This is a very sobering article from a Professor Michael Kelly.
https://www.thegwpf.org/content/uploads/2019/11/Kelly-1.pdf
And he has continued to research the reality around NetZero....
And a more recent article (might be behind a paywall)
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/10/11/green-energy-net-zero-biden-command-economy-impossible/
A very intelligent man who makes some very interesting points. As others have pointed out far from unbiased, he does seem to equate the increase in power generation with rising living standards and I cannot disagree, however the examples of the moon landings (successful therefore positive), trying to eradicate cancer (unsuccessful therefore negative) are just ridiculous. How much of the reduction in child mortality is due to cancer research etc. Much of which could not be carried out without the higher living standards obtained via cheap power, to separate or equate the two is ludicrous.
His power generated per Kg equations do betray his intent, let me know the next time you see a steam turbine sitting on a plinth in a field or, except that the weight (if that's your preferred measure) of the power station and all the infrastructure needed to produce both types of turbine should be taken into account, it's called cradle to grave analysis, do it properly or not at all.
Field area - there is a lot of farming going on under wind turbines.
Contested science, there are people who also contest the fact that the moon landings happened or that the earth is approximately spherical
I didn't know that aluminum and glass fiber require more processing than nuclear fuel either.
I did think that hydro was a renewable though - and there is a lot of concrete in a dam, surprised he didn't take that tack.
His point that the plinths under turbines have to be removed after use puzzles me, they are designed to outlast the masts which outlast blades and to be reused. It's the same as saying when your tires wear out scrap the car and build a new garage.
He is unfortunately correct about the magnitude of the task and the Chinese coal power stations. Also the need to lift people out of poverty
He is a very cleaver man and knows exactly what he is doing.
35 years ago it was know that we could not run the national grid with more than 10% renewable power and maintain a stable voltage, it was a fact, correct at that time the CEGB proved it. Then a whole lot of engineers got involved, many from the CEGB
That's called progress.
Gluing yourself to a road will not make it happen by 2025, (insert name of preferred deity) help us if we tried.
Saying it's not necessary, we can't do it, lets just keep making money at all costs is not the way forward. Even if he was correct do we just burn coal, oil and gas till they run out?
Better to do the best we can and hope.