Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

Возникла проблема при загрузке этого видео. Это может быть связано с временными проблемами сети или видео может быть недоступно.

На главную

🇺🇸 ENERGY SEC. WRIGHT: WIND AND SOLAR CAN’T REPLACE RELIABLE ENERGY "The problem with wind is that the wind doesn't always blow. If the wind is blowing, you can say it's powered by wind power, then the wind stops or the wind gets weaker. Something has to fill that... show more

Mario Nawfal

2,529,095 subscribers

208,235 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

Наука и технологии Новости и политика

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

Energy Secretary Chris Wright: "With wind and solar, you don't know when they're gonna be there and when they're gonna go away. That's just not productive for the electricity grid. They end up just making the reliable stuff have to turn down when the wind is blowing, turn back up again when the wind dies."

Energy Secretary Chris Wright: "With wind and solar, you don't know when they're gonna be there and when they're gonna go away. That's just not productive for the electricity grid. They end up just making the reliable stuff have to turn down when the wind is blowing, turn back up again when the wind dies."

Aaron Rupar

301,053 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад

Thiessen: Just so people understand wind and solar only work when there is wind and sun. We don't have technology to store the energy from wind and solar…

Thiessen: Just so people understand wind and solar only work when there is wind and sun. We don't have technology to store the energy from wind and solar…

Acyn

5,011,678 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад

Solar and wind are sold as cheaper than coal, gas or nuclear using a number called LCOE (Levelized Cost of Energy). But LCOE is a junk metric. It pretends that one-megawatt-hour of intermittent power is the same as one-megawatt-hour of reliable power. It isn't. When the sun doesn't shine or the wind doesn't blow, you still need electricity. So backup plants (coal, gas or nuclear) must run in the background, ready to fire instantly. LCOE fails to count that cost. It also ignores the miles of transmission lines for remote wind farms, the giant storage systems to cover lulls, the stabilizers to keep frequency steady, and the massive overbuild needed just to survive bad weather weeks.These hidden costs explode as wind and solar take over more of the grid. On paper, LCOE makes these renewables look cheap. In reality, they drive up costs system-wide. That's why nations with the most wind and solar have the highest electricity prices. LCOE isn't just misleading, it's a lie.

Solar and wind are sold as cheaper than coal, gas or nuclear using a number called LCOE (Levelized Cost of Energy). But LCOE is a junk metric. It pretends that one-megawatt-hour of intermittent power is the same as one-megawatt-hour of reliable power. It isn't. When the sun doesn't shine or the wind doesn't blow, you still need electricity. So backup plants (coal, gas or nuclear) must run in the background, ready to fire instantly. LCOE fails to count that cost. It also ignores the miles of transmission lines for remote wind farms, the giant storage systems to cover lulls, the stabilizers to keep frequency steady, and the massive overbuild needed just to survive bad weather weeks.These hidden costs explode as wind and solar take over more of the grid. On paper, LCOE makes these renewables look cheap. In reality, they drive up costs system-wide. That's why nations with the most wind and solar have the highest electricity prices. LCOE isn't just misleading, it's a lie.

Electroverse

13,404 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Ed Miliband says the choice is to build wind farms or gas power plants. This is dishonest. He needs to build the gas plants anyway for when the wind doesn’t blow. They’ll just sit idle most of the time. That’s the model: more capacity, lower productivity = higher cost energy.

Ed Miliband says the choice is to build wind farms or gas power plants. This is dishonest. He needs to build the gas plants anyway for when the wind doesn’t blow. They’ll just sit idle most of the time. That’s the model: more capacity, lower productivity = higher cost energy.

Claire Coutinho

128,440 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

Wind turbines are getting bigger, more efficient, and are delivering higher output. That sounds impressive, but it isn't compared to other sources. A single nuclear plant, for example, produces around 1,750 megawatts. To match that, you need roughly 150 large turbines. Wind uses over 100X more land than nuclear for the same output. And turbines, of course, only produce power when the wind is blowing. Nuclear is constant. Then there's the storage requirements. To make wind reliable, you need batteries. At grid scale, that becomes impossible with current technologies. Wind power remains an expensive pipe dream, lining the pockets of a few at the expense of the many.

Wind turbines are getting bigger, more efficient, and are delivering higher output. That sounds impressive, but it isn't compared to other sources. A single nuclear plant, for example, produces around 1,750 megawatts. To match that, you need roughly 150 large turbines. Wind uses over 100X more land than nuclear for the same output. And turbines, of course, only produce power when the wind is blowing. Nuclear is constant. Then there's the storage requirements. To make wind reliable, you need batteries. At grid scale, that becomes impossible with current technologies. Wind power remains an expensive pipe dream, lining the pockets of a few at the expense of the many.

Electroverse

21,589 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Did you know Australia ranks 12th in the world for the amount of power we make from solar & wind? We’ve built a 42% renewable grid, where 36% of our electricity is powered just by the sun & wind! 📊This graph compares energy use from solar, wind & other renewables.

Did you know Australia ranks 12th in the world for the amount of power we make from solar & wind? We’ve built a 42% renewable grid, where 36% of our electricity is powered just by the sun & wind! 📊This graph compares energy use from solar, wind & other renewables.

Climate Council

10,476 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

Burgum: "The wind energy only works when the wind is blowing. And at times when we've needed it the most along the east coast during the coldest days and hottest days, we've had 2% of the entire grid being powered by wind. You still need all the rest of the power."

Burgum: "The wind energy only works when the wind is blowing. And at times when we've needed it the most along the east coast during the coldest days and hottest days, we've had 2% of the entire grid being powered by wind. You still need all the rest of the power."

Aaron Rupar

274,352 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

The Wind Turbine that is giving Solar a run for its money for you to run your Home 🏡 Energy ⚡ off the grid.

The Wind Turbine that is giving Solar a run for its money for you to run your Home 🏡 Energy ⚡ off the grid.

Arcfunmi

16,052 просмотров • 1 год назад

Nuclear generates up to 1,000x more power per square meter than wind/solar. That's why wind and solar need 10–25x more materials for the same energy output. Which energy source is actually "green?" Full video:

Nuclear generates up to 1,000x more power per square meter than wind/solar. That's why wind and solar need 10–25x more materials for the same energy output. Which energy source is actually "green?" Full video:

Ben (Promethean Action)

22,781 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Germany built one of the largest wind and solar fleets on Earth. It dismantled its nuclear power stations and retired its coal, with the promise that green energy would power its future. The country spent billions transitioning. Then winter arrived, and Dunkelflaut hit - the dark windless dead zone. Wind and solar fell to barely 5% of demand. The grid staggered, and Germany was forced to fire up old coal plants it said had closed forever, and import expensive nuclear from France. This is the physics politicians fail to mention, and a point many people still fail to grasp. When the wind dies and the sun sets, renewables disappear. And the only way the grid survives, the only reason countless millions don't freeze to death, is thanks to oil, coal, nuclear and gas.

Germany built one of the largest wind and solar fleets on Earth. It dismantled its nuclear power stations and retired its coal, with the promise that green energy would power its future. The country spent billions transitioning. Then winter arrived, and Dunkelflaut hit - the dark windless dead zone. Wind and solar fell to barely 5% of demand. The grid staggered, and Germany was forced to fire up old coal plants it said had closed forever, and import expensive nuclear from France. This is the physics politicians fail to mention, and a point many people still fail to grasp. When the wind dies and the sun sets, renewables disappear. And the only way the grid survives, the only reason countless millions don't freeze to death, is thanks to oil, coal, nuclear and gas.

Electroverse

252,569 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

Trump: The wind, the wind… The wind, the wind, the wind is, the wind is bullshit. I'll tell you, it's horrible. The windmills aren't wind

Trump: The wind, the wind… The wind, the wind, the wind is, the wind is bullshit. I'll tell you, it's horrible. The windmills aren't wind

Headquarters

557,092 просмотров • 1 год назад

Very good from Ed Miliband on wind energy, "The cost of building new generation gas would be higher than off shore wind" "Off shore wind prevents the need for expensive gas plants to run" "Off shore wind farms will provide enough power to supply 12 million homes" "Also on energy security and sovereignty" "When Russia invaded Ukraine and prices went through the roof and we were subject to the markets controlled by petro states and dictators" "This is home grown clean power that we control"

Very good from Ed Miliband on wind energy, "The cost of building new generation gas would be higher than off shore wind" "Off shore wind prevents the need for expensive gas plants to run" "Off shore wind farms will provide enough power to supply 12 million homes" "Also on energy security and sovereignty" "When Russia invaded Ukraine and prices went through the roof and we were subject to the markets controlled by petro states and dictators" "This is home grown clean power that we control"

Farrukh

340,518 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

If emissions reduction were the real goal, nuclear would already dominate. First off, it is the safest energy source per unit of power produced. Secondly, it has the lowest life cycle CO2 emissions, lower than coal, gas and even wind and solar. Thirdly, nuclear runs 93% of the time. Wind and solar don't come anywhere near that, just 33% and 23% respectively. And on top of all that, a one gigawatt nuclear plant fits on about one square mile and powers 750,000 homes. Wind and solar require vastly more land, materials and backup batteries for the same power. If climate alarmism were serious, the answer would be nuclear.

If emissions reduction were the real goal, nuclear would already dominate. First off, it is the safest energy source per unit of power produced. Secondly, it has the lowest life cycle CO2 emissions, lower than coal, gas and even wind and solar. Thirdly, nuclear runs 93% of the time. Wind and solar don't come anywhere near that, just 33% and 23% respectively. And on top of all that, a one gigawatt nuclear plant fits on about one square mile and powers 750,000 homes. Wind and solar require vastly more land, materials and backup batteries for the same power. If climate alarmism were serious, the answer would be nuclear.

Electroverse

11,687 просмотров • 3 дней назад

The best energy policy is always energy freedom, which means: * Sell American energy abroad — *and* cut tariffs * End wind/solar subsidies and mandates — *and* allow wind and solar to compete on a real market

The best energy policy is always energy freedom, which means: * Sell American energy abroad — and cut tariffs * End wind/solar subsidies and mandates — and allow wind and solar to compete on a real market

Alex Epstein

17,835 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад

The claim that solar and wind energy are cheaper because the wind and sun are free is not supported by the evidence. In reality, adding more solar and wind to the grid increases electricity costs. The reason is straightforward: while the wind and sun are free, the infrastructure—wind turbines, solar panels, backup batteries, 15,000 kilometers of extra transmission lines, and access roads—is very expensive to produce, transport, install, and maintain. Unlike modern coal or nuclear power plants that last 60 years, solar panels, wind turbines and backup batteries only last 15 years. The $1.9 trillion investment will only get us to 2050. After that, every 15 years, solar and wind infrastructure will need to be replaced at a cost of hundreds of billions more. This madness must end! One Nation will abolish the federal department of climate change along with all related agencies and programs, including net zero measures and mandates. This will return $30 billion a year to the Treasury, contributing to One Nation's pledge to reduce $80 billion plus in government spending in our first term. More importantly, it will put billions of dollars back into the pockets of Australians and businesses, making everything more affordable. That's how we solve the cost-of-living crisis. It's time to end the net zero scam. One Nation will make it happen.

The claim that solar and wind energy are cheaper because the wind and sun are free is not supported by the evidence. In reality, adding more solar and wind to the grid increases electricity costs. The reason is straightforward: while the wind and sun are free, the infrastructure—wind turbines, solar panels, backup batteries, 15,000 kilometers of extra transmission lines, and access roads—is very expensive to produce, transport, install, and maintain. Unlike modern coal or nuclear power plants that last 60 years, solar panels, wind turbines and backup batteries only last 15 years. The $1.9 trillion investment will only get us to 2050. After that, every 15 years, solar and wind infrastructure will need to be replaced at a cost of hundreds of billions more. This madness must end! One Nation will abolish the federal department of climate change along with all related agencies and programs, including net zero measures and mandates. This will return $30 billion a year to the Treasury, contributing to One Nation's pledge to reduce $80 billion plus in government spending in our first term. More importantly, it will put billions of dollars back into the pockets of Australians and businesses, making everything more affordable. That's how we solve the cost-of-living crisis. It's time to end the net zero scam. One Nation will make it happen.

Malcolm Roberts 🇦🇺

14,658 просмотров • 1 год назад

Trump: Wind is a disaster. You can take 1,000 times more than energy out of a hole in the ground this big. It’s called oil and gas. This big that nobody would even see. You can take 1,000 times more power because the wind is intermittent, it doesn't work. We won’t allow it. Starmer: We believe in a mix. Oil and gas will be with us for a very long time. And that will be part of the mix but also wind, solar, increasingly nuclear as we go forward

Trump: Wind is a disaster. You can take 1,000 times more than energy out of a hole in the ground this big. It’s called oil and gas. This big that nobody would even see. You can take 1,000 times more power because the wind is intermittent, it doesn't work. We won’t allow it. Starmer: We believe in a mix. Oil and gas will be with us for a very long time. And that will be part of the mix but also wind, solar, increasingly nuclear as we go forward

Acyn

68,403 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад

Sen. King: I don't understand why you continually say wind and solar aren't reliable when your own state is the sixth highest wind source state in the nation and it's saving you from the currently exorbitant cost of fossil fuels.

Sen. King: I don't understand why you continually say wind and solar aren't reliable when your own state is the sixth highest wind source state in the nation and it's saving you from the currently exorbitant cost of fossil fuels.

Senate Energy Democrats

232,660 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

If emissions reduction were the real goal, nuclear would already dominate. First off, it is the safest energy source per unit of power produced. Secondly, it has the lowest life cycle CO2 emissions. Lower than coal, gas and even wind and solar. Thirdly, nuclear runs 93% of the time. Wind and solar don't come anywhere near that, just 33% and 23% respectively. And on top of all that, a one-gigawatt nuclear plant fits on about one square mile and powers 750,000 homes. Wind and solar require vastly more land, materials and backup batteries for the same power. If climate alarmism were serious, the answer would be nuclear. The rest is just theater.

If emissions reduction were the real goal, nuclear would already dominate. First off, it is the safest energy source per unit of power produced. Secondly, it has the lowest life cycle CO2 emissions. Lower than coal, gas and even wind and solar. Thirdly, nuclear runs 93% of the time. Wind and solar don't come anywhere near that, just 33% and 23% respectively. And on top of all that, a one-gigawatt nuclear plant fits on about one square mile and powers 750,000 homes. Wind and solar require vastly more land, materials and backup batteries for the same power. If climate alarmism were serious, the answer would be nuclear. The rest is just theater.

Electroverse

16,013 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Wind energy vs. Nuclear energy We are the Saudi Arabia of wind energy we have enough to power the UK several times over. Wind energy is the fastest, cheapest, cleanest new energy we can make.. Nuclear is the slowest, most expensive and most dangerous new energy we can make. It’s very black and white.

Wind energy vs. Nuclear energy We are the Saudi Arabia of wind energy we have enough to power the UK several times over. Wind energy is the fastest, cheapest, cleanest new energy we can make.. Nuclear is the slowest, most expensive and most dangerous new energy we can make. It’s very black and white.

Dale Vince

173,535 просмотров • 1 год назад