←back to thread

353 points dmazin | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.205s | source
Show context
ambientenv ◴[] No.44517509[source]
I just can't get that exuberant when I also read things like this [1].

[1] - https://thehonestsorcerer.substack.com/p/the-tale-of-two-ene...

replies(4): >>44517843 #>>44518046 #>>44523495 #>>44524410 #
1. MichaelNolan ◴[] No.44524410[source]
That article's whole premises seems to hinge on the quote: "Energy from non-fossil fuel combustible electricity generation is accounted for on their input heat requirements and non-combustible renewables on the energy content of their gross electrical output."

But that line means the exact opposite of what the author claims it means. He claims that renewables are being overinflated, but the reverse is true. Coal and gas get evaluated based on their heat content, not their useful work output. Wind and solar get evaluated on their electrical output.