Reposted by Dr. Judith Curry’s Climate Etc.
Posted on February 8th, 2021 by curryja
by Judith Curry
Spatial requirements for wind / solar and nuclear energy and their respective costs
“In addition to the energy sector, the climate debate also needs a transition. From ideology and wishful thinking to facts, numbers and rationality. “
An important document was published last week, a collaboration initiated by two Members of the European Parliament – one from the Netherlands and one from Czechoslovakia. One of the editors of the resulting report is Lucas Bergkamp, who has made several guest posts at Climate Etc.
The study is now available for download on the website www.roadtoclimateneutrality.eu.
This document provides a critical reality check of the rush to replace fossil fuels with renewable energy.
Press release
The climate study advises the EU to embark on a “nuclear renaissance” program
A new study on EU climate policy shows that it is practically impossible to generate enough energy with wind and solar energy because there is not enough land available to meet all electricity needs. The study, entitled “The Road to Climate Neutrality in the EU by 2050”, advises the EU to embark on a “nuclear renaissance” program in order to achieve its climate goals.
The EU has approved the ambitious target of achieving climate neutrality (ie net CO2 emissions from greenhouse gases) by 2050. To achieve this goal, an energy transition away from fossil fuels is required. The ECR and the Renew Group of the European Parliament have commissioned an independent study in which the spatial requirements of wind / sun compared to nuclear energy and their respective costs are examined. A team of experts concluded that it is practically impossible to get enough energy from renewable sources.
The study includes a case study carried out for two EU Member States: the Netherlands, a country on the North Sea with strong winds, and the Czech Republic, a landlocked country with no access to the sea and a more geographically demanding landscape. In realistic scenarios, there would not be enough land to meet all electricity needs if the Czech Republic and the Netherlands were solely or primarily dependent on wind and solar energy.
The study, initiated by the Dutch MEP Rob Roos and the Czech MEP Ondřej Knotek and appraised by, among others, the respected scientist, Nobel Prize-winning economist William Nordhaus, finds that nuclear energy is also cheaper than renewable energy. Even if significant efficiency improvements in solar and wind parks are taken into account, nuclear power will remain the cheaper option in 2050. This comparison does not even include the enormous costs of adapting the power grid, such as connecting wind turbines at sea or solar parks on land. This price is always lower for nuclear energy too.
“We found it remarkable that the EU has made a political decision in favor of renewable energies in the transition from fossil fuels, without taking into account the relative advantages and disadvantages of all climate-neutral technologies,” said both MEPs.
Mr. Roos: “Nuclear energy is always available, cheaper and protects the landscape. In addition, further research into the thorium molten salt reactor, for example, offers enormous opportunities for our export position. Let’s put our tax money into that. ”
At the moment, solar and wind energy are being promoted and nuclear energy is being held back. The study contains several policy recommendations for the European Commission to change its approach.
Mr. Knotek: “The EU is well invited to create technology-neutral competitive conditions for decarbonised power generation technologies. To this end, the EU should adopt a “nuclear renaissance” program that puts nuclear energy on an equal footing with renewable energies. Today’s EU policy is discriminatory when it comes to nuclear energy. It is time for all policy makers to live up to the EU principle of technological neutrality. “
The study also concluded that, if achieved, EU climate neutrality in 2050 is likely to result in only a very small decrease in the average global rise in atmospheric temperature, which in 2100 was 0.05 ° C to 0.15 ° C and no more than 0.02 ° C and 0.06 ° C in 2050, assuming no carbon leak occurs. Power generating technologies should therefore be assessed to what extent they represent solutions that are not regrets.
Excerpts from the summary
This report summarizes the results of a study1 examining three issues that are critical to the EU’s climate neutrality ambition:
I. The impact of EU climate neutrality on average global air temperature by 2050 and 2100;
ii. The spatial requirements (land and sea) for wind and solar energy compared to nuclear energy in the Czech Republic and the Netherlands; and
iii. The cost of wind / solar and nuclear energy for these two countries.
Of course it would have been preferable if the European Commission had carried out a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis itself
alternative policy options to pursue the EU’s climate neutrality goal. The fact that no such analysis was carried out despite the European Commission’s “better regulation” underscores the strong political forces and sense of urgency behind EU climate policy.5
Given the spatial and economic consequences of renewable energy in relation to nuclear energy, the EU would be well advised to consider a program for a “nuclear renaissance”. Under this program, the EU would create a level playing field for all electricity generation technologies.
The central theses:
The EU’s climate neutrality strategy for 2050 carries a high risk of ineffectiveness. However, the expected energy transition can hedge against this risk by using solutions without remorse that are resistant to climate-related ineffectiveness. Nuclear power is one such solution.
In addition, nuclear energy offers considerable advantages over renewable energy (any combination of wind and sun) in terms of both spatial requirements (land area required) and electricity costs. The cost advantage of nuclear power increases once the system cost is added to the equation, and continues to increase with higher wind and solar penetration rates.
These advantages have been recognized in the Czech Republic, but not (yet) by policy makers at EU level and in the Netherlands.
4.7
13
be right
Item rating
Like this:
Loading…
Comments are closed.