Energy - Fossil, Renewable, Nuclear

ThatNickGuy

ThatNickGuy



This is an incredible video. The Orkney Islands have an issue where their various sources of renewable energy, especially wind, generate TOO much power.

I'm not an expert, of course, but they mention three possible local changes: switching more cars to electric, switching ferries to electric, and switching oil heated homes to electric. And maybe I'm wrong, but would the latter not be the easiest transition?

They also mention building a new interconnected cable to the British National Grid and sell energy to places outside the island. But doing so would cost close to a quarter of a billion pounds (!!).

Imagine if one of those rich assholes like Elon Musk funded that new interconnector with their pocket change, bringing massive amounts of renewable energy to Scotland and maybe other parts of the UK?
 
PatrThom

PatrThom

ThatNickGuy said:
Imagine if one of those rich assholes like Elon Musk funded that new interconnector with their pocket change, bringing massive amounts of renewable energy to Scotland and maybe other parts of the UK?
Click to expand...
PatrThom said:
we have the capability, RIGHT NOW, to build enough solar [EDIT: and wind] capacity to supply THE ENTIRE WORLD with electricity that costs PRACTICALLY NOTHING, but the reason we won't do that is because SOME PEOPLE WON'T MAKE ENOUGH PROFIT.
Click to expand...
I mean, what is there to spur the rich assholes to do it, exactly? Altruism? Pfaugh!

--Patrick
 
ThatNickGuy

ThatNickGuy

PatrThom said:
I mean, what is there to spur the rich assholes to do it, exactly? Altruism? Pfaugh!

--Patrick
Click to expand...
See, what I don't understand, aside from the building cost issue, of course, is why we don't see more solar panels on buildings. Instead of building these giant solar farms, why not have as many houses and buildings with solar panels on them? Individually, they MIGHT be able to power a low-energy household, but combined? Along with energy efficient renovations and other sources? You could probably power a whole city and still have power to spare. Heck, combine it with the smaller wind turbines you could put on many houses and you have back up energy on top of that for less sunny days.

I don't know. In a perfect world, I imagine nearly every roof with solar panels and wind turbines. And converting as many roofs - commercial and residential - into green roofs.

EDIT: I fully admit my way of thinking is completely naïve and probably unrealistic. Especially convincing major oil corporations to reasonably accept "Yeah, no, we're not going to burn oil anymore for our energy." Of course, I also firmly believe we need to greatly reduce the need for individual cars and move towards more infrastructure for public transport and cycling. Which again, I admit is naïve.
 
Last edited:
PatrThom

PatrThom

Putting panels/turbines on buildings would require the permission of each individual homeowner, but more importantly it would require each homeowner to manage the maintenance of "their" equipment. Not only that, but the best place(s) to put houses won't always be the best place(s) to put solar/turbines. Solar/wind farms are just like other farms in that they gain efficiency by dedicating large areas of land to a single purpose. Canada in general has issues due to its high latitude resulting in less overall sunlight exposure (or at least less-dependable exposure), but I don't know to what degree wind would make up for that. They do tend to be complementary.

As for funding, I completely see committing large sums of money to projects like this being the sort of thing a rich asshole would do, BUT only once they are laying on their deathbed, and only as a way to screw over all the other still-living rich assholes under the guise of "getting into Heaven."

--Patrick
 
evilmike

evilmike

ThatNickGuy said:
Imagine if one of those rich assholes like Elon Musk funded that new interconnector with their pocket change, bringing massive amounts of renewable energy to Scotland and maybe other parts of the UK?
Click to expand...
Elon would only be interested if he could build a tunnel to the mainland and move the electricity in charged batteries carried by Teslas.
 
PatrThom

PatrThom

Massachusetts? California? Hah! They are but mere amateurs who only wish to ban sales of new internal-combustion engines. New York state, however, plans to ban new vehicles that run on any type of fossil fuel. And it's not just cars, the law also requires all new off-road vehicles and equipment must be zero-emission, and medium- and heavy-duty vehicles must* be ZEVs within ten years after.

That's only 14 years, folks. Might want to start putting $20/wk into your mattress NOW so you'll be ready to buy your new ZEV** in 2035.

--Patrick
*"where feasible"
**or you'll at least have a ~$14000 down payment.
 
Bubble181

Bubble181

figmentPez said:
With stroke of his pen, Gov. Mike DeWine defines natural gas as green energy

"COLUMBUS, Ohio -- Gov. Mike DeWine signed legislation that broadly expands the ability to drill for oil and gas in state parks and also legally redefines natural gas as a source of 'green energy.' ”
Click to expand...

It's the Democrats' fault we all have to go outside with gasmasks and rebreathers, because of their desire to *rolls dice* allow transpeople to get married!
Don't take muh guns!
Ooh-Rah U-S-A-U-S-A!

I don't mind people being more or less cnservative. I understand some people being uncomfortable with the world changing faster (and them having to accept changes faster) than what they can cope with. What I really do get worked up about is people so blatantly and obviously consistently voting against their own best interests;, though. And I don't mean in a "but allowing everyone full expression will set you free too!" BS way - in a "this party is literally saying they're going to detroy the woods you're hiking in and they're telling you to your face they want to tax other people less and you more".
 
ThatNickGuy

ThatNickGuy

The sad thing is, of the fossil fuels, natural gas is the greenest. It's still not "green" energy by any definition, but it has the lowest carbon emissions compared to coal or oil.

Of course, this just sounds like he's making excuses to "drill, baby, drill."
 
PatrThom

PatrThom

PatrThom said:
Massachusetts? California? Hah! They are but mere amateurs who only wish to ban sales of new internal-combustion engines. New York state, however, plans to ban new vehicles that run on any type of fossil fuel.
Click to expand...
Wyoming has seen the writing on the wall, has heard the distant cries, and...
www.teslarati.com

Wyoming wants to phase out sales of EVs by 2035 to "ensure the stability" of the oil & gas industry

Wyoming is considering phasing out the sales of electric vehicles by 2035 to "ensure the stability" of its oil and gas industry.
www.teslarati.com www.teslarati.com
...oil and gas production has been one of the state’s proud and valued industries, creating “countless jobs” and contributing “revenues to the state of Wyoming throughout the state’s history.” [...] The bill praises gas-powered vehicles for allowing the state’s industries and businesses to flourish and criticize the use of batteries in electric vehicles due to the critical minerals contained in them.
Click to expand...
...I'm sorry, what now?
EDIT: So Wyoming, where the population of the ENTIRE STATE is about 1/3 that of just Manhattan, is going to step in and single-handedly rescue the oil and gas industry. Riiiiight.

--Patrick
 
Last edited:
HCGLNS

HCGLNS

When are people gonna learn that electric cars are coming because the 1% want to crush us underfoot even more. Christ sakes America, NOTHING gets done in your country unless it makes rich people richer!
 
PatrThom

PatrThom

figmentPez said:
There are so many red flags about this proposal.
Click to expand...
Not the least of which is simple physics!
Look, you can only do one of two things.
-You can let the cars charge themselves by converting their forward momentum into stored energy, but we've already discussed this one, and all that would do is place drag on the cars, slowing them down, which would be counterproductive.
-OR you can put energy into the cars while they drive, which requires that the road has to somehow know how much energy to "broadcast" into the car, which means there has to be some kind of handshake between the road and the car that educates the road on how much energy the car needs/is capable of absorbing/etc.

This is not merely a simple matter of laying down a stretch of powered rail, Florida! We're talking about a system that could conceivably EMP a car (and its contents!) if done incorrectly.

--Patrick
 
Frank

Frank

Florida is about the last state I would trust with implementing that.

Fuckin' might have sensors to detect if the passengers are trans and execute them on contact.
 
PatrThom

PatrThom

I'm imagining the state government putting out an apology after accidentally boosting the power and turning it into an impromptu railgun.

--Patrick
 
HCGLNS

HCGLNS

C'mon guys lets not be too hasty. It will more than likely just sterilize anyone driving over it, and fewer Floridians is something we can all agree upon, yes?
 
ThatNickGuy

ThatNickGuy

"We're phasing out coal!"
"Yay!"
"And replacing it with heavy fuel oil!"
"Boo!"

halifax.citynews.ca

NS Power plans to produce electricity with fuel oil until 2050 instead of with coal

HALIFAX — Nova Scotia’s power utility plans to convert a coal-burning electricity station in Cape Breton to burn heavy fuel oil once federal regulations phase out coal entirely in 2030. The proposal has raised the eyebrows of one utility review board member and was characterized as “disturbing”...
halifax.citynews.ca halifax.citynews.ca
 
MindDetective

MindDetective

ThatNickGuy said:
"We're phasing out coal!"
"Yay!"
"And replacing it with heavy fuel oil!"
"Boo!"

halifax.citynews.ca

NS Power plans to produce electricity with fuel oil until 2050 instead of with coal

HALIFAX — Nova Scotia’s power utility plans to convert a coal-burning electricity station in Cape Breton to burn heavy fuel oil once federal regulations phase out coal entirely in 2030. The proposal has raised the eyebrows of one utility review board member and was characterized as “disturbing”...
halifax.citynews.ca halifax.citynews.ca
Click to expand...

But the heavy fuel oil comes with a free frogurt!
 
ThatNickGuy

ThatNickGuy

That's pretty great. Although there have been an increasing number of alternatives to lithium for batteries. They're all still being researched and prototyped, mind you. So they're still a ways away from being viable on the market.
 
PatrThom

PatrThom

bhamv3 said:
I feel like "mining out a volcano" sounds like the start of a sci-fi disaster movie.
Click to expand...
I feel like "mining out an American Indian reservation" could be the start of a different kind of movie. But I can't seem to get a straight answer out of the Internet as to whether it is on protected land.

--Patrick
 
GasBandit

GasBandit

Staff member
PatrThom said:
I feel like "mining out an American Indian reservation" could be the start of a different kind of movie. But I can't seem to get a straight answer out of the Internet as to whether it is on protected land.

--Patrick
Click to expand...
Naturally they're being very cagey about the exact location, but they do say it's in the McDermitt Caldera, and there IS a reservation there (Fort McDermitt). I'd be willing to bet there's going to be some drama.
 
figmentPez

figmentPez

Staff member
Read this Twitter thread from Hank Green:


For those who can't/won't use Twitter, I'll try to remember to copy or summarize it here later.
 
PatrThom

PatrThom

At first glance, I thought it was comparing presidential effect on CO2 emissions against that of a department store chain.
Tress said:
Thank you. I refuse to get an account, and Musk has made it so only people with accounts can read replies to tweets.
Click to expand...
I have an account, and I still refuse to allow Musk the pleasure of my eyeballs.

--Patrick
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top