Page 110 of 114 FirstFirst ... 1060100108109110111112 ... LastLast
Results 1,091 to 1,100 of 1134

Thread: The Remarkable Progress of Renewable Energy

  1. Top | #1091
    Administrator lpetrich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Eugene, OR
    Posts
    16,219
    Archived
    16,829
    Total Posts
    33,048
    Rep Power
    97
    Plans for largest US solar field north of Vegas scrapped - NIMBY's objecting to it being an eyesore and to it taking up a lot of land.

    renewable energy: China to install over 30 GW of new energy storage by 2025, Energy News, ET EnergyWorld - "China, the world's biggest electricity generator and carbon emitter, has said it is aiming for renewable power to account for more than 50% of its total electricity generation capacity by 2025, up from 42% now."

    Japan Unveils Ambitious Energy Goals - WSJ - "Strategy proposes doubling renewables, slashing fossil fuels’ share of power grid to less than half over the next decade"

    Australian wind output record smashed after big boost from South Australia | RenewEconomy
    Australia’s main grid has posted a new record for wind output, after constraints that had previously capped the output of South Australia’s wind farms were apparently relaxed.

    According to energy analyst Dylan McConnell, from the Climate and Energy College, a new record of 5,899MW of wind was recorded at around 4.50pm on Tuesday afternoon (see first graph).

  2. Top | #1092
    Administrator lpetrich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Eugene, OR
    Posts
    16,219
    Archived
    16,829
    Total Posts
    33,048
    Rep Power
    97
    Europe’s hydrogen split: blue vs green and north vs south – EURACTIV.com - "The only element keeping blue hydrogen projects alive are subsidies and as green hydrogen declines in cost more government subsidies will be needed. This might be good for Shell and Exxon but is unlikely to be popular with voters, writes Mike Parr."

    Blue hydrogen = hydrogen from natural gas. - mainly in N Europe
    Green hydrogen = hydrogen from electrolysis using renewable-energy electricity. - mainly in S Europe

    Europe currently consumes about 9 million tonnes of H2 per year, 4M for fertilizer, 4M for oil cracking, and 1M for other uses.

    Report: 30M solar homes would create 1.77M jobs, $69B in energy savings | Renewable Energy World

    Fintel, MK Group to build 340 mln euro agrivoltaic plant in Serbia
    The plant, named Agrosolar Kula, is planned to be launched in April 2022 and will produce 832 GWh of electricity annually, enough to cover the energy demand of about 200,000 households, MK Group said in a statement on Thursday.

    In the initial phase, the plant will cover 700 hectares of land in Kula, divided into seven zones for various organic crops and solar panels will be installed in regular rows covering one third of the total area, MK Group noted.
    No details on which crops, however.

  3. Top | #1093
    Fair dinkum thinkum bilby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
    Posts
    25,088
    Archived
    10,477
    Total Posts
    35,565
    Rep Power
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by lpetrich View Post
    High-temperature solid-oxide electrolysis seems most practical on a large scale, because of the square-cube law. But industrial-scale elecrolysis is what we need, with megawatt and gigawatt equivalent output.

    Has the Carbontech Revolution Begun? - The New York Times - "Science can now pull carbon out of the air. For that to make a difference, though, businesses need to find profitable places to put it."

    This is not a new technology, but I'm sure that it will get more prominence in synfuel and chemical-feedstock technologies.
    Yet in their very composition, they were something new. This carpeting was a result of four years of intensive research and development, according to Interface. It incorporated a material made from recycled vinyl and processed vegetation; it was infused with a latex created from smokestack exhaust. It was topped and tufted with salvaged nylon. And it had been manufactured in the least environmentally demanding way possible. By Interface’s reckoning, the carpeting had a carbon footprint of negative 300 grams per square meter. “It’s not a magic material,” Erin Meezan, chief sustainability officer at Interface, told me recently. But the math does have a magical quality to it: In part because of how the carbon is sourced, carpeting a 10-feet-by-20-feet conference room, say, with these tiles can be seen as the equivalent of pulling roughly 12 pounds of carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere.
    "By some estimates, nearly 40 percent of global CO2 emissions comes from buildings and construction, a level that Meezan notes is unsustainable. “That’s why we’re doing this,” she said." -- Erin Meezan, chief sustainability officer at Interface

    Volker Sick, a professor of mechanical engineering at the University of Michigan who runs the school’s Global CO2 Initiative — its mission is to make carbon utilization a mainstream pursuit for U.S. industry — believes that carbontech offers a counterpoint to the prevailing thinking about CO2. It assigns a value to the gas and allows us to imagine it as not only a problem but also a resource. “Think back maybe 200 years, when this whole Industrial Revolution began, when we moved away from what was largely a circular economy to one that’s extractive,” Sick says. “We began to take from the earth, use and then dispose. So, I think we need to use things in a circular way again. And the way it works is not that we go back to before — build a log house and hunt and collect berries. There are too many of us around. We have to have industrial processes.” An essential aspect of a circular carbon economy, Sick notes, would involve using renewable, emissions-free energy to put CO2 into products. “That’s the real linchpin for this whole thing,” he says.
    Reversion to a preindustrial lifestyle -- the thought of it makes me gag. With renewable energy, it will be possible to sustain a full-scale industrial economy.
    Not unless something massive and dramatic changes in the very short term. Like storage reducing in cost by five or six orders of magnitude.

    It's only possible to sustain a full scale industrial economy with nuclear power. Or with some hypothetical alternative that currently doesn't exist, or seem likely to be discovered, invented, or magicked into existence any time soon.

    Right now, the only thing standing between renewables and blackouts is burning gas.

    What doesn't speak doesn't lie:


  4. Top | #1094
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Buenos Aires
    Posts
    3,596
    Archived
    7,588
    Total Posts
    11,184
    Rep Power
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by bilby View Post
    Everyone needs to be like France.



    Germany has had the full focus of this alleged "remarkable progress" for over a decade now. When is it going to get average emissions from electricity generation below 100gCO2eq/kWh?

    France has been doing it for thirty years. How much longer are we supposed to wait to see this "remarkable progress"?
    Actually, France is planing a massive reduction of its nuclear power, though delayed to 2035.

    https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/A...h-energy-plans

    It seems to me that across the Western world (and in some other countries), nuclear power is losing the fight in the public opinion court. Badly.
    Last edited by Angra Mainyu; 07-25-2021 at 02:33 AM.

  5. Top | #1095
    Administrator lpetrich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Eugene, OR
    Posts
    16,219
    Archived
    16,829
    Total Posts
    33,048
    Rep Power
    97
    Quote Originally Posted by bilby View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by lpetrich View Post
    ... With renewable energy, it will be possible to sustain a full-scale industrial economy.
    Not unless something massive and dramatic changes in the very short term. Like storage reducing in cost by five or six orders of magnitude.
    Five or six orders of magnitude???

    It's hard to take seriously claims like that when they are grossly contrary to reality. Grid scale Battery costs are declining faster than Wind and Solar - Katy for Coos County for instance. Still about 2 to 4 times more expensive than bare renewables, but not 10^5 - 10^6.
    It's only possible to sustain a full scale industrial economy with nuclear power. Or with some hypothetical alternative that currently doesn't exist, or seem likely to be discovered, invented, or magicked into existence any time soon.
    We are starting to find out otherwise. I note that we are starting to see a lot of technologies being developed for renewable energy that could have been developed for nuclear energy, but that weren't. High-capacity batteries, for instance. Or synfuels.
    Right now, the only thing standing between renewables and blackouts is burning gas.
    In fill-in-the-gaps fashion. Just like with nuclear energy.

  6. Top | #1096
    Fair dinkum thinkum bilby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
    Posts
    25,088
    Archived
    10,477
    Total Posts
    35,565
    Rep Power
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by Angra Mainyu View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by bilby View Post
    Everyone needs to be like France.



    Germany has had the full focus of this alleged "remarkable progress" for over a decade now. When is it going to get average emissions from electricity generation below 100gCO2eq/kWh?

    France has been doing it for thirty years. How much longer are we supposed to wait to see this "remarkable progress"?
    Actually, France is planing a massive reduction of its nuclear power, though delayed to 2035.
    Yeah, nobody's immune to stupidity.
    [url]https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Macron-clarifies-French-energy-plans[/url

    It seems to me that across the Western world (and in some other countries), nuclear power is losing the fight in the public opinion court. Badly.
    It seems to me to be the other way about.

    Regardless, it's objectively the best solution to rising carbon dioxide levels, and the only widely deployable electricity generation technology that can make reliable low carbon emissions power - Hydroelectric and geothermal being the only other reliable solutions, both of which are only practical in very specific and rare geographical conditions.

    The choices are nuclear, carbon emissions, or blackouts. There's no fourth option. If the public doesn't understand that, then they will learn it the hard way.

  7. Top | #1097
    Fair dinkum thinkum bilby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
    Posts
    25,088
    Archived
    10,477
    Total Posts
    35,565
    Rep Power
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by lpetrich View Post
    Five or six orders of magnitude???

    It's hard to take seriously claims like that when they are grossly contrary to reality. Grid scale Battery costs are declining faster than Wind and Solar - Katy for Coos County for instance. Still about 2 to 4 times more expensive than bare renewables, but not 10^5 - 10^6.
    Yeah, but it handles dips in production measured in minutes or hours. To handle seasonality, you need storage that's both sufficient in size, and cost effective, when deployed on scales of months or years.

    Nobody's saving solar power from June to use in February. In fact, nobody's storing electricity generated at 3pm for use at 3am. To make the leap to months rather than minutes of storage will need cost reductions at least on the scale I am suggesting.
    It's only possible to sustain a full scale industrial economy with nuclear power. Or with some hypothetical alternative that currently doesn't exist, or seem likely to be discovered, invented, or magicked into existence any time soon.
    We are starting to find out otherwise.
    Really? Where?

    Give any example of a national or sub-national grid that has emissions below 100gCO2eg/kWh, which doesn't depend on at least 80% of generation from nuclear and/or hydro.

    I'll wait.

    I note that we are starting to see a lot of technologies being developed for renewable energy that could have been developed for nuclear energy, but that weren't. High-capacity batteries, for instance. Or synfuels.
    Right now, the only thing standing between renewables and blackouts is burning gas.
    In fill-in-the-gaps fashion. Just like with nuclear energy.
    Nuclear energy leaves no such large nor unplanned gaps, and as France, Sweden and Ontario have all demonstrated, can easily beat the 100gCO2eg/kWh target on full year timescales. No wind or solar heavy grid anywhere has achieved that goal on a timescale as large as a month, much less a year.

    Data talks, bullshit walks. Where are the renewables heavy grids achieving low carbon emissions?

  8. Top | #1098
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Buenos Aires
    Posts
    3,596
    Archived
    7,588
    Total Posts
    11,184
    Rep Power
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by bilby View Post
    Yeah, nobody's immune to stupidity.
    [url]https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Macron-clarifies-French-energy-plans[/url

    It seems to me that across the Western world (and in some other countries), nuclear power is losing the fight in the public opinion court. Badly.
    It seems to me to be the other way about.

    Regardless, it's objectively the best solution to rising carbon dioxide levels, and the only widely deployable electricity generation technology that can make reliable low carbon emissions power - Hydroelectric and geothermal being the only other reliable solutions, both of which are only practical in very specific and rare geographical conditions.

    The choices are nuclear, carbon emissions, or blackouts. There's no fourth option. If the public doesn't understand that, then they will learn it the hard way.
    The other way around? Clearly we have very different impressions.

    Anyway, why do you think they'll learn? Depending on where they live and their ideology/religion, people might just blame the government and/or the capitalists and/or big companies and/or the 1% and/or conservatives and/or whatever.

  9. Top | #1099
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    7,402
    Rep Power
    23
    In the local news in a neighborhood not too far from me peole installed a solar electric systm in a parking lot. Enoygh to power about 50 homes. They had assistance to get it going but it was community driven.

    I'll post a link if I find one.

    Central District Solar Villiage

  10. Top | #1100
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    7,402
    Rep Power
    23

Similar Threads

  1. The Social Progress Initiative
    By lpetrich in forum Political Discussions
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 01-18-2019, 04:39 PM
  2. Why I Advocate Renewable Energy Sources
    By lpetrich in forum Natural Science
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: 07-10-2018, 07:01 PM
  3. Constraints on Social Progress
    By rousseau in forum General World History
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 07-08-2018, 04:09 PM
  4. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-29-2014, 05:28 AM
  5. Progress on D.M. Murdock's The Christ Conspiracy
    By Zwaarddijk in forum Pseudoscience
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 11-20-2014, 09:38 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •