Solar energy doesn't work where it is cold. Neither does wind power.

[Botany]

[NNadir]

1. On my drive to work this morning, I noted a large...

...number of solar cells covered with snow.

If "working" means addressing climate change, solar, wind, blah, blah, blah, haven't worked, aren't working, and won't work.

[Botany]

2. And homes and businesses in TX that had solar and or wind generation capacity should ...

.... still have had electricity too. Although some of those homes and or businesses might not have had
electricity because they were connected to the grid.

[Beakybird]

3. This is a bunch of hooey! Ha! Someone's post was taken down.

Let's do a thought experiment. Let's assume that humans were more wise, and there was a consensus that global warming posed a threat to humanity in the early 1980's and that there was massive investment in R&D of wind, solar, and battery technology - the kind of $$ that we spend in wars and protecting our global oil supplies. The advancements in the technology would be far, far beyond what exists today. The adoption of green energy would be far, far beyond what it is today.

Don't blame global warming on renewables. Blame it on a four decade right wing resistance to green energy.

As it is, solar is the cheapest source of electricity.

This was a reply to a DU'er (I think it was him) who I assume has good intentions who is always putting down wind and solar and lauding nuclear energy.

[NNadir]

5. I've been engaged in "thought experiments" on energy...

...and the environment for more than thirty years. Much of my diary on this website consists of discussions and ruminations on the topic, usually with reference to the primary scientific literature.

I am assuming that we are in a Dunning Kruger territory in which the definition of what "hooey" is stems from limited understanding of things like thermodynamics, material constraints, land use and related topics.

I'm an old man. I've been hearing for half a century how solar and wind would save the world. Having 30 years of critical thinking behind me on this topic, excuse me if I know how and why we hit 417 ppm + at the Mauna Lia CO2 observatory already this year.

To understand what is and is not "hooey" opening a science or engineering book might be a good place to begin.

[Beakybird]

10. If global warming had been a national emergency 40 years ago...

And if there had been multi billion dollar r&d and subsidies in renewables in a way that today's pennies per Kwh prices had existed 20 years ago, and if there had been massive investment and subsidies for public transportation and weatherization of houses and buildings you'd see substantially lower ppm at Mauna Lia.
The problem is that humanity has dragged its feet for way too long.

[NNadir]

12. We've spent close to three trillion dollars on solar and wind in this century.

This is not about money, but rather about the wise use of resources.

The three trillion to which I refer is more than the GDP of India, a nation with close to 1.4 billion people.

Combined, after this expenditure for no real result, solar and wind do not provide even 3% of world energy demand, now at 600 exajoules per year.

Combined, solar and wind remain trivial forms of energy compared to dangerous natural gas, for which solar and wind merely function as lipstick on the pig.

A feature of the 21st century is the willingness to embrace lies and delusions.

Lies and delusions are not the exclusive province of the right wing, as much as I hate to admit it. We are not immune, far from it.

History will not forgive us, nor should it.

[lagomorph777]

4. Solar panels still get some light through a light snow covering.

And they are more efficient when cold.

Sorry, fossil fuels are on the way out.

Nuclear is way too expensive.

Renewables have crossed the affordability threshold; they can't be held back anymore.

[NNadir]

6. Yeah, I hear thar line of wishful thinking and Ayn Rand...

Last edited Mon Feb 22, 2021, 02:12 PM - Edit history (1)

...type of horseshit all the time.

What I never hear in connection with this pablum is an explanation of how it it is that the US built more than 100 nuclear plants, in around 25 years while providing the lowest priced electricity in the world.

The difference between nuclear power and solar and wind crap, all of which will be landfill in 20 to 25 years and nuclear plants, is that nuclear plants last 60 years.

Enthusiasm for called renewable energy is a pure consumerist fantasy.

Contempt for all future generations is the real driver behind the tiresome and frankly delusional chanting.

History will not forgive us, nor should it.

[lagomorph777]

11. Heard you before.

As somebody not in the nuclear industry, I can't see the extra cost being worth it.

[NNadir]

13. Well as someonewho cares about future generations...

...I really can't see a shred of decency involved in piling more electronic waste and landfills on all future generations for a stupid reactionary affectation.

There is a reason that humanity abandoned so called "renewable energy" in the 19th century and all the contemptuous reactionary rhetoric, all of which I hear continuously, will change that fact.


Facts matter.

[jpak]

8. Snow transmits lots of sunlight

They are producing electricity

They would have to be buried in meters of snow to completely block them

The ignorance is appalling

[csziggy]

7. After driving all over the UK, I saw many solar panels and wind farms in Scotland

And on the Orkney Islands. While they may not be "THE" answer, they can be part of the solution, especially when they can reduce the load on the power grid.

I've never understood why the American South has not gone all in, when Germany and the UK keep increasing the percentage of their power produced by wind and solar.

[hunter]

9. Solar and wind advocates often ignore the horrors of natural gas.

Without natural gas "backing up" the grid whenever the sun isn't shining and the wind isn't blowing these renewable energy fantasies are not economically viable.

An economy powered entirely by solar, wind, and other "renewable" energy sources would look nothing like the economy many affluent people now enjoy. Given the current human population of earth, it's likely renewable energy can't even feed and comfortably shelter everyone, no matter how much money and research we throw at it.

Renewable energy isn't going to replace fossil fuels by any magic hand of the free market.

If we honestly intend to shut down all fossil fuel production, which is the only way we will save whatever remains of the natural environment we are accustomed to, then we just have to do that. It's like quitting smoking. You haven't quit smoking if you reduce your two pack a day habit to one pack a day and a vape pen. You haven't quit fossil fuels if they are still providing half your power.

I think if we quit fossil fuels many people would decide that nuclear power doesn't look so bad after all. And it's not.

What about the nuclear waste? Many toxic fossil fuel wastes have a "half life" of FOREVER. Global warming and air pollution are killing thousands of people every day. Filling up your car with gasoline and driving down the highway exposes you and your fellow humans to carcinogens and mutagens. It adds greenhouse gasses to the atmosphere

Modern twenty first century nuclear power technology could be vastly superior to nuclear power plant designs developed in the 1950s and 1960s. These reactors could be fueled with materials that have already been mined, things like depleted uranium, mine tailings, used light water reactor fuel, and decommissioned atomic weapon cores.

I'm not going to pay any attention to right wing bullshit coming out of Texas. That disaster was clearly caused by mismanagement and corruption in a power grid predominantly fueled by natural gas, not by wind or solar power.

In terms of environmental footprint modern fracked natural gas is hardly any better than coal.

In the existing market supplemental wind and solar only serve to further entrench natural gas.

There's more than enough natural gas in the ground to destroy the world as we know it if we continue to burn it.

We know how to quit fossil fuels. We have the technologies. We have the wealth. We have the workers. We just have to do it.