Transitioning to wind and solar is probably one of the greatest mistakes that humanity has ever made, German commodity trading company HMS Bergbau president Dr Lars Schernikau said at nonprofit organisation FFF Carbon’s 2024 Middelburg Coal Conference in Mpumalanga, on October 17.

“It's a very uncomfortable and unpopular thing to say,” he admitted, highlighting numerous often ignored challenges posed by the ongoing energy transition.

Schernikau outlined several key issues with wind and solar energy, starting with the problem of energy density.

“Even though wind energy and solar energy is free and huge, whatever we get per square meter is very little,” he said, noting similarly that other future energy alternatives, such as liquid hydrogen, offer only a fraction of the energy density provided by petroleum, which would result in higher costs and a greater environmental impact.

Schernikau also addressed the underwhelming operational lifetimes of renewable-energy infrastructure, citing concerns over their longevity.

“Wind and solar power plants have a very limited operational lifetime. You have to replace them every few years. How many years? We don’t know. What we do know, is that it doesn’t last 25 years at grid scale,” he said.

He noted that grid-scale solar panels from China last between 12 to 15 years, a far cry from the 25 to 35 years often projected in net-zero analyses. He clarified that, while certain solar panels on residential rooftops might last 25 to 30 years, this longevity did not apply to grid-scale infrastructure owing to the optimisation of materials for cost-efficiency.

He pointed out that windmills, particularly offshore installations, often had operational lifespans of just 8 to 20 years owing to factors such as sea salt corrosion.

Another major challenge Schernikau highlighted was the issue of intermittency. He pointed to studies carried out over three years, which showed that wind and solar were able to meet energy demands when demand was at an absolute minimum and generation was at an absolute maximum. However, it was far from capable of meeting peak energy demand at any stage.

This shortfall is compounded by the fact that electricity demand is projected to rise dramatically, driven by the increased use of electric vehicles, AI and continued industrialisation.

He quoted the International Energy Agency (IEA), which projects that peak power demand will nearly double in the next decade, particularly in China and other advanced economies.

“This is not by 2050. This is in ten years,” Schernikau warned, stressing that the world was not building enough power plants to meet future demand. His central argument was that new optimised coal-fired power plants were the way forward, not only more renewables.

He pointed to China and India as good examples, where both economies were investing in renewables alongside new investments in coal-fired power and clean coal technologies.

Schernikau highlighted the hidden cost of solar systems, noting the overbuild requirements that made it more expensive than initially assumed.

For example, South Africa’s natural solar capacity factor is 25%, meaning that energy production is significantly lower than total installed capacity.

“You would have to overbuild four times,” he said, adding that, in Germany, where the capacity factor is 10% to 11%, the overbuild would need to be nine or ten times.

Compounding the problem, storing energy to shift it from daytime- to nighttime use results in significant losses, depending on the storage technology used. He noted that battery storage results in a 20% energy loss, while hydrogen storage results in up to 80% loss.

In Germany, Schernikau calculated, the required overbuild could reach up to 45 times to compensate for storage losses, and up to 450 times when considering periods without sunlight.

He elaborated on the inherent limitations of the technology, saying the energy density of renewables could not be improved.

“I cannot change the sunshine. I cannot change the density per square meter. And this stuff lasts 12 years, must be overbuilt 450 times and renewed every 12 years,” he said.

He also pointed out that, as materials were further optimised for cost, they became thinner and more prone to failure.

Another issue is the increased need for minerals and raw materials in renewable-energy systems. Schernikau referenced the IEA’s recent findings that a clean energy system required more resources, including silicon, aluminium, iron, steel, copper, rare earths and various chemicals, than fossil fuel-based energy systems.

Beyond the overbuild requirements, Schernikau stressed that renewable systems needed both short-duration storage, such as batteries, and long-duration storage, along with backup thermal power plants, to ensure reliable energy supply.

This, combined with the need for new transmission grids and smart systems, significantly raises the cost.

“The required transmission infrastructure is at least twice as expensive as normal transmission infrastructure,” he added, underscoring the economic implications.

Despite the technological advancements in AI, Schernikau asserted that physics remained a limiting factor.

“You cannot overcome the loss of thermodynamics. The more complex your energy system, the more energy you lose, thereby warming the biosphere,” he explained, adding that renewable systems might paradoxically contribute to global warming more than fossil fuel energy systems, owing to these inefficiencies.

Environmental concerns are also prevalent in renewable-energy infrastructure. Schernikau warned of the challenges associated with the large-scale deployment of solar and wind systems, including their impact on landscapes and wildlife.

Additionally, the low recyclability of solar panels and other renewable components poses a significant disposal issue.

“Recycling again requires energy, again requires raw materials to recycle the old stuff. So it’ll just get thrown out,” he said.

Schernikau was bluntly pessimistic about the true financial viability of renewable energy on a grid scale.

“There is no way you can make honest money with wind and solar. It’s not possible. When I say honest money, I mean without somebody else’s money, because you are living off somebody’s subsidies, which is paid by taxpayers,” he said.

He illustrated this by pointing to the economic problems with high solar penetration in markets such as Germany, where an oversupply of solar energy has led to a significant drop in prices. In May, for example, the price of solar energy in Germany fell by 50%, reducing the earnings of solar producers.

The impact of high electricity costs on households was another area of concern. Schernikau cited a March report from the German government auditor, which revealed that energy poverty in Germany had risen to 25%, meaning one in four households is now classified as energy poor.

“Electricity has become so expensive that they cannot afford it,” he said, warning that this scenario could be exported to other regions, including Africa.

Schernikau argued that the transition to wind and solar on a country-wide scale was not a viable solution but a costly mistake that should be avoided.

He conceded that off-grid solar systems could be beneficial, particularly in rural areas, but once integrated into a grid, they contributed to the overall system’s cost and inefficiency.

“The transition to wind and solar comes with a high cost and the impact is on the environment, on the economy, and, of course, on the people. It is not a transition or a solution. It’s a disaster,” Schernikau asserted.