Climate Change

[neufox47]

We use 60-90 kWh per day in the summer but with 10kw of solar and a 18kwh battery that eliminates most of our grid pull. The problem is eliminating that last bit of sporadic grid pull. One option that looks pretty darn appealing is to use vehicles as backup. That would potentially give EV homes 50-150 kWh of backup from a fully charged car.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[neufox47]

This is fun! Again very wrong.

"maybe learn to read or something, durr." -SumJongGuy

Maybe just focus on your reading comprehension.

"maintenance and upkeep" was not the cause of the Texas outage. ERCOT instead took the lowest bids for install of natural gas lines that had no thermal protection. It saved them millions upfront, but they pay for it every cold snap with frozen natural gas lines, just like they did in 1989 and 2011. No amount of "maintenance and upkeep" will prevent the problem of the system being constructed improperly from the start.

https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2...RoC3tAQAvD_BwE

According to an attorney who is litigating against the utilities, two significant causes of the outage were that natural gas sellers just saw the spot markets go up so much and the opportunity to make so much money was there that they stopped providing natural gas to the electric generators who bought at prearranged prices. To him this amounts to breech of contract and he thinks there is good recourse to collect on damages from those decisions. Secondly, a number of the natural gas suppliers did not submit a 1 page form that would list them as critical infrastructure during a brown out. Therefore the gas lines froze because they didn’t have power and couldn’t operate because they didn’t fill out this form…

[abraham]

[QUOTE=WMD;6465251]

When I was studying resources in '17, the consensus seemed to be that renewables alone would not meet energy requirements - not by a long shot. Yes, we have NGO's saying it's possible with a world wide grid and something like 70% storage capacity for energy production - that's sci-fi levels of wishing.

We're currently trying to fit a square peg in the proverbial round hole if we think current levels of energy consumption are sustainable. And, we're slated to see increased energy use over the next three decades. Every solar/wind farm helps but these have their own set of environmental impacts too.

Technology and prices are changing fast, but there certainly are challenges to 100% clean energy. And yes, there are impacts with everything. We really need to cut energy use but I don't have much hope of that anytime soon.

The fairly conservative Breakthrough Institute just compared three new plans/ models in getting to 100% clean energy or net zero by 2050.

Here is the first half of this article.

Just curious, do you listen to any of the Decouple podcasts? Of you don't, I think you might find them interesting, since this is clearly something you care about. I do and find it interesting but I don't know if I think what they say is possible or too technology focused. Generally I don't know where I stand with respect to useful steps, I think nuclear in some form is pretty important and it's not great to dismiss it out of hand while hand waving away the radiation coming from coal plants just because it's not directly connected in the public's mind.

[westoxified]

This is fun! Again very wrong.

this version of burns writes like an ass

[Greenstateofmind]

Here is the first half of this article.

Thanks for this. Clearly there is a lot of current research in net-zero emission goals. Also, I was a bit hasty to say a reduction in consumption is the cure all/end all. That's just not super feasible given society's need for energy.

One thing in your article prompted a thought: That is, to me, we can celebrate steps to carbon pollution reduction. A move to phase out coal is a huge step in the right direction.

[Squirreljam]

Worth reading. Not new science but talks about effect on ski industry
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/14/t...smid=url-share

[shafty85]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/mega...mate-1.6352052

[NakedShorts]

Leftists be like Batteries duh.

Those with brains are like “Um we do not have enough of the raw materials to make those with our current technology”

Even the IEA says if everyone hits the 2030 goals that fossil fuels will account for 70%. Of global energy in 2040 instead of the 82% that it is today.

We will need another source, different tech, new tech, or maybe just less people to solve this problem.

[Buzzworthy]

Leftists be like Batteries duh.

Those with brains are like “Um we do not have enough of the raw materials to make those with our current technology”

Even the IEA says if everyone hits the 2030 goals that fossil fuels will account for 70%. Of global energy in 2040 instead of the 82% that it is today.

We will need another source, different tech, new tech, or maybe just less people to solve this problem.

Hilariously short sighted. Y’all get to a point in your thoughts that your brain shuts off yet you still keep babbling. Thanks for the laugh!

[shafty85]

Leftists be like Batteries duh.

Those with brains are like “Um we do not have enough of the raw materials to make those with our current technology”

Even the IEA says if everyone hits the 2030 goals that fossil fuels will account for 70%. Of global energy in 2040 instead of the 82% that it is today.

We will need another source, different tech, new tech, or maybe just less people to solve this problem.

This is such a tired argument. The people who are developing these policies, and most people who support the policies, aren't counting on one single tech to solve the problem but rather to contribute toward the solution.

The parallel to your argument would be to stop enforcing the law because despite the police and prosecution, laws continue to be broken and not all crimes are solved.

[Long duc dong]

We use 60-90 kWh per day in the summer but with 10kw of solar and a 18kwh battery that eliminates most of our grid pull. The problem is eliminating that last bit of sporadic grid pull. One option that looks pretty darn appealing is to use vehicles as backup. That would potentially give EV homes 50-150 kWh of backup from a fully charged car.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

I should actually check just how much solar our system generates. I really have not done that since we put it in.

Most months we get about 10-20 dollars back. Occasionally we have a bill, but I don't think I have paid one that is more than 20 dollars since we put the solar in.

We occasionally use air conditioning during the summer. Sometimes we use heat during the winter. We live in Newport Beach so the weather is pretty moderate, and we don't have kids so even though we are both remote now, and always on our laptops, we really don't use all that much power.

I will give the Treeium guy credit, they pretty much nailed the number of panels we would need.

We opted against a powerwall for now. Based on our usage we don't really need one. Most of the days are between 60 and 80 degrees here, so it is not as if one season has a massive need for power over other seasons.

In a lot of winter months our Mammoth ski lease uses more power than we do down here. Most of our group only uses it on weekends, and we have to keep the power on so the pipes don't freeze. Most of us use the woodstove when we are up there, so we don't use that much power for heat when we are actually there, but during the week we obviously can't use the woodstove to heat the place.

I still need to put a charger in the garage, I have not done that yet. I need one that could charge both a Tesla and a Rivian. I love my Tesla, but if the Rivian reviews from the first owners are good I might change.

Solid state batteries. Hopefully someday.

The problem needs to be solved using a number of different methods. But we do have too many people and people do simply need to use their brains. When there is a TV on in every room, regardless of whether anyone is in the room, and all the lights are on in the house that is a problem. We do consume quite a bit, but there is definitely room to cut back.

[NakedShorts]

You do know that we do not have enough lithium or cobalt right? Sure we should speed up the progress but 700 years. Come on Man!




WSJ - IEA Report

[neufox47]

You do know that we do not have enough lithium or cobalt right? Sure we should speed up the progress but 700 years. Come on Man!




WSJ - IEA Report

Oh great, an estimate using current technology only that claims “it is unlikely to be off by several multiples”. Our batteries will likely use less or no lithium and cobalt by the time we fully convert to renewables. Sodium, iron, or some other technology will replace lithium and cobalt in the next 10-20 years. Our known reserves of lithium currently are 50% of the amount required in your study. There’s plenty of lithium to get us to the next battery technology.

You can do that with oil too, where we only have 40 years of known reserves. We’ve spent a lot more money lookin for oil than lithium.

[old goat]

I should actually check just how much solar our system generates. I really have not done that since we put it in.

Most months we get about 10-20 dollars back. Occasionally we have a bill, but I don't think I have paid one that is more than 20 dollars since we put the solar in.

We occasionally use air conditioning during the summer. Sometimes we use heat during the winter. We live in Newport Beach so the weather is pretty moderate, and we don't have kids so even though we are both remote now, and always on our laptops, we really don't use all that much power.

I will give the Treeium guy credit, they pretty much nailed the number of panels we would need.

We opted against a powerwall for now. Based on our usage we don't really need one. Most of the days are between 60 and 80 degrees here, so it is not as if one season has a massive need for power over other seasons.

In a lot of winter months our Mammoth ski lease uses more power than we do down here. Most of our group only uses it on weekends, and we have to keep the power on so the pipes don't freeze. Most of us use the woodstove when we are up there, so we don't use that much power for heat when we are actually there, but during the week we obviously can't use the woodstove to heat the place.

I still need to put a charger in the garage, I have not done that yet. I need one that could charge both a Tesla and a Rivian. I love my Tesla, but if the Rivian reviews from the first owners are good I might change.

Solid state batteries. Hopefully someday.

The problem needs to be solved using a number of different methods. But we do have too many people and people do simply need to use their brains. When there is a TV on in every room, regardless of whether anyone is in the room, and all the lights are on in the house that is a problem. We do consume quite a bit, but there is definitely room to cut back.

There's the answer--everyone move to the Socal coast.
Unfortunately, returning to pre-industrial CO2 levels means returning to a pre-industrial world and a pre-industrial lifestyle. It's hard for me to see how more technology is going to solve the problem of too much technology. I'm not saying don't try but it's hard for me to be optimistic.

[SumJongGuy]

Better batteries are only one part of the puzzle. I remember when flashlight worth using had two D cell batteries that needed replacing after an hour. The bulbs have gotten better Now a little AA battery can run a flashlight for what seems like days. For cars though, I won't be tempted until there's a battery swap (universal batteries) that makes long toad trip stops just as quick as they are with refilling gas tanks.

Or, the roads and parking lots are giant solar powered wireless charging pads that provide sufficient juice to all devices/cars using them at any particular time..

[Percy Rideout]

Oh great, an estimate using current technology only that claims “it is unlikely to be off by several multiples”. Our batteries will likely use less or no lithium and cobalt by the time we fully convert to renewables. Sodium, iron, or some other technology will replace lithium and cobalt in the next 10-20 years. Our known reserves of lithium currently are 50% of the amount required in your study. There’s plenty of lithium to get us to the next battery technology.

You can do that with oil too, where we only have 40 years of known reserves. We’ve spent a lot more money lookin for oil than lithium.

While I am rooting for a technological breakthrough RE: batteries, this sounds awfully similar to the nuclear fusion crowd who have been saying nuclear fusion and clean energy are only 10 years away! That trope started all the way back in 1970, and continues today.

Understanding the technology/science to create the reaction, and scaling up the tech to make it economically viable are two different things, sadly.

Edit: For the dentists: To many people are looking at this great clean mythical energy search as a tooth extraction, but rather should be thinking more like orthodontics.

[NakedShorts]

I am sure of one thing replacing the current stuff with stuff that does not exist yet will certainly NOT be cheaper.

[liv2ski]

How about the USA goes the way of France and builds a fuckton of small modern nuke plants for electricity so we can produce hydrogen for our vehicles. Seems more green than raping the earth for battery minerals.

[oldnew_guy]

What’s important is that we remain frozen in place and wait for a perfect solution instead of taking incremental steps in the right direction.

[PB]

.... and moving to the coast - any coast anywhere - requires a major investment in house boats.

[googledidoo]

Unfortunately the earth can't sustain 8 billion people and growing with any kind of lifestyle we are used to. Human induced climate change is one of several issues related to overpopulation. I'm not optimistic for a good solution.

[neufox47]

While I am rooting for a technological breakthrough RE: batteries, this sounds awfully similar to the nuclear fusion crowd who have been saying nuclear fusion and clean energy are only 10 years away! That trope started all the way back in 1970, and continues today.

Understanding the technology/science to create the reaction, and scaling up the tech to make it economically viable are two different things, sadly.

Edit: For the dentists: To many people are looking at this great clean mythical energy search as a tooth extraction, but rather should be thinking more like orthodontics.

I don’t think any credible source ever said fusion was 10 years away. More like 30. But we are still 30 + years away. There have been breakthroughs that have gotten us closer. But according to my physics and EE friends, the fusion problem is several orders of magnitude more complicated than the next generation of batteries. We have the next generation of batteries in tech that works, it is just expensive as shit to produce currently. We aren’t very close to having a continuously sustained fusion reaction that is a net energy positive.

[Buster Highmen]

Glad the pioneers didn't whinge on about the obstacles they faced while trying to roll across the plains.

Honestly, they likely did. But some of them also continued to roll.

[shaft]

Ah...looking pretty dang warm around here. Bump

[Core Shot]

Unfortunately the earth can't sustain 8 billion people and growing with any kind of lifestyle we are used to. Human induced climate change is one of several issues related to overpopulation. I'm not optimistic for a good solution.

Yep.

But a few more wars and pandemics can pare that population.

We just need 500 million living in harmony with nature.

Any volunteers? Soilent green is delish