Stanford Professor Mark Jacobson’s 2017 rebuke

The famous Mark Jacobson costed by nuclear engineers

I am highlighting this particular study because it was promoted by Mark Ruffalo (the Incredible Hulk) and Leonardo DiCaprio as the fool-proof answer for climate change. Jacobson gave TED talks and was adored by all progressives as showing a mix of Water, Wind, and Solar could meet all our energy needs. But far from being the economic miracle DiCaprio presented, it’s an economic nightmare! Some energy engineers costed the proposal (see youtube below), but here are the takeaway points.

Summary regarding Jacobson’s renewables:-

  • 5 Megawatt wind turbines standing 100 meters tall. How many? Only half a MILLION of them! Yup, 500,000 gigantic wind turbines.
  • 18 BILLION square meters of Solar PV panels which even if allowing for a 40 year lifespan (and MOST don’t make it that long!) will in 40 years require 1.23 MILLION solar panels recycled every single day, forever!
  • These will be scattered into about 50,000 wind and solar farms scattered across America.
  • 75 MILLION residential rooftop systems
  • Will cost over $15.2 TRILLION dollars (plus backup and storage which could take it out to over $22 TRILLION) and take till 2050. The 2017 American GDP was $19.4 TRILLION.

Summary for Molten Salt Reactors:-

  • But if America just built MOLTEN SALT REACTORS they would build 1515 GW of factory-built MSRs exactly where the power is needed.
  • It would cost $3 TRILLION.
  • But if MSR’s aren’t ready yet build today’s AP1000’s to get the job done at about $6.7 TRILLION and then in 60 years switch to the perfected breeder reactor, whether MSR or IFR.
  • Molten Salt Reactors CANNOT melt down as they are already a liquid, have other passive safety features like overheating liquid fuel expanding as it heats to spread atoms out that then cannot fission, and of course being a breeder reactor the MSR ‘eats’ nuclear. Watch the full 24 minute video here.

Mark Jacobson debunked by the National Academy of Sciences!

Not only were the economics an outright lie, but so were the scientific claims. As climatologist Ken Caldeira reported with a National Academy of Sciences team, Jacobson overestimated the potential hydro backup by a factor of 100! He also fudged many other costs like a continent wide HVDC grid and other technologies. 

This entry was posted in 100% renewable energy papers. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s