IEA counts fossil fuels threefold versus wind and solar

3 comments

1. Two more articles illustrating the statistical complexity

   [**Calculation methodologies for the share of renewables in energy consumption**](https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Calculation_methodologies_for_the_share_of_renewables_in_energy_consumption)
   [**Understand the three different scales for measuring primary energy and avoid errors**](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0360544206002957)

2. Counting solar and wind threefold would basically hide the benefits of electrification combined with renewable energy. You would have no energy savings when using EVs or heat pumps, which is contrary to the real impact.

   Converting solar PV electricity to primary energy using any factor is always arbitrary. You can consider you are wasting all the energy the panel doesn’t capture, why only the one that reaches the panel? And what does the primary energy means there? Are we using less of the energy from the sun energy if we have a more efficient panel?

3. The renewable energy critics also misuse primary energy to show how costly it will be to convert all of that fossil energy to renewables, without saying that two thirds or more of that is waste heat that will never need to be replaced. It’s known as the ‘primary energy fallacy’.

Comments are closed.