The Dark Side of Renewable Energy | feat. Adam Rozencwajg | Global Macro #14

Adam Rozencwajg, Managing Partner at Goehring & Rozencwajg, joins us in today’s episode to discuss ESG policies, the emerging energy crisis, and the new battle between the Climate-Green and the Nature-Green. We also dive into how the energy sector has evolved over time and the dark sides of renewable energy, why Moore’s Law does not apply to wind and solar energy, how cheap energy leads to distortion and malinvestment of energy, how the argument of human extinction skews the energy debate, nuclear energy and how it might be a solution to the climate crisis, how de-globalization has made the energy sector more vulnerable and much more.
#toptraders #investing #trendfollowing #globalmacro
Episode Summary
00:00 - Intro
05:12 - Adam’s background & the history of Energy
13:58 - The Dark side of Renewable energy
29:11 - Moore’s Law
36:54 - Malinvestment and creative destruction
44:33 - The renewable energy debate
52:34 - Nuclear energy
01:04:54 - De-globalization and its consequences
01:09:42 - Link between energy prices and GDP
01:13:00 - Rounding off
===
Subscribe to our podcast:
iTunes: itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/t...
Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/2OnOvLb...
Follow us on social media:
TWITTER: / toptraderslive (@TopTradersLive)
FACEBOOK: / toptradersunplugged
INSTAGRAM: / toptradersunplugged
SOUNDCLOUD: / toptradersunplugged-com
Adam Rozencwajg: / adam-rozencwajg-770614
Cem Karsan: / jam_croissant (@jam_croissant)

[@prettyblueplanet]

Very interesting and great detail.

[@vibratoryuniverse308]

Under rated content for sure. Good work, gentleman

[@IzaiPokusa]

I was looking for copper and i found GOLD! GREAT PODCAST!

[@Anza_34832]

Herr Rosenzweig’s analysis and historical information on energy consumption and production is very interesting to listen to as he explains it well. Especially e-mobility is more of a politically motivated self-betrayal than an efficient way of conserving energy, trying to prevent potential challenges posed by climate change. “Hubris” as he calls it. The awakening will be tough and sobering. Meanwhile, clever investors that look beyond all the talk and wishful thinking will earn money doing good investments heeding the facts.

[@Notrocketscience101]

Great show!

[@HariKrishnan-wi4ls]

I am a big fan of G&R's work, excellent choice

[@bautistabaiocchi-lora1339]

THESE ARE AMAZING

[@koltoncrane3099]

One key point no environmentalist talks about is like half of the electricity is lost in transmission. So California is extremely wasteful buying wind power from Wyoming. If you can about going green you should want power sources that are close to the consumer which why small nuclear reactors by every major city makes the most sense. It’s kind of pathetic bill gates is one of the few that’s invested in researching nuclear power. Like the U.S. could be way more advanced in that area if it’d continue promoting research. Another issue no one talks about is that power can travel back underground under transmission lines. I’m not sure what it is exactly, but there was a lawsuit against IPP power plant in central Utah years ago between them and a dairyman. His cows were dying and he was trying to show in court it’s from the electricity transmission lines. What’s weird is the day of the lawsuit he was driving a truck from one dairy to another dairy and his front right driver tire exploded and it took him off the interstate and he crashed by the frontage road and died by scipio Utah. He literally died the day of and never testified.

[@colinmegson7721]

The front runner in SMR technologies is GE Hitachi's BWRX-300. At 300 MW, it's an ideal size, capable of supplying electricity to 240,000 [average] American homes for 60 years. And, for those 60 years, providing the highest quality of jobs and wages. In combination with green hydrogen electrolyser plant, the BWRX-300 can load follow demand daily and seasonally - no gas-fired backup plant; no conventional or pumped hydro. It's the nearest thing to a silver bullet America could so easily utilise to decarbonise all of its energy use, with microscopic environmental impact. At an overnight capital cost (OCC) of US$2,250/kW, it is ~60% lower than the OCC of Big-Nuclear. It has a 2 to 3 years build programme compared to 6 to 8 years for Big-Nuclear. The cost of capital is no different to that of dysfunctional wind and solar power plants (WASPPs), which are so environmentally destructive. The BWRX-300 is proving to be super-investable. The first one will be operational in Ontario in 2028 and site preparation is already underway. Another 3 or maybe 4 will get underway in Saskatchewan in the 2030s. 2 Polish billionaires are committed to 'buying' at least 10 BWRX-300s for their energy-intensive industries to get the cheapest low-carbon electricity possible and 'green' their company images. For their 'New Nuclear Program' the TVA have selected the BWRX-300 as the first SMR to be built. The safety of SMRs is recognised by USA's NRC by indicating emergency planning zones (EPZs) can be at site boundary fences. As Dr James Conca said in his Forbes article: "...No need to come up with huge evacuation plans for nearby cities or anyone living near the plant, like we did for older plants. You can just stand there at the fence and watch what’s going on..."

[@ryanward10]

How fast can they build 1000 of 'em? 🙃

[@michaels4255]

In 2009, the World Nuclear Association or WNA forecast peak global uranium production in 2025 and a sharp decline in supply by 2030. The WNA is a pro - nuclear organization. The Energy Watch Group's 2006 study was even less optimistic.

[@cometier]

Where have they built one or a prototype?

[@patrickdegenaar9495]

Interesting, but coal mining didn't start in the 1600s! Britons were mining and using coal before the Romans arrived!

[@MrCaptainPeng]

Google says Although some deep mining took place as early as the 1500s (in North East England, and along the Firth of Forth coast) deep shaft mining in the UK began to develop extensively in the late 18th century, with rapid expansion throughout the 19th century and early 20th century when the industry peaked.

[@patrickdegenaar9495]

@@MrCaptainPeng No need for deep mining! Even today, you you walk along the beach in Newcastle, there are exposed seems in the cliffs. I don't have any detailed knowledge of Geology, but most medieval and pre-medieval mines were shallow - around 10 metres or so in depth.

[@michaels4255]

From what I have read, enough coal to provide a non trivial energy subsidy to the English economy only began to be used in the 16th century.

[@johnmosheim]

I think commenters are right. Coal was used in the UK and possibly other locations, the industrial level mining extraction did not happen until 500-600 yrs ago or so and really took of with the harnessing of hydraulic power followed by the invention of the steam engine.

[@michaels4255]

Russians fracked a test well a few years ago, so I disagree that there is zero chance of their developing their tight oil deposits. Russia is not technologically backward.