Why renewables can't save the planet

Swimmy

Practice your craft.
WFF Supporter
I'm a scientist, not a policy person, so I don't have good answers to your questions.

This is another challenge I have with these conversations. We love to virtue signal and sky scream about the pending doom of the planet. Yet when pressed, no one seems to have sound, reasonable solutions. Instead we get "ban fossil fuels" or Green New Deal! Both, of course would have devastating effects to our society.

And if you don't fall in line with the group think you are labeled a science denier or "you don't understand the urgency of the issue." Ok.

One of the forecasts I've seen is that gas in WA state next year will be $5 per gallon. That won't affect Bill Gates or John Kerry but certainly would have an affect on the working class.

And this is not meant as an attack on you personally Richard. I believe you have good intentions.
L8VPdFIT_o.gif
 

dustinchromers

Active Member
This is another challenge I have with these conversations. We love to virtue signal and sky scream about the pending doom of the planet. Yet when pressed, no one seems to have sound, reasonable solutions. Instead we get "ban fossil fuels" or Green New Deal! Both, of course would have devastating effects to our society.

And if you don't fall in line with the group think you are labeled a science denier or "you don't understand the urgency of the issue." Ok.

One of the forecasts I've seen is that gas in WA state next year will be $5 per gallon. That won't affect Bill Gates or John Kerry but certainly would have an affect on the working class.

And this is not meant as an attack on you personally Richard. I believe you have good intentions.
L8VPdFIT_o.gif

"Ladies and gentlemen, are you ready to rock! ............ Please welcome to the main stage at the mega dome, SKYYYYYYYSCREAMER!"
 

Zak

WFF Supporter
This is another challenge I have with these conversations. We love to virtue signal and sky scream about the pending doom of the planet. Yet when pressed, no one seems to have sound, reasonable solutions. Instead we get "ban fossil fuels" or Green New Deal! Both, of course would have devastating effects to our society.
I think effective action to limit the harm from climate change will have significant impacts on our society, both good and bad. But I think the effects of doing nothing to limit the harm of climate change will be far more devastating.

I'm for carbon cap and trade. It would reward innovators who can produce a product or service with less climate impacts, and then the market and ingenuity can take it from there.
 

newfydog

Active Member
And if you don't fall in line with the group think you are labeled a science denier or "you don't understand the urgency of the issue." Ok.
It runs even deeper. Scientists who agree there is anthropogenic warming, but don't see a crisis are dismissed as "bought off by the fossil fuel lobby". I follow a number of them who regularly hear that claim, but are still waiting for the check. A true believer has no problem sorting out which scientists to believe apparently. Bill Gates (who never got a college degree) and Bill Nye (an engineer) Neil deGrasse Tyson (astrophysicist) and are credible in the field, while others, with hundreds of published papers in atmospheric science are dismissed if they are not sufficiently alarmist.
 

girlfisher

Active Member
I am glad for the opportunity to have a Conservation sub forum. Also glad that this thread is still going and has not become too political. My main interests lies in those who not only question renewables but actually oppose them. If I may, I will borrow two paragraphs from Charles Sullivan's well written and thoughtful post:

"I find these energy discussions so interesting. Perfection is the enemy of improvement. People are happy to deal wit the imperfections and issues of fossil fuels but any imperfection in any renewable energy form is reason for complete dismissal.

In the end, I do not believe that it is the energy type that bothers the anti-renewable crowd. I think that renewable energy types don't fit into their world view and at times their politics."


On the cover of the book Building a Sustainable Society, by Lester Brown, is the quote, “We do not inherit the earth from our fathers, we are borrowing it from our children.” I do not mind being labeled an alarmist if the outcome is a habitable planet for your children and their children.
 

longputt

Active Member
One of the forecasts I've seen is that gas in WA state next year will be $5 per gallon. That won't affect Bill Gates or John Kerry but certainly would have an affect on the working class.
If you read the UW and UCB studies on the $13/hr minimum wage in Seattle the findings show that the working class has had their hours reduced to offset the increased cost and now hold multiple jobs to make a living. Per UW and Seattle Times studies of Seattle mass transit and traffic: because they need mobility to go to multiple work locations they do not use mass transit and have increased grid-lock and consume more fuel. The working class in Seattle is getting hammered by these policies. I have no idea where this is headed but the trajectory looks bad to me.

Back to the OP, yes we should look at more nuclear power but it is not the end all. There are places in the US and the world where it is not safe or sustainable and other technologies are better. I really think carbon capture for fossil fuels is important.

BTW stop the wind power insanity now and divert those subsidies to something that can actually work for our energy future.
 

girlfisher

Active Member
If you read the UW and UCB studies on the $13/hr minimum wage in Seattle the findings show that the working class has had their hours reduced to offset the increased cost and now hold multiple jobs to make a living. Per UW and Seattle Times studies of Seattle mass transit and traffic: because they need mobility to go to multiple work locations they do not use mass transit and have increased grid-lock and consume more fuel. The working class in Seattle is getting hammered by these policies. I have no idea where this is headed but the trajectory looks bad to me.

Back to the OP, yes we should look at more nuclear power but it is not the end all. There are places in the US and the world where it is not safe or sustainable and other technologies are better. I really think carbon capture for fossil fuels is important.

BTW stop the wind power insanity now and divert those subsidies to something that can actually work for our energy future.

longputt: Is this the article you are referring to? You will note that the article also points out opposition to the short sightedness of the study.

Can you give us the Times studies of Seattle mass transit and traffic that you are referring to? I would think that some of this is folks not doing mass transit because of Pandemic.

And one final note; why do you refer to Wind Power as Wind Power Insanity?

Here is an article that forms a fairly strong opposition:
 
Last edited:

SilverFly

Active Member
A couple of dumb questions here for the power industry experts:

(1) Has there been any attempts to scale kinetic UPS technology to grid-level applications? Realizing this tech is not really a true "battery", it would seem to have potential to deal with short term surge/sag events.

(2) On the topic of power "surges", How phucked are we when the Earth gets hit with the next Carrington Event level Coronal Mass Ejection?
 

longputt

Active Member
A couple of dumb questions here for the power industry experts:

(1) Has there been any attempts to scale kinetic UPS technology to grid-level applications? Realizing this tech is not really a true "battery", it would seem to have potential to deal with short term surge/sag events.

(2) On the topic of power "surges", How phucked are we when the Earth gets hit with the next Carrington Event level Coronal Mass Ejection?
1. There have been/are enormous studies to make a large scale "UPS". So far no luck but look at Vanadium flow cell batteries. Brilliant people are working on this and it has promise.
2. Be careful...global warming people believe everything is man made...this could never happen :)
 

Peyton00

Active Member
I think effective action to limit the harm from climate change will have significant impacts on our society, both good and bad. But I think the effects of doing nothing to limit the harm of climate change will be far more devastating.

I'm for carbon cap and trade. It would reward innovators who can produce a product or service with less climate impacts, and then the market and ingenuity can take it from there.

Well rounded response. Break some eggs to make an omelet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zak

wetline dave

Active Member
I will not disagree that man kind is affecting climate but to what degree is debatable. The planet has been heating and cooling since it was formed., There is a natural cycle here that we can not change nor most likely modify.

To conserve resources is important and to seek out alternative sources of energy is noble and a good thing. But to think that solar or wind is going to do the job is just dreaming. The wind doesn't always blow at the right speeds and solar only works when there is day light. And what is the environmental costs of storage batteries.

There is always a trade off that needs to be factored into the equation,.

Dave
 

Support WFF | Remove the Ads

Support WFF by upgrading your account. Site supporters benefits include no ads and access to some additional features, few now, more in the works. Info

Latest posts

Top