Global warming

[Subduction Zone]

Those who are having solar and wind power would disagree with you about them being the "two cheapest sources of energy out there." So would the developers.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/01/us/orsted-wind-energy-canceled-climate/index.html

You are cherry picking again and demonstrating ignorance at the same time. I guess that your ignorance of the topic is part of the problem as well. Or perhaps i should have assumed an ignorant audience. Three are two types of wind farms. Land based and sea based. There are advantages to each. Right now sea based wind farms are more expensive to build. Land based windfarms and solar panels are the cheapest sources of energy. Here is a chart of levelized cost (that i s the average lifetime cost) of various power sources. Please note that offshore wind, the light blue line, is almost twice that of onshore wind. The two yellow lines slightly below onshore wind are two different types of solar panels:

One more note, storage of excessive green power has a long way to go. You can see the long term trend has been a rather strong drop. The recent uptick in prices is due to the global post covid inflation.

Cost of New Renewables Temporarily Rises as Inflation Starts to Bite | BloombergNEF

Supply-chain woes push up cost of new-build solar, battery storage and onshore wind, which rises between 4% and 14% from year ago London and New

about.bnef.com

 

[Subduction Zone]

You sure seem to have a problem with an increasing number of people here.
Ya feelin' ok there?

Really? Do you have to make every error of yours a personal attack?

 

[Valjean]

Sounds very Rube Goldberg of a process. In what you described, why not just use the solar and wind power directly instead of using it to generate the potential for a different energy production?

It is used directly -- to pump water to the elevated 'gravity battery'. When the wind stops or sun goes down the water flows back down through turbines to 'directly' generate hydro-electricity. When the sun comes up next morning the process repeats.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Ok, then what is the reality of the number of hydrogen stations for drivers to fill up their vehicle with in your part of town?

Zero. I am amazed at how those that hate progress do not understand how it works at all. Hydrogen as a fuel is a new technology and tis it currently limited to mostly California as a testing ground. That makes sense since California has high density areas of population and also lots of open space. You need a high population to test ideas when you are going to start out with a very low percentage of people using a product. Here is the current state of hydrogen plants in California. It does not look as if it has been abandoned at all.

It makes far more sense to do a limited testing of a product before releasing it to the general public and that is what they are doing:

Hydrogen Refueling Stations in California

www.energy.ca.gov

 

[Pete in Panama]

Reserves are proven to run out in 50 years.

Not sure where you got your numbers but historically proven reserves are only for the next 3 to 6 years. Here's the data (from here and here)

Every year they look at how oil is selling and if they "prove" more reserves as needed.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sounds very Rube Goldberg of a process. In what you described, why not just use the solar and wind power directly instead of using it to generate the potential for a different energy production?

They will and they do. But sometime in the future they will need to start to turn off fossil fuel plants and to do that they will need a source of power when the wind is not blowing. In other words, sometime in the future we need a working method of storing electricity and the time to develop the technology is before we need it and not after.

 

[Koberstein]

LOL! How am I a "naysayer'? And running away is what you did. I offered to go over the basic science of AGW a long time ago. You ran away. We know why your solution fails. That is not "nay saying". And yes, like it or not you will be forced to give up that dirty habit.

Amazing, every accusation was an admission.

You are a nay sayer. I never ran away from anything. You don't know anything about AGW. only in left wing indoctrination. I have studied and learned from the best. You obviously have not. Fossil fuels are here to stay and I don't see any left wing pinhead changing that. In fact the Baker Hughes rig report will show increases in the rig count after the King Trump coronation in Jan 2025. Smart money is on big Oil. In order to bring inflation down to 2%, you have to bring the price of oil down. You do that by drilling more wells and fracking more. I imagine oil prices will settle to around $40 a barrel, give or take. That should give us about $2 a gallon for gas at the pump. EVs will be stacking like cord wood with no buyers. They won't be able to give them away. 40 dollar oil will bankrupt Iran. It did the last time around. All your solutions fails because you don't or refuse to see the big picture. It's not about you and your small ideas that have no merit.

 

[Pete in Panama]

Do you disagree that there is a limited amount
beneath the Earth's surface? If so, how would
it be replenished?

This is hard to follow. There's also a "a limited amount beneath the Earth's surface" for gold, iron, sand for glass, etc. etc. My personal take is that we exploit all these resources and if the price changes for scarcity then we use something else. Sounds like you're seeing or you're worried about something else tho, I'm listening...

 

[Subduction Zone]

York and Bell, 2019. https://content.csbs.utah.edu/~mli/Economics 7004/York and Bell-Energy Transition or Addition.pdf
and the constantly rising use of fossil fuels despite the "explosive growth in renewables" as some people describe it: Numbers Don’t Lie

Rather than respond to all your other points individually, I'll just point you to this presentation, which covers it all very well.

Sorry but that is a very limited view of what is planned And it is not accurate. In places we only added new plants, but take a look at the UK. They used to be a coal powered country and now about 1% of all electrical power comes from coal. Their general use of all fossil fuels has dropped to levels not seen since the 1950's.

Analysis: UK electricity from fossil fuels drops to lowest level since 1957 - Carbon Brief

The amount of UK electricity generated from fossil fuels fell 22% year-on-year in 2023 to the lowest level since 1957, Carbon Brief analysis reveals.

www.carbonbrief.org

The days of fossil fuels are ending around the world.

 

[Pete in Panama]

Right on my friend. Let the fracking begin!

Ah yes, aka hydraulic fracturing. Sounds like you have opinions there, care to share them?

 

[Subduction Zone]

You are a nay sayer. I never ran away from anything. You don't know anything about AGW. only in left wing indoctrination. I have studied and learned from the best. You obviously have not. Fossil fuels are here to stay and I don't see any left wing pinhead changing that. In fact the Baker Hughes rig report will show increases in the rig count after the King Trump coronation in Jan 2025. Smart money is on big Oil. In order to bring inflation down to 2%, you have to bring the price of oil down. You do that by drilling more wells and fracking more. I imagine oil prices will settle to around $40 a barrel, give or take. That should give us about $2 a gallon for gas at the pump. EVs will be stacking like cord wood with no buyers. They won't be able to give them away. 40 dollar oil will bankrupt Iran. It did the last time around. All your solutions fails because you don't or refuse to see the big picture. It's not about you and your small ideas that have no merit.

Nope, you ran away. Several times I offered to go over the basics of AGW with you. And of course you support the incredibly incompetent and dishonest convicted felon.

Even if Trump gets elected the increase of abuse will be short lived.

 

[Koberstein]

Considering the known blowback, isn't this a little shortsighted and counterproductive?

I don't think so. China is building coal fired utility plants faster than the spread of covid19 through a nursing home.

 

[Valjean]

You sure seem to have a problem with an increasing number of people here.
Ya feelin' ok there?

People use energy and resources, and they generate pollution and waste. If our extractive industry and technology generate population increase -- which they have/do -- the increasing need for resources to accommodate the increasing population will generate an ever increasing demand and its negative, destructive consequences.
We're in a finite system. This is not a sustainable progression.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don't think so. China is building coal fired utility plants faster than the spread of covid19 through a nursing home.

Yes, China can appear to be short sighted too. But according to the most recent statistics that I can find their coal use has topped out. They are still building new plants but they may be replacing older technology with more efficient new technology:

China Coal Reserves and Consumption Statistics - Worldometer

Current and historical Reserves, Production, and Consumption of Natural Coal in China. Global rank and share of world's total. Data, Statistics and Charts.

www.worldometers.info

They are trying to catch up to the first world countries in production capability. But they also have a long view. Besides being the number one consumer of coal they are also the number one country in green power.

How China Became the World’s Leader on Renewable Energy

China has achieved stunning growth in its installed renewable capacity over the last two decades, far outpacing the rest of the world. But to end its continued dependence on fossil fuels, it must now move ahead with planned reforms to its national electricity system.

e360.yale.edu

Green power is more disperse than fossil fuel plants. So it takes longer to develop it. They have both a short term plan and a long term plan:

How China Became the World’s Leader on Renewable Energy

China has achieved stunning growth in its installed renewable capacity over the last two decades, far outpacing the rest of the world. But to end its continued dependence on fossil fuels, it must now move ahead with planned reforms to its national electricity system.

e360.yale.edu

 

[Jimmy]

Not sure where you got your numbers but historically proven reserves are only for the next 3 to 6 years. Here's the data (from here and here)




View attachment 93216
Every year they look at how oil is selling and if they "prove" more reserves as needed.

If we had three years left, gasoline would be a little more expensive

 

[Laniakea]

Really? Do you have to make every error of yours a personal attack?

You were responding to someone else, so your knee-jerk response of saying it was my "error" is a bit misplaced.
I also notice that you couldn't answer my question, which is an answer itself.

 

[Laniakea]

You are cherry picking again and demonstrating ignorance at the same time. I guess that your ignorance of the topic is part of the problem as well. Or perhaps i should have assumed an ignorant audience. Three are two types of wind farms. Land based and sea based. There are advantages to each. Right now sea based wind farms are more expensive to build. Land based windfarms and solar panels are the cheapest sources of energy. Here is a chart of levelized cost (that i s the average lifetime cost) of various power sources. Please note that offshore wind, the light blue line, is almost twice that of onshore wind. The two yellow lines slightly below onshore wind are two different types of solar panels:

View attachment 93214

One more note, storage of excessive green power has a long way to go. You can see the long term trend has been a rather strong drop. The recent uptick in prices is due to the global post covid inflation.

Cost of New Renewables Temporarily Rises as Inflation Starts to Bite | BloombergNEF

Supply-chain woes push up cost of new-build solar, battery storage and onshore wind, which rises between 4% and 14% from year ago London and New

about.bnef.com

Oh my! Did you actually read your source? It obviously doesn't say anything that supports your claim. So I'll take it that you admit that oil and gas are still the best choice, and that the "green" crap still isn't ready for mainstream takeover of our energy grid.

 

[Subduction Zone]

If we had three years left, gasoline would be a little more expensive

Yes, "proven reserves" are oil sources where we know that there is oil there and we have a reasonable estimate of the amount of oil. We are always finding new oil and developing fields. What has changed is how much work goes into recovering that oil. At current usage rates we have about 50 years of oil left. Estimated amounts are not the same as "proven reserves" here are the current estimates:

"Globally, around 1.6 trillion barrels of recoverable oil remain, according to a 2023 survey by Rystad Energy. There's also recoverable oil we haven't yet discovered; that's a hazier number, although in 2012, the U.S. Geological Survey put the estimate at 565 billion barrels."

By the way, that "recoverable oil" is the amount that can be recovered with current technology. Fracking was a major development in the oil industry because we left a lot of oil behind in the past. Reopening those sources and fracking was relatively easy and gave us an oil boom.

How much oil is left and will we ever run out?

We may never run out of oil, though known reserves are expected to last for about 50 years, current estimates suggest.

www.livescience.com

 

[Laniakea]

It is used directly -- to pump water to the elevated 'gravity battery'. When the wind stops or sun goes down the water flows back down through turbines to 'directly' generate hydro-electricity. When the sun comes up next morning the process repeats.

Nope! If the energy was used directly, it would power homes and businesses. In the scenario you lay out, the wind and solar power are used to move water around to then be used for hydroelectric power. That's called using it indirectly. It would be far better just to use the wind and solar power to power the homes and businesses rather than power another source to do what had already been done by the wind and solar setups.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You were responding to someone else, so your knee-jerk response of saying it was my "error" is a bit misplaced.
I also notice that you couldn't answer my question, which is an answer itself.

You question had a false accusation in it and that was an error.

If I asked someone "Have you quit beating your wife yet?" that would have been the same sort of question that you asked me.