July 29, 2021

Fake solutions are produced through minisculization. Centuries ago fake solutions were produced by hoaxers, scammers or charlatans who used simple trickery to scam the public. Now days, nothing compares to complex technology to scam the public. Just as Hoaxers bury their trickery out of view, technology conceals the trickery of modern hoaxers.

The trick to success for hoaxers is to deceive. Locate the deception and the hoax is exposed for what it is. So the deception is the hinge-point of success for hoaxers.

Minisculization is how it works with complex technology. What it means is that the hoaxers focus on the smallest minutia they can produce to rationalize their wares. In the minutia are unlimited possibilities to misrepresent, because the minutia has no definable meaning without its context. With no definable meaning, hoaxers fabricate fake worth as the supposed solution to problems.

One of the most obvious examples now days is the promotion of so-called renewable energy by claiming it is on par with coal. To compare renewables to coal would require encyclopedias of information. But the hoaxers reduce the subject to a miniscule point which strips away the meaning.

What is meant by on par with coal is that a watt from renewables can now be produced at the same coast as a watt from coal. The fakes are comparing the cost of the source of renewables (windmills or solar panels) to the total cost of coal power. Not said is that the watt from renewables is about 5% of the total cost.

One of the reasons for the difference is that coal plants are located near cities, so transmission lines are eliminated. Transmission lines are extreme with renewables, because the sources are located hundreds or thousands of miles from consumers and spread out. The usual cost of transmission lines is so monumental that society has been dangerously short on transmission lines even before renewables. Multiply that problem by factors of tens of thousands for renewables.

The amount of metal required is what makes transmission lines prohibitively expensive (not considering environmental damage which stops most of them now days). To reduce the amount of metal, long transmission lines have 50% loss of energy (due to heat) built in and short lines have 20% loss built in.

But transmission lines are only about half the cost of renewables. Every time electricity is touched about 60% is lost to heat.

One of the major discrepancies is the off time for renewables. A windmill typically functions at 20% of its nameplate rating due to reduced wind. So divide the assumed par by a factor of five right there. A rationalizer would say (has said) that some windmills get more than 20%. But the low hanging fruit is already gone. That means future windmills will get less than 20% of nameplate rating as output. Coastal windmills have more consistent wind, but there isn't enough space for them to make the slightest dent in energy needs. The amount of electricity would have to be increased by a factor of six over present production to electrify the transportation system.

The point is that the "on par" analysis looks only a the mechanism that produces a watt of electricity and removes 95% of the expense from the claim.

Doing that is only possible with futurism. After something exist, the actual result can be looked at. Germany and England have already maxed out at 15% renewables which forced them to revert to coal and nuclear. No one can get past 15% renewables, because lines will not tolerate more than 15% fluctuations and the fluctuations with renewables cannot be eliminated even with backup systems. The backups are too slow, expensive and wasteful. They don't operate by the same dynamic as renewables, so they don't level loads on a short-term basis.

At 15% renewables, Germans and the British pay about ten times as much for electricity than it used to cost based on coal. California has something like 5% renewables, and its electricity costs 4-5 times as much as coal-produced electricity used to cost. That's the real test of what on par means.

Another example of fake futurism is the attempt to replace agriculture with hydroponics or laboratory grown meat. Rationalizers narrow their focus to the laboratory and claim to be eliminating all of the expense and problems of agriculture. That's millions of square miles of activity reduced to a laboratory. What they miss is that manufacturing amino acids and carbohydrates on the scale that millions of square miles do with free sunshine replacing artificial lighting isn't going to leave the environment in a livable condition.

What is shown by both of these examples is that persons who know nothing of the subject promote the hoaxes for the public. Knowledgeable persons do not. They know what the actual problems are.

Renewable energy has gone nowhere over the past ten years for two major reasons: One, the low hanging fruit is long gone. And two, the visible problems and expense are stopping the fakery in its tracks. Yet fakes keep pretending that there is never ending progress being made.