Solar power due to overtake oil production investment for first time, IEA says

[chuckChuck]

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/article-solar-power-due-to-overtake-oil-production-investment-for-first-time/

Solar power due to overtake oil production investment for first time, IEA says
Noah Browning
London
Reuters

Investment in clean energy will extend its lead over spending on fossil fuels in 2023, the International Energy Agency said on Thursday, with solar projects expected to outpace outlays on oil production for the first time.

Annual investment in renewable energy is up by nearly a quarter since 2021 compared to a 15-per-cent rise for fossil fuels, the Paris-based energy watchdog said in its World Energy Investment report.

Around 90 per cent of that clean energy spending comes from advanced economies and China, however, highlighting the global divide between rich and poor countries as fossil fuel investment is still double the levels needed to reach net-zero emissions by midcentury.

“Clean energy is moving fast – faster than many people realize,” said IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol.

“For every dollar invested in fossil fuels, about 1.7 dollars are now going into clean energy. Five years ago, this ratio was one-to-one.”

Around US$2.8-trillion is set to be invested in energy worldwide in 2023, of which more than US$1.7-trillion is expected to go to renewables, nuclear power, electric vehicles and efficiency improvements.

The rest, or around US$1-trillion, will go to oil, gas and coal, demand for the last of which will reach and all-time high or six times the level needed in 2030 to reach net zero by 2050.

Current fossil-fuel spending is significantly higher than what it should be to reach the goal of net zero by midcentury, the agency said.

In 2023, solar-power spending is due to hit more than US$1-billion a day or around US$380-billion on a yearly basis.

“This crowns solar as a true energy superpower. It is emerging as the biggest tool we have for rapid decarbonization of the entire economy,” energy think tank Ember’s head of data insights, Dave Jones, said in a statement.

“The irony remains that some of the sunniest places in the world have the lowest levels of solar investment.”

Investment in new fossil fuel supply will rise by 6 per cent in 2023 to US$950-billion, the IEA added.

The agency did not expressly reiterate its blockbuster projection from 2021 that investors should not fund new oil, gas and coal supply projects if the world wants to reach net-zero emissions by midcentury.

Producer group OPEC has said calls by the IEA to stop investing in oil undermine global energy security and growth. Scientists and international climate activists have warned the fossil fuel industry exacerbates the catastrophic impacts of climate change.

[jazz]

Thanks in advance for the $300 oil chuck. My portfolio loves cashing in off you woke esg nutbars.

[furrowtickler]

Catastrophic impacts of climate change … LOL

[Hamloc]

The leaders in China must be rubbing their hands together with glee. One obvious side effect will be oil going back over $100 a barrel at some point in the near future, maybe even much higher. Still using over 100 million barrels a day. FYI, I am like you Chuck2, I didn’t read the article.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Catastrophic impacts of climate change … LOL

That is how you know it is a completely unbiased fact-filled non-emotional intellectual article.

[blackpowder]

Clearly the most critical lost skill in recent decades has been to know the difference between news and editorial.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Off the top of my head, trying to recall from previous discussions. I believe solar now accounts for approximately 1% of total global energy consumption. Fossil fuels closer to 80% of total global energy consumption. Not to be confused with capacity as chuck would attempt to muddy the waters with.
So for all the money already invested into solar, this is not looking like a great return on investment.
If this article has any basis in fact, that would indicate that we are going to invest more Capital into what provides 1% of our energy, then we do into what provides 80% of our energy.
I realized investment is supposed to pay dividends in the future, not today. So perhaps this outsized investment can move solar up to 2% of world energy production. That would make the ROI only 80 times less than the investment into fossil fuels according to this article. You would have to be a chuck chuck to think that is a good investment.

[chuckChuck]

Alberta is leading the way on solar and wind in Canada with lots already and big plans for more according to the AESO. But Rome wasn't built in a day was it?

You will be eating crow sooner than you think, that is if you don't freeze in the dark first?

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Alberta is leading the way on solar and wind in Canada with lots already and big plans for more according to the AESO. But Rome wasn't built in a day was it?

You will be eating crow sooner than you think, that is if you don't freeze in the dark first?

Chuck, I will happily eat crow on this issue. Please let me know when solar and wind result in cheaper electricity to the end user, and unsubsidized dispatchable solar and wind are so cost competitive that they completely displaced fossil fuels. As a consumer, I will rejoice. It will be great to see the end of money flowing into despotic oil producing regimes around the world.
Have you done the math on what it will cost to get there? If it requires more investment than all of fossil fuels, just to get 1%? Do you think that after investing that much, it could still be done cheaper than fossil fuels in the end? And keep in mind that is not even including any investment in storage which doesn't even exist.

[TSIPP]

I think he meant we will all freeze to death in the dark trying to eat a dead crow.

If we are relying on solar and wind, that’s exactly what will happen with a vast majority.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

I think he meant we will all freeze to death in the dark trying to eat a dead crow.

If we are relying on solar and wind, that’s exactly what will happen with a vast majority.

But look on the bright side (pun intended ), at least there will be lots of dead crows to eat. And dead eagles and every other kind of bird who tangles with the wind turbines.

[jazz]

Who wants to tell chuck what happened to the roman empire. Maybe we should call him Nero.

[shtferbrains]

Canada and solar power

Solar Energy Statistics
According to the Canadian Renewable Energy Association (CanREA), the solar energy sector grew by 13.6% (288 MW) in 2021. Canada now has a solar capacity of 2,399 MW, compared to 2,111 MW in 2020. Canada's most valuable source for solar generation is Ontario, sharing almost 96% of its solar power.[1] In 2021 Canada had over 50 energy storage projects with the highest concentration of facilities in Ontario. Canada's utility scale rechargeable energy storage capacity is estimated at over 160 MWac.[2]

"Most of the solar power generating potential in Canada is located in the south in Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Ontario. Canada has an overall maximum capacity factor of 6%, compared to 15% in the US. The Canada Energy Regulator (CER) anticipates that solar will form 3% of the country's overall generation by 2040.[3] The potential in coastal regions is lower due to increased cloud cover. Many Canadian cities have a solar potential that rivals many major cities around the world. Installing solar panels on the roofs of residential homes can supply half of Canada's home energy demands. An anticipated 3,000 MW will be commissioned by the end of 2022 and a similar amount in 2023.

From Global Energy Monitor Wiki

We compete with the world and currently have one of the highest standard of living ratings largely attributed to our abundant natural resources including cheap abundant electricity due to Hydro and Fossil Fuels.

We have no advantage with solar as we have among the lowest capacity factors in the world.

Solar in Canada is 100% driven by Government regulation and subsidies, tariffs, and incentives at every level of production.
The power produced is contracted to companies like Amazon that are intensive C02 producers to greenwash their image and avoid carbon tax. Incentivized again.

There is no solar industry without taxpayer dollars. Zero

“On wind energy, we get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms. That's the only reason to build them. They don't make sense without the tax credit.” – Warren Buffett

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Clearly the most critical lost skill in recent decades has been to know the difference between news and editorial.

You can't really blame the reporters for being unable to distinguish between news and opinion, and for being unable to keep emotion and bias out of supposedly news stories.
Chuck's holy Grail of scientific integrity, the peer reviewed research paper is equally guilty in recent years. Many of them are full of emotional statements, hyperbole, conjecture, presuppositions and opinions. This is especially coming in any paper related to climate change. So when a reporter with no scientific background reports on these topics, there isn't even an unbiased scientific source they can base their opinion pieces on.

[jazz]

Every step towards chucks ESG utopia needs more and more oil to back it all up.

Thats good for Ab and Sk. By all means chuck, keep going.