Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

General Discussion about electric vehicles.
billvon   100 MW

100 MW
Posts: 2601
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by billvon » Oct 18 2018 6:23pm

Hillhater wrote:
Oct 17 2018 5:12pm
When you get to the point where you have to lie to try to make your argument - perhaps try a different argument?
. . .
..and see my previous replies !
Or not.
--bill von

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 9775
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Oct 18 2018 9:45pm

billvon wrote:
Oct 16 2018 5:07pm

We know with pretty good accuracy how much CO2 we are putting into the atmosphere. We know with pretty good accuracy how fast the CO2 content of the atmosphere is rising. The difference between those two numbers - the "missing" CO2 - is going into natural sinks, like the ocean, or faster-growing trees, or limestone weathering.
But how accurate is our knowledge of the rate of CO2 release and adsorbtion in the Oceans ? or the land and forrests ? ( 10-20 times greater than fossil emissions)..... Those are just extrapolated estimates..+_ 10 % either way on each makes a Massive difference to the " net balance" !
Potentially many times more than the entire human CO2 contribution!
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

Punx0r   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 5097
Joined: May 03 2012 8:16am
Location: England

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Punx0r » Oct 19 2018 5:26am

Hillhater wrote:
Oct 18 2018 4:12pm
Apollo 17 moonwalker Harrison Schmitt stirs up a buzz with climate change views
I did thing again where I google the name of someone you've quoted. Turns out Harrison Schmitt is a well-known AGW-denier/fruitcake in league with that other favourite of yours, ICoCC/The Heartland Institute. Also conspiracy-nutjob Alex Jones.

Some quotes from Wikipedia:

"climate change is a tool for people who are trying to increase the size of government"

"global warming scare is being used as a political tool to increase government control over American lives, incomes and decision-making."

"He appeared in December that year on the Fox Business Network, saying "[t]he CO2 scare is a red herring"

"Schmitt asserted a link between Soviet Communism and the American environmental movement: "I think the whole trend really began with the fall of the Soviet Union. Because the great champion of the opponents of liberty, namely communism, had to find some other place to go and they basically went into the environmental movement."

"Schmitt said that climate change was a stalking horse for National Socialism"

"increasing levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere are not significantly correlated with global warming, attributing the "single-minded demonization of this natural and essential atmospheric gas" to advocates of government control of energy production."

"Contrary to what some would have us believe, increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will benefit the increasing population on the planet by increasing agricultural productivity."


It's impressive how many clichéd debunked climate myths one man can hold. And of course, being a politician means he's much more truthworthy than those forked-tongued scientists!

"I hope the science writers in this room will start to dig deeply into whether or not science has been corrupted by the source of funds that are now driving what people are doing in research, and what their conclusions are.”

Says the man speaking at a Heartlands-sponsored event...

Punx0r   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 5097
Joined: May 03 2012 8:16am
Location: England

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Punx0r » Oct 19 2018 6:38am

Hillhater wrote:
Oct 18 2018 9:45pm

But how accurate is our knowledge of the rate of CO2 release and adsorbtion in the Oceans ? or the land and forrests ? ( 10-20 times greater than fossil emissions)..... Those are just extrapolated estimates..+_ 10 % either way on each makes a Massive difference to the " net balance" !
Potentially many times more than the entire human CO2 contribution!
It doesn't matter how much natural emissions are, nor their relation in magnitude to human ones. The natural carbon cycle exists in a delicate balance established over geological time. Human emissions, however small, are external to that largely self-regulating system. It's hubristic to think that in a finely balanced system, we could dump BILLIONS OF TONS of CO2 EVERY YEAR for over a century into the atmosphere and presume it won't have any affect at all on anything.

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 9775
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Oct 19 2018 6:39am

There are only 4 astronauts left who walked on the moon.
3 of them Have publicly spoken out against the AGW theory.
They were all highly trained , highly educated , logical thinking, rational, specialists.....The "best of the best".
Schmitt has a Phd in Geogology...... And you choose to lable him a "Fruitcake" !
I think, even in his '80s, he might be a bit smarter than you !
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 9775
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Oct 19 2018 6:43am

Punx0r wrote:
Oct 19 2018 6:38am
....The natural carbon cycle exists in a delicate balance established over geological time. ..
How do you KNOW. Its "in balance" ?
What part of ESTIMATED dont you understand ?
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

Punx0r   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 5097
Joined: May 03 2012 8:16am
Location: England

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Punx0r » Oct 19 2018 7:25am

...because if it wasn't balanced it would be chaotic, which is not amenable to life... Also we know the past composition of the atmosphere and climate conditions, which shows *drum roll* stability compared to the last 150 years...


What has being a test pilot got to do with climate science? Even geology isn't strongly linked. His knowledge IN HIS FIELD might well be impressive, but it doesn't make him an expert on everything. Especially when THOUSANDS of scientists, whose speciality is Earth's climate all says he's dead wrong. Let's not also forget the tragic deterioration in mental faculties that all to often comes with age.

A basic logic check says his beliefs are unlikely to be true. His assertions that AGW is a conspiracy by the U.S. government to control it's citizens doesn't make sense when the U.S. is probably the worst offender in the world in denying AGW. Also, what would the rest of the world care about buying into a domestic U.S. political manipulation?
Last edited by Punx0r on Oct 20 2018 6:40am, edited 1 time in total.

sendler2112   100 kW

100 kW
Posts: 1125
Joined: Dec 07 2012 6:14am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by sendler2112 » Oct 19 2018 1:44pm

PDF round up from IAEA of small modular reactor designs under consideration.
.
https://aris.iaea.org/Publications/SMR-Book_2018.pdf
.

billvon   100 MW

100 MW
Posts: 2601
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by billvon » Oct 19 2018 2:14pm

Hillhater wrote:
Oct 19 2018 6:39am
There are only 4 astronauts left who walked on the moon.
3 of them Have publicly spoken out against the AGW theory.
They were all highly trained , highly educated , logical thinking, rational, specialists.....The "best of the best".
Schmitt has a Phd in Geogology...... And you choose to lable him a "Fruitcake" !
A lot of astronauts are. A friend of mine is one, and she's awesome - but she's a little out there.
--bill von

billvon   100 MW

100 MW
Posts: 2601
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by billvon » Oct 19 2018 2:15pm

sendler2112 wrote:
Oct 19 2018 1:44pm
PDF round up from IAEA of small modular reactor designs under consideration.
Let's hope one of those designs works out.
--bill von

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 9775
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Oct 19 2018 3:47pm

Punx0r wrote:
Oct 19 2018 7:25am
...because if it wasn't balanced it would be chaotic, which is not amenable to life... Also we know the past composition of the atmosphere and climate conditions, which shows *drum roll* stability compared to the last 150...
So you are just assuming its in "balance" .?
On a planetary timescale , atmospheric CO2 levels are currently at one of the lowest levels they have ever been,. And temperatures are lower than the long term average.
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 9775
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Oct 19 2018 4:02pm

Punx0r wrote:
Oct 19 2018 7:25am
....
What has being a test pilot got to do with climate science? ....
Pilots, , commercial , military, even private, are trained to understand weather patterns and atmospheric conditions, and their effects, together with the factors that influence them.
I Suspect Astronaughts need to go way beyond any normal pilots level of understanding atmospheric systems (their lives depend on it !). As well as planetary and solar interactions.
You cannot compare men/women who dedicate most of their life to interplanetary travel, to a bunch of political puppets (IPCC) , and label them as "fruitcakes",..just because they have a different understanding of a controversial theoretical topic.
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

billvon   100 MW

100 MW
Posts: 2601
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by billvon » Oct 19 2018 6:24pm

Hillhater wrote:
Oct 19 2018 4:02pm
Pilots, , commercial , military, even private, are trained to understand weather patterns and atmospheric conditions, and their effects, together with the factors that influence them.
I'm a pilot. And the weather I learned was restricted to how that weather affects airplanes. We got zip, zero, nada information about climactic forcing, or even about weather prediction (beyond the basics, like correlating pressure changes with front arrival.)

You might as well claim that pilots are programming geniuses because their instruments are largely run by computers nowadays, or that they are expert doctors because they have to decide when a medical issue necessitates a landing.
I Suspect Astronaughts need to go way beyond any normal pilots level of understanding atmospheric systems (their lives depend on it !).
Uh, astronauts fly in . . . space. Where there is no atmosphere. Shuttle pilots got the same weather training as any other commercial pilots. Well, a little less, since they had about a hundred other experts looking at the weather as well, so they don't need to sit in a cockpit looking at radar returns trying to deduce what a weather system is doing.
You cannot compare men/women who dedicate most of their life to interplanetary travel, to a bunch of political puppets (IPCC) , and label them as "fruitcakes",..just because they have a different understanding of a controversial theoretical topic.
No astronaut alive has dedicated his/her life to interplanetary travel. But that's beside the point. Even if they had, that has nothing to do with understanding climate change, any more than a sea captain must understand ocean chemistry.

Astronauts are people, like any other segment of society. Generally better educated due to the requirements of their job. Some are fruitcakes. Some are mental cases. Some are political puppets. Most are pretty reasonable people. Claiming "well, but they are ASTRONAUTS, so they must understand climate science!" is one of your sillier claims.
--bill von

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 9775
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Oct 19 2018 6:38pm

12 people have walked on the moon, a few dozen have left the Earths gravity.
Our of the thousands that trained, those few were selected for their many skills and abilities.
"Fruitcake" would have eliminated anyone at the first application form !
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

sendler2112   100 kW

100 kW
Posts: 1125
Joined: Dec 07 2012 6:14am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by sendler2112 » Oct 19 2018 9:32pm

found several years worth of good data for a 50kW solar PV system in Ithaca, NY. 13.7% capacity factor for the lifetime. Located at an intentional community so it gets the best care, snow removal, cleaning.
.
https://www.sunnyportal.com/Templates/P ... lang=en-US
.
.

billvon   100 MW

100 MW
Posts: 2601
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by billvon » Oct 20 2018 12:14am

Hillhater wrote:
Oct 19 2018 6:38pm
12 people have walked on the moon, a few dozen have left the Earths gravity.
Our of the thousands that trained, those few were selected for their many skills and abilities.
"Fruitcake" would have eliminated anyone at the first application form !
Nope. They were selected for their abilities as astronauts, not for their ability to study atmospheric science (or even come to rational conclusions about their experiences.)

Gordon Cooper, one of the Mercury AND Gemini astronauts, and backup for several Apollo missions: "I believe that extra-terrestrial vehicles and their crews are visiting this planet from other planets... Most astronauts were reluctant to discuss UFOs... I did have occasion in 1951 to have two days of observation of many flights of them, of different sizes, flying in fighter formation, generally from east to west over Europe."

Great astronaut. Fruitcake about UFO's.

What you are doing now is the classic logical fallacy "appeal to authority." This is a fallacy where someone's opinion is given more weight because they are famous in a way that gives them some level of celebrity - even though that fame comes about from something unrelated to the subject being discussed.
--bill von

sendler2112   100 kW

100 kW
Posts: 1125
Joined: Dec 07 2012 6:14am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by sendler2112 » Oct 20 2018 7:06am

sendler2112 wrote:
Oct 19 2018 9:32pm
found several years worth of good data for a 50kW solar PV system in Ithaca, NY. 13.7% capacity factor for the lifetime. Located at an intentional community so it gets the best care, snow removal, cleaning.
.
https://www.sunnyportal.com/Templates/P ... lang=en-US
.
.
The cheapest pricing I have seen in the NY area is from Renovus on community/ shared grid scale installations at $2.20/ kW installed. So the Ithaca group's 50kW system would have cost at least $110,000 and have a 15 year pay back at $0.12/ kWh if the electric company gives them the very generous situation of buying any instantaneous excess at the "meter runs backwards" price. If they only received the true spot price for their excess they would only get back around $0.04
.
State and national rebates would give back an additional $60,000 of the installation price. And they might even qualify as a "grid scale" installation which unlocks a further $0.03/ kWh federal "feed in tariff" reimbursment.

billvon   100 MW

100 MW
Posts: 2601
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by billvon » Oct 20 2018 1:24pm

sendler2112 wrote:
Oct 20 2018 7:06am
The cheapest pricing I have seen in the NY area is from Renovus on community/ shared grid scale installations at $2.20/ kW installed. So the Ithaca group's 50kW system would have cost at least $110,000 and have a 15 year pay back at $0.12/ kWh if the electric company gives them the very generous situation of buying any instantaneous excess at the "meter runs backwards" price. If they only received the true spot price for their excess they would only get back around $0.04
Right. And in that case the value of the array would be about $0.07/kwhr, because they would get the FIT of 0.04 when they generate more than they use, and they would get 0.12/kwhr reduction in the bill when they offset their own use - and those heavy use times (hot sunny days in the summer) will tend to coincide with maximum solar generation. So that gives you a payback time of ~30 years unsubsidized - in one of the worst places in the US for solar.

Bring down the cost of solar (which has been happening regularly) or move the installation to a better location, and payback times go down dramatically.
--bill von

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 9775
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Oct 20 2018 6:09pm

billvon wrote:
Oct 20 2018 12:14am
......
What you are doing now is the classic logical fallacy "appeal to authority." This is a fallacy where someone's opinion is given more weight because they are famous in a way that gives them some level of celebrity - even though that fame comes about from something unrelated to the subject being discussed.
And what you are doing is the classic,'. "Discredit the messenger". Which is a tactic used by oponents who fear that the knowledge and experience of that messenger could cause others to pay attention tto the message.
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

billvon   100 MW

100 MW
Posts: 2601
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by billvon » Oct 20 2018 8:26pm

Hillhater wrote:
Oct 20 2018 6:09pm
And what you are doing is the classic,'. "Discredit the messenger". Which is a tactic used by oponents who fear that the knowledge and experience of that messenger could cause others to pay attention tto the message.
Nope. (BTW the term is ad hominem, not "discredit the messenger.") I am sure he is a nice guy, and has as much credibility as any other layperson. (Say, yourself.) So does my friend Pete the Southwest pilot, who is another climate change denier.

He does not have as much credibility as, say, a climate researcher on the topic of climate change.

As an aside, do you believe that UFO's are visiting the Earth and flying in formation over it?
--bill von

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 9775
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Oct 21 2018 5:12pm

billvon wrote:
Oct 20 2018 8:26pm
He does not have as much credibility as, say, a climate researcher on the topic of climate change.
An independent free opinion is worth more than a thousand sponsored ones.
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

Punx0r   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 5097
Joined: May 03 2012 8:16am
Location: England

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Punx0r » Oct 21 2018 6:43pm

That is true, especially ones sponsored by the fossil fuel industries. Which is why scientists speak with facts, not opinions.

And no, just because you don't believe or understand something doesn't stop it from being a fact.

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 9775
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Oct 21 2018 7:27pm

Punx0r wrote:
Oct 21 2018 6:43pm
That is true, especially ones sponsored by the fossil fuel industries.
Or have research funded by any organisation with a particular interest in a specific outcome !
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

User avatar
TheBeastie   1 MW

1 MW
Posts: 1813
Joined: Jul 28 2012 12:31am
Location: Melbourne Australia

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by TheBeastie » Oct 21 2018 9:43pm

sendler2112 wrote:
Oct 20 2018 7:06am
sendler2112 wrote:
Oct 19 2018 9:32pm
found several years worth of good data for a 50kW solar PV system in Ithaca, NY. 13.7% capacity factor for the lifetime. Located at an intentional community so it gets the best care, snow removal, cleaning.
.
https://www.sunnyportal.com/Templates/P ... lang=en-US
.
.
The cheapest pricing I have seen in the NY area is from Renovus on community/ shared grid scale installations at $2.20/ kW installed. So the Ithaca group's 50kW system would have cost at least $110,000 and have a 15 year pay back at $0.12/ kWh if the electric company gives them the very generous situation of buying any instantaneous excess at the "meter runs backwards" price. If they only received the true spot price for their excess they would only get back around $0.04
.
State and national rebates would give back an additional $60,000 of the installation price. And they might even qualify as a "grid scale" installation which unlocks a further $0.03/ kWh federal "feed in tariff" reimbursment.
That is interesting, still a small scale solar compared to the big ones out there.
linked the embeded image, looks like they had some issues in 2016, probably inverter breakdowns.
https://www.sunnyportal.com/chartfx70/t ... 109E28.png

Image


I am so sick of you other guys talking about climate change in this thread, start a new thread if you want as this is just getting so annoying.
Starting a new thread will help reduce database load as it would cause less data to be pointlessly served when all people want to actually read about is energy technology.
Hillhater, I think Bilvon is just baiting you to fill this thread with crap about climate change that will never ever end.
Speed Kills Range, 10mph = 46 miles range, 20mph = 20 miles, 30mph = 8 miles rangehttps://goo.gl/1JNL53
Over Charging Kills ur battery bit.ly/1hzWKl4
Consider PAS as your only throttle https://goo.gl/Kg1F8F
Fuel-Cell is the ultimate battery coupled with 4th-gen Nuclear
https://goo.gl/TcKtHs https://goo.gl/ZhFFot https://goo.gl/gfa215
10 Square Miles of solar panels = 0.12GW average power! https://goo.gl/Ub1S39

mark5   100 kW

100 kW
Posts: 1248
Joined: Dec 28 2011 9:26pm
Location: USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by mark5 » Oct 21 2018 10:39pm

TheBeastie wrote:
Oct 21 2018 9:43pm
I am so sick of you other guys talking about climate change in this thread, start a new thread if you want as this is just getting so annoying.

Post Reply