Comments 100

  • So I have some big news. I have joined forces with Wendover Productions, CGP Grey, Kurzgesagt and many more EDU friends to start our own video streaming platform. We currently have some original content from Isaac Arthur, Polyphonic and Real Life Lore/Second Thought online. I will be adding my own Nebula Original series in the next month or two. This platform was created to remove the creative shackles that the algorithm places on creators. I want to be able to make more military content without worry of demonetisation. I want to experiment with new ideas without worry about my views being affected. This platform is going to allow me to make more content for you!

  • the solar panels work 10 hours a day but you pay for them 24 hours a day, I have a friend who owns a company that repairs wind turbines, I asked him if they required a lot of repair and he laughed "said they (owners) are lucky if the run 10 years without major repair, but that's good for my business and they don't come close to paying for themselves."   at this time it looks like nuclear is the only cost effective and enviro friendly option we have

  • This will never work very stupid idea it's for remount areas tax payer is paying for this towers and paneled cal should clean up your Democrat party global warming bullshit

  • nuclear sounds good until the cost of decommissioning is figured in, which it almost never is considered.

  • Could you use Batteries to do the day-to-night storage, and use say hydrogen to do the summer to winter storage?

  • Just a thought if California falls off into the ocean then there would no cause for worry since they great at spending money or throwing it in holes no one can find.

  • Not mentioning the incredible environmental issues caused by production (and by the disposal) the huuuuuge number of batteries and solar cells.

  • That super energy plant is probably non fly zone.

  • No nuclear ever. No coal ever. Solar and battery storage on every home. Close every nuclear plant in the USA. Ban combustion engines. Ban plastic.

  • Why not focus on Nuclear Fusion? Thats the real deal

  • $1000.00 a month electric bills…great jobs nutcases

  • Lithium battery are just as bad as used nuclear fuel rods when used up. Don't put that crap in my basement.

  • I've always wondered if you could take something heavy, put a magnet inside it, put it in a vacuum on magnetic bearings, and spin it…. how much energy could you store? How fast can you rotate something before it flies apart if it doesn't come in contact with the surface?

  • CO2 based climate change is a scam. California has always had droughts and wildfires. If they are worse now it is because more properties are in the way of natural wildfires and there is a high in the natural fluctuations in temperatures. It is likely that the 2020s will be a colder trend if you look at the raw temperature data over the past 100 years. California is wasting billions building non-eco-friendly solar and wind farms when we should be building more nuclear, thermal, and hydro plants. But California is a haven for regressive Democrat idiots.

  • What a load of crap.

  • But the planet needs more CO2 in the atmosphere to improve the growing of plants and thus replenish Oxygen.

  • @Real Engineering, can you do a video on California's transportation woes? I live there myself, it is has been bugging me ever since I have been going to high school.

  • Can someone explain to me the actual downside of nuclear power? Nuclear power is cheaper[1] than coal, oil, or natural gas (not to mention renewables) and clean. According to information from peer-reviewed journals, nuclear power has 45x, 300x, and 400x less fatalities due to accidents or pollution than natural gas, oil, and coal respectively and this is based off of a likely overestimate of nuclear danger. [2]
    So basically, nuclear is safe, clean, and cheap.

  • instead of all this BS , just build a few nuclear power plants. keep using Natural gas and oil.

  • Heh… so what saves California's energy butt is that they use the electricity made from fossil fuels and nuclear from other states… ROFL!!! Just like the posing leftist trash.

  • Of course all of this would be deemed pointless if we just invested in and retrofitted older sites to melted Thorium or Lithium salt reactors. The Newest form of nuclear power that doesn't require Deadly Enriched Uranium, DOESN'T Produce DEADLY WASTE PRODUCT that needs to be stored in Special Subterranean storage facilities for 20 – 50 Thousand Years. The Technology is Safe cost effective, Efficient, It can be SCALED up or down for Personal commercial use, Military use, use in Space Programs, and can be EASILY retrofitted to most, if not all, Current nuclear Power plants.
    Only Problem is, despite the Support, the enthusiasm behind the tech, and initial Interest… For some reason THE DEPT OF ENERGY just took an ABOUT FACE on the idea.

    Or we could Develop HYDROGEN 3 reactors… abundant, clean, powerful… Moon ie full of it, so are many Astroids.

  • First: Stop demonizing nuclear.
    Second: Instead of investing in batteries, invest in hydro-pumped storage.
    Third: Photovoltaics are just fancy and only popular because they convert sunlight directly to electricity. Invest in Solar Thermal and not in PV. Heat is much easirer and cheaper to store than electricity, not to mention the small lifespan of batteries and the envirnmental impact of making and disposing of them.

    Also, policy makers are mostly lawyers by training and not engineers. So, in order to make themselves look good to voter's eyes, they use fancy words and policy making, but they make things worse.

  • BTW, carbon dioxide is what plants live on, so, why is it all of a sudden bad?

  • Cogeneration allows any consumer of heat to efficiently produce electricity using natural gas powered piston engine driven generators. Any hotel or apartment block could profit from this proven technology.

  • Pump storage. It needn't all be about batteries

  • It seems they are ignoring vandium flow cells as an alternative to li-ion.

  • Turn water into Hydrogen and Oxygen also desalination. Batteries technology is getting better.

  • People that believe in climate change are idiots.
    Just like California corrupt politicians.

  • Use the excess power to create pure H2O from sea water. Than split it up into Hydrogen and Oxygen using electricity. Then store it. A hydrogen fuel cell will then transform the 2 gases back into water and electricity when the need arises. It is far better for the environment than batteries. Especially considering that current batteries can only be recharged a limited amount of times. Then those batteries become industrial waste that is very difficult to properly recycle.

  • Think about this. Solar and Wind is NOT renewable. How do you make solar or wind new again?

  • Ummmm, so what!

  • Just a few points:
    1. This video is correct in that any critical infrastructure needs to be diversified.
    2. This video does not mention anything about energy conservation.
    3. California often makes goals that might not be ultimately achievable, like vehicle emissions. We have found that if you don't have any goals, you are much less likely to have any progress.
    4. Nuclear power is not feasible because the U.S. has no safe way of storing spent fuel. Also, think of what happened to the Fukushima power plant in Japan. Both Diablo Canyon and the closed San Onofre are at that same risk. (Even though closed, San Onofre has spent fuel stored on site, next to the ocean.)
    5. Yes, Tesla batteries are good things, for a start. However, there are much cheaper technologies in place and being developed, for examples, sodium batteries or hydro-electric "batteries."
    6. Coal power plants are being reduced because natural gas power plants are cheaper to operate.

  • There…..the Irish are not so silly are they…..!!??!!

  • Hydrogen power generation offers a lot of promise to replace natural gas because they are developing systems that can ramp up and down production fluidly with demand. Its really not that far off.

  • I support efforts to cut carbon emissions, but California is adding to the problem more than the solution with uber and lyft increasing transport emissions 40%, the meal delivery doubling the carbon for each meal while increasing garbage! And then their politicians run around the country telling us we have to shut down our industry and take the refugees forced out by their NIMBY policies!

  • First, I AM an engineer and you are nutty as a squirrel turd 🙂 In 1955 Kennedy proposed the Passamaquoddy Tital Wave generator. The bill was passed. Just as soon as Kennedy was killed, Johnson (big oil) killed it graveyard dead. Now it used no fuel and put out zero emmisions (what you say your looking for). This one would have supplied 2/3 of the electrical needs of the East Coast. There are 168 more places around the US where these could be built. Electricity should be 3/10 of a penny per KWH!!!!!!! So all money your spending is absolute waste. I got some more news, the tides never stop!!!!! My grandfather had a name for you, he said it was "Ignorance gone to seed" 🙂

  • The "problem" with Cali's "statistics" on energy production is that they have no compunction about lying about "percentages".

  • Energy efficiency is also an appreciable data set to include. On the programming note, I 'm brushing up on my C and adding C++. Python is on the list as well. Thank you for your time.

  • California reaches goal or not reaches goal, at least they are trying. Go California! More states should follow California.

  • and we get all the info from an Irishman, who relied on North Sea oil to survive.

  • The carbon footprint from PRODUCING things like electric cars, solar panels and wind turbines, is enormous!


  • How much co2 is produced to smelt the steel for one windmill? How much co2 is produced from natural gas? How long can u run a natural gas plant before you hit that number for the production of that one windmill? It's all stupid if quote unquote global warming oh I mean climate change was this terrible threat we would be building thorium nuclear plants and sinking all research funds into fusion. The future is run on effing windmills our grandkids will be laughing at us as the demolish them for scrap . But at least we can say between solar and wind we will have committed the largest bird Holocaust the world has ever seen






  • 567 megawatts not a term that would use as relating to battery/power storage. If you had used the SI units, it may make some sense.

  • Am I missing something here? Cannot longer term storage be done using pumped hydro? And what about using excess power at peak offload times to power de-salinisation plants? Cos that turns excess power into a valuable commodity, that can also be stored.

  • Nuclear Seems to be reliable, cheap, sensible, wonderful! So let’s build some more windmills and solar fields for the environment

  • Maybe it's your intent or just an honest omission. Nowhere during this video do you address the issue of power output degradation of Solar panels over time. On average solar panels power output degrades at 0.5 % per year. So as these solar panels installations age they are with each year producing less power output. This fact coupled with increased population per year and increased power consumption would significantly increase the projected costs over time. This video is otherwise accurate and informative. Thank you for posting it.

  • The whole basis for this presentation is false. Despite what they keep repeating. The temperature is NOT higher, droughts are NOT more frequent OR more severe. Wild fires are NOT more frequent.

    Batteries and solar are environmentally much more damaging than natural gas.

    And it’s capital and operating costs are NOT cheaper.

    California is driving itself off the cliff for NO benefit. Suicide on the alter of eco ideology.

  • Why no nuclear 🙁

  • Stop making scene, Irish. Cali is ……

  • Meantime Every solar panel is made in China with coal power and shipped on a cargo ships that produces as much pollution as the entire state of California just to ship the stupid things.

  • Very informative. Lots of data. It seems to me that the problem here is energy density. It escapes me why nuclear gets a bad rap. Properly controlled it's 1 million times more energy dense that anything else and very low if not zero emissions. And the cost over time is the most economical. Should be a no brainer. Apparently is is not glamorous enough for California. Energy should be simpler not more complex. These complexities require more maintenance over time, E.G. Shelf life of batteries and solar panels. We should be moving towards energy that simplifies the problem.

  • Clear, concise, well researched, intelligent, great video. Earned a sub. Look forward to more content from this channel!

  • The argument of basing the purchase of sufficient solar and battery capacity on economics is entirely short term thinking. Note the cost of toxic mercury levels from coal plants in the worlds fish supply. Note the cost of living as a nuclear refugee in a cardboard box a decade after the Fukushima disaster. Oh, climate change anyone? Fires, floods, rising seas. This argument is saying the price of not striking yourself in the head with a hammer will cost a lot of money. What's the alternative?

  • Solution is to every home should install solar system on the roof tops use dc load instead of ac load …
    I have done it and i am happy with it…
    Only my air conditioner runs on grid remaining stuff runs on dc

  • Just how long do the batteries last before they become unreliable ? I can see that billions will need to be spent on them on a regular basis if this method of energy storage is widely adopted. Maybe a new attitude to relatively clean nuclear such as generation usingThorium reactors is needed ?

  • Brian, Thanks for your hard work on the video.

    What about Carbon Capture technology? It's a good, affordable interim solution. There a power plant in La Porte, Texas that's running Carbon Capture as a demo.

    Carbon Capture isn't a perfect solution but it would reduce Carbon Footprint until a perfect solution is found.

    There's a pretty good explanation at:…/a-fossil-fuel-plant-that-releases-no-carbon-dioxide- testing-has-begun-in-texas/

    Texas is serious about reducing its Carbon Footprint – already gets more electrical power from renewables than any other state – including California.

    This technology is not ruinously expensive, does not require years for special permits and approvals and could reduce Carbon Footprint NOW.

  • In brief, the figures for wind + Solar do not add up! So, step 1 is to reduce the demand. This is difficult as more electricity is predicted for the growing fleet of electric vehicles. Step 2 is to find a better, more predictable and steadier form of renewable generation. May I suggest tidal turbines? Tidal flows contain massive kinetic energy and are highly predictable decades in the future. They have 2 problems. The R & D has not been done and they are not politically "Sexy" being off shore and largely under water so the politicos can not point at them and say "See! Look how green we are!".

  • Really this is a political problem created by socialist/communist political hacks who think CO2 is pollution when it is actually needed by plants for photosynthesis and our food supply meanwhile they try to endlessly de-industrialize the US and ship manufacturing to China which runs wide open with minimal if any pollution controls of any kind, then the polluted air blows back in to California and the west coast. This policy failure would be comical if it didn't cost so many American manufacturing jobs here in the US from higher electricity costs and over-regulation of US based companies.

  • Environmentalists: use renewables to save our land with wind and solar. How much land is used to build these type of farms? How many birds are killed by the wind turbines? How much noise is produced by the turbines? Where is the power stored, batteries? What is used to power the grid when the wind and solar does not produce enough? Environmentalists are not so environmental friendly are they?

  • Carbon dioxide is plant food. It does not cause GW. Ice ages have happened in earths past many time while co2 was very low. GW is a new religion. Based on faith, not facts.

  • I would encourage this channel to actually research abiotic oil and you will understand that oil is actually not a fossil fuel. It is a renewable resource produced by the Earth.

  • Carbon capture tech has actually already solved the problem, folks, if that is really what the problem is. However, the rational thnking Americans understand that carbon is not the problem. If just one of these carbon capture plants equals 40 million trees, then all we have to do is build a few dozen and problem solved. The political left in this country have no f'g clue when it come to issues of science.

  • Biomass Phytoplankton is priority! It needs to be cultured, nurtured & harnessed if it can be for survival of the planet & mitigation of our carbon footprint heating the planet or our sea is dead by 2048 ive read with current heat gains & us long before that date i imagine, dont give us much time dose it world leaders?! All issues need addressing in 1 genius solution i fear Phytoplankton is key & its declining year on year in the heat no time to cool the planet get our house in order other than an ash cloud induced ice age which is basicly a failure full reset damage limitation if it dont happen naturally once all the permafrost is gone & the planets stable ice spinning poles are all water free to move in tidal forces!!! Start here & realise how ignorant we truely are absolutely no winners in this race to a canibal appocalypse as previouse civilizations have fell so shall we have the self destruct button at the ready please i dont fancy witnessing that end.

  • The "scaling" that occured at 12:48 drives me nuts. I remember people mentioning this glaring oversight when the video first came out but reading the comments now suggests that it's fallen out of scrutiny.

    Basically what he's suggesting is that you add more solar panels. When you do this not only does your max output increase by the scaled value but so does your min value and the difference between your max and min. So if your high was 5, low 3, so your difference is 2. Now scale that up by 10, and now your high is 50, low 30, and your DIFFERENCE is 20. In essence of he scaled the graph correctly the variences of scaled solar would be much greater, thus ruining all later assumptions made in the video.

  • You didn't take into account the limited life and replacement costs of current batteries. Typical would be around 5 yrs, no longer than 10. Then investment you stated in energy storage would be recurring every 5 – 10 years. This is an wonderful goal, but a bit too soon to remove NG plants as a backup source. Cold-turkey is never a good plan; work the new twch in as it becomes available and reliable. AMAZING how free market capitalism worlds when given an incentive.

  • how about chemical storage? like hydrogen from electrolysis? it can be used in hydrogen power cells when power is needed back again

    or hydroelectric storage plants?

  • They'd might as well just keep the one nuclear plant open to provide the energy to fill in the Gap days. Either way 85% reliance on renewable energy is still a good enough goal.

  • Here's a suggestion build LFTR reactors. No carbon footprint, unlimited fuel, inherently safe, no plutonium by product, very little waste and cheaper than current nuclear power stations.
    But wait, you can't virtue signal with nuclear power can you? Oh well that's that idea out the window.

  • Nuclear energy is the most obvious solution. Too bad Cali is full of morons

  • Did you include the future need for charging millions of electric cars?

  • @4:20 I want you to look at that graph and understand it says DAILY GENERATION by SOURCE. California counts power from Washington state and Nevada as power generated. More importantly they count HYDROELECTRIC. Which WA counts as well. These numbers are reused and recycled over and over again. CALIFORNIA counts hydro electric that WA produces as green power that California daily generated. This is VERY COMMON and why ENRON got in trouble.

  • 70% drop in Western countries but not in China. Solar panels? Future land fill with toxic chemicals leaking into the water tables and aquifers. Ditto for electric cars and battery installations. Wind Turbines? Blots on the landscape, noisy, wiping out whole species of flying creatures and inconsistent/unreliable. Let's get rid of all aircons and other modern mod cons and go back to 18th century life-styles.

  • Does adding an additional 236 million cars to the grid make this problem better or worse?

  • So battery are not a permanent solution. How about that nuclear power plant? When was it built? In the 80's ? Will the lithium ION batteries last 40 years? Will the solar and wind generators last 40's?

  • What if we could take all of that energy and store it in some form of potential energy. Like a big huge reserve of water that is hundreds of feet above the power generators allowing for massive power production. Ohhh wait.. there is now a dam problem.

  • Dams are "environmentally destructive" you have never lived in farm land or seen a dam fail. Dams allow us to better regulate and protect larger areas than the dam converts. By the way NATURE has created dams IE rock slides and beavers so how are dams not green or "destructive"

  • What if they use the extra power to power carbon capture plants?

  • These stats are for electricity only, not total energy — huge difference

  • And this doesn’t even go into the pollution from mining rare earth minerals or the increased prices from higher demand of ‘green’ energy creator. The prices would quickly go over these estimates as they ordered them

  • Nuclear Power is Cleaner, Safer and Cheaper than Solar And Wind. The world needs to invest primarily in Nuclear Fission today and Nuclear Fusion research for tomorrow. Nuclear will be the ONLY energy solution to make humanity a space fairing civilization.

  • Using batteries to store grid energy is STUPID.

  • Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant produces carbon free energy 24/7/365 at a mere six cents per watt. Solar and Wind cannot approach the low cost of nuclear. California buys Nuclear power from AZ because they're a bunch of stupid virtue-signalling fake environmentalists.

  • Calculate the carbon footprint of the electronics required to grid tie solar energy. The carbon footprint approached a coal fired plant. Also, the amount of fresh water consumed to keep solar farms clean can solve the water shortages CA farmers are suffering through. Again, stupid liberals and their virtue signaling fake environmentalism strikes again.

  • Humanity needs to build another thousand Nuclear power plants. Dependency on all other forms of dirty energy sources comes to an end. Carbon free future and electricity five times cheaper than today. Global poverty would disappear. problem solved.

  • Kinetic or potential energy storage seems like a better solution than chemical batteries.

  • Questions I have include: Are batteries renewable? Will the maintenance required for batteries cancel out the sustainability benefits of renewable energy sources?

  • Will the uptake of EV cars not also increase power needed within the grid? You should do the calculations when all the cars in California need charging every day.

  • I need your help. Would you like to see
    renewable energy systems become the norm for all energy on the Earth?
    Better yet, would you like to be instrumental in that occurrence? A
    story you can tell your grandchildren how YOU were there and
    contributing when the greatest single change on planet Earth since
    people took flight, or discovered and harnessed electricity took

    Hi my name is Tim Gard. I am an energy
    researcher. And many of us have been waiting over fifty years for the
    opportunity to present itself, and I am convinced the time is now. I
    can see exactly how to do it. I just need one more ingredient.
    People. People with passion to see the event take place. People like

    I am assembling a think tank of people
    interested in renewable energy, from all different aspects of life.
    Electricians, plumbers, business people, sales people, investors,
    lawyers, farmers, politicians, anyone who would like to be a part of
    an international organization to put renewables on its final approach
    and touchdown.

    There are no financial requirements,
    only your input.

    We will start with a weekly meeting on
    Sunday evenings at 8 PM Eastern Standard Time on my You Tube page
    discussion page to begin planning our mission.

    And from your bio, I get the impression you might want to be a part
    of this!

    Send me a short description of who you
    are and how you are connected to renewable energy science, and I will
    get you on a contact list for a heads up on meetings.

    [email protected]

    Our first discussion will be how to
    bring solar and wind to a base load state of application.

    Our future's so bright we gotta wear


  • There is a solution not even mentioned: Tesla's Power Wall, a simple three by five feet device, that stores solar. They are $9,000 dollars. They can be installed in homes with solar. That's the answer: every new building, and the old, need to have solar installation.

  • There is a newer type of battery already being developed that will solve a lot of these "problems." No, we don't need nukes or oil or coal or gas.
    People with solar know this. There are plenty of people in California who are living "off the grid." Tesla's power wall is one answer, and I am sure it will be improved, and it is not so much a wall but a rather small sized, three by five foot device that stores solar energy. Solar panels are only going to be improved, and so will batteries. That is where the money should be going: R and D for solar and batteries and their storage capabilities. Going backwards to oil, gas, coal, and nukes is NOT the way to go! Also, there is no mention of conserving energy and NOT using so damn much. Even public transportation that uses electricity from a power source needs to go away, as a firm in So Cal has invented light rail trains that are self propelled using batteries, using solar, and NOT having to use a third rail or overhead wires: Tig-M being the name of the firm, and they are in Chatsworth! They have vids on this site.

  • Was there any reason you didn't mention distributed generation & storage plus demand reduction? i.e. rooftop solar and battery storage at a consumer level and improving building codes to reduce energy consumption and/or demand shifting by incentivising users (particularly big energy customers) to shift their usage to different hours?

    Also what about alternative energy storage arbitrage systems, such as pumped hydro (pumping upstream when abundant energy and releasing when expensive) or thermal energy storage systems i.e. or

  • It's commonly said water and oil don't mix. Oil and electricity also do not mix. However, water and electricity do mix!
    Now I live in Manitoba where Hydro electric dams is our main thing… "Land of 100,000 lakes" and all… The water behind a Hydro electric dam is really just a big battery on a year-long cycle. The potential energy of the water lasts until its used and is charged once a year.
    If we could only use these dams in winter and go solar in summer our dams would be twice as effective. We are using up that potential energy in July when we really don't need to! If we could save it until December when solar is at an all time low we could use up the water twice as fast and be producing extra energy during that season for more provinces and states without worrying about running out!
    Now not every where has as much water as we do, and we shouldnt start building more dams everywhere for that would wreck even more of the ecosystems we are trying to protect, but it is a powerful thing that should not be underestimated. There is a huge "potential" for it to pair perfectly with solar power throughout the whole year, instead of just looking to it daily to meet our ordinary needs.
    It's like turning on a tap and getting free energy when you want. We need to turn it on strategically instead of letting it run all year round.
    PS. I think if we keep on researching nuclear power it can be our very best option. While you don't have to support it happening now I think we all should be pushing for research to make it safer and cheaper and a more viable option in a decade or two. We've seen many advancements in solar energy in cost, efficiency, applications, and durability in such a short time. If we supported nuclear research as much as this and other things (ie. Space exploration! or Cancer! or any political belief) we'd really see changes very quickly.

  • Hello, would anyone be interested in providing renewable energy to every home in America for less than $700,000,000,000 spread out over 10 years. That's about 128,000,000 homes that would have the ability to support themselves while using the current utility grid as a backup. The current renewable energy sources, wind, solar, and hydro electric systems are okay. The current issue that concerns me is they require massive amounts of land for solar, wind turbines are a real eye sore, and hydro plants have reshaped our land and not in good way. The cost factor to build and maintain these systems are asinine. Some may say $700B is a lot money, and they are correct. I have finished development of a system that is not at the mercy of the elements. Low cost and low maintenance make it a game changer. To find out more information about my system check out my YouTube videos. Then contact me. Thanks.

  • A good topic for a video would be the pilot projects using renewable electricity to make make hydrocarbon fuel, it seems counter intuitive but because it uses C02 from the air it could be carbon neutral. It reuses existing infrastructure and could even get tax breaks and carbon credits by returning some of the fuels underground.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *