They Just Weren’t Communist Enough

A common theory among leftists about the failure of the Soviet Union is “they just weren’t communist enough.” Wind and solar advocates think the same way.

Sven Weihusen • 14 minutes ago

Lol, I am German and the energy prices are so high BECAUSE we currently rely on fossil fuels ESPECIALLY Russian gas. We WOULDN’T have these problems, or at least not to this extent, if we had more renewable energy. And with higher fossil fuel prices renewable energy gets more economic.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to They Just Weren’t Communist Enough

  1. Conrad Ziefle says:

    Sven Weihusen, lol, you’re a moron. Maybe the Dutch farmers will conquer Germany and make you milk cows, lol.

    • arn says:

      Sven Weihusen has been terrorizing Tony’ s YouTube Videos for years with his comments.
      He is the typical (German) braindead lefty who are so pathetic that the chinese even a special insult for them – Baizuo.

  2. GreyGeek says:

    A similar argument I’ve often heard to explain away the failures of Marxist states was that “they are not true socialists”. A sure sign you are talking to a “true believer”, one who has made a religion of Marxism.

    We know that a scientific theory has failed if it is not falsifiable. “Climate Change” arrived at that mecca years ago and every example of a weather phenomena which was or is not predictable by the AGW models has been turned into a proof for AGW without any supported papers or evidence. Merely the public pronouncements by Mann, Thus, if there is too much rain, or too little rain, too much or too little flooding or too many or too few droughts, too many or not enough tornadoes or hurricanes …. all are cited as proof of AGW. Never mind that the AGW “scientists” have to alter historical data to fit their models and dismiss the work of hundreds of academics and Nobel Laureates whose work disproves Mann’s narrative.

    There is a simple explanation, which was revealed in the 2009 CRU leaked emails: “fight the good fight” for socialism and against capitalism.
    Mann: I gave up on Judith Curry a while ago. I don’t know what she think’s she’s doing, but its not helping the cause

    Thorne to Jones & Parker: “I also think the science is being manipulated to put a political spin on it which for all our sakes might not be too clever in the long run.”

    Settled Science: Crowley: I am not convinced that the ‘truth’ is always worth reaching if it is at the cost of damaged personal relationships

    PAL REVIEW: Jones: “With JGR submission you need to be careful who you suggest to review or not review the manuscript. I will leave this to you, but it might be worth suggesting Fu and someone at RSS, but not UAH.”

    The Cause: Mann: By the way, when is Tom C going to formally publish his roughly 1500 year reconstruction??? It would help the cause to be able to refer to that reconstruction as confirming Mann and Jones, etc. – “fudge factor” code to “Apply a VERY ARTIFICAL correction for decline!!”

    When Green Peace writes the CRU’s letter to the Times you know what the “cause” is about. GP uses the environment as a tool to push Marxism.

  3. GWS says:

    Great video, Tony! It still amazes me how this information, and these comments, reach so few ears, i.e. the crowd prefers la la woke land to reality. Animals have greater survival instincts than humans, some say.

  4. Ivan Wainwright says:

    Is there a wind turbine anywhere in the world which has produced more energy than was used in constructing it and connecting it to the grid?

  5. edmh says:

    Saying the unsayable

    There is a fundamental question to be asked and fully answered before any further commitment is made to respond to Climate Change / Global Warming / Net Zero / ESG (Environment Social and Governance)”, etc.
    Simply put: is it certain that Man-made CO2 emissions are a future problem for Global temperature at all ??

    Compared to water vapour and clouds in the atmosphere, CO2 is a minor Greenhouse gas, contributing ~5-10% of the warming of the overall Greenhouse Effect. For cogent technical reasons, as CO2 concentration increases, its warming capability diminishes. At its current level of CO2 of ~410parts / million in the atmosphere, CO2’s warming effect is saturated. Whatever the scale of future Man-made CO2 emissions, those CO2 emissions can have very little warming effect in future. min 24>

    On the other hand, higher levels of atmospheric CO2 have already brought massive positive effects for plant growth and agricultural production Worldwide.

    Methane although a more powerful Greenhouse gas than CO2, reacts with Oxygen in the atmosphere and dissipates rapidly on its release, whether from natural sources or Man-made release. Methane is currently ~1900 ppb, (parts / billion): it has an insignificant warming effect and like CO2 its effect also diminishes with increasing concentration.

    Beyond the “developed” Western world, all other Nations, including China, India and in Africa, dismiss the fallacy that CO2 is pollution at all. They have no interest in restraining the advances of their well-being to control what they know is a non-problem.

    Whatever energy self-harm the West indulges in, “to set an example”, the rest of the World, will be unconcerned about emitting whatever CO2 they may require.

    In the expectation that Weather-Dependent power generation technologies would reduce emissions of Man-made CO2, the Western policy to combat “is still to install, heavily subsidise and give massive preferential legal support to Weather-Dependent “Renewable” Wind and Solar power for power generation.
    The Productivity of Weather-Dependent power generation is crucial when comparing the cost of providing an equivalent level of power to the Grid, as provided by conventional power generation technologies. In Europe the measured productivity of Weather-Dependent generators over the past 10 years has been:
    Onshore Wind 22.5%
    Offshore Wind 32.7%
    Combined Wind Power 23.5%
    Solar PV on grid 11.6%
    Combined Weather-Dependent Productivity 18.7%
    Whereas, conventional power generation works 24/7 and can perform at ~90% productivity, just accounting for normal maintenance.

    Solar and Wind power technologies are mature: very little performance improvement can be expected as their power production is now limited by immutable laws of physics.
    When these European productivity values are combined with the capital and long-term costs as assessed by the US EIA in 2022, their comparative results are:
    • Onshore Wind power provision is ~8-9 times the cost of Gas-firing
    • Offshore Wind power is ~16-25 times the cost of Gas-firing.
    • Solar power provision is about ~10-12 times the cost of Gas-firing
    Would anyone sane buy a car costing 8 – 25 times the normal price that only works one day in five, when you never know which day that might be ? And then insist that its technology is used to power the whole economy.

    The resulting excess expenditures across Europe to date compared to using Gas-firing for power generation can be estimated as:
    • Weather-Dependent “Renewables” 385GW
    • Weather-Dependent power output 2021 69GW
    • in wasted capital costs ~630 € billion
    • in wasted long-term costs over a 40-year service life ~2,040 € billion.
    This is the scale of direct fiscal damage that has been caused by the obstruction of Fracking throughout Europe, just to benefit of Russian Gas exports.

    It will be fruitless to continue ever more massive excess expenditures on Weather-Dependent “Renewables” to avert possible minor warming in the distant future.

    Weather-Dependency means that “Renewable” power is intermittent, unreliable and non-dispatchable, so, there will always be times, whatever the scale of future Weather-Dependent generation is installed, when their power output will be virtually nil for Wind power in still Weather and nil for Solar power at night, on cloudy days and throughout the winter.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.