"I think if you'd bothered to just watch a couple minutes from that video you'd see that it's actually quite easy."
I watched the video: it was little more than a commentary on the political tribalism surrounding the climate debate and the position stated by "conservatives" (whatever they are... besides, Margret Thatcher isn't someone I think would be someone whose cues that I'd necessarily take when it comes to solving innately complex technological challenges. Which is exactly what the energy problem is. Thatcher's inclusion in the video is a classical stalking horse: long on rhetoric, acutely short on technical detail.)
Anyone can stand up and declare, "We have a problem."
Why, even you do it.
But presenting comprehensive solutions is far more difficult.
Your video is not only very western-specific, but decidedly Australia-specific, referencing carbon taxes as a solution, but nothing at all about addressing the limitations of physics, thermodymanics, supply chains and economics, when it comes to rolling out renewables exclusively in the underdeveloped and developing world.
Showing a few huts with solar panels on them might make for good video footage, but who paid for those panels? The average rural Sub-Saharan family leads a subsidence existence;, who is going to pay to fit out every rural sub-Saharan hut with a solar panel? And where are those panels going to come from?
Biofuels made from cellulose, EV batteries to concentrate energy. Solar panels that can bend and bear the weight of cars. Geothermal power. Using algae and sunlight to produce biofuel, hydrogen fuel, converting ammonium back into hydrogen .... all nice first world concepts but of zero practical application in the developing world.
As for the video's claim of "once its up there, wind power doesn't need a lot of maintenance", a mere two years later, that has been proven to be absolute bunkum:
"GE has struggled with its wind business, blaming the $US2.2 billion ($A3.3 billion) loss in 2022 on rising warranty provisions as more complicated turbines cause higher than expected maintenance costs and warranty call-outs."
GE is not the only company suffering from upsizing its turbines too quickly, with the industry increasingly suffering from getting too big, too fast.
Faulty components created a €472 million ($A28 million) hole in Siemens Gamesa’s December quarter result, making up more than half of the nearly billion-euro loss for the period.
And Vestas added €210 million in warranty provisions for repairs in the December quarter, as rising call outs and higher upgrade costs bite at the Danish company, too."
Unexpected and increasing wind turbine failure rates, largely in newer and bigger models, are savaging the profits of some of the world’s biggest manufacturers, as Siemens Gamesa, GE and Vestas report heavy repair and maintenance losses.
Faulty components created a €472 million ($A28 million) hole in Siemens Gamesa’s December quarter result, making up more than half of the nearly billion-euro loss for the period. Of that total, €187 million was due to a reduction in revenue with the remainder due to warranty provisioning.
The wind turbine maker said a “negative trend” of failure rates from turbines are causing higher than expected maintenance costs and warranty call-outs. It did not specify which components are affected.
Siemens Gamesa ended the year with a quarterly loss of €884 million ($A1.4 billion), more than double that of the same period the prior year, and net debt of €1.9 billion.
Write-downs in goodwill and the inclusion of integration and restructuring costs come as the company prepares to delist and integrate with Siemens Energy.
“The group’s financial performance in Q1 23 was materially impacted by the outcome of the company’s periodic monitoring and technical failure assessment of its installed fleet,” the company said in its quarterly results.
“The expected cash impact during FY23 amounts to a mid-double-digit euro million figure.” Vestas has added €210 million in warranty provisions for repairs in the December quarter, as rising call outs and higher upgrade costs bite at the Danish company, too.
Vestas also said its lost production factor is rising towards 4 per cent due to the number of “extraordinary” repairs and upgrades.
That video quoted renewable technology competing without financial support. Really? Have a look at the cancelled wind projects off the north eastern seaboard of the USA because the contractor can't make it work without a helping hand from the state.
Another article quoted in that video was "wind turbines may double in size by 2024".
As can be seen in those articles I posted above, a mere 2 years after that video was produced, it turns out that the trend is now away from big turbines because of all the problems being encountered (to wit: "too big, too fast").
As for the renewables getting ever cheaper to produce, the data offered in the video ends in 2017. What has happened to the cost to produce renewable power since then?
I'll tell you what: it has soared. Why?
Because it takes energy to manufacture and transport and the components for renewable equipment. And the the cost of energy had been falling for a decade until the past few years, when a fundamental shortage of energy around the world pushed up energy prices. And with it, the cost to produce polysilicon for the solar panels and resins for the blades of wind turbines.
Finally, what the video did not do is answer the critical questions around the limitations of physics, thermodymanics, supply chains and economics. It fails to:
a.) place a monetary value on the the sort of investment that needs to be made to provide solar capacity to the world's 5 billion people living in developing and under-developed nations of the world?
b.) identify the source of supply of all the polysilicon ingots and wafers that will be required, as well as the technical expertise and trades skills in those countries to be able to do what you are suggesting?
c.) explain where the not-so-small matter of the required capital will come from?
(20min delay)
