By Vijay Jayaraj
When it comes to global energy policy, few narratives are as instructive – and as cautionary – as Europe's.
Why?
Your unfortunate experiment with wind and solar energy.
The continent's self-inflicted woes contain lessons that should be taken to heart by those formulating a U.S. energy strategy for the new administration.
Europe's misplaced trust in wind and solar energy
The adoption of weather-dependent power generation in Europe, particularly Germany and the United Kingdom, was a profound miscalculation.
These nations have embarked on an ambitious energy transition based on the assumption that wind and solar energy could replace traditional fossil fuels. The result was disaster, as many predicted.
Germany, often hailed as a pioneer of “renewable” energy, should be crowned the king of incompetence.
The country's heavy investments in wind and solar power have not only failed to deliver promised reductions in carbon dioxide emissions – the bogeyman of climate alarmists – but have also destabilized its once-robust industrial economy.
The manufacturing sector in Germany – historically the economic powerhouse of Europe – has been brought to its knees because many industrial processes are economically unviable due to energy costs.
Robert Bryce reports on prices in the second week of December and says: “The German wholesale electricity market reached almost $1,000 per megawatt hour, the highest level in 18 years.”
The fundamental problem lies in the inherent unpredictability of renewable energy sources.
In critical phases, wind energy exhibits acute vulnerabilities.
Winter presents a deluge of challenges: reduced wind energy production is accompanied by peak energy demand, leading to grid instability and an increased risk of power outages.
Furthermore, despite claims to the contrary, so-called renewable energy is unreliable and expensive.
The myth of energy production costs
Policymakers and renewable energy advocates have long relied on the Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) as the primary metric for comparing energy sources.
However, this misleading construct only benefits traders.
The LCOE does not take into account the massive infrastructure investments, the need for backup generation and the grid stabilization costs associated with intermittent sources.
This results in the actual cost of wind and solar energy being much higher than the advertised price and is harmful to the economy of businesses and households.
“What we have in Europe is a crumbling power grid, deliberately created by politicians who want to be seen as green as an emerald,” said Thomas Shepstone, a U.S. energy market observer.
“They have delivered what can only be described as a green slime that threatens to swallow and suffocate them all.
“Electricity prices are getting out of control, power outages are imminent and yet the ideologues want to exert even more pressure.”
The USA must avoid the European catastrophe
The European experiment offers a clear warning: ideological aspirations – particularly such as the “green” transition, which is rooted in feverish ravings about a supposed climate crisis – must never crowd out technological and economic realities.
The United States has an opportunity to chart a more responsible, pragmatic course – one that balances economic imperatives and energy security with innovative technologies:
- Natural gas, which is abundant through hydraulic fracturing, has not only reduced electricity prices but also provided a competitive advantage to energy-intensive industries such as chemicals, steel and manufacturing.
- Highly reviled coal should be allowed to make a comeback with currently available technology – such as that used in Japan and elsewhere – to reduce emissions to harmless levels.
- Nuclear power appears to be on the rise.
Policy recommendations
To avoid repeating Europe's mistakes, the United States should:
- Prioritize reliability and affordability when promoting energy sources.
- Promote investments in grid resilience and the transition away from wind and solar energy, particularly in regions with severe winters.
- Use realistic key figures to evaluate energy costs.
- Make industrial competitiveness a priority in energy policy development.
The likelihood that the United States will pursue this line of thinking is greatly increased by the election of Donald J. Trump as the nation's 47th commander in chief; although this matter is too important to take for granted.
This commentary was first published on Newsmax on January 7, 2025.
Vijay Jayaraj is a science and research associate at the CO2 Coalition, Arlington, Virginia. He holds a master's degree in environmental science from the University of East Anglia and a postgraduate degree in energy management from Robert Gordon University, both in the United Kingdom, and a bachelor's degree in engineering from Anna University, India.
Like this:
Load…
Related
Explore more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to receive the latest posts by email.
Comments are closed.