Letters by a modern St. Ferdinand III about cults

Back Printer Friendly Version

Wednesday, February 8, 2023

Scientism, Solar Panels and False Accounting

No the ecologically destructuve solar farms are not cheaper than a coal plant.

by StFerdIII

An often-quoted Scientism declaration, is that solar panels and wind turbine or bird choppers, are less expensive than coal plants. The Scientism than concludes that industrialised nations should de-industrialise and focus the energy needs of a modern economy on unreliable solar and wind power, which of course, provide very poor value in output for the roughly US$500 million to $1 Trillion, per annum investments which feed the ‘climate change’ industry. The accounting fraud in declaring that solar is cheaper than coal for example, is similar to the Corona fraud and data manipulation of death rates from the ‘virus’ and the death rates post the stabbination programs in which the latter in reality, is 5 times higher, than the former.

In reality wind and Solar ‘energy’ are NOT less expensive than Coal. The claim by Scientism that poor value for money solar panels or bird-chopping turbines is ‘cheap’ is rather tendentious and full of the usual fraud one finds with cults of ‘The Science’. These declamations clog up search engine inquiries and dominate the fake-science mass media. As with Corona, the Quacksines, and other cults of ‘The Science’, the claim that digging up tonnes of earth to find rare materials for solar panels, and the related manufacturing, shipping and distribution of said panels, or the hydrocarbon manufacturing process and related operational costs and management of said useless wind turbines which run on diesel gas, being cheaper than a coal plant is ridiculous.

Solar Panel creation

Setting up a Solar Farm costs roughly U$115.000 per 5 MW of produced energy. That is just the setup. The total costs are in the region of $1 million per 1 MW of produced energy including operations, replacement costs and upgrades. 1 MW of energy supports 200 households. To produce 1 MW of energy these solar farms will consist of roughly 72 solar cells linked over 6-10 acres, comprising some 500-1000 panels. The total costs do not include soil degradation, ecological devastation, or the loss of farmland or other productive uses, which is called an ‘opportunity cost’ in accounting. You will never see ‘opportunity costs’ included in the total cost of solar farm deployments. Just as rare are the calculated costs for on-going maintenance, both material and human.

By contrast a single coal plant costs less than US$ 1billion to setup with maintenance costs of about $100 million per annum and produces 4.000 MW of energy and coal stations provide 40% of the world’s electricity. We can do a simple comparison of coal versus solar energy.

Total costs over 10 years for a coal plant: U$ 2 billion.

Energy produced over 10 years from a coal plant: 40.000 MW

Cost per MW produced over 10 years: U$50.000

Total costs of a solar farm, over 6-10 acres, for 10 years: U$ 10 million

Energy produced over 10 years: 10 MW

Cost per MW produced: U$ 1 million

So, in reality, coal plants are 20 times more efficient per MW than a solar farm.

The UK consumes 300 Terawatts of energy, each year. Does anyone with a shred of common sense believe that a constellation of 6-10 acre solar farms, producing 1 MW of year is going to satisfy such a demand? Solar panels may contribute 3% of UK energy usage today or a meagre 9 Terawatts. Please note that official UK statistics vary the output of ‘renewables’ between 28 and 43% depending on the agency or reporter. This includes nuclear energy. Solar by itself is a small fraction of total output. If we strip out nuclear energy, and focus on solar, the zealots usually demand that solar should comprise 30% or more of energy output, necessitating the building of an almost unlimited number of solar panel farms. 100 Terawatts of energy produced by solar panels is equivalent to 1 million Megawatts.

This means that the UK would need to have roughly, 1 million solar farms of roughly 10 acres in size, or 10 million acres under solar panels. The current agricultural land availability in the UK outside of cities and forests is approximately 17 million hectares or roughly 40 million acres. The eco-fanatics are demanding that ¼ of UK agricultural land be torn up and polluted by solar panel farms. Or, they are demanding that some of the 8 million acres of woodland, already under pressure due to insatiable housing demands, be put under solar racks and despoiled. On the other hand, the Gaia cult of course laments the loss of wild, forested or undeveloped land which are the exact targets for solar farm deployments. Many farmers in the UK are offered government largesse to employ solar farms on their acreage and these subsidies of course are never accounted for in the cost of solar energy. The UK government is also bribing farmers not to farm and to turn over their acreage to the bird and bat choppers.

David Craig wrote a very good book There is No Climate Crisis. In the Daily Sceptic he takes the latest solar propaganda: “New Wind and Solar Are Cheaper Than the Costs to Operate All But One Coal-Fired Power Plant in the United States.“ to task highlighting the fraudulent analysis and data used.

He notes the massive government subsidies which are omitted from the costs of the beloved solar panels.

“Here’s a U.S. Treasury ‘Factsheet‘ about the Inflation Reduction Act. In it we read that: The U.S. Department of the Treasury will be at the forefront of implementation, delivering $270 billion in tax incentives as part of the $369 billion the Inflation Reduction Act dedicates to combating climate change.” U.S. consumers spend about $1 trillion on energy each year including transport. I did a quick ‘back-of-a-fag-packet’ calculation. If the USA’s 123 million or so households spend around $4,000 a year each on energy (excluding transport) then that’s about $400 billion. Yet the inflation Reduction Act is spending a massive $369 billion subsidising supposed ‘renewables’, which are just a minor part of the USA’s energy use. In fact, wind and solar make up only about 3% of USA energy use:

Yet these almost negligible energy sources are getting $369 billion in subsidies – that’s almost as much as the $400 billion U.S. households pay for in total for energy each year.”

Government accounting. Xi Biden and his Green Totalitarian policies will pour out subsidies equal to the total energy spend in the US, to generate 3% of its actual production? This idiocy is repeated in the UK and everywhere else. Add in the dark side of panels, the ecological devastation of the solar panels, the destroyed farm and forest lands, the effects on wildlife, and you have a massively negative balance sheet. Only an incompetent, immoral and deluded eco-zealot could possibly try to argue on their behalf.