Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. Vol 3
Discussion
dudleybloke said:
He's certainly a bonkers weirdo.rovermorris999 said:
It's the latest scare story from the green nutters strategy central. Ocean Acidification has failed to deliver a single real world problem so they decided to add in 'and Hypoxia' because real examples happen quite frequently (nothing to do with AGW though). Of course history says ocean life thrives at much higher CO2 and temperatures, so as usual, file under fake.Solar PV in Europe etc. worthless.
http://notrickszone.com/2016/04/30/devastating-con...
The corruption of the IPCC/government science - not that we need more proof.
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2016...
Edited by Mr GrimNasty on Saturday 30th April 21:01
mondeoman said:
Shamelessly stolen from the Tesla thread...
Norway has a small population in a large land area that readily provides some very obvious potential for Hydro power generation with a lot of potential.gangzoom said:
Back in 1910 when the Ford Model T first appeared there was barely a petrol station in sight, and the streets were full of horses.....and society made the transition to petrol cars fine - though clearly at the time we didn't know any better about emissions.
Germany has made a concerted effort to develop renewable energy in recent years, last year 1/3 of their entire electric supply was via renewables. Here in the UK we have some of the best winds resources anywhere in th world, coupled with energy storage we could have access to FREE and almost ULIMiTATED renewable power, all without having to worry about OPEC/Russian oil.
If you want to see the future, look at Norway, they have loads of oil/gas but almost their entire electric supply is renewable. 1 in 3 cars sold there are now EVs, and ironically their biggest export is oil/gas to the rest of Europe who are still addicted to the stuff.
If you than looking at the developing world, China and India are now the biggest investors in renewable energy, it's not a coincidence Tesla is keen to build its next EV factory in China (not Europe). In the first 3 months of this year EV sales in China has already hit 40K.
The world is changing, we cannot carry on with the status quo, and we shouldn't. Solar/wind with a mixture of existing power supply is the way forwards, but it's up to government to drive it. Sadly the current UK government seems more keen to give tax cuts to North sea oil than support wind/solar whilst the likes of Germany keep on reducing their reliance on old money.
Germany has made a concerted effort to develop renewable energy in recent years, last year 1/3 of their entire electric supply was via renewables. Here in the UK we have some of the best winds resources anywhere in th world, coupled with energy storage we could have access to FREE and almost ULIMiTATED renewable power, all without having to worry about OPEC/Russian oil.
If you want to see the future, look at Norway, they have loads of oil/gas but almost their entire electric supply is renewable. 1 in 3 cars sold there are now EVs, and ironically their biggest export is oil/gas to the rest of Europe who are still addicted to the stuff.
If you than looking at the developing world, China and India are now the biggest investors in renewable energy, it's not a coincidence Tesla is keen to build its next EV factory in China (not Europe). In the first 3 months of this year EV sales in China has already hit 40K.
The world is changing, we cannot carry on with the status quo, and we shouldn't. Solar/wind with a mixture of existing power supply is the way forwards, but it's up to government to drive it. Sadly the current UK government seems more keen to give tax cuts to North sea oil than support wind/solar whilst the likes of Germany keep on reducing their reliance on old money.
They would be bonkers to use oil and gas when they can sell that to others who do not also have the Hydro option and make themselves very wealthy along the way. Solar is something of a non-starter for them and turbines may struggle in their harsh environment. They also have masochistic tendencies to ensure that they penalise themselves for their good fortune by making their cost of living extremely high.
UK has a large population in a small land area with little or not further financially viable places to develop Hydro at scale even for rapid response load balancing options. Other options are marginal due to intermittency and in any case are not "free" however you look at them.
Try this poignant video from the Energy Matters blog.
http://euanmearns.com/david-mackay-the-final-cut/
Sadly Prof. McKay still relied on the wish that Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) exists or is likely to exist in the near future. Currently there seeme to be no evidence to support this idea. Still, a miracle may happen ....
CCS exists in experimental form but no-one is rushing to build a commercial scale plant because it's bloody inefficient and you need to burn an additional 30-40% of whatever fuel to recoup the losses. Mr Zoom is correct in pointing out India and China are investing a lot in solar and whirligigs but neglects to mention they're simultaneously investing large amounts in coal and nuclear power stations.
hidetheelephants said:
CCS exists in experimental form but no-one is rushing to build a commercial scale plant because it's bloody inefficient and you need to burn an additional 30-40% of whatever fuel to recoup the losses. Mr Zoom is correct in pointing out India and China are investing a lot in solar and whirligigs but neglects to mention they're simultaneously investing large amounts in coal and nuclear power stations.
And that in the past the UK has 'invested' substantial sums of taxpayers' money in China's coal-fired power stations. Tafia used to post about this regularly with details of the number per week and how much we were sending over. At least we're still sending them 'recycled' waste as ship ballast so it can go in Chinese landfill sites.turbobloke said:
Renewables Catch 22
http://bravenewclimate.com/2014/08/22/catch-22-of-...
Engineers Say Renewable Energy ‘Simply won’t work’
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/11/22/shocker-top-...
That's really interesting, not seen it before. http://bravenewclimate.com/2014/08/22/catch-22-of-...
Engineers Say Renewable Energy ‘Simply won’t work’
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/11/22/shocker-top-...
George111 said:
turbobloke said:
Renewables Catch 22
http://bravenewclimate.com/2014/08/22/catch-22-of-...
Engineers Say Renewable Energy ‘Simply won’t work’
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/11/22/shocker-top-...
That's really interesting, not seen it before. http://bravenewclimate.com/2014/08/22/catch-22-of-...
Engineers Say Renewable Energy ‘Simply won’t work’
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/11/22/shocker-top-...
rovermorris999 said:
George111 said:
turbobloke said:
Renewables Catch 22
http://bravenewclimate.com/2014/08/22/catch-22-of-...
Engineers Say Renewable Energy ‘Simply won’t work’
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/11/22/shocker-top-...
That's really interesting, not seen it before. http://bravenewclimate.com/2014/08/22/catch-22-of-...
Engineers Say Renewable Energy ‘Simply won’t work’
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/11/22/shocker-top-...
Maurice Strong said:
Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about?
Reading one of the links above it mentions Hydro power and it got me thinking, and I'm no scientist so probably opening myself up here but here goes....
It mentions Hydro is geography dependant, mountainous, but does it need to be? We have a long history of building down into the earth so why not start at sea level?
Would it be possible to build say 1km down to house the turbines and then build a vast underground network of tunnels to store water until such time that it can be pumped back up to the surface again? I get that hydro is not so much generation of electricity but used to smooth electrical demand at peak times but could this be used in a similar way as a non chemical storage solution to wind and solar power, build the underground water storage so vast that renewable energy could pump it back when it can, maybe made big enough to not have to rely on conventional energy to pump?
Just a Sunday morning thought but ready for a roasting
It mentions Hydro is geography dependant, mountainous, but does it need to be? We have a long history of building down into the earth so why not start at sea level?
Would it be possible to build say 1km down to house the turbines and then build a vast underground network of tunnels to store water until such time that it can be pumped back up to the surface again? I get that hydro is not so much generation of electricity but used to smooth electrical demand at peak times but could this be used in a similar way as a non chemical storage solution to wind and solar power, build the underground water storage so vast that renewable energy could pump it back when it can, maybe made big enough to not have to rely on conventional energy to pump?
Just a Sunday morning thought but ready for a roasting
jgmadkit said:
Reading one of the links above it mentions Hydro power and it got me thinking, and I'm no scientist so probably opening myself up here but here goes....
It mentions Hydro is geography dependant, mountainous, but does it need to be? We have a long history of building down into the earth so why not start at sea level?
Would it be possible to build say 1km down to house the turbines and then build a vast underground network of tunnels to store water until such time that it can be pumped back up to the surface again? I get that hydro is not so much generation of electricity but used to smooth electrical demand at peak times but could this be used in a similar way as a non chemical storage solution to wind and solar power, build the underground water storage so vast that renewable energy could pump it back when it can, maybe made big enough to not have to rely on conventional energy to pump?
Just a Sunday morning thought but ready for a roasting
I would imagine it's a question of cost, making a reservoir underground ,and stop it naturally filling with water, then you have to maintain the pumps that will have to be located near the bottom ain't going to be cheap given that we are talking large capacity.It mentions Hydro is geography dependant, mountainous, but does it need to be? We have a long history of building down into the earth so why not start at sea level?
Would it be possible to build say 1km down to house the turbines and then build a vast underground network of tunnels to store water until such time that it can be pumped back up to the surface again? I get that hydro is not so much generation of electricity but used to smooth electrical demand at peak times but could this be used in a similar way as a non chemical storage solution to wind and solar power, build the underground water storage so vast that renewable energy could pump it back when it can, maybe made big enough to not have to rely on conventional energy to pump?
Just a Sunday morning thought but ready for a roasting
"The response from the signatories of the letter [essentially threatening The Times for carrying less than full on CAGW articles] was a perfect case-study in what Irving Janis, the former Yale professor of psychology, analysed as “groupthink”. Those, caught up in a bubble, he showed, first succumb to a collective mindset which is in some way at odds with reality. They then elevate this into an illusory orthodoxy which cannot be challenged. Finally, because their groupthink is based on such shaky ground, they intolerantly lash out at anyone who dares question it."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/01/the-cli...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/01/the-cli...
k?Mr GrimNasty said:
dudleybloke said:
He's certainly a bonkers weirdo.rovermorris999 said:
It's the latest scare story from the green nutters strategy central. Ocean Acidification has failed to deliver a single real world problem so they decided to add in 'and Hypoxia' because real examples happen quite frequently (nothing to do with AGW though). Of course history says ocean life thrives at much higher CO2 and temperatures, so as usual, file under fake.Solar PV in Europe etc. worthless.
http://notrickszone.com/2016/04/30/devastating-con...
The corruption of the IPCC/government science - not that we need more proof.
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2016...
Edited by Mr GrimNasty on Saturday 30th April 21:01
Even more ludicrous is that there are people in europe that think solar panels installed in the roads, aka solar roadways is an excellent idea. A solar panel, flat on the ground, buried under a load of toughened glass/perspex with cars and lorries driving over it. Yeah that'll work a treat. That one shouldn't have even have gotten off the drawing board.
Mr GrimNasty said:
"The response from the signatories of the letter [essentially threatening The Times for carrying less than full on CAGW articles] was a perfect case-study in what Irving Janis, the former Yale professor of psychology, analysed as “groupthink”. Those, caught up in a bubble, he showed, first succumb to a collective mindset which is in some way at odds with reality. They then elevate this into an illusory orthodoxy which cannot be challenged. Finally, because their groupthink is based on such shaky ground, they intolerantly lash out at anyone who dares question it."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/01/the-cli...
That's some letter! They really ought to write more, it would do the climate realism movement as many favours as Obama did for Brexit.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/01/the-cli...
Who would of thought the UK was so important?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3568772/Le...
We had a narrow escape at the last election.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3568772/Le...
We had a narrow escape at the last election.
rovermorris999 said:
Who would of thought the UK was so important?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3568772/Le...
We had a narrow escape at the last election.
Quite.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3568772/Le...
We had a narrow escape at the last election.
Voting for Miliband would have endangered the UK, says planet
Fortunately we left him. Now we need to do the same with the EU but that's another thread
rovermorris999 said:
Who would of thought the UK was so important?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3568772/Le...
We had a narrow escape at the last election.
just about the best news the leave campaign could hope for http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3568772/Le...
We had a narrow escape at the last election.
"The former Labour leader will join forces with Environment Secretary Elizabeth Truss, Green party leader Caroline Lucas and former Lib Dem minister Sir Ed Davey to claim that ‘our global habitat’ will suffer if Britain leaves the EU."rovermorris999 said:
George111 said:
turbobloke said:
Renewables Catch 22
http://bravenewclimate.com/2014/08/22/catch-22-of-...
Engineers Say Renewable Energy ‘Simply won’t work’
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/11/22/shocker-top-...
That's really interesting, not seen it before. http://bravenewclimate.com/2014/08/22/catch-22-of-...
Engineers Say Renewable Energy ‘Simply won’t work’
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/11/22/shocker-top-...
turbobloke said:
rovermorris999 said:
No doubt Durbster will insinuate something or other so he can ignore it. I'd love to see the content addressed and if wrong, why?
Based on their track record I don't think believer greenies are bothered by piffling trifles such as EROEI and running a developed economy within a civilised society. They want to return us to a localised medieval lifestyle. The pearl of great price is this (below) as expressed by one of the fruitiest nuts there ever was.Edited by durbster on Monday 2nd May 09:45
jgmadkit said:
Reading one of the links above it mentions Hydro power and it got me thinking, and I'm no scientist so probably opening myself up here but here goes....
It mentions Hydro is geography dependant, mountainous, but does it need to be? We have a long history of building down into the earth so why not start at sea level?
Would it be possible to build say 1km down to house the turbines and then build a vast underground network of tunnels to store water until such time that it can be pumped back up to the surface again? I get that hydro is not so much generation of electricity but used to smooth electrical demand at peak times but could this be used in a similar way as a non chemical storage solution to wind and solar power, build the underground water storage so vast that renewable energy could pump it back when it can, maybe made big enough to not have to rely on conventional energy to pump?
Just a Sunday morning thought but ready for a roasting
Dig deep enough to use geothermal energy after the hydro - electric phase. Channel the water down from sea level to power the turbines, then heat that water to power steam turbines (rather than expending energy to pump it to the surface.It mentions Hydro is geography dependant, mountainous, but does it need to be? We have a long history of building down into the earth so why not start at sea level?
Would it be possible to build say 1km down to house the turbines and then build a vast underground network of tunnels to store water until such time that it can be pumped back up to the surface again? I get that hydro is not so much generation of electricity but used to smooth electrical demand at peak times but could this be used in a similar way as a non chemical storage solution to wind and solar power, build the underground water storage so vast that renewable energy could pump it back when it can, maybe made big enough to not have to rely on conventional energy to pump?
Just a Sunday morning thought but ready for a roasting
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff