEV production is 7 million. There are 1.4 Billion light vehicles. If you magically made 10x production, your dream would only make 600 million BEVs,no Semis, no battery farms to power them at night; nor any to power cities. It is time to stop pretending that this technology will be anywhere in 6 years.

[@rowanbroekman3929]

Any company can easily raise that number, the lithium is out there, you just need to take it.

[@litestuffllc7249]

@@rowanbroekman3929 Surely; so even if it magically jumps by 10x today; it won't be a major component of the world economy nor impacting the environment in 6 years and probably not even in 20 ¥ears. Here and elsewhere; there is a lot of talk of new better battery chemistries - if those are at all likely why would I invest billions into lithium mining? If sodium, nano carbon, selenium, or some new tech comes my investment is destroyed.

[@Gobhumi]

they make projections based on current tech. just imagine 50-100% more efficient solar cells and batteries. then make the cost calculations. The decommissioning of fossils and nukes will be total.

[@beatreuteler]

Nuklear will not be quickly decommissioned in countries that maintain a nuclear military strategy. However it will in countries who don't. fossils may not be decommissioned so quickly as for a long time forward they will be needed as a backup power strategy.

[@snappingclam8801]

Renewable energy is not environmentally friendly: Simon and Lawrence Cathles of Cornell University analyzed 120 years of global data from copper mining companies to determine how much copper would be required for the [USA] to transition to renewable energy. The study found that the need would exceed what copper mines can produce at the current rate. “Just to meet business-as-usual trends, 115% more copper must be mined in the next 30 years than has been mined historically until now. To electrify the global vehicle fleet requires bringing into production 55% more new mines than would otherwise be needed,” the study said. “On the other hand, hybrid electric vehicle manufacture would require negligible extra copper mining.”

[@MrChakra108]

Fossil propaganda. Aluminium works too. Elsa recycling.

[@snappingclam8801]

@@MrChakra108 Yeah right, EVs require much more copper - motor windings, for example - than do ICE vehicles. Aluminium is not a substitute for copper in many applications.

[@gregbrown7163]

USA watcher… Solar is great if you live in southwest USA. Wind in Midwest USA. Most of the USA Canada needs nuclear power for the coming manufacturing boom over the next 20 years.

[@tasmanianbadger]

Greg… with respect… a mix of hydro, solar, and wind can be deployed all over North America. Nuclear is… it’s gone down the wrong path. Liquid salt reactors… thorium… maybe. They have medical byproducts that can be helpful… but just on dollars and cents… nuclear and fossil fuels just don’t make any sense.

[@bobwallace9753]

No. Someone has given you the mushroom treatment. Every part of North America, every part of the world has ample renewable energy resources. If you want some details visit The Solutions Project. They've done the math.

[@johnrdadrian]

I like your show, and love EV's, but Solar & Wind are terrible for the grid. First off they are SUPER EXENSIVE, much more expensive than conventional power. Germany spent 1/2 a trillion dollars on Wind & Solar, and now they are suffering. The cost of this electricity in Germany is 300% more than conventional electricity in the US. On cloudy days and at night time Solar doesn't work, and battery backup is super expensive, it just cant handle the load. Wind kills millions of birds and is breaking down all the time, doesn't work when the wind stops blowing; plus its an eyesore. The Grid needs continuous, inexpensive power, I know, I have solar on my house roof. SO WIND & SOLAR ARE OUT... What is the answer? Kirk Sorenson explains in the KZbin video "Thorium in 5 min". This is not theoretical, or something that will happen in 30 yrs. Its happening right now. Clean, safe, inexpensive continuous power. First developed for the US Airforce in 1964, at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Now China has built a demonstrator reactor, and is in the process of building one that will power a small city. This is a Reactor that cannot melt down and is super safe. Friday night, you flick a switch to turn it off. Monday morning you flick a switch to turn it back on. There is also 100 times less waste than conventional systems. See Link: kzbin.info/www/bejne/q3yWZ2qKbM1pkLssi=_A-t-K_0-ntfQTUT

[@beatreuteler]

Dear John, you couldn't be more wrong than that. 1.) Germany has high power cost not becuase of the renewables, but due to the high cost of gas powered electricity. The prices in the grid are always defined by the most expensive unit on the grid which pretty always is a gas station and Germany is suffering from that. 2.) Yes, Germany has invested a lot in renewables, but it is importing oil and gas for 67 Billion a year. This said, in 7 years, Germany is spending 1/2 trillion on oil and gas and guess what: it is then burnt. But the investment of 1/2 trillion in renewables is now an asset!!! 3.) Solar works perfect on cloudy days, check this out. 4.) Wind power plants actually so not kill many birds. There are large studies that come approximately to the following conclusion: 4a) Cats are killing about 700x more birds than wind power stations (WPS). 4b) Cars are killing about 500x more birds than WPS. 4c) Buildings, especially with their windows, are killing more than 100x as many birds than WPS. -> Do you want to ban cats, cars and buildings? just let the community know how to do that. 5.) Thorium reactors may or may not be a way to go for countries who do not want to abandon nuclear, but it will not help for the ones who want their nuke stations to make weapons. But Thorium reactors do not exist today and about theor safety (look at the entire system, not just the reactor itself) there is nothing but the parole of their supporters. And the idea of having them ON/OFF is a plain lie. As far as it is about building trust which is the first thing to care about when trying to convince people, spreading lies is the worst you can do. Thanks, but NO thanks.

[@tomconrad7091]

Sam, I am shocked how ignorant people are of basic economics. If the price is cut in half for solar panels in a year then demand will skyrocket. Tony Seba is not crazy, these cost curves are like gravity.

[@nerdbikes3841]

Bit coin miners should be regulated to build solar systems that can provide 2x the amount they use at peak power, or pay an amount to an expanding operating system that can provide 2x the amount the need. The amount of energy Bit mining uses is unreal.

[@andersandersson4636]

...and turn asics off, when demand on grid are high. Yes they do that!

[@iareid8255]

Sam, The International Energy ASgency has a seemingly powerful and authoritative name. However it's knowledge and pronouncements are very poor and do not reflect reality. Do not rely on them.

[@peteharvey2342]

Robots and AI could soak up extra capacity. Exciting times.

[@litestuffllc7249]

Oops - Our world in data "world enegy profile" says after 20 years of installations world power is only about 6% wind and solar. Solar install rates are declining year to year. Big wind projects are being cancelled due to costs. As the amount installed each year gets larger; it becomes harder to top that; so year to year increase is now only 10% and declining; as replacements start to be needed the rates can go negative. Electrical power is only 1/3rd of power consumed; you have to replace all energy production even in another 20 years; you won't see 12% of world production; not with current lithium tech.

[@pr7049]

Finnish independent research institute calculated Chinas CO2 emissions increased last year 4%. It is consuming coal more each year. When will coal burning peak there? In 5, 10 years?

[@beatreuteler]

I'm afraid we don't know. However there is a limit on growth also for China. Like any other economy. Keep looking at the curve. Once it starts to flatten a bit, e.g. if growth doesn't keep the pace, you can start to make your own estimate on when it will peak.

[@nickmcconnell1291]

Over and over again I hear the cry "we need to upgrade the grid"...No! What you need to do is distribute power production by lowering the price of solar panels to such a point that consumers will install them enmasse along with battery storage.... relieving the need to upgrade the grid. This can be seen in Australia where recently it was shown that the vast majority of the power on their grid comes from home solar installations. Solar is so cheap in Australia that it is a no brainer to install it. Not only does this keep you from having to upgrade the grid it also is more secure because every home has their own energy generator. Wide outages are a thing of the past. What does the US do? It slaps even higher tariffs on affordable Chinese solar panels driving the price up in the US to where few can afford to install it. The EXACT opposite of what we should be doing. By artificially keeping solar prices high they guarantee there will only be a small market for US made solar panels... which in turn means our own solar industry will fizzle out and not grow. US policy is backwards. We should be using the low cost manufacturing capabilities of China to our advantage to clean up our own grids and get energy security and low energy prices for all our people. Tariffs never work and have unintended consequences.

[@user-hx5qv4kd6]

It will take time. It took 20 years for me to go from I’ll never touch a Kia to I want a Kia but I’ll never be able to afford it. Same for renewables and evs.

[@100c0c]

Depending on where you live. That decision will be made for you.

[@neildolan7177]

We need to get batteries into all homes to allow consumers to take control & stop globalisation of electricity. Stop investors pushing profits ahead of the transition.You should not profit from a climate crisis.

[@dannybauman1454]

Part of the growth for renewables relies on hydro power. I would hope at some point wind and solar make hydro obsolete.

[@beatreuteler]

This will not happen. BTW: What would be the advantage?

[@mrmawson2438]

I don't have a job

[@user-st6mx8xd8f]

So Y is china opening a new coal powered power station every week fact

[@leerizer]

The increment of RE capacity still couldn't meet daily demand of electricity. New coal powered plant replacing Old coal powered plant due to higher efficiency and result into lower emissions and cost saving. It is same thing like around 50% vehicle sold in China is new energy yet most of the vehicle transit on road is still ICE. It take time to replacing all of it

[@fenrirgg]

Chinese consumers see coal power as more stable and reliable. But China is the top 1 country installing renewables (it already has half of their energy generation capacity made of renewables, but it's not efficiently used yet). So to use their capacity more efficiently they are working in unifying the country's power grids, and with the use of batteries they will achieve their goal of generating most of their electricity with renewables. It's taking time so coal power plants still want to make as much money as they can making more chimneys and burning everything as fast as possible.

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

The grid is extremely expensive and more electricity is needed to replace fossil fuels. Electricity is 5cents kWh My bill is 50cents kWh Generation costs 5cents kWh It is the GRID between millions and millions and millions and millions of customers and 5cents kWh electricity. Rooftop solar PV with EV big battery has NO GRID COSTS. And no battery STORAGE COSTS Normally $4,000 generation needs $40,000 of NEW GRID as 5cents kWh new generation is built to replace the fossil fuels. PEOPLE ARE CONFUSED. As the fossil fuels are replaced with electricity the grid will be needed to BALANCE storage. If you MONOPOLISE the existing national grid with only 15% of ALL the electricity we need then you have to build new grid, FMD, this is f...king expensive. Electricity generation and storage AT THE CUSTOMER'S location is the only economic solution.

[@thystaljaard7607]

Big solar + big batteries = big problems where I live. Cross subsidies wil suffer, so it will be fixed tariffs to be connected to the grid.