Michelle Sterling of Friends of Science took a liking to my first article about Mark Carney and his unbridled interest in altering common economic theory for climate change adaptation. Michelle liked it so much she posted a YouTube video on their site. She has done a great job at conveying the messages I was trying hard to put down in written form which made the article somewhat lengthy.
You can tune into the video and watch it here:
Visiting FOS website can also be an interesting exercise with lots of great articles and observations including lots of videos disputing the eco-warrior claims and their site is here:
For someone holding the credentials of “Former Governor of the Bank of Canada” and “Former Governor of the Bank of England” one would surmise that individual would be someone with the ability to have logic on their side. If you are someone who recognizes Mark Carney as that individual you may become disappointed based on some of his recent claims and media reports.
As noted in an earlier composition, after Carney became the Vice-Chair of Brookfield Asset Management, during an interview February 10, 2020, he made the claim; “Brookfield is in a position today where we are net zero,” Carney said, referring to all of the company’s assets.” Carney was forced to walk back on that claim as green energy advocates challenged him saying his claim was false.
Carney Moves Net Zero for Brookfield
A recent announcement by Brookfield and their role in the creation of an “Initial US$7 Billion Closing for Brookfield Global Transition Fund” has apparently resulted in Carney moving their “net zero” claim into the future. The press release carries the following quote from him showing his initial claim may have been out by 30 years! His quote was: “Brookfield is committed to achieving net-zero by 2050 or sooner, and to accelerating the global net-zero transition.” For someone who is advocating for ESG (environmental, social and governance) audits for all corporations globally it appears he is unaware of exactly what he is proposing and the results that will occur.
The Brookfield announcement, related to the new “Transition Fund”, is a partnership with Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan Board (“Ontario Teachers’”) and Temasek, who have both committed to achieving net zero by 2050 or sooner. Assets held by the three funds totals approximately Cdn$1.171 tillion so the commitment ($7 billion) represents a miserly 0.7% of their current total assets. Total assets for Ontario Teachers is reported as $221.2 billon, for Temasek (Singapore) S$381 billion (Cdn$350.6 billion) and for Brookfield Asset Management over Cdn$600 billion! Needless to say, many of the assets held by all three are emitting CO 2 so they will have a difficult time meeting their commitments before 2050. The 0.7 % commitment will not move the net zero bar very far unless they plan to buy cheap “carbon offsets” that Carney is a fan of.
Rest assured that with Carney’s role as the UN’s Special Envoy on Climate Action and Finance and the UK’s Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, Finance Advisor for the COP26 UN climate change conference planned for Glasgow in November 2021 he will continue his push for net zero along with his claim that the ESG audits are needed for all corporations.
As Carney keeps moving the “net-zero” pea under the shells and preaching from the pulpit of “climate change” we should hope he will be recognized by all as someone similar to Chicken Little who insisted “the sky is falling”!
I was on the Marc Patrone show yesterday (July 21, 2021) on Sauga 960 AM and our chat was all to do with Mark Carney and his decision to bow out of running in the next Federal election this fall for the Liberal Party of Canada due to his commitment to stop “climate change” from happening!
You can listen to our conversation on NEWSTALK CANADA here if you are a subscriber:
Part 1 of this series briefly reviewed Mark Carney and some of the many creations he played a hand in developing or where he takes part in; including biased organizations such as the WEF (World Economic Forum) where he is a trustee or as the UN Special Envoy on Climate Action and Finance. The institutions and his creations are focused on altering the climate by using financial modeling. The modeling seeks to either get the world to embrace socialism, globalism or perhaps communism and is cited as “The Great Reset’. The WEF’s focus on “The Great Reset” tells us by 2030 “you’ll own nothing and you’ll be happy” and puts the Carney push in perspective. The WEF just doesn’t tell us who will own everything?
The goal of The Great Reset and Carney’s role in it seems focused on using his credentials as former Governor of the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England to convince the global financial community (central banks) to adapt the concept which will make the super-rich richer and the middle class poorer!
Just a few days ago the Washington Post carried an article titled; “Why Big Central Banks Are Becoming Climate Warriors” which carried the following comments related to Carney: “In 2015, former Bank of England governor Mark Carney raised an alarm about the “tragedy” of climate change and warned specifically about “re-pricing” events. That includes physical damage that destroys the value of assets (such as waterfront properties), imposes new liabilities on companies (as shown by California utility giant PG&E Corp.’s wildfire-driven bankruptcy) or sharply raises insurance prices. Another risk is a sudden slump in the value of certain assets because of drastic government action to combat climate change, like the introduction of a steep carbon tax or regulations that keep fossil fuels in the ground. “The speed at which such re-pricing occurs is uncertain and could be decisive for financial stability,” Carney said.” The Post didn’t fact check Carney’s claims as the article was a product of Bloomberg L.P. which is part of Carney’s friend/associate, Michael Bloomberg’s empire.
Is it any wonder why a September 2020 Gallop poll showed 27% have “not very much” trust and 33% “none at all” in the US mass media!
The focus of the super-rich is on “climate change” and a reduction of those nasty CO 2 emissions which keep the world functioning by generating food for us humans and all plant and animal life. Here in Canada rumours have circulated that Carney would run for the Liberal Party in the next election. That rumour has been dispelled as he recently tweeted he wouldn’t run in the next election!
His tweet explaining why said: “Climate change is the most important issue on the planet. I made commitments to @antonioguterres & @BorisJohnson to help make sure @COP26 is successful this November. As a goalie, I know you don’t skate off the ice in the 3rd period of a must-win game.” You might if the other team offered to double or triple your pay which I suspect would be the opposite for Carney if he agreed to run for parliament with no guarantee he would win. He would have to forego what he currently receives for the over fifteen plus titles and positions he currently holds to avoid a conflict of interest.
The reduction of emissions he claims are needed will reputedly be created by central banks regulating financial institutions to ensure they price in climate change risk when regulating financial companies. Those institutions will be regulated to both invest and/or lend money to borrowers with sustainability goals! This will be accomplished by instituting “carbon taxes” on all of mankind’s consumption driving up the price of everything. Companies will be required to offset their emissions by purchasing “carbon offsets” which is where the big money will be made at the expense of the consumer.
A recent article in the Financial Times headlined: Carney calls for ‘$100bn a year’ global carbon offset market quotes him saying;“The demand for this is going to be huge, because we have this big shift. More and more companies-and it will be a tsunami by Glasgow-will have net zero emissions plans,” said Mr. Carney.
Bloomberg Green ran a recent article about a top U.S. seller of “carbon offsets”, Nature Conservancy which noted they were reputedly selling meaningless carbon credits to clients such as “JPMorgan Chase & Co., BlackRock Inc., and Walt Disney Co., which use them to claim large reductions in their own publicly reported emissions.” The article went on to state; “In 2020, companies purchased more than 93 million carbon credits, equivalent to the pollution from 20 million cars in a year.“ An article from GreenBiz on June 14, 2021 claimed: “Carbon offset prices on average stand at just $3-5 per metric ton of CO2 at present, with experts fearing that prices are far below the level required” meaning to reach Carney’s suggested $100bn a year they would have to increase by more than 300 times their current level.
The foregoing raises the question; why has the Trudeau led Liberal Party imposed a cost of C$170/tonne by 2030 when the market is currently trading at only US $3/5.00 per tonne? The current levy on Canadians is currently C$40/tonne or about 10 times the current market rate!
Needless to say, one of the Carney creations; Taskforce on Scaling Voluntary Carbon Markets (TSVCM) recently morphed into Project Carbon, a Voluntary Carbon Marketplace pilot consisting (so far) of CIBC, Itaú Unibanco, National Australia Bank and NatWest Group. They seek others to join them! Their stated aim, after claiming, “Corporations worldwide are using carbon offsets as a tool to implement their climate action strategies.” is “to support a thriving global marketplace for quality carbon offsets with clear and consistent pricing and standards and will provide a valuable pathway for our clients in their efforts to achieve a net zero goal.” Presumably those “quality carbon offsets” are unlike those being sold by Nature Conservancy as noted above.
Just a presumption on my part but I suspect the real aim is to profit from the Carney creation and should all governments raise their “carbon tax” to Canadian levels their aim will be achievable. No wonder another of his tweets stated “I fully support @JustinTrudeau & the @liberalparty and will do everything I can to help.”
It seems obvious Carney’s claim that “Climate change is the most important issue on the planet” is his narrative to fool the masses and Bloomberg L.P. aids the process via the media. His focus is clearly on consolidating wealth among the super-rich and that he joins the club!
The rest of us will own nothing and we will be happy!
Over eight years ago rumours were flying around about future leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada (LPC) suggesting some members and sitting MPs were trying to convince Mark Carney to run for the leadership of the party to challenge Justin Trudeau. A Globe and Mail article from December 15, 2012 about the rumour quoted Carney saying: “Certain people want things to happen … the political world, it seems to me, is a world for optimists. I’m in a world that’s a world for realists.” As suggested in his remark, Carney declined those pushing for him to run for leadership of the LPC! Shortly after the rumours were swirling, Carney went off to become Governor of the Bank of England until March 2020 when he stepped down.
Then on August 26. 2020 Brookfield Asset Management ($600 billion of assets under management) announced Carney had been appointed Vice Chair and Head of ESG (environmental, social and governance) and Impact Fund Investing so his responsibilities, titles and presumably his income kept growing. At one point after he became Vice Chair during an interview, he was quoted stating “Brookfield is in a position today where we are net zero,” Carney said, referring to all of the company’s assets.” Carney was challenged on that claim and had to walk back on it after being accused of a false claim by many who simply pointed to Brookfield’s investment portfolio. Since the foregoing happened Brookfield, ironically, have been trying hard to acquire Inter Pipeline and recently upped their offer price in a takeover attempt. One wonders how Carney as Vice Chair and head of ESG at Brookfield feels about that move away from his prior claim of “net-zero” and if he blessed it?
Shortly after his UN appointment he launched what appears to be the big money maker in the world of those who are super rich and use the words “net-zero” in a manner opining; mankind controls the climate! The new entity; “Private Sector Voluntary Carbon Markets Taskforce (TSVCM) was established to help meet climate goals. The September 02, 2020 press release noted: “Initiated by Mark Carney, the group will deliver an action-oriented solutions blueprint.WASHINGTON D.C. AND LONDON – Today, a private sector-led taskforce was launched to begin scaling Voluntary Carbon Markets, which need to be grown and consolidated to help meet the goals agreed in the Paris Climate Agreement.”
Carney was and still is a member of the Group of Thirty and Co-Chairs their Steering Committee; “Working Group on Climate Change” (WGCC). The latter issued a report dated October 2020 titled “Mainstreaming the Transition to a Net-Zero Economy. This group of “economists” (principally) infer; “The evidence that climate change is posing unprecedented risks to our livelihoods is overwhelming.” and goes on to claim “these effects pale in significance compared to what might come. If the world continues on its current path”. Interestingly two of the “experts” presumably involved in generating the report were from BlackRock, the largest asset management firm in the world with over $8 trillion under management. The scaremongering continues despite many factual scientific studies that show mankind’s influence on “climate change” is far below those “economic” predictions.
Task Force for Climate-Related Disclosure The Financial Stability Board established the TCFD to develop recommendations for more effective climate-related disclosures that could promote more informed investment, credit, and insurance underwriting decisions and, in turn, enable stakeholders to understand better the concentrations of carbon-related assets in the financial sector and the financial system’s exposures to climate-related risks.
During Mark Carney’s tenure as Governor of the Bank of Canada and then as Governor of the Bank of England he also served as Chair of the FSB (Financial Stability Board) from 2011 to 2018 and during that time he created TFRD (Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures) with none other than Michael Bloomberg as the Chairman. “The Financial Stability Board established the TCFD to develop recommendations for more effective climate-related disclosures that could promote more informed investment, credit, and insurance underwriting decisions and, in turn, enable stakeholders to understand better the concentrations of carbon-related assets in the financial sector and the financial system’s exposures to climate-related risks.”
Just before (September 17, 2020) the aforementioned WGCC report was issued, Mark Carney was added to PIMCO’s (Pacific Investment Management Company with assets exceeding $2.2 trillion) Global Advisory Board. They noted; “Mark’s extensive experience as an economist and central banker, combined with his focus on transforming climate finance, makes him an invaluable addition to this renowned group of thinkers,” said Emmanuel Roman, PIMCO’s Chief Executive Officer.” One wonders with all the responsibilities Carney had by that date just how much time could he devout to “this renowned group of thinkers”?
In February 2021 “Stripe”, a global technology company (market value of $115 billion) building economic infrastructure for the internet, announced that Mark Carney, the former Governor of the Bank of England and the Bank of Canada, had joined the company’s board of directors.”
His Holiness Pope Francis appears to have been the inspiration in the founding of the Council for Inclusive Capitalism with The Vatican and surprise, surprise, Mark Carney is on their Steering Committee. The “Council” members reputedly have $10.5 trillion in assets under management and $2.1 trillion in market capitalization.
The World Economic Forum (WEF) is the International Organization for Public-Private Cooperation and was founded by Charles Schaub in 1971 and advocates for an “inclusive and sustainable economy for all.” Based on what is evident the words “inclusive” and “all” references the super-rich like Bloomberg, Fink, Gates and others. Mark Carney is on the WEF’s Board of Trustees where none other than Laurence Fink (BlackRock) is also a trustee. They are joined by Canada’s Finance Minister, Chrystia Freeland and Mr. “climate change” himself, Al Gore.
Carney is also a board member of the Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE) self-described as a, “independent nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization dedicated to strengthening prosperity and human welfare in the global economy through expert analysis and practical policy solutions.” The foregoing is their claim but they have been on about the effects of “climate change” for well over a decade so anyone who is a “climate realist” would not support the “nonpartisan” allegation!
Carney is also a member of Bloomberg Philanthropies founded by multi-billionaire Michael Bloomberg. They report: “In 2020, Bloomberg Philanthropies invested $1.6 billion around the world. Over his lifetime, Mike has so far given $11.1 billion to philanthropy.” It certainly appears a fair portion of that money was aimed at fighting “climate change”.
Carney’s biography also states he is a member of the Board at the Hoffmann Global Institute for Business and Society at INSEAD (The Business School for the World) but beyond his appearance at an INSEAD function as a speaker the search on their website and elsewhere turned up nothing.
Yet another Carney creation via “MARK CARNEY’S PRIVATE FINANCE HUB” is GFANZ where he is the Chair.
If one totes up the aforementioned entities Mark Carney created or is the Chair or Vice-Chair of and those where he holds a directorship or is on a steering committee you will reach the number fifteen (15). One would surmise most of those positions would require him to spend considerable time on the myriad of details associated with revising financial theories that have been around for centuries and combining those theories with the complexities of “climate change”! Nevertheless, he seems intent on convincing us he is the world’s reigning champion of juggling and can keep those fifteen responsibilities in his eye sight while achieving the goals set for him.
We all will be affected by his efforts to redefine financial issues and achieve net-zero. We must focus on his failures such as his false claim as Vice-Chair of Brookfield Asset Management, “we are net zero”! There are surely more falsehoods to follow!
How did Carney get so many auspicious appointments and what are he and his circus of super-rich benefactors and unelected UN bureaucrats aiming for? Oh, it must be because he is “in a world that’s a world for realists.” How could we forget!
NB: Stay tuned for Part Two of this series that will provide better insight on the foregoing question.
I was on the Marc Patrone Show on Sauga 960 AM this morning to talk about the recent heat wave they experienced out west. I was inspired by a chart posted by Tony Heller which led to the interview. I sent the chart out to many and it is the one below. In addition Marc and I also discussed an article (or two) I am researching. It has to do with the incredible influence Mark Carney (former Governor of the Bank of Canada and Governor of the Bank of England) has in the world of the “climate change” religion. He holds this influence with the super rich and many naive politicians around the world who also believe mankind is reputedly responsible for such things as the aforementioned heat wave. Many of the super rich see an opportunity to become richer; is what appears to be behind this push.
You can listen to our chat for todays (July 13, 2021) podcast starting at 1:04:45 and ending at 1:22:45 here:
If you are a subscriber to NEWSTALK CANADA you can listen here:
I was invited on the Marc Patrone Show on Sauga 960 AM today and the above title suggests some of the topics we covered. You can listen to our discussion on Sauga 960’s Marc Patrone Show starting at 1:03:25 of the podcast of his July 6, 2021 show by going here:
Back in April 2018 Doug Ford, the then recently chosen leader of the Ontario PC Party promised “to cut hydro bills by 12 per cent if he wins Ontario’s spring election, saying it would be on top of a rate reduction from the governing Liberals, whose plan he has repeatedly criticized. The Progressive Conservative leader said Thursday that he would cut rates through a variety of measures that would save the average ratepayer $173 a year.”
So how has that promise turned out?
A recent report from the C. D. Howe Institute titled; “Power Surge: The Causes of (and Solutions to) Ontario’s Electricity Price Rise Since 2006” reminded me of Premier Ford’s above promise. I decided to measure his promise against actual results from our personal Hydro One bills.
A quick calculation of our June 2018 bill indicated all-in costs on the Hydro One bill we received were 15.06 cents/per kWh (kilowatt hour) after being granted a rebate of the provincial portion (8%) of the HST and a further discount under the “Fair Hydro Plan”. Collectively the two reductions represented 34.5% of what our bill would have been. Without discount(s) costs would have been 22.6 cents/kWh!
Fast forward three years later to June 2021 and all-in costs were 14.99 cents/kWh or a drop of 0.07 cents not the 1.8 cents/kWh of the promised 12% reduction. The strange thing about the latter bill however is on the actual calculations the amount deducted is referenced as the “Ontario Electricity Rebate” (OER) and if added to what we paid would have raised the price to 18 cents/kWh. On page 1 of the bill however, there was a dollar amount cited (Total Ontario support) that was 3.5 times the amount of the OER and if added to what we were required to pay would have increased the costs to 25.5 cents/kWh or 12.8% more than the 22.6 cents/kWh of June 2018.
What the foregoing suggests is the Ford government has done nothing to reduce the cost of electricity since elected and instead is simply burdening taxpayers at the rate of 10.6 cents/kWh (25.5 cents/kWh minus 14.9 cents/kWh) for electricity consumed by residential and (perhaps) other ratepayers.
In respect to the foregoing the C. D. Howe report contains the following about the taxpayer burden: “As system costs – particularly in energy generation – have continued to rise, the Ontario government has increasingly turned towards taxpayers to keep total bills down. The most recent estimates from the Ministry of Finance show the cost of subsides rising to a staggering $6.5 billion for the 2021/22 fiscal year – or nearly 3.5 percent of total government expenditures. To put this number in context, that same budget proposed to spend $5.8 billion in taxpayer dollars on long-term care.“
Premier Ford left Greg Richford in the portfolio for three years and this suggests he accomplished nothing other than burdening taxpayers with debt! With the advent of Todd Smith as the new Minister of Energy, taxpayers and ratepayers should hope he will somehow start the process of fixing the mess.
The time has come for the Ford led Government to recognize that taxpayers and ratepayers are normally one and the same individual!
As summer in Ontario finally arrived temperatures rose over the past few days and resulted in IESO reporting, so far in 2021, hour 18 of June 28, 2021 is the #1 peak hour with demand reaching 22,258 MW (megawatts). While that is the highest demand hour so far in 2021 it is by no means the highest peak over the past three years with September 5, 2018 at hour 18 reaching 23,240 MW.
Nuclear was operating at close to 100% capacity at hour 18 generating just over 47% of peak demand and hydro 22% of demand and operating at almost 69% of capacity. Our gas plants thankfully were at the ready generating slightly more than 26.5% of our peak demand and operating at 63% of their capacity.
The remaining generation capacity consisting of wind (4,500 MW), solar (438 MW) and biomass (238 MW) managed to only produce 13.9% of their capacity (just over 3% of demand) or a miserly 716 MW during the peak hour. In other words, they weren’t performing when we actually needed them! As a result, IESO imported power from Michigan and New York when prices hit their peak for the day of $232.79/MWh. Those two states regularly buy Ontario’s surplus power and in 2020, on average, they purchased it for $13.90/MWH. Interestingly according to the US IEA; “Natural gas accounted for 33% of the state’s (Michigan) net generation, while coal’s share declined to 27%.” What that means is we were importing fossil fuel generation. That should upset the eco-warriors and the Federal Liberals under Trudeau who want to eliminate all usage of fossil fuels and reach net-zero emissions by 2050 or perhaps they think the pain should only be inflicted on Canadians?
Looking to the future one wonders what will happen should Ontario see those 27 municipalities; (who have signed on to the Ontario Clean Air Alliance’s [OCAA] push for all gas plants to be shut down) get what they asked for. Where is the peaking power going to come from as it won’t come from intermittent and unreliable sources like wind and solar? Perhaps all the Ontario EV drivers will agree to provide all the power that gas generation previously did as envisaged by the OCAA. We can anticipate those same EV car owners will be told, as they were very recently in California, when they can’t charge their batteries or we will experience brownouts and/or blackouts.
Also, what happens if a peak demand day comes on a cold winter day in January (one did on January 21, 2019) after the 67% of homes currently using natural gas as a heating source are forced to convert to electric heat? Where will that additional electricity generation come from as EV lose a large percentage of their power in cold weather?
From all perspectives it seems the eco-warriors and our Federal government aim to punish all low and middle-income households in the province in their efforts to deliver on their religious beliefs.
Mankind cannot control the sun or Mother Nature so why is it so difficult for them to understand!
It was interesting to note two articles appearing on the same day (June 23, 2021) had wildly conflicting information on the benefits and harm of eliminating fossil fuels in the electricity generating sector. The article in the Financial Post was headlined: “Canada’s clean energy push to create more than 200,000 jobs by 2030: report” and cited a new dispatch from Clean Energy Canada (CEC) of Simon Fraser University (SFU) and Navius Research, an outgrowth of SFU and Professor Mark Jaccard. Professor Jaccard is full blown in his belief the world is doomed unless we achieve “net-zero” emissions and was cited in a CBC article stating: “Fossil fuels are wonderful except for destroying the planet“.
It is fascinating the eco-warriors, in the CEC report, use data on a continuing basis that is impossible to verify. As an example, the CEC report suggests “Canada’s clean energy sector already employs 430,500 people—more than the entire real estate sector—and by 2030, that number is projected to grow almost 50% to 639,200 under the federal government’s new climate plan.” The foregoing 430,500 (already employed) appears to be a number picked out of a hat as the Ivey Business School at the University of Western Ontario back in December 2020 issued a “policy brief” and in it noted; “electric power, generation power and transmission” employed 104,315 people in 2019. So, one should ask, where are those 430,500 people, actually employed? One example the CEC report suggests is; “Jobs in electric vehicle technology are on track to grow 39% per year, with 184,000 people set to be employed in the industry in 2030—a 26-fold increase over 2020.”
According to Unifor as of August 2020 current employment in the Canadian automotive industry is “129,000 people in Canada, in vehicle assembly (44,000) as well as body and trailer (13,000) and parts manufacturing (72,000). Factoring in various other auto-dependent jobs and workplaces, some estimates peg the overall number of direct jobs at over 188,000”! Apparently, according to CEC and Navius, it is a foregone conclusion 184,000 jobs in 2030 somehow translates to a 26-fold increase over 188,000 in 2020 instead of a loss of 4,000 jobs! The foregoing should remind all Ontario ratepayers how, when former Ontario Energy Minister, George Smitherman, responded to a question in the Ontario legislature as to how the Green Energy Act would create 50,000 jobs said; “Across the landscape of these investments, we feel quite confident that 50,000 jobs will be created.” As we Ontarians know those jobs never materialized but electricity rates inceased well over 100%!
The second article on June 23rd in the National Post was titled: ‘Solar trash tsunami’: How solar power is driving a looming environmental crisis. The article spelled out; the problem with solar panels as it turns out, is significant! The article notes: “Put simply, we can expect a lot more solar panel waste within the next decade than we are prepared for,” wrote a team led by Calgary-based supply chain researcher Serasu Duran in a pre-publication paper.” The study tried to estimate the tonnage of solar panels set to hit landfills and warned if the solar industry doesn’t get a handle on its trash problem, “we may soon face the dark side of renewable energy.” IREA (The International Renewable Energy Agency) in 2016, noted by 2050 the world would need to deal with up to 78 million tonnes of solar panel trash. In order to wrap your mind around that; consider the City of Toronto manages more than 786,000 tonnes of residential waste each year (1% of what IREA estimate solar panel waste will be) and in 2020 diverted 413,673 tonnes of residential waste from landfill through several programs. Solar panels are not part of that diversion!
The report from Duran suggests IREA’s number is a vast underestimate because it assumed the world’s existing solar panels would remain bolted to roofs for 30 years but they estimate millions of people will replace those panels to install cheaper and more efficient ones. The report suggests by 2030 solar waste could be 50 times higher then IREA’s estimate which would equate to about 39 million tonnes.
Perhaps what the CEC report suggests is the 200,000 jobs “clean energy” will reputedly create by 2030 may be related to recycling solar panels. Perhaps some of those jobs will also be involved in grinding up IWT (industrial wind turbines) blades that are each 120 feet or longer so the fiberglass, etc. can be mixed with cement rather than being dumped in landfills as they are currently.
The report by Duran, et al, in a recent review of their research for the Harvard Business Review suggests “the solar industry could be generating 2.5 tonnes of waste for every tonne of solar panel it installs”.
The foregoing may require CEC and Navius Research to revise their report as more jobs will be needed to recycle that increased solar panel trash and grind up those wind turbine blades!
Now we know the real value of what the eco-warriors claim is “clean energy”!