The Hidden Cost of Renewable Energy Expansion
The Great Green Hypocrisy: Why Fossil Fuels Are Still Indispensable | Watch
Diving into the complexities of our energy choices! 
It’s time to untangle the green narrative and confront the essential role fossil fuels still play in our lives. Let’s explore the contradictions and find a balanced path forward. #EnergyReality #GreenDebate #FossilFuels #Sustainability 
The Energy Transition Dilemma: Balancing Sustainability with Global Energy Needs.
Navigating the complex world of energy transition isn’t easy!
We must find a way to balance our growing energy demands with sustainability. Join the conversation and discover how we can tackle this dilemma together! #EnergyTransition #Sustainability #FutureOfEnergy 
Mining for lithium — an essential element to power the clean energy transition — can have negative impacts on the environment. Photo: TomTooM03
The race toward net-zero emissions depend heavily on lithium — to power electric vehicles, to store wind and solar power. This element of the periodic table is one of the main protagonists of the economic and infrastructural transformation that we are experiencing today.
Our dependence on lithium recalls that of oil and coal that transformed our society in the past. At the time, however, the long-term effects of burning fossil fuels were unknown, whereas today, we know of the highly negative aspects of lithium extraction on the environment.
With this knowledge should come responsibility — towards the environment and future generations. We must not fall into the same traps from which we are trying to free ourselves.
Together with the powerful “curative” and “palliative” qualities of lithium on the effects of climate change, it is necessary to consider the potential “side effects” and communicate them in a transparent manner. These side effects include: use of large quantities of water and related pollution; potential increase in carbon dioxide emissions; production of large quantities of mineral waste; increased respiratory problems; alteration of the hydrological cycle.
Obviously the economic interests at stake are enormous. Australia, Chile and China produce 90% of the world’s lithium. The global lithium market rapidly approaches $8 billion.
A paradox, therefore, can arise between “clean” revolution and “dirty” lithium mines: it is true that electrifying cars and other aspects of our society favors the reduction of carbon dioxide emissions. However, after we consider the cost of emissions associated with extracting lithium, the transition may not be as efficient as we believe, especially when miners are not using clean energy.
Let us consider, for example, electric cars. To give an idea of this effect, producing a battery weighing 1,100 pounds emits over 70% more carbon dioxide than producing a conventional car in Germany, according to research by the automotive consultancy Berylls Strategy Advisors.
Furthermore, lithium mining requires a lot of water. To extract one ton of lithium requires about 500,000 liters of water, and can result in the poisoning of reservoirs and related health problems.
What to do, then? To begin with, we should invest in alternative solutions to lithium batteries. At the same time, recycling and increasing the lifetime of these batteries would reduce the need to mine huge quantities of the precious material. This effort should be accompanied by launching lithium mining operations with strict environmental laws and regulations, and investing in advanced mining methods capable of extracting lithium from seawater.
Remediating and reducing the impact of lithium mining is essential to be able to call the steps we are taking towards a new world “progress.” Otherwise, we are just going in circles.
Marco Tedesco is a research professor at Columbia Climate School’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory.
The impact of lithium mining on the environment includes123:
- Pollution
- Water depletion
- Loss of biodiversity
- Threats to human rights
- Non-mining livelihoods
- Indigenous sovereignty and cultural integrity
- Ecological devastation
- Negative impact on indigenous communities
- Social struggles and human rights issues
- Hazards to Wildlife
Read More:
Hazards of Lithium Mining – Search
The Reality Behind Electrons: Where Do Batteries Fit In?
When we think about renewable energy, we often picture wind farms sprawling across vast landscapes or solar panels glittering under the sun. It’s a clean image. However, behind these clean systems lies a hidden truth—batteries.
Batteries are the key component in storing renewable energy, but they are far from green. On the surface, they seem like the ultimate solution for energy storage, yet the way they’re produced and disposed of tells a different story.
For instance, the mining of lithium, a critical component in batteries, leaves a massive carbon footprint and significantly disrupts ecosystems. Moreover, the energy consumption in manufacturing batteries negates some benefits of being “green”.
Mining for Elements: Digging Deeper into Environmental Impacts
The process starts with lithium extraction. Lithium is critical for battery production, and its extraction is energy-intensive, involving water-heavy mining practices. Imagine a metal straw in a water glass; that’s akin to the massive water removal necessary to obtain lithium. The regions rich in lithium, such as parts of Chile and Bolivia, face water shortages as a consequence, drastically affecting local communities and agriculture. Equally concerning are the other elements like cobalt and nickel, which carry their own environmental baggage. As demand for these materials rises, so do tensions over resource exploitation, raising ethical questions about renewable energy’s true footprint.
Pollution Prevails: The Toxicity of Manufacturing Batteries
Once the precious elements are gathered, they move to factories for processing. Battery production itself generates hazardous waste, which often ends up in landfills, contaminating soil and water sources. Chemicals such as sulfuric acid used during the process can persist in the environment long after production stops. Moreover, the energy used in these factories often comes from coal or gas, overshadowing the environmental benefits that renewable energies aim to provide. As transparency grows and the public becomes more educated, the irony becomes clear—while these batteries power clean energy, they are born from not-so-clean origins.
Lifespan Limitations: When Batteries Die, Mother Earth Pays
With time, batteries degrade. Their lifespan is not infinite, usually ranging from a few to about ten years, depending on usage. Unfortunately, end-of-life management often includes incineration or landfilling. Picture a car graveyard—but with old batteries. These practices release toxic chemicals into the environment, disrupting ecosystems and posing significant health risks. While recycling exists, it’s often not cost-effective, and only a tiny fraction of batteries actually get recycled. Economic and technical hurdles mean the rest simply contribute to the growing problem of electronic waste.
The Cost Quandary: Financial Spin on a Green Illusion
Beyond environmental concerns, there’s a financial strain. The cost of producing and maintaining energy storage systems is high. Though efforts to reduce costs continue, batteries remain expensive to both produce and recycle. Subsidies often mask these costs, painting a picture of sustainability that isn’t entirely accurate. Consumers and stakeholders sometimes find it frustrating as these costs are passed on, making renewable energy seem less affordable in the long run. This financial burden can seem like paying more for what seems to be a green alternative, making the transition toward renewables less attractive.
Technological Tides: Striving for Sustainable Storage Solutions
Despite the challenges, there’s a ray of hope with innovations. Researchers are looking into alternative battery technologies that could reduce reliance on harmful materials, like solid-state and flow batteries. These technologies promise higher efficiency and sustainability if hurdles like cost and scalability can be overcome. Some envision a future where more sustainable materials, like sodium, replace lithium. However, these advancements are still in their infancy, and mainstream adoption could take years. The race for alternatives signifies the growing acknowledgment of current battery technologies’ limitations, sparking a quest for genuinely green solutions.
Land Use and Landscape: The Visual and Cultural Footprint of Storage Solutions
The infrastructure required to store renewable energy can be quite invasive. Large battery storage facilities occupy vast areas of land that might otherwise be used for agriculture or wildlife habitat. This land use shift affects not only the environment but also cultural landscapes. Local communities often face the double-edged impact of having greener energy solutions but losing lands that hold cultural significance or provide livelihood. Sometimes, even basic aesthetic alteration of landscapes can spark resistance among communities, pointing to a broader tension between development and preservation.
A Time for Change: Assessing the Path Forward
While challenges exist, awareness is the first step toward change. Realizing that batteries aren’t the green energy solution opens up dialogues on improving storage methods. Governments, companies, and researchers are increasingly focused on the development of alternative energy storage solutions that could be less impactful on the environment and society. Investing in these new technologies is vital for a sustainable future, with the hope that someday we might rely on genuinely green energy storage systems. Acknowledging the dirty secret of battery-powered energy storage is crucial as we tread this path toward true environmental sustainability without greenwashing.
Batteries are recycled because they are the highest concentration of battery ore on the planet!
And your alternative is? Burn more hydrocarbons? Really? Newer batteries are greener, but we have to get production up to speed. They also last through more cycles and hold more charge. Lithium sulfur, graphene supercapacitors, redox flow batteries, aluminum graphite batteries, or even hydrogen fuel cells which actually cleans the air as they are used.
Plus electric vehicles are much more fuel efficient than fossil fueled vehicles. EVs convert 77% of the electric power into motion, while traditional gas engines only use 12 to 30% of the gasoline for motion. EVs also recapture forward momentum to turn back into electricity it can re-use, emit no pollutants into the air as you drive through neighborhoods and reduce dependency on OPEC and other oil producers like Russian and Venezuela.
Biden tried to send us down this green energy path and at least 10 years before the technology is ready. But he would not listen to anyone. California now has surplus solar power that can not be utilized and when the sun does not shine we are short of power.
Another green hit piece from Climate Cosmos. – Search
With an increasing number of industrial-scale wind turbines around the world, numerous reports are surfacing to suggest that noise, infrasound and stray voltage (dirty energy) may be harmful to livestock and wildlife.
The increase in whale, dolphin, and other cetacean deaths off the East Coast of the United States since 2016 is not due to the construction of large industrial wind turbines, U.S. government officials say.
The Formula That Will Determine Our Energy Future – Answers With Joe | Watch
We all want cleaner, more renewable energy. But when it comes down to it, the energy of the future is going to be the cheapest energy. So, in this video we compare energy production by the Levelized Cost of Energy, or LCOE – the formula that will determine our energy future.
Sun vs. Wind: Weighing the Advantages and Disadvantages of Solar Panels and Wind Turbines | Watch
In the battle of energy sources, solar panels and wind turbines each have their perks and pitfalls! 
Let’s explore how they stack up against one another for a greener planet. Which one do you think is the better option? #RenewableEnergy #Sustainability #SolarVsWind
Their scientists have done the research, they say, to prove that whatever is killing the whales is completely unrelated to the wind industry.
But now, a new documentary, “Thrown To The Wind,” by director and producer Jonah Markowitz, which I executive produced, proves that the US government officials have been lying.
The film documents surprisingly loud, high-decibel sonar emitted by wind industry vessels when measured with state-of-the-art hydrophones. And it shows that the wind industry’s increased boat traffic is correlated directly with specific whale deaths.
My nonprofit organization, Environmental Progress, which is independent of all energy interests, funded the documentary because, like millions of Americans, we love whales and believe their extinction is an avoidable tragedy
The species in question is the North Atlantic right whale. Its population has dropped to 340 from over 400 over the last few years.
And, there have been more than 60 recorded whale deaths of all species on the East Coast since Dec 1, 2022, a number that increased markedly since 2016 when the wind industry started to ramp up.
The documentary may not stop the industrial wind projects from being built. After all, the wind projects are going forward despite urgent warnings from leading conservation groups and a top scientist at the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
BONUS: Wind Turbines Hurt Dogs Ears – Search
Dead Whales Wind Turbines – Search
The waters off New York and New Jersey have seen a sudden upsurge in whale deaths this year.
But our documentary has hit a nerve. Within the first 48 hours of it being online, over 20,000 people re-posted it, and over 6 million people total, across two tweets, have viewed the posts with the embedded trailer for “Thrown To The Wind.”
And, now, Republican members of Congress tell me they want to hold hearings to investigate.
I have been involved in a lot of great causes in the 35 years that I have been politically active. This one, saving the whales, is easily one of the most noble and important. One of my first political memories as a boy was the Greenpeace “Save the Whales” sticker in my father’s food co-op.
Whales touch something deep within us. They care deeply for their offspring. They form communities. They sing.
The most recent death in New York waters was the discovery on August 15 of a young male humpback on Atlantic Beach, in Long Beach, Long Island. AMSEAS/ Instagram
Whales are, as the conservationists in “Thrown to the Wind” explain, magnificent spiritual beings, not just great biological ones.
There appear to be at least two distinct mechanisms by which wind industry activities are killing whales.
The first is through boat traffic in areas where there hasn’t historically been traffic. The second is through high-decibel sonar mapping that can disorient whales, separate mothers from their calves, and send them into harm’s way, either into boat traffic or poorer feeding grounds.
Whale deaths caused by boat strikes are not unrelated to wind farm works — as some have sought to claim — but fueled by them.
We cannot ignore the real cause of whale deaths like this humpback washed ashore at Brigantine, NJ, in January, says Shellenberger: windfarm development is a clear and present danger.AP
The waters around New York and New Jersey have seen three humpbacks die in August alone; two of them had blunt force trauma while the third was too decomposed for a necropsy.
Shot in the hand-held style made famous by Paul Greengrass, the creator and director of the Jason Bourne movies, Markowitz’s “Thrown To The Wind” gives the experience of being on the ocean and in the room with the film’s stars, Lisa Linowes, who correlated the whale deaths to wind industry activity with Eric Turner, and Rob Rand.
Linowes is a lifelong environmental activist, data analyst, and co-founder of the Save the Right Whales Coalition.
She’s also an obsessive data nerd who, working with her husband, sold their start-up software company over a decade ago and moved to New England where she does her conservation work full-time and without pay.
Antarctic ice melt harming emperor penguin chicks: study
The film follows Lisa Linowes, who correlated the whale deaths to wind industry activity.Thrown to the Wind / Public productions
Linowes was able to hear the sounds to which whales are exposed during filming. Shellenberger writes that the effect of the sound is to disorient the whales, and drive mothers and calves apart — and into danger.Thrown to the Wind / Public productions
Rand, meanwhile, is a conservationist and one of the world’s leading underwater acoustics experts with over 30 years of experience.
The commitment by Markowitz to investigative documentary filmmaking led him to go out on the ocean with Rand to measure the sound of industrial wind activity.
It was on that trip that Rand and his team discovered high-decibel sound emissions that appeared to violate NOAA’s protective standards for marine life.
When combined with the work of Linowes and Turner, correlating whale deaths with wind industry vessel traffic, Rand’s acoustic research should have far-reaching implications, including halting all industrial wind activity along the East Coast.
This barge off Smith Point, Long Island, is part of the survey work for wind turbines. A dead humpback washed up on Smith Point on August 11.Newsday via Getty Images
After a dead whale washed ashore on Takanassee Beach in New Jersey two weeks ago, police blocked off the area so tractors could be brought in to remove it.
“We were sitting on the beach yesterday, and I noticed it when people started running up to it,” Soraya Nimaroff, who lives nearby, told the Ashbury Park Press. “I’m very sad. It is very sad.”
Our research shouldn’t have been necessary. Dr. Sean Hayes, a top NOAA scientist, warned last year that industrial wind projects “could have population-level effects on an already endangered and stressed species.”
“Population-level effects” include extinction.
On Lido Beach in January, the grim aftermath of a humpback death was apparent as heavy machinery was brought in to bury the 35-foot adult.AP
This was the warning from NOAA’s head of protective species about the dangers of wind farms. It was ignored, writes Shellenberger.
Dr. Hayes, NOAA’s chief of protected species warned that “oceanographic impacts from installed and operating turbines cannot be mitigated for the 30-year lifespan of the project unless they are decommissioned.” His warnings were ignored.
So, too, were the ones from scientists representing many of the same environmental groups supporting the industrial wind energy projects wrote in a 2021 letter that “the North Atlantic right whale population cannot withstand any additional stressors; any potential interruption of foraging behavior may lead to population-level effects and is of critical concern.”
But the scientists then stood by as their organizations sold out them and the whales.
Under pressure from the White House, the US government has ignored its top scientists and pushed forward to industrialize the oceans and risk the extinction of the North Atlantic right whale.
It’s surprising that the environmentalists who are lobbying for these wind towers don’t seem to care about this collateral issue. Animals that navigate by echolocation such as whales – Search are especially affected as are any of the marine life that live on the ocean floor.
The Jersey Shore has become an all too frequent host of the least welcome form of whale visitor: a washed-up corpse.
This 2021 letter from scientists, many from groups backing the expansion of wind energy, warned how vulnerable right whales are. “Population-level effects” include extinction. Part of the problem is that the wind industry spent years bribing the US government, scientific organizations, and aquariums to lie to the American people.
Wind energy companies and their foundations have donated nearly $4.7 million to at least three dozen major environmental organizations.
And Facebook went so far as to censor my post linking whale deaths to wind energy off the East Coast of the United States.
The censorship came in the form of adding a link to a “FactCheck.org” article from March 31, 2023, which relied entirely on U.S. government sources “Thrown to the Wind” debunks.
Rhode Island hosts the nation’s first offshore wind farm. Shellenberger argues it is reckless not to stop the expansion of the offshore giants.AP
“Thrown To The Wind” exposes the reality that the U.S. government agencies and the scientists who work for them either haven’t done the basic mapping and acoustic research to back up their claims, have done the research badly, or found what we found and are covering it up.
Given the evidence presented in “Thrown To The Wind,” it’s clear that the American people and our representatives cannot trust NOAA and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), the two government agencies that, for years, have repeatedly betrayed the public’s trust in service to powerful industrial interests.
In the documentary, the reality of the danger to whales is clear to all taking part. “When people see the evidence, the American people, their policymakers, and the courts will end this awful destruction of wild nature,” Shellenberger writes.Thrown to the Wind / Public productions
Because politics has corrupted the normal scientific and regulatory process for protecting the North Atlantic right whales, we are urging elected officials at federal and state levels to conduct an investigation, issue subpoenas, and hold public hearings.
Saving the North Atlantic right whale is a goal that is within reach and well worth pursuing. Yes, its numbers have plummeted from over 400 to just 340 at the last estimate.
But the species will likely rebound if the sonar mapping and new boat activity in previously non trafficked areas is ended.
The strong reaction to the documentary over the last two weeks, including from members of Congress, gives me hope that things will soon change.
The depressing sight of a whale being buried, like this one in Lido Beach, has become too frequent already. Shellenberger is urging state and federal lawmakers to act.AP
When people see the evidence, the American people, their policymakers, and the courts will end this awful destruction of wild nature.
The government officials, scientists, and journalists who have been involved in promoting this project should quit their jobs and become whistleblowers before their work kills any more whales.
Michael Shellenberger is Founder of Environmental Progress and Public, a Substack publication. @shellenberger
Dems ask Trump USDA pick who will do ‘backbreaking’ farming amid mass deportations
Game Changer – Trillions of Tons of Hidden Hydrogen Could Power Earth for 1,000 Years
Nuclear Power Redux: Why Scientists Are Reconsidering Its Role in a Green Future | Watch
10 Countries That Are Trailblazers For Clean Energy & 10 That Need To Catch Up
Trump’s executive orders might threaten growth of electric vehicles and wind power
Unlocking the Future: Exploring Renewable Energy Challenges and Opportunities
10 Breakthroughs in Nuclear Energy That Could Change the Future | Watch
The Truth About Electric Vehicles: Are They Really Better for the Planet?
Nuclear Fusion: Is It the Key to Solving the Energy Crisis? | Watch
Clean hydrogen in minutes: Microwaves deliver clean energy faster
Batteries Are Not Green: The Dirty Secret of Renewable Energy Storage
Trump is desperate for more energy, as long as it’s not from the wind
Did Biodiesel Fail? Here’s What Happened To The Renewable Fuel
Biofuels Are Destroying Forests: The Other Side of Green Energy
Electric Vehicle Market Heading for a Cliff: Here’s Why | Watch
People Want Electric Cars Banned and Here’s 18 Reasons Why
Unveiling the Top 10 Pros and Cons of Renewable Energy
WATCH: “Thrown To The Wind” — Environmental Progress
The Battle of Renewables: Solar Panels vs. Wind Turbines
How Wind Turbines Are Shaping Rural America | Watch