Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

General Discussion about electric vehicles.
billvon   100 MW

100 MW
Posts: 2840
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by billvon » Sep 16 2019 2:51pm

Hillhater wrote:
Sep 16 2019 5:58am
Very true .
But, the real reason climate models are criticised ( except for the unique Russian model ), is because they repeatedly fail to predict anywhere close to what actually happens..
Actually from the very first IPCC predictions, the models have been remarkably accurate.
And yes, i am confident i will be fine !
No doubt. But while "frock you, I got mine" is a fine approach for an old guy living alone, it is perhaps not the best policy for a society.
--bill von

Punx0r   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 5258
Joined: May 03 2012 8:16am
Location: England

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Punx0r » Sep 16 2019 5:16pm

I'm sure plenty of people would think anything less to be "commie" :lol:

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10128
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Sep 16 2019 8:52pm

billvon wrote:
Sep 16 2019 2:51pm
Hillhater wrote:
Sep 16 2019 5:58am
Very true .
But, the real reason climate models are criticised ( except for the unique Russian model ), is because they repeatedly fail to predict anywhere close to what actually happens..
Actually from the very first IPCC predictions, the models have been remarkably accurate.
So why do they have to revise them (downwards) every new report issued ?
And yes, i am confident i will be fine !
No doubt. But while "frock you, I got mine" is a fine approach for an old guy living alone, it is perhaps not the best policy for a society.
More like ..watching confident in the science, whilst you alarm cult members rush to follow each other over the cliff of economic oblivion !
I guess its just natures way of purging the population..survival of the (mentally) fittest ?
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10128
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Sep 16 2019 8:56pm

sendler2112 wrote:
Sep 16 2019 10:30am
......
Kids today have an increased opportunity to learn much more than the normal things they would learn in grade school due to the internet if the are dedicated.
They will learn nothing by marching in the street, rather than dedicating their fertile brains to learning.
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

User avatar
jonescg   1.21 GW

1.21 GW
Posts: 3594
Joined: Aug 07 2009 9:22pm
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by jonescg » Sep 16 2019 9:09pm

By marching in the streets, they are teaching the adults a lesson. I'll be joining them.

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10128
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Sep 16 2019 9:10pm

Punx0r wrote:
Sep 16 2019 10:25am

Ah, I see you're progressing up the Ladder of Denialism!

1) CO2 doesn't cause climate change
2) OK, CO2 does cause climate change but it's not our emissions that's going it
3) OK, it is our emissions that's doing it, but it's not a bad thing
4) OK, it is a bad thing, but we can't do anything about it
5) OK, we could do something about it, but it isn't as bad as *whatever*

Congrats, one or two more steps and you might reach reality :shock:
You see ?, you have completely missed the plot..looking up the wrong ladder..
Try..
1) Nature causes (and controls ) climate change
2) humans cannot control Nature
3) Focusing on CO2 is a waste of effort and resources, and will only result in a regression of social progress.
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10128
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Sep 16 2019 9:26pm

jonescg wrote:
Sep 16 2019 9:09pm
By marching in the streets, they are teaching the adults a lesson. I'll be joining them.
And that lesson is what exactly ?
What they will be doing is demonstrating to the wider population, how they ( and those that join them) have been badly misled and wrongly taught by weak socialist dominated teaching , about real science and how the planet functions.
The kids i dont blame, they are being manipulated... ( they literally do not have the knowledge or experience to understand what they are saying) ...they are just happy to have a day out of school !, But the adults leading this manipulation, are a sad, desperate, group to choose to hide behind their children , rather than engage in rational scientific debate.
P155 weak !
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

User avatar
jonescg   1.21 GW

1.21 GW
Posts: 3594
Joined: Aug 07 2009 9:22pm
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by jonescg » Sep 16 2019 9:54pm

Hillhater wrote:
Sep 16 2019 9:26pm
jonescg wrote:
Sep 16 2019 9:09pm
By marching in the streets, they are teaching the adults a lesson. I'll be joining them.
And that lesson is what exactly ?
What they will be doing is demonstrating to the wider population, how they ( and those that join them) have been badly misled and wrongly taught by weak socialist dominated teaching , about real science and how the planet functions.
The kids i dont blame, they are being manipulated... ( they literally do not have the knowledge or experience to understand what they are saying) ...they are just happy to have a day out of school !, But the adults leading this manipulation, are a sad, desperate, group to choose to hide behind their children , rather than engage in rational scientific debate.
P155 weak !
You have just demonstrated a fine example of projection fallacy. Just because you found it difficult to comprehend, doesn't mean 16 year olds find it hard to comprehend. It's almost like the opposite of an appeal to authority, except it's an appeal to ignorance. "They're just kids, how would they know?" By reading and understanding the same research findings as the adults did.

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10128
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Sep 16 2019 10:21pm

jonescg wrote:
Sep 16 2019 9:54pm

You have just demonstrated a fine example of projection fallacy. Just because you found it difficult to comprehend, doesn't mean 16 year olds find it hard to comprehend. It's almost like the opposite of an appeal to authority, except it's an appeal to ignorance. "They're just kids, how would they know?" By reading and understanding the same research findings as the adults did.
Its pretty obvious that many adult “scientists” (97% :wink: ). do not understand the basics of climate change,.. so it is beyond a joke to suggest any number of school age kids have any personal learning of the complexities involved.
School kids dont read science papers, they read Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc,...they dont even read newspapers !
They are being manipulated and used to influence the minds of their weaker parents...
...Gretta T is a fine example of a child being used by her mad Green parents....she actually believes she can SEE CO2 ! :lol: .. ( her parents have probably shown her photos of steam from cooling towers ?)
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

User avatar
jonescg   1.21 GW

1.21 GW
Posts: 3594
Joined: Aug 07 2009 9:22pm
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by jonescg » Sep 16 2019 11:04pm

If you bothered to read her story, she convinced her parents to make changes. Because they were based on sound reasoning. I find it fascinating and amusing that one 16 year old girl can inflict so much fear and loathing in the conservative ranks. Almost like she's demonstrating an ability to unite an entire generation in a way these fossils could never dream of.

But go on, believe that the kids are wrong. You won't care how dope their fly ride is, word. It's probably their Donkey Kongs making them so confused.

Go shout at some clouds.

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10128
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Sep 16 2019 11:33pm

jonescg wrote:
Sep 16 2019 11:04pm
If you bothered to read her story, she convinced her parents to make changes. Because they were based on sound reasoning. ....
Sure, like the fact she could see the CO2 ?
The “ story” makes a convincing read, doesnt it
Go shout at some clouds.
Not a bad idea , its about the only way i will get anything from my solar today...< 100W at midday !
Better still, i will light my Biomass wood pellet furnace and generate some ( non IPCC recognised). CO2 to help the trees grow faster :wink:
( yes its been snowing today on the East coast ! ...remember 17 yrs ago when our Chief “scientist” and climate change warrior, Tim Flappery, predicted we would never see snow again ? ...and he wrote some of those papers ! :roll: )
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

Punx0r   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 5258
Joined: May 03 2012 8:16am
Location: England

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Punx0r » Sep 17 2019 2:51am

Hillhater wrote:
Sep 16 2019 10:21pm
Its pretty obvious that many adult “scientists” (97% :wink: ). do not understand the basics of climate change,..
Yet you clearly believe that you, yourself, do understand climate science. In a normal person this alone would be ringing alarm bells in their head that they are almost certainly wrong (or are one of the most arrogant and conceited people ever to have lived).

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10128
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Sep 17 2019 3:26am

Punx0r wrote:
Sep 17 2019 2:51am
Yet you clearly believe that you, yourself, do understand climate science.
That is not something i have ever claimed...
....but i do have a well tuned bull 5h1t detector, with an ability to think logically and independently :wink:
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

User avatar
TheBeastie   1 MW

1 MW
Posts: 1858
Joined: Jul 28 2012 12:31am
Location: Melbourne Australia

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by TheBeastie » Sep 17 2019 4:00am

jonescg wrote:
Sep 16 2019 9:09pm
By marching in the streets, they are teaching the adults a lesson. I'll be joining them.
Every time I see the climate kids strikes, all I wish someone there would hold an "electricitymap.org" sign so everyone checks out electricitymap.org and compare the wind/solar states vs the nuclear states like France and Sweeden.
https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet/status ... 92544?s=20
^Check out the young girl crying because she belives she is going to die very soon.

If only someone would tell her to check out https://www.electricitymap.org/?wind=fa ... emote=true
Image

We can see on average year after year how wind/solar states ultimately emit as much as 10 times more co2 than nuclear-based France.
If we were comparing these co2 stats as if they were two different cars then the "wind/solar renewables car" would be considered a bad extreme polluting joke, but we have broadcast media doing such a bad job of informing people that this is literally the situation we see in politics and climate kids year after year.
Taking sides on if co2 is actually bad or not is practically a moot point when wind/solar just doesn't solve the problem.
Broadcast media must die and be entirely replaced with internet fibre/5G wireless, because broadcast media is useless cancer on society.

https://twitter.com/energybants/status/ ... 1797714944
Image
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

User avatar
jonescg   1.21 GW

1.21 GW
Posts: 3594
Joined: Aug 07 2009 9:22pm
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by jonescg » Sep 17 2019 6:27am

Yes, some grids are cleaner than others. The goal is to make them all clean. As soon as possible. What is your point?

Punx0r   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 5258
Joined: May 03 2012 8:16am
Location: England

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Punx0r » Sep 17 2019 6:56am

Hillhater wrote:
Sep 17 2019 3:26am
Punx0r wrote:
Sep 17 2019 2:51am
Yet you clearly believe that you, yourself, do understand climate science.
That is not something i have ever claimed...
You've claimed a lot of "alternative facts" on climate science but this is just the most recent:
Hillhater wrote:
Sep 16 2019 9:10pm
Try..
1) Nature causes (and controls ) climate change
2) humans cannot control Nature
3) Focusing on CO2 is a waste of effort and resources, and will only result in a regression of social progress.

Cephalotus   10 kW

10 kW
Posts: 617
Joined: Jun 18 2012 12:27pm

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Cephalotus » Sep 17 2019 8:50am

TheBeastie wrote:
Sep 17 2019 4:00am

We can see on average year after year how wind/solar states ultimately emit as much as 10 times more co2 than nuclear-based France.
If we were comparing these co2 stats as if they were two different cars then the "wind/solar renewables car" would be considered a bad extreme polluting joke,...
In reality it is the amount of coal power plants (+ oild and gas power plants) that decide about the average CO2 emission of a countries electricity mix.

It happens that France does not burn coal for electricity generation and this is why their emissions are so low.

France invested 188 billions Euro over 40 years ago into their nuclear programm, much more than other countries did spend for wind and solar power and for a much longer time. Reasonable cheap photovoltaik has only available been available for 7-8 years.

sendler2112   100 kW

100 kW
Posts: 1250
Joined: Dec 07 2012 6:14am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by sendler2112 » Sep 17 2019 8:59am

GNDs emphasise switching to renewable energy. So far, increases in renewable energy deployment have not led to a reduction in fossil fuel usage globally. Overall their deployment has been to add to the global energy mix rather than replacing fossil fuels. Moreover, it is doubtful whether renewables can provide the scale of concentrated energy used by the current global economy: the constraints are less in the power that could theoretically be generated from natural flows than in the minerals needed to deploy them: minerals used in generators and motors, in batteries and in electronics, as well as copper for transmission of power (García-Olivares 2015). These are finite and with limited substitutability. The revolution will be low powered, so the Green Deal has to factor in a plan for energy descent
.
https://www.resilience.org/stories/2019 ... een-deals/
.

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10128
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Sep 17 2019 9:17am

Cephalotus wrote:
Sep 17 2019 8:50am

In reality it is the amount of coal power plants (+ oild and gas power plants) that decide about the average CO2 emission of a countries electricity mix.

It happens that France does not burn coal for electricity generation and this is why their emissions are so low.
..consider why France does not need coal or gas plants ?...
.....because they do not have to back up large amounts of intermittent wind or solar. !
Cephalotus wrote:
Sep 17 2019 8:50am
France invested 188 billions Euro over 40 years ago into their nuclear programm, much more than other countries did spend for wind and solar power and for a much longer time. Reasonable cheap photovoltaik has only available been available for 7-8 years.
Hmmm ?...188 bn.....seem like a bargain compared to Germany’s choice.
..(Germany’s) current economy and energy minister, Peter Altmaier, caused a stir in 2013 when he said during his time as environment minister that “the costs of the Energiewende and of the transformation of our energy supply could add up to around one trillion euros by the end of the 2030s” without policies in place to lower the costs. He explained that legal commitments to support renewable energy alone would add up to about 680 billion euros by 2022, and that the costs of grid extension, back-up power generation capacities, research & development, electric mobility, and the modernisation of buildings would have to be added to this figure.
Wind & Solar plants may be cheap , however it is the additional “backup” , replacement, and infrastructure costs that are overlooked.
Last edited by Hillhater on Sep 17 2019 9:39pm, edited 1 time in total.
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

Ianhill   1 MW

1 MW
Posts: 1696
Joined: Sep 25 2015 5:55pm

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Ianhill » Sep 17 2019 2:46pm

I think we have missed the point in this thread completely stuck lost amongst current politics rather than discuss actual future prospects and we have solar in space as discussed which plausable will not provide a good watt per $$$, and yet we have heard fusion prospects so many times I'm in no doubt that 100 years from now if we push forward in a scientific manor we will have a base grid met buy fusion in colder climates with solar wind and hydro acting as top up and battwry storage where as warmer areas grids needs will be met with out the fusion.

Even then I don't see us not burning anything at all but we will just work to a capture scheme to try keep an equilibrium point not have to much influence, it won't stop a major eruption tipping the scale in a cold climates favour it just means we won't be responsible, at that point AI may decide we are obsolete at science and blow our brains with technical marvels as we squable over what shade of colour we are all looking at.

Like elon really says we either play along or get left behind as wierd as he is with his hand and facial gestures there is a little sence to his big super scale madness.

sendler2112   100 kW

100 kW
Posts: 1250
Joined: Dec 07 2012 6:14am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by sendler2112 » Sep 17 2019 6:36pm

Excellent essay explaining divestment. Would it really help restrict new fossil fuel development? Or just allow the biggest corporations to take over weaker start ups and buy up their own shares for pennies on the dollar?
.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-co ... =actionkit
.
The real solution is to reduce demand by austerity and eventual replacement.

billvon   100 MW

100 MW
Posts: 2840
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by billvon » Sep 17 2019 9:44pm

Hillhater wrote:
Sep 16 2019 8:52pm
So why do they have to revise them (downwards) every new report issued ?
They have, of course, revised them in both directions, and will continue to do so to get more and more accurate predictions.
More like ..watching confident in the science, whilst you alarm cult members rush to follow each other over the cliff of economic oblivion !
97% of climate scientists agree that the climate is warming due to anthropogenic causes, so I'm pretty confident in the science. Of course, the deniers will continue to fail miserably year after year, as the climate continues to warm, matching IPCC predictions. It's fun to watch the deniers scramble to come up with new excuses every time reality come around to bite them. It's like watching an anti-vaxxer try to explain away the latest measles epidemic.

And "economic oblivion?" You sound pretty alarmist to me.
--bill von

billvon   100 MW

100 MW
Posts: 2840
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by billvon » Sep 17 2019 9:45pm

Ianhill wrote:
Sep 17 2019 2:46pm
Even then I don't see us not burning anything at all but we will just work to a capture scheme to try keep an equilibrium point not have to much influence, it won't stop a major eruption tipping the scale in a cold climates favour it just means we won't be responsible . . .
I don't even think we will engage in CCS. We will just dial back fossil fuel combustion until the ecosphere can maintain the CO2 levels at a new (slightly higher) level - but a level that will not cause as much warming. Say, 350ppm.
--bill von

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10128
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Sep 17 2019 9:54pm

Ianhill wrote:
Sep 17 2019 2:46pm
...I'm in no doubt that 100 years from now if we push forward in a scientific manor we will have a base grid met buy fusion in colder climates with solar wind and hydro acting as top up and battwry storage where as warmer areas grids needs will be met with out the fusion.
Anything is possible, any combination is likely,....but the next train coming down the track, is next/new generation Nuclear of various forms , modular PWR, Gen 4, 5, Thorium Salt, etc etc...all of which are in various stages of commercialisation.
Eventually, common sense and economic reality will prevail and we will progress to the next period of practical electricity generation.
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10128
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Sep 17 2019 10:04pm

....97% of climate scientists “ASKED” agree that the climate is warming due to anthropogenic causes, .....
There......corrected it for you !
PS....incase you forgot, that 97% actually amounted to 79 “scientists” ..
........some of whom had no expertise in climate science !
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

Post Reply