Greens BTFOd Again: Solar Increases Emissions, Toxic Air Pollution

The West has tapped a vast well of stupidity.

North State Journal: Duke Energy application points finger at solar for increased pollution

Duke spokeswoman Kim Crawford confirmed that increased solar power on the state’s electric grid is increasing emissions of nitrogen oxide (NOx), a dangerous air pollutant. She said that reductions in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions could also reverse if current solar growth continues without policy changes.

Climate advocates blame increases in manmade gases like CO2 for global warming and have promoted solar power as environmentally clean.

An increase in emissions triggers the need to rethink national energy policy, experts say.

Crawford provided measurements showing that even on sunny days — when solar power is at its maximum output — more NOx pollution is released into the air than would occur if no solar electricity were used and natural gas were used instead.

People working on real, tangible, specific problems are doing good work. Ocean acidification, micro plastics and so on, conservationists saving natural habitats. The focus on climate change and alternative energy has sucked up money and attention though, and here is yet another piece of evidence that they are giant scams.

If solar is indeed increasing emissions, then my confidence in "madmade climate change" being a 100-percent false rises above 90-percent confidence. This would be the killshot for me because my chief complaint about solar was that it doesn't create enough energy, and not enough reliable energy. The switch to solar didn't make sense because it was going to increase energy costs and harm the economy, when nuclear would lower energy costs, help the economy and also eliminates emissions:

That’s because traditional power plants — including cleaner burning natural gas plants — must scale back electric generation to accommodate solar energy surging onto the system when the sun rises, and power back up when the sun sets and solar energy dissipates. That starting and stopping reduces efficiency and incapacitates emission control devices, increasing pollutant levels.

If alterative energy increases emissions, which it obviously does with Germany talking about how a return to coal may be necessary, how come the people making computer models didn't know that? If you have climate models predicting emissions and you think Man is making the emissions, then you need to model human behavior in response to various policies. They don't do that accurately though, in fact it looks like they have the sign wrong. The next question is, what other variables are they screwing up, weighting wrong, assuming is geometric or arithmetic when it is vice versa, or ignoring entirely?

Man does clearly impact the environment. Concrete-coated cities have their own microclimates. Dams and manmade lakes, ocean pollution, air pollutions and so on exist. But when an entire movement and industries are built on computer models selling the climate change narrative and those very same people push a solution that makes things worse, not better, then one must call the entire effort into question.

It was a joke in the 1990s that greens were watermelons because international socialists who lost their sinecures and/or credibility when the Soviet Union collapsed moved into environmentalism. Soviet central planning and Green economics with solutions like wind and solar grew from the same intellectual branch. Many people were surprised by the Soviet collapse, so they are again as Western economies are being seriously hobbled by the same line of thinking. 

The goal has always been rip roaring inflation that destroys developed economies. Nations and peoples can only be made equal in misery.