|Climate Change Solutions : What you thought you knew is obsolete. Joe Romm16-12-2017 19:28|
|Some guy talking for an hour about various renewable energy price milestones putting it cheaper in cents per kilowatt hour than fossil fuel and nuclear.|
So game over in a nutshell.
He's got all the figures and seems to know what he's talking about.
One company mentioned seems to be confirming what he says ...
Enel to build 146 MW of new wind capacity in Canada following first renewables tender win in the country - 14 December 2017
The smart money is on the move.
"Bring us your sick and tired, your educated ..."
|Into the Night★★★★★
|As usual, the costs of actually running the thing, the land required, etc. are being ignored. Also the data in this particular video seems to be manufactured data. Much of it is based on speculation of future conditions, including the so-called 'running out of oil' argument.|
Oil is a renewable resource. So is natural gas. Coal might be, we don't know. We have a LOT of coal though. That's why it's so cheap.
Nuclear energy can be run safely, just like aircraft can be flown safely. The fuel they use is fairly easy to obtain and process to the purity required by the plants, and the 'waste' can be used to power a different kind of nuclear plant. The end waste is not dangerous.
Germany found that wind and solar energy don't work, and went back to coal.
Washington State is on the Left Coast. It is liberal haven (in the western half). It is covered in wind farms, most of them in eastern Washington. By combining ALL of the output of the wind farms, their total power output is about one tenth of our ONE nuclear plant. They don't even hold a candle to Grand Coulee dam.
Wind requires a LOT of real estate. It exposes the public to dangers such as blades or ice being thrown for miles. They only work when the wind is blowing within a certain range of speed. Too fast or too slow they don't work at all.
Solar is a LOT more expensive than is advertised. It's capacity is quite low also. What they don't tell you is the maintenance of the thing (yes, it requires maintenance) and the lifespan of solar cells vs their efficiency (quite short).
Batteries are ballast, not power. It takes time to charge them. They can only be charged or discharged at certain limited rates, regardless of the type of battery. Any faster and you blow up the battery. This rate is determined by the internal resistance of the battery and it's ability to dissipate heat. Batteries are heavy (even lithium oxide cells). While you can certainly make a drivable car out of them, they DO lose the ability to charge/discharge after a few years. The cost of mining the lithium, smelting it, and processing that into batteries is not accounted for by 'greenies' such as this.
Both solar power devices and wind power devices must use carbon based fuels (fossils don't burn), to build them. Neither solar power nor wind power have the ability to smelt steel or aluminum on an industrial basis. They also have many plastic parts in them (petroleum based product), and required grease and lubrication in wind generators (petroleum based product).
All to satisfy a religion. CO2 does not have the capability to warm the planet. There is no reason to be afraid of it.
Your answer to total ignorance of science is to defer to people whom you believe to know what they're talking about. And you select them because they say what you want to hear.
On the news this morning: the Millennial generation is far less physically fit than any previous. They expect that despite vastly improve medical treatments that Millennials will have measurably shorter lifespans than the previous three.
Considering your vast lack of education it couldn't happen to a nicer guy.
|Solutions anyone?||23||15-11-2017 22:36|
|I present to you my Climate&Energy solutions and leads and quests I wrote/made over the past 2 years||4||09-10-2015 22:01|
|How to create actual solutions to global warming||17||07-10-2015 21:07|