The “Wind and Solar Will Save Us” Delusion | Our Finite World: "The underlying problem is that burning coal in a power plant produces a better, but more expensive, product. If this electricity is used for a process that coal cannot perform directly, such as allowing a new automobile production plant, then this higher cost is easily absorbed by the economy. But if this higher-cost product simply provides a previously available service (heating) in a more expensive manner, it becomes a difficult cost for the economy to “digest.” It becomes a very expensive fix for China’s smog problem. It should be noted that this change works in the wrong direction from a CO2 perspective, because ultimately, more coal must be burned for heating because of the inefficiency of converting coal to electricity, and then using that electricity for heating."
Saturday, February 18, 2017
Plans to use renewables generally means using electricity as distribution when talking about large scale application. However just switching from coal to electricity for heat is already a significant loss of energy.
at 9:16 PM
Wednesday, February 15, 2017
Questioning “Our Renewable Future” – Resilience: "It would obviously be impossible to pay out anything like 29% of GDP for energy. Hall and Klitgaard (2014) find that when energy expenditure remains above about 5.5% of US GDP for some time recession occurs. In other words far lower assumptions than have been made in this exercise would have to be true before the costs arrived at could be affordable. And all this is for Australia, which has possibly the most favourable renewable energy conditions in the inhabited world. "There are a lot of problems with renewables.
- Jevons (whole human race must be in on it)
- They depend on fossil fuel
- They use up declining resources
- Some pollute
- They promote growth
- They cost more
- They distract from the need for degrowth
at 1:30 PM
Saturday, February 4, 2017
Friday, February 3, 2017
PM Pollution from electric cars no better than internal combustion cars: "Therefore, it could be concluded that the increased popularity of electric vehicles will likely not have a great effect on PM levels. Nonexhaust emissions already account for over 90% of PM10 and 85% of PM2.5 emissions from traffic"
at 7:08 AM
Free Transit Library: "Therefore, it could be concluded that the increased popularity of electric vehicles will likely not have a great effect on PM levels. Nonexhaust emissions already account for over 90% of PM10 and 85% of PM2.5 emissions from traffic"
at 7:05 AM
Thursday, January 12, 2017
Growth, carbon, and Trump: States are “decoupling” economic growth from emissions growth | Brookings Institution: " largely due to favorable changes in these states’ fuel mixes, such as coal-to-gas power switching and increased reliance on nuclear energy. The shift toward cleaner-burning natural gas has enabled significant decoupling of growth from emissions""Decoupling" the latest distraction from degrowth from the growth advocates. Achieved by switching to gas and nuclear from coal. The externalities of coal are well documented. Gas and nuclear are newer and there is more confusion about their true costs. This is the only change.
at 8:44 AM
Fair Observer: "For example, wind/solar require the mining of rare earths. All mining is environmentally devastating, but rare earths mining is especially so. Rare earths mining and refining has devastated, for example, the area around Baotou, China. As The Guardian wrote, “From the air it looks like a huge lake, fed by many tributaries, but on the ground it turns out to be a murky expanse of water, in which no fish or algae can survive. The shore is coated with a black crust, so thick you can walk on it. Into this huge, 10 sq km tailings pond nearby factories discharge water loaded with chemicals used to process the 17 most sought after minerals in the world, collectively known as rare earths.” The soil in the region has also been toxified."
at 8:29 AM