Renewable Energy Sources Are Money Sinks

Renewable Energy Sources Are Money Sinks

Via Chateau Heartiste

[411 Note: This is good reading – whether you’re a sensible skeptic who follows the “cui bono?” mentality – or a brainwashed lemming who blindly follows the popular virtue-sniveling memes on your social cesspool feed. We need more “tell it like it is” people in this world.]

The latest rhetorical gambit by shitlibs emotionally invested in virtue sniveling about global warming but starting to feel uncomfortable about conspicuously aligning themselves with globalist nation-wreckers, is that renewable energy — by which they mean solar and wind — is good for the American economy and will create lots of jobs.

This is how shitlibs are trying to do an end-run around Trump’s nationalist appeals. They like to crow about there being “ten times as many solar industry jobs as there are coal mining jobs”, and point to that as evidence that Trump’s pulling out of the Paris Accord will hurt American workers.

It’s all disingenuous bullshit, which is standard operating procedure for the Fat Cat Globalist Left. Solar and wind are propped up by MASSIVE government subsidies. Wind subsidies alone total $176 billion dollars.

Can the US afford these subsidies? The country is $19 trillion in debt and essentially bankrupt. You tell me.

If you remove the Fake Economy of government subsidies, the renewable energy industry collapses overnight. And a reminder: subsidies are your taxed income from productive work being redistributed to artificially maintain uncompetitive job sectors.

Now one can argue that those subsidies are necessary investments to avoid the coming global meltdown apocalypse (similarly how one could argue government make-work and set-asides are a necessary Dindugeld to pacify an enormous class of dysfunctional moochers), but what you can’t argue is that the renewable energy industry is good for the American economy. But just try telling this lovefact to the numbnuts at Shitlib Central hiveminds like NPR.

The Paris Accord is nothing less than a Globohomo cash grab from America to China, India, and the dirt poor Southern Hemisphere. A good rule of thumb is that all these international agreements have as their primary goal the hobbling of American power and sovereignty. That’s why the Gay Mulatto loved signing up for them. And that’s why the big business community and 0.1%ers hate immigration restriction and a Rio Grande Wall; they enrich themselves on the cheap labor provided by the Southern Hemisphere and the destruction of middle class White localism that would act as a preventive against globohomoist depredations.

If elitist shitlibs now crying about Trump’s majestic middle finger to the globalists were sincere in their stated beliefs about what pulling out of the Paris Accord would mean for the earth, they’d immediately stop jetting around the world to their Davosian confabs. Richard Branson, the homosexual CEO of Virgin Airlines who was photographed canoodling with the homosexual Barack Obama, certainly contributes more than his fair share of CO2 to the atmosphere.

Also, mass dirt world immigration into the West isn’t exactly a boon for the environment, either. Nothing says “I love Mother Gaia” like importing hundreds of millions of low carbon-emitting Third Worlders into the First World where they can immediately jump the economic development queue and live the high life of a high carbon-emitting Westerner.

Of course, shitlibs aren’t sincere, they just want to virtue snivel for the approval of their effete low T audiences with sterling SAT scores. You can tell how badly insincere they are because they’ve resorted to criticizing Trump for leaving an agreement that wasn’t even binding. OK, if the Paris Accord wasn’t binding, then what the hell good would it have done if the US stayed in it?

Oh yeah, the whole point to the Paris Accord, like most of these international deals, is to set up a money train in loans from international investment bankers.

The agreement is widely expected to be the catalyst for large-scale lending and investments in greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction technologies and infrastructure. The International Energy Agency has estimated that the investment required to meet the Paris Agreement goals could be a towering $1 trillion annually. Bank of America Merrill Lynch calculates that investments in renewable energy alone will need to grow to $900 billion by 2030.

renewable energy money sinks solar

Real thoughts about “global warming…”

My thoughts on global warming:
– probably some human influence
– likely not as bad as predicted
– intervention would be pointless (CO2 lag effect baked in the cake)
– best solutions are adapting & nuclear power
– wind & solar are money sinks
– Int’l accords are meant to hobble USA
– Trump right again.

So chalk this one up as a win for Trumperica. If shitlibs want to reduce CO2 emissions, maybe they should think about de-scaling their societies and retreating from international liberalism? As @tteclod put it on Gab,

Best solution is energy conservation. Your family doesn’t need two commuter cars if your wife doesn’t need to be employed outside your home. Your kids don’t ride a bus if they attend a neighborhood school. Your country can build less infrastructure if it rejects refugees & immigrants. Conserve.

Trump should sell his travel bans, wall, and immigration moratorium as environmentally friendly. It would be an easy sell, because it’s true. You listening, Bannon? Miller?

The Paris Accord discord on the Left is the usual shitlibbery: distilled womanish hysteria from the rank and file emos, shekel-counting from the internationalist bankers. Trump is hated by both because he refuses to subsidize their lifestyles. And that’s a win for Heritage America.

PS More proof that the renewable energy industry is a scam. A government-investment banks payola scheme. It takes 79 solar workers to produce the same amount of electric power as one coal worker. Simply comparing jobs numbers between the solar and coal industries, as disingenuous shitlibs do, is misleading.

Here are some important energy facts that help provide a more complete picture about how much energy is being produced in different sectors, how many workers it takes to produce a given amount of electric power, and which sectors receive the most generous taxpayer handouts.

To start, despite a huge workforce of almost 400,000 solar workers (about 20 percent of electric power payrolls in 2016), that sector produced an insignificant share, less than 1 percent, of the electric power generated in the United States last year (EIA data here). And that’s a lot of solar workers: about the same as the combined number of employees working at Exxon Mobil, Chevron, Apple, Johnson & Johnson, Microsoft, Pfizer, Ford Motor Company and Procter & Gamble.

In contrast, it took about the same number of natural gas workers (398,235) last year to produce more than one-third of U.S. electric power, or 37 times more electricity than solar’s minuscule share of 0.90 percent. And with only 160,000 coal workers (less than half the number of workers in either solar or gas), that sector produced nearly one-third (almost as much as gas) of U.S. electricity last year.

Renewables can’t compete with coal and oil. Solar and wind are terribly inefficient sources of power. This is a geophysical fact of life that eludes libtards, who should really stop lying about the supposed economic benefits of the renewable energy scam, but I guess asking for honesty from shitlibs is a bridge too far.

Leave a Reply

Be the First to Comment!

wpDiscuz