Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

General Discussion about electric vehicles.
User avatar
jonescg   1.21 GW

1.21 GW
Posts: 3603
Joined: Aug 07 2009 9:22pm
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by jonescg » Oct 09 2019 6:53am

In the 80's I knew guys in Queensland who would build a 'battery fire' consisting of heavy gauge corrugated roofing iron at a slight incline on a concrete slab. An enormous bonfire was prepared with about two dozen old car batteries in the middle. Once well alight they would stand back and watch the lead run down the corrugations into steel pails.

Not the brightest guys, probably due to the lead...

minimum   100 W

100 W
Posts: 116
Joined: Nov 10 2016 2:53pm

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by minimum » Oct 09 2019 9:15am

Hillhater wrote:
Oct 09 2019 4:52am
CLIMATE MODELS ARE BASED ON FLAT EARTH ASSUMPTION ! :lol: :lol:
...
Read all...
https://www.pnas.org/content/116/39/19330
So instead of reading past the 1st paragraph, let the ignorance rule and let's not get past first familiar phrase?

From the same article:
Without implementing these spherical corrections in a climate model, we can only speculate on how they would affect the simulated climate. Does an additional global 2 W⋅m−2 out of a total heating of 240 W⋅m−2 matter? Since climate models can clearly detect the climate change caused by similar levels of human forcing (41), the shift in climate caused by flat atmosphere errors should be obvious. Also, 2 W⋅m−2 is typical of the model-to-model differences in atmospheric heating (42).

User avatar
TheBeastie   1 MW

1 MW
Posts: 1860
Joined: Jul 28 2012 12:31am
Location: Melbourne Australia

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by TheBeastie » Oct 09 2019 9:23am

I strongly live under the terms "It's OK to listen to people you don't necessarily agree with".
I actually got stopped on my ebike riding through Melbourne CBD today, via the Extinction Rebellion climate change protesters.
They fully blocked the road for all cars and trams (but almost entirely trams were blocked) as almost no cars are allowed.
I just hopped off my bike and walked around them on the footpath, so no big deal.
Brought a smile to my face as their dance routines were pretty practised by the looks of it.
Twitter video report.
https://twitter.com/7NewsMelbourne/stat ... 81825?s=20
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Chinese based solar installation company in Melbourne has been banned due to ultra dodgy installations.
Looks like they just tried to sign up as many people as they could and get the cheapest and dodgy overseas contractors to slap the panels on the roof.
Of course, the most important thing to this solar company is that they get to keep the money they made.
All this is of course entirely caused by the super juicy subsidy/grant money they get per solar install handed out by the state government in Victoria.
An inquiry has been launched to find out why hundreds of potentially dangerous solar panel installations were signed off as safe.
Twitter video report.
https://twitter.com/7NewsMelbourne/stat ... 27361?s=20

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That said I enjoy the Tony Hellers youtube channel videos.
It's remarkable how deep he digs into the official data and charts.
This might get some folks triggered.
Image

Here is his latest
How NASA Creates Fake Sea Level Rise
https://youtu.be/cK8wHwm7oWU

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fuel-cell stuff
I love watching the testing or extreme destruction safety examples of fuel-cell stuff, very convincing that its safe.
https://img.fuelcellsworks.com/wp-conte ... -Test1.mp4
https://fuelcellsworks.com/news/how-the ... t-by-iihs/

I think if people really want to see wind/solar stuff built then I think the most practical thing they can do with the energy is make hydrogen because putting intermittent energy into the grid is a giant pain in the arse.
As long as this hydrogen production facilities can run ok with intermittent energy it seems like a great way to make hydrogen and keep everyone happy playing with wind-farms and solar panels.
Siemens Supports New Renewable Hydrogen Project in Australia
https://fuelcellsworks.com/news/siemens ... australia/

What I find truly fascinating about Fuel-cell hydrogen stuff is the fact that despite the absolute-blistering-extreme amount of media coverage lithium batteries get as the holy grail of clean energy solutions, the amount of stuff and work of the biggest titans of big industry (like Siemens etc) just keep gearing up deeper and deeper on fuel-cell stuff
https://fuelcellsworks.com/news/hyundai ... on-system/
https://fuelcellsworks.com/news/newly-d ... efficient/
If you read all the breakthrough news on fuel-cell announcements that come out every other day it seems like fuel-cells taking over is a mere formality but we just need to wait a while.
https://fuelcellsworks.com/news/fuel-ce ... -catalyst/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Watching Googles Waymo self-driving technical videos on YouTube have been by far the most convincing stuff I have seen that Waymo will have self-driving cars on USA roads before anyone else, now Waymo are even announcing it.
https://techcrunch.com/2019/10/09/waymo ... n-the-way/


Image
Last edited by TheBeastie on Oct 10 2019 4:45am, edited 7 times in total.
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

billvon   100 MW

100 MW
Posts: 2852
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by billvon » Oct 09 2019 10:26am

jonescg wrote:
Oct 09 2019 12:47am
The dead simple stuff is also the low value stuff. Recycling lead batteries is 99% circular because of the very high value of lead, and the desire to keep toxic metals out of the environment.
And because it's easy. You strip off the case and recycle the plastic. You remove the separators and recycle them. (You can actually reuse them as-is after cleaning them if they are going back into the same battery.) Then you melt what's left, and it's almost all lead.

Lithium ion recycling is a lot harder. There's no metallic lithium, for example - it's in a salt dissolved in an organic electrolyte. The electrodes are layered copper and aluminum with complex coatings. That's not to say it's impossible - at this year's SPI there were three companies offering 100% li-ion recycling, where every part of the battery is reused. But since lithium (and copper, and cobalt etc) are currently so cheap, it's cheaper to get new materials than reuse the old ones.
--bill von

billvon   100 MW

100 MW
Posts: 2852
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by billvon » Oct 09 2019 10:28am

Hillhater wrote:
Oct 09 2019 4:52am
CLIMATE MODELS ARE BASED ON FLAT EARTH ASSUMPTION !
You didn't read the article, did you. No wonder you remain ignorant of so much of the science - you don't even read it.
--bill von

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10142
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 09 2019 5:53pm

minimum wrote:
Oct 09 2019 9:15am
Hillhater wrote:
Oct 09 2019 4:52am
CLIMATE MODELS ARE BASED ON FLAT EARTH ASSUMPTION ! :lol: :lol:
...
Read all...
https://www.pnas.org/content/116/39/19330
So instead of reading past the 1st paragraph, let the ignorance rule and let's not get past first familiar phrase?

From the same article:
Without implementing these spherical corrections in a climate model, we can only speculate on how they would affect the simulated climate. Does an additional global 2 W⋅m−2 out of a total heating of 240 W⋅m−2 matter? Since climate models can clearly detect the climate change caused by similar levels of human forcing (41), the shift in climate caused by flat atmosphere errors should be obvious. Also, 2 W⋅m−2 is typical of the model-to-model differences in atmospheric heating (42).
What do you think you understand from that statement ?...
I read the whole paper ..and other review papers, ...and agree with the conclusion..

“The authors stress that the resulting errors are in the order of magnitude of the greenhouse gas forcing. Thus the solar irradiation and the aerosol forcing are falsified.”
Can you understand the implications of that statement ?

So in the future, when someone insults annoying climate critics again as “flat-world supporters”, the answer is basically clear: The real “flat earthers” are climate modelers who still simulate flat worlds, because they have not yet been able to accurately simulate the real spherical world…
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

Punx0r   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 5260
Joined: May 03 2012 8:16am
Location: England

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Punx0r » Oct 10 2019 2:40am

Hillhater wrote:
Oct 09 2019 5:53pm
I read the whole paper ..and other review papers, ...and agree with the conclusion..

“The authors stress that the resulting errors are in the order of magnitude of the greenhouse gas forcing. Thus the solar irradiation and the aerosol forcing are falsified.”
Can you understand the implications of that statement ?
That is not a quote from the PNAS paper you linked.

Rather, your unattributed quote appears to be from here: https://co2coalition.org/2019/10/06/law ... -aerosols/

And you wonder why people question your dilligence...

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10142
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 10 2019 5:13am

Well, no. ..that is not where i got the quote from actually.
Whilst you may not have expected to find the article on an IPCC fan site, there do seem to be numerous sites carrying the article which was translated from a German paper.
German climate scientist Dr. Sebastian Lüning comments on climate models at the Die kalte Sonne website. Dr Lüning cites a recently published paper by Prather and Hsu, who claim that the models assume the earth to be flat, and thus result in major inaccuracies in their results.

“The real flat-earthers are the climate modelers,” Lüning says.
I felt that the original comment was better than any i might produce.
Now.. how exactly does that reflect on anyones dilligence ?
Or do you question the facts of the paper ?
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

Punx0r   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 5260
Joined: May 03 2012 8:16am
Location: England

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Punx0r » Oct 10 2019 7:52am

Because in science and academia it is customary (and expected) to provide sources for any material you quote. You linked to a paper and provided a quote, implying it was quote from the paper, when it fact it wasn't. This is at least sloppy, if not intentional missleading. I note you still haven't given the source even though prompted to do so. Instead you just made another unreferenced quote (unless you're counting "a German paper" as a source).

You're constantly bashing scientists, claiming they don't understand the basic scientific method, yet demonstrate profound ignorance yourself with nearly every utterance.

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10142
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 10 2019 8:13am

You seem to be confusing this casual public forum with some academic science institute with formal rules and traditions ?
And since much of “science and academia” seems to have stuck its head up its own arse over AGW, i would not pay it much reverence anyway.
It does not matter where the words or thoughts came from.....i could have simply left out the quote marks and taken them as my own words....but i chose to make it clear they were not mine.
Now quit deflecting away from the root of the post, and state your reasons if you think the paper was incorrect in its contention that the climate models are based on a simplistic “flat earth” principle .!
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

Punx0r   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 5260
Joined: May 03 2012 8:16am
Location: England

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Punx0r » Oct 10 2019 9:49am

Hillhater wrote:
Oct 10 2019 8:13am
You seem to be confusing this casual public forum with some academic science institute with formal rules and traditions ?
And since much of “science and academia” seems to have stuck its head up its own arse over AGW, i would not pay it much reverence anyway.
It does not matter where the words or thoughts came from.....i could have simply left out the quote marks and taken them as my own words....but i chose to make it clear they were not mine.
Human behavioral traits are very interesting:

https://link.springer.com/article/10.10 ... 19-00014-7

"anthropogenic climate change denialists were found to have a much great incidence of paedophilic behavior than any other group in Western societies

billvon   100 MW

100 MW
Posts: 2852
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by billvon » Oct 10 2019 10:04am

Hillhater wrote:
Oct 10 2019 8:13am
It does not matter where the words or thoughts came from....
It actually does. In the real world (not the Internet) the thoughts of a competent, experienced scientist on his field of study are actually more valid than similar thoughts from an angry Trump supporter who lives in his mom's basement.
Now quit deflecting away from the root of the post, and state your reasons if you think the paper was incorrect in its contention that the climate models are based on a simplistic “flat earth” principle .!
Nope. That's like saying that when you drive you assume the Earth is flat because you drive straight on straight roads.
--bill von

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10142
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 10 2019 4:30pm

billvon wrote:
Oct 10 2019 10:04am
Hillhater wrote:
Oct 10 2019 8:13am
It does not matter where the words or thoughts came from....
It actually does. In the real world (not the Internet) the thoughts of a competent, experienced scientist on his field of study are actually more valid than similar thoughts from an angry Trump supporter who lives in his mom's basement.
So you will be able to sleep content in your cradle then bill knowing that those “unatributed”. words...
“The authors stress that the resulting errors are in the order of magnitude of the greenhouse gas forcing. Thus the solar irradiation and the aerosol forcing are falsified.”
.....came from 2 competent , experienced scientists ..Prather and Hsu, authors of the original paper , and repeated by Dr Sebastian Luning, a German Climate Scientist. !
But you could have realised that had you bothered to read and comprehend the articles posted.
That's like saying that when you drive you assume the Earth is flat because you drive straight on straight roads.
:shock: that has to be one of the most pathetic, meaningless, attempts at an analogy, i have seen :lol:

PunxOr ...you need to get a life ..!
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

User avatar
TheBeastie   1 MW

1 MW
Posts: 1860
Joined: Jul 28 2012 12:31am
Location: Melbourne Australia

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by TheBeastie » Oct 11 2019 8:06am

Posting about single or multiple weather events as proof about climate change has always seemed pretty dumb to me but its never stopped anyone doing it. So here it is!!!

The climate "Experts" said snow in Australia would be a thing of the past 10 years ago, except this year Australia's biggest ski resort had it's the longest snow season in history.
We’re extending the season! You can now ski & board until 13 October! 2019 is officially Perisher’s longest season in memory
https://twitter.com/PerisherResort/stat ... 29473?s=20
^Video-tweet of snowboarding in Australia in October.
Image
And while people are skiing in Australia on the longest snow season in history, on the other side of the world where it's supposed to be summer its now also getting the biggest earliest snowstorm in history.
So now everyone can be skiing on both hemispheres of the planet at the very same time! Everyone wins :lol:
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/10/10/weat ... index.html
https://www.zerohedge.com/health/unhear ... t-blizzard
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nat ... 918343002/
Image

And now the snowstorm in north America is here.




---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On another subject, Toyota's next fuel-cell car looks pretty sporty
https://fuelcellsworks.com/news/toyota- ... ture-expo/
Image


And a Hydrogen-powered super-truck
https://fuelcellsworks.com/news/anglo-a ... ine-truck/
Image
Last edited by TheBeastie on Oct 12 2019 1:51am, edited 2 times in total.
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

sendler2112   100 kW

100 kW
Posts: 1253
Joined: Dec 07 2012 6:14am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by sendler2112 » Oct 11 2019 1:05pm

A walk with Jem Bendell.
.
"It's not just about drawing down carbon. We need to ADAPT fairly."
.
"60% of food for the UK is imported."
.
https://youtu.be/3jtKemrEMzA

billvon   100 MW

100 MW
Posts: 2852
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by billvon » Oct 11 2019 1:24pm

TheBeastie wrote:
Oct 11 2019 8:06am
And while people are skiing in Australia on the longest snow season in history, on the other side of the world where it's supposed to be summer its now also getting the biggest earliest snowstorm in history.
How you know the climate is changing - snow in October is now big front page news.
--bill von

Ianhill   1 MW

1 MW
Posts: 1697
Joined: Sep 25 2015 5:55pm

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Ianhill » Oct 11 2019 1:25pm

sendler2112 wrote:
Oct 11 2019 1:05pm
A walk with Jem Bendell.
.
"It's not just about drawing down carbon. We need to ADAPT fairly."
.
"60% of food for the UK is imported."
.
https://youtu.be/3jtKemrEMzA
UK is a small island with a large population of course we will import food, can los angeles support itself with out its surrounding area no.

Tell that to the people that que in traffic and live on bare essentials living to work not working to live, it's not a fun time in UK it's massive inequality, we need to share evenly amongst ourselfs let alone other country's.

sendler2112   100 kW

100 kW
Posts: 1253
Joined: Dec 07 2012 6:14am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by sendler2112 » Oct 11 2019 1:37pm

Ianhill wrote:
Oct 11 2019 1:25pm
UK is a small island with a large population of course we will import food, can los angeles support itself with out its surrounding area no.

Tell that to the people that que in traffic and live on bare essentials living to work not working to live, it's not a fun time in UK it's massive inequality, we need to share evenly amongst ourselfs let alone other country's.
His point is that there is large food insecurity and people could go hungry if the imports become unavailable.

Ianhill   1 MW

1 MW
Posts: 1697
Joined: Sep 25 2015 5:55pm

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Ianhill » Oct 11 2019 2:02pm

sendler2112 wrote:
Oct 11 2019 1:37pm
Ianhill wrote:
Oct 11 2019 1:25pm
UK is a small island with a large population of course we will import food, can los angeles support itself with out its surrounding area no.

Tell that to the people that que in traffic and live on bare essentials living to work not working to live, it's not a fun time in UK it's massive inequality, we need to share evenly amongst ourselfs let alone other country's.
His point is that there is large food insecurity and people could go hungry if the imports become unavailable.
It's happening now there's food banks in most poor places, the price on food is through the roof and it's only going to get worse the more of it that don't get bought we have a big problem with waste, there's food to go round but not enough money for every one to buy it.


I do agree we have a major problem we produce for profit not to feed the world.

User avatar
jonescg   1.21 GW

1.21 GW
Posts: 3603
Joined: Aug 07 2009 9:22pm
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by jonescg » Oct 12 2019 7:10am

TheBeastie wrote:
Oct 11 2019 8:06am
Posting about single or multiple weather events as proof about climate change has always seemed pretty dumb to me but its never stopped anyone doing it. So here it is!!!

The climate "Experts" said snow in Australia would be a thing of the past 10 years ago, except this year Australia's biggest ski resort had it's the longest snow season in history.
We’re extending the season! You can now ski & board until 13 October! 2019 is officially Perisher’s longest season in memory
https://www.sbs.com.au/interactive/2015 ... now-depth/

Looks like it's pretty shit to me.

sendler2112   100 kW

100 kW
Posts: 1253
Joined: Dec 07 2012 6:14am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by sendler2112 » Oct 12 2019 8:40am

World economic growth and energy consumption are highly correlated. Despite our (modest so far) efforts to displace Carbon energy sources with rebuildables, new additions of fossil fuel consumption continue to outpace additions of wind and solar by a wide margin.
.
.
Image
.
.

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10142
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 12 2019 10:17pm

Cresent Dunes Thermal Solar plant headed for bankruptcy
Thats another $700+ million lesson in RE practicality !
. Even after securing DOE funding in 2011, Tonopah wasn’t able to commence commercial operations until 2015. And since then, power purchaser NV Energy has been less-than-thrilled with the project’s output. NV Energy was supposed to purchase power from Crescent Dunes until 2040, but the project has failed to generate target electricity output over the past four years. Finally, on October 4, NV Energy called it quits and terminated their agreement with Crescent Dunes.
https://townhall.com/columnists/rossmar ... b-n2554430
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

sendler2112   100 kW

100 kW
Posts: 1253
Joined: Dec 07 2012 6:14am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by sendler2112 » Oct 13 2019 6:40am

Total CAPX for the Crescent Dunes concentrated solar plant was stated as $1 billion for a 110 MW capacity but it's best year in 2018 only produced a capacity factor of 20% and it had a problem with a molten salt leak after the first year.
.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crescent_ ... gy_Project
.

User avatar
jonescg   1.21 GW

1.21 GW
Posts: 3603
Joined: Aug 07 2009 9:22pm
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by jonescg » Oct 13 2019 8:51am

Yeah I'm all for innovation in renewable energy generation and dispatch, but solar thermal does not stack up. The same sum of money would have bought a decent PV array and some batteries and achieved far more.

billvon   100 MW

100 MW
Posts: 2852
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by billvon » Oct 13 2019 11:43am

jonescg wrote:
Oct 13 2019 8:51am
Yeah I'm all for innovation in renewable energy generation and dispatch, but solar thermal does not stack up.
I tend to agree. The only place it makes sense is as a booster to existing natural gas plants, where most of the physical plant is being built anyway.
--bill von

Post Reply