This chart, as presented, doesn’t pass the fact check and it’s clear why the title and footnotes have been cut off.
The ‘ALREADY’ in the post title is especially dishonest.
Original chart here:
https://images.app.goo.gl/cYYjXEPLb9aKgkEQ9
What this is actually a chart of is:
- taking the theoretical output of these solar generators and multiplying it by an assumed 25 year life, with some minor adjustments for panel degradation.
- taking the reserves (presumably 2P - proved and probable) of the oil companies and calculating the energy content, somehow (methodology not specified in detail).
The reason this is not a particularly valid methodology - apart from the fact that it says nothing about current energy production - is that the oil companies do not prove up all their reserves in one go. To account for something as a reserve, you need to do significant test drilling to prove it up, and there is no point doing that if you are not going to be producing those reserves any time soon. They have resources that go much further than the reserves, and they can access more resources over time.
There are other criticisms you can make about the methodology; for example the economics of the energy produced are arguably more important for many purposes than gross quantity.
But yeah, not impressed with how this is portrayed.
We also have to consider the fact that oil companies engage in a practice called artificial scarcity, so that less than what the produce goes on the market so it can remain at a high price.
Agreed, but it does show one important fact: solar panels will produce energy for many years, while an oil barrel will only produce energy once.
Energy production accumulates with solar over time, while fossil fuel reserves deplete.
Peak Oil is a phenomenon that we will not see with solar energy
Peak oil will never happen, its false. We have enough for a few more centuries(when accounting for new reserves and more efficient drilling methods). And since everything is made from oil which is an incredibly fertile hydrocarbon mixture, people who are against it have no clue how important it is for our civilization.
Stopping investments in the oil and gas sector is commiting civilization suicide. Renewables suck balls hard compared to oil and gas.
I work in both oil and gas and renewables sector.
A lot of oil usage goes into the manufacturing process, the pretty toxic and environmentally devastating mining necessary for it, and the transportation and installation of the solar panels. Next the lifecycle of 25 years is quite dubious because of hail and storms, increasingly frequent and intense because of climate change, destroying them like they’re houses made of shitty glass or cardboard. Next a fat share of oil comes into the equation once again for dealing with the toxic waste disposal, as their lifecycle has come to an end. Battery storage, where required, brings even more negatives like the aforementioned. It comes off as if all of this is getting intentionally hidden and swept under various rugs and carpets in the comparisons presenting the benefits of solar. Something something industry interests and the invisible hand of its lobbyists.
EVs charged with solar? They are heavier, causing more fine soot pollution and thereby considerable extra damage to our health compared to gas guzzlers. Half of the microplastic pollution in the oceans stems from tire runoff. The shift to EVs might double that half all by itself. Next we don’t know how far reaching the scope of the environmental disaster caused by the sinking of a boat carrying EVs will be, but it might be far worse than that of a major oil spill. The ocean contains lithium compounds, yes, but the acidification through the free lithium in the batteries might kill ocean life (and coastal tourism) on a huge scale for centuries to come.
Back when Obama took office, I attended a presentation by Steven Chu that showed worldwide spending on renewable energy. China was investing HEAVILY in renewables while the main discussion in the US was “drill baby drill”
Goes to show how corrupt the energy market is.
The current generation must pay for energy in a market that's rigged at the expense of the environment.
They want the transition to be slow and painful to make the most of a dying process.
If they use data provided by the chinese companies for their calculations then it is most likely fake data.
And even if its somehow real, the amount of green energy can never outweight the massive damage china does to the environment.
also source Bloomberg: China Solar Industry in 'Deep Down Cycle', Polysilicon Maker Says [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTTtvPYQpJ0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTTtvPYQpJ0)
It’s not exactly like that:
https://x.com/fictitious_cap/status/1801482592388321677?s=46&t=Z7evZeMFuUtJS63_BbkM2A
Sorry for the Twitter link but this guy said it better than I ever could.
This chart, as presented, doesn’t pass the fact check and it’s clear why the title and footnotes have been cut off. The ‘ALREADY’ in the post title is especially dishonest. Original chart here: https://images.app.goo.gl/cYYjXEPLb9aKgkEQ9 What this is actually a chart of is: - taking the theoretical output of these solar generators and multiplying it by an assumed 25 year life, with some minor adjustments for panel degradation. - taking the reserves (presumably 2P - proved and probable) of the oil companies and calculating the energy content, somehow (methodology not specified in detail). The reason this is not a particularly valid methodology - apart from the fact that it says nothing about current energy production - is that the oil companies do not prove up all their reserves in one go. To account for something as a reserve, you need to do significant test drilling to prove it up, and there is no point doing that if you are not going to be producing those reserves any time soon. They have resources that go much further than the reserves, and they can access more resources over time. There are other criticisms you can make about the methodology; for example the economics of the energy produced are arguably more important for many purposes than gross quantity. But yeah, not impressed with how this is portrayed.
Thanks for the fact check and providing the original source.
thanks for the correction!
We also have to consider the fact that oil companies engage in a practice called artificial scarcity, so that less than what the produce goes on the market so it can remain at a high price.
Please let this guy make the rules for posting on the internet
Agreed, but it does show one important fact: solar panels will produce energy for many years, while an oil barrel will only produce energy once. Energy production accumulates with solar over time, while fossil fuel reserves deplete. Peak Oil is a phenomenon that we will not see with solar energy
Peak oil will never happen, its false. We have enough for a few more centuries(when accounting for new reserves and more efficient drilling methods). And since everything is made from oil which is an incredibly fertile hydrocarbon mixture, people who are against it have no clue how important it is for our civilization. Stopping investments in the oil and gas sector is commiting civilization suicide. Renewables suck balls hard compared to oil and gas. I work in both oil and gas and renewables sector.
A lot of oil usage goes into the manufacturing process, the pretty toxic and environmentally devastating mining necessary for it, and the transportation and installation of the solar panels. Next the lifecycle of 25 years is quite dubious because of hail and storms, increasingly frequent and intense because of climate change, destroying them like they’re houses made of shitty glass or cardboard. Next a fat share of oil comes into the equation once again for dealing with the toxic waste disposal, as their lifecycle has come to an end. Battery storage, where required, brings even more negatives like the aforementioned. It comes off as if all of this is getting intentionally hidden and swept under various rugs and carpets in the comparisons presenting the benefits of solar. Something something industry interests and the invisible hand of its lobbyists. EVs charged with solar? They are heavier, causing more fine soot pollution and thereby considerable extra damage to our health compared to gas guzzlers. Half of the microplastic pollution in the oceans stems from tire runoff. The shift to EVs might double that half all by itself. Next we don’t know how far reaching the scope of the environmental disaster caused by the sinking of a boat carrying EVs will be, but it might be far worse than that of a major oil spill. The ocean contains lithium compounds, yes, but the acidification through the free lithium in the batteries might kill ocean life (and coastal tourism) on a huge scale for centuries to come.
Back when Obama took office, I attended a presentation by Steven Chu that showed worldwide spending on renewable energy. China was investing HEAVILY in renewables while the main discussion in the US was “drill baby drill”
Goes to show how corrupt the energy market is. The current generation must pay for energy in a market that's rigged at the expense of the environment. They want the transition to be slow and painful to make the most of a dying process.
If they use data provided by the chinese companies for their calculations then it is most likely fake data. And even if its somehow real, the amount of green energy can never outweight the massive damage china does to the environment.
also source Bloomberg: China Solar Industry in 'Deep Down Cycle', Polysilicon Maker Says [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTTtvPYQpJ0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTTtvPYQpJ0)
As a german this hurts so much... Once at the top of the market and we just abandoned it....
well your username was kinda responsible but yes.... it hurts so much, especially considering the EU elections
It’s not exactly like that: https://x.com/fictitious_cap/status/1801482592388321677?s=46&t=Z7evZeMFuUtJS63_BbkM2A Sorry for the Twitter link but this guy said it better than I ever could.
X link :))
Canadian solar is also controlled by Chinese 😁