Australian Politics Forum - The COP26 Failure And More Blah, Blah, Blah

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register

Forum rules, Recent posts (with text), RSS, Search options, Browse all uploaded images
Home, Articles, Green Tax Shift, Evolution,

Australian Politics Forum › Member Run Boards › Environment › The COP26 Failure And More Blah, Blah, Blah

(Moderators: Bobby., Sir_Bobby)

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 12

The COP26 Failure And More Blah, Blah, Blah (Read 11531 times)

lee Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 21502 Gender:	Re: The COP26 Failure And More Blah, Blah, Blah Reply #30 - Nov 14^th, 2021 at 12:51pm Bobby. wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 7:39am: The next goal will be to take this technology to industrial scale and achieve competitiveness Call me when they get it that large and for minimal cost.
Back to top	IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics<br
/>

Posts: 15644
Gender: male

Re: The COP26 Failure And More Blah, Blah, Blah
Reply #31 - Nov 14^th, 2021 at 1:36pm

lee wrote on Nov 13^th, 2021 at 6:30pm:

So no peer-reviewed paper for you because you just know things

?? we were discussing poisonous pollution from burning fossil fuels of all types, which is the reality in highly populated areas (apart from CO2 'pollution'). London has banned older diesel cars (with pre EU6 standards) in the CBD for that very reason.

Quote:

Yep no spending needed.

Step down to a lower class, again.... You will find yourself in the class for sub-70's IQ group if you keep spouting statements like that one. It's resource mobilization, not spending, which is the limiting factor for a sovereign currency issuing government.

So sovereign currency issuing governments don't need to tax in order to spend. OK not what you were taught at school, based on obsolete classical economics and more confused by a since abandoned 'gold standard'.

Quote:

[But power generation does. So we need a peer-reviewed paper that says it is workable not someone who says unfunded economics will work

You are in effect saying we don't have the resources or know how to build sufficient solar/wind + p.hydro + smart grid to transition to a green economy.

Quote:

So not a global economy then. Do make up your mind.

In the sense that the world can run on free electricity, so an economy which is based on free electricity in every nation.....

Quote:

So no global energy mandate then.

That's what Glasgow is all about, seeking a global agreement/mandate. Excruciating, I agree. In a decade it should be clearer to what extent we have to abandon the private sector free market (depending on severity of fires, floods, sea rises and wind damage).

Quote:

Ah onsite compressed air machines. Machines that need grease and oil. machines that need servicing. Machines that break down especially in dusty environments.

Yep, unemployment will be eliminated.

Quote:

High paying jobs? to dust solar panels? And the electricity will be free despite the on costs. So how does the worker get paid?

By government decree funding green economy workers, not determined by free market forces.

Quote:

They are both "developing" countries. The Green fund is for "developing" countries.

Never mind, I am trying to explain to the Chinese they can transition to green faster than any country in the world, because they already have the largest engineering capacity in the world.

Quote:

"China, India and Other Developing Nations Seek $1.3 Trillion a Year in Climate Finance"

Last I heard (at Glasgow) India said they wanted $1 trillion, not much left for other 'developing' countries.

Quote:

"African nations and a group called the Like-Minded Developing Countries, which includes China, India and Indonesia, said in a document they submitted to the United Nations at the summit that half the money should go toward funding renewable energy in the developing world and half toward protecting these countries from the effects of global warming."

Certainly China doesn't need a paranoid US - seeking to maintain global hegemony in the face of a rising China - slapping tariffs on Chinese PVs. China is already the world's largest investor in PV's and wing turbines.

Quote:

That won't happen with Weather Dependent Renewables.

Yes it will, the ANU has already identified sufficient renwables storage sites around the world.

Quote:

Ah yea free electricity again. No one pays for it.

Correct

Quote:

Everyone can use as much as they like.

Incorrect: up to a regulated limit, after which fees will apply.

Quote:

But somehow there is going to be a limit; because you have already said it won't be that large.

Addressed above.

Quote:

And of course if you have a cyclone - no sun, too much wind - absolutely no power and that 450GWh storage will supply Australia for how long? Don't forget we need the industry and the homes.

A smart grid includes intercontinental connection to deal with temporary lack of renewables in any given locality.

Quote:

So it seems we used 4.57Twh/day in 2019-20 and that was somewhat low because of Covid. I will let you work out how big a 450Gwh storage would last.

No need, I point to the ANU-examined global storage capacity. Meanwhile Oz itself has the potential to produce the world's largest supply of green hydrogen and hence ammonia, another source of backup. (That's why 'Twiggy' is so enthusiastic about the transition opportunities.

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21502
Gender: male

Re: The COP26 Failure And More Blah, Blah, Blah
Reply #32 - Nov 14^th, 2021 at 2:22pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 1:36pm:

we were discussing poisonous pollution from burning fossil fuels of all types, which is the reality in highly populated areas (apart from CO2 'pollution').

So which pollution then? PM2.5? Did you know trees emit PM2.5 particles? They are called terpenes. Oh noes. And of course CO2 is not pollution. Wink

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 1:36pm:

It's resource mobilization, not spending, which is the limiting factor for a sovereign currency issuing government.

Yes the spending you have when you don't have spending. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 1:36pm:

So sovereign currency issuing governments don't need to tax in order to spend. OK not what you were taught at school, based on obsolete classical economics and more confused by a since abandoned 'gold standard'.

And still not accepted fact. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 1:36pm:

You are in effect saying we don't have the resources or know how to build sufficient solar/wind + p.hydro + smart grid to transition to a green economy.

No petal I am saying Weather Dependent Renewables don't cut it.

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 1:36pm:

In the sense that the world can run on free electricity, so an economy which is based on free electricity in every nation.....

Ah yes I have heard of that it, is called UNOBTAINIUM. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 1:36pm:

That's what Glasgow is all about, seeking a global agreement/mandate.

And that failed. 26 years of failure. Wink

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 1:36pm:

In a decade it should be clearer to what extent we have to abandon the private sector free market (depending on severity of fires, floods, sea rises and wind damage).

What severity? Have any of them increased? I mean sea level has been rising since the last Ice Age.

Wind damage? We are getting stronger winds? According to studies increasing wind farms cause lessening of the wind. We are save; saved I tell you.

But perhaps you can post this stuff of which you speak? You haven't provided anything else. Wink

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 1:36pm:

Yep, unemployment will be eliminated.

Ah these are the high paying jobs of which you speak. Who will be employing them as the electricity will be free? Therefore there will be no middleman, no employment unless it is government. And they won't need to pay them as they won't collect taxes. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 1:36pm:

By government decree funding green economy workers, not determined by free market forces.

With all the money that they aren't collecting. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 1:36pm:

Never mind, I am trying to explain to the Chinese they can transition to green faster than any country in the world, because they already have the largest engineering capacity in the world.

And they are increasing coal mining and coal plant at a greater rate than anywhere else in the world. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 1:36pm:

Last I heard (at Glasgow) India said they wanted $1 trillion, not much left for other 'developing' countries.

India called for the one trillion at the LMDC event. A joint communique was issued. You don't research much do you?

"The Union Minister for Environment, Forest and Climate Change Bhupender Yadav called upon the Like-Minded Developing Countries (LMDC) to work closely to protect the interests of developing countries on Tuesday, and urged that climate finance cannot continue at the levels decided in 2009 and should be increased to at least 1 trillion dollars to meet the goals of addressing climate change.."

https://www.indiatvnews.com/news/india/india-calls-hike-climate-finance-one-tril...

"Underscores that the post 2025 mobilization goal must reflect the ambition, progression and the collective agreement to stay well below 2c and aspire to stay within the 1.5c temperature goal, and therefore agrees that the deliberations on the a quantum mobilization target should start from range of a commitment by developed countries to mobilize jointly at least USD 1.3 trillion per year by 2030, of which 50% for mitigation and 50% for adaptation and a significant percentage on grant basis from a floor of USD 100 billion, taking into account the needs and priorities of developing countries outlined in the Updated NDCs;"

https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/3_11_21_%20Joint_CPR_New%20Goal....

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 1:36pm:

China is already the world's largest investor in PV's and wing turbines.

Using fossil fuelled sources. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 1:36pm:

Incorrect: up to a regulated limit, after which fees will apply.

So we have unlimited power but it is limited. Grin

« Last Edit: Nov 14^th, 2021 at 2:30pm by lee »

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21502
Gender: male

Re: The COP26 Failure And More Blah, Blah, Blah
Reply #33 - Nov 14^th, 2021 at 2:34pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 1:36pm:

A smart grid includes intercontinental connection to deal with temporary lack of renewables in any given locality.

So these intercontinental connections - will they be lossless? Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 1:36pm:

No need, I point to the ANU-examined global storage capacity. Meanwhile Oz itself has the potential to produce the world's largest supply of green hydrogen and hence ammonia, another source of backup.

Ah yes. The Green Hydrogen myth. It hasn't even started. The power required is huge. And it is a process full of losses, so you get less energy out than you put in. Wink

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 1:36pm:

(That's why 'Twiggy' is so enthusiastic about the transition opportunities.

He is free to spend his money where he wants. Wink

And all this is based on IF we have a climate emergency. So much money for so little.
All you have is some kind of feeling we might have a climate emergency? Grin

And you still haven't responded about Africa. We know renewables haven't been installed on any large scale. So do you want a mendicant Africa? A new Age Slavery.

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 60422
Gender: male

Re: The COP26 Failure And More Blah, Blah, Blah
Reply #34 - Nov 14^th, 2021 at 3:07pm

Lee is right on all points.

Start with climate emergency and corresponding climate action - it is a statistical swindle answered by accounting sleights of hand.

The point on Africa (and China, India) are studiously avoided by the 'clima taction now' kids. Africa's population will DOUBLE to 2.5 billion by the net zero year of 2050. India, 1.6 billion. China, 1.4 billion. Australia, 35 million. Roughly like Canada or Morocco today.

Even if Australia, or the entire West, went zero today, Africa, India, China and the rest of the world would wipe out any gain in the CO2 stats, not least because most of the energy intensive products are made in China and other cheap third world countries.

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics<br
/>

Posts: 15644
Gender: male

Re: The COP26 Failure And More Blah, Blah, Blah
Reply #35 - Nov 14^th, 2021 at 5:41pm

lee wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 2:34pm:

So these intercontinental connections - will they be lossless?

No, but transmission technology is improving all the time.

Quote:

Ah yes. The Green Hydrogen myth. It hasn't even started. The power required is huge. And it is a process full of losses, so you get less energy out than you put in

Er...most mechanical/chemical processes create less output energy than the required input energy. (energy efficiency <100%)

Quote:

. He is free to spend his money where he wants.

japan and S. Korea , for example, are interested because they don't have vast sunny deserts like Oz and because they want to exit fossils.

Quote:

And all this is based on IF we have a climate emergency. So much money for so little.
All you have is some kind of feeling we might have a climate emergency?

No I already told you I want free electricity, AND clean air in big cities . (I won't be running the explanation past you again). The climate change thingy is just a bonus...and an incredibly BIG BONUS ...if AGW climate science is correct.

You happy to take the gamble? Fewer and fewer people are.......whatever happened at Murdoch's press (re the 180 degree turn on the AGW climate change "myth"?

Quote:

And you still haven't responded about Africa. We know renewables haven't been installed on any large scale. So do you want a mendicant Africa? A new Age Slavery.

We must install renewables on a large scale for many reasons eg, climate, clean air which is fit to breathe - impossible in high-density cities with diesel vehicles everywhere. Technical advances may be needed for the last 20% or so of de-carbonization; we will have a clearer picture by 2030.

Heard from Glasgow today: " the great powers EU, US and China agreed to a last minute change of words in the final text from "phase out" (of coal) to "phase down", in order to get India to sign. (China GDP and GDP per capita is over 5 times that of India, with similar populations; 40 years ago India's economy was bigger than China, I'll leave you to ponder why the change in wealth occurred).

Btw, OAC is a layperson who has understood MMT, but there are many professors of economics who are now on board with its revelations.

« Last Edit: Nov 14^th, 2021 at 6:03pm by thegreatdivide »

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21502
Gender: male

Re: The COP26 Failure And More Blah, Blah, Blah
Reply #36 - Nov 14^th, 2021 at 7:05pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 5:41pm:

No, but transmission technology is improving all the time.

All cables have losses. So tell us how they are improving.

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 5:41pm:

Er...most mechanical/chemical processes create less output energy than the required input energy.

That's true. So they will be using Solar? Wind? for their energy supply? Of course the supply has to be stable. Wink

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 5:41pm:

japan and S. Korea , for example, are interested because they don't have vast sunny deserts like Oz and because they want to exit fossils.

So how will they get their energy? No spare land for solar or wind. And too far for your intercontinental energy from Australia.

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 5:41pm:

No I already told you I want free electricity, AND clean air in big cities .

I want free gummy bears for life. But wishing it won't make it so.

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 5:41pm:

The climate change thingy is just a bonus...and an incredibly BIG BONUS ...if AGW climate science is correct.

ONLY IF it is correct. Otherwise it is a big drain. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 5:41pm:

You happy to take the gamble?

Oh yes. You haven't enunciated just what you are scared of. Why is that?

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 5:41pm:

whatever happened at Murdoch's press (re the 180 degree turn on the AGW climate change "myth"?

Who knows? They know as much about climate as you I suspect. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 5:41pm:

We must install renewables on a large scale for many reasons eg, climate, clean air which is fit to breathe - impossible in high-density cities with diesel vehicles everywhere.

So there you go again about climate and according to you IF it is CORRECT it is a big bonus. Roll Eyes

And again you dodge the question on Africa. The technology hasn't been proved on large scale, even small scale has its problems. But you want Africa to go all in for the sake of the planet? Grin

So tell us about the dirty air deaths in Delhi for example. Wink

What is the life expectancy?

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 5:41pm:

I'll leave you to ponder why the change in wealth occurred).

They built far more coal plant. Roll Eyes

India has 281 coal plants for 229.2 GW. China has 1,082 for 1,042.9GW.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/530569/installed-capacity-of-coal-power-plan...

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 5:41pm:

Btw, OAC is a layperson who has understood MMT, but there are many professors of economics who are now on board with its revelations.

And yet you can't cite these converts. AOC couldn't understand her own gibberish. Grin

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 60422
Gender: male

Re: The COP26 Failure And More Blah, Blah, Blah
Reply #37 - Nov 14^th, 2021 at 10:16pm

It is worth considering how borderline psychotic the demand for Net Zero is in a world in which 84 per cent of our energy comes from fossil fuels. The ‘deep and urgent’ reduction in fossil-fuel use that greens dream of would, if it ever came to fruition, be a calamity for humankind. It would do far more to bring about the parched, impoverished conditions of their apocalyptic fantasies than carbon emissions ever could. As Alex Epstein, author of the brilliant book The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels, puts it: ‘Environmentalists’ climate proposals would result in exactly the kind of apocalyptic scenario they claim climate change is causing.’ Climate change is a problem, but a ‘middling one’, as Bjorn Lomborg describes it. It threatens nothing as horrendous as a sudden reduction in fossil-fuel use would.
https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/11/12/keep-burning-those-fossil-fuels/

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics<br
/>

Posts: 15644
Gender: male

Re: The COP26 Failure And More Blah, Blah, Blah
Reply #38 - Nov 15^th, 2021 at 12:05pm

lee wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 7:05pm:

All cables have losses. So tell us how they are improving.

https://www.azom.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=18258

"Another option could be the use of high-voltage direct current (DC) transmission lines, which can provide higher efficiencies over alternating current (AC) lines. This is a high-cost approach that is most viable for long-distance transmission."
(remember, cost is irrelevant for a currency-issuer, on the journey to free electricity (MMT).

Quote:

That's true. So they will be using Solar? Wind? for their energy supply? Of course the supply has to be stable.

Irrelevant. A large PV farm in the Pilbara could power all of Australia. We should be leading the world, we have vast areas of useless hot deserts, and a vast coastline in the "roaring forties", for offshore wind turbines.

Quote:

So how will S.Korea and Japan) get their energy? No spare land for solar or wind. And too far for your intercontinental energy from Australia.

From burning Oz-made green ammonia or hydrogen in power plants.

Quote:

I want free gummy bears for life. But wishing it won't make it so.

I want free electricity as the basis for eradicating poverty in the 3rd world. (I already told you that. ...but I realize I am fighting your RW free-market ideology all the way in this debate). No doubt free global electricity sounds like "communism" to you. And no "wishing" required, just a determination to create a better world.

Quote:

ONLY IF it is correct. Otherwise it is a big drain.

On the contrary, it just changes opportunities to use some resources in different ways. But clean healthy air itself - impossible in a fossil based economy - is also priceless.

Quote:

Oh yes. You haven't enunciated just what you are scared of. Why is that?

The whole world is "getting scared" eg, smoke seeping into bedrooms in ALL of Sydney, for weeks on end, in summer 2019....

Quote:

Who knows? (Murdoch press) know as much about climate as you I suspect

They were your 'shining beacon on the hill' ...until the sudden about-turn 2 months ago. Perhaps they are good at judging public opinion...and they have to sell newspapers.

So we are left with YOUR opinion, which is as worthless as mine, when it comes to the facts of AGW climate science.

Quote:

So there you go again about climate and according to you IF it is CORRECT it is a big bonus

Addressed above. You can't attack me on the climate issue, because I'm agnostic...though climate catastrophes do seem to be increasing around the world, which even Murdoch seems to have noticed. Clean healthy air in Asia and everywhere else, and free access to a basic necessity (electricity powered by sun and wind) is the important thing.

[/quote]And again you dodge the question on Africa. The technology hasn't been proved on large scale, even small scale has its problems. But you want Africa to go all in for the sake of the planet?[ /quote]

Lets' see: 20,000 sq miles of PV required to power the US. Say 100,000 sq.miles for Africa.. the Sahara is 3.6 million sq. miles. I rest my case.

Quote:

So tell us about the dirty air deaths in Delhi for example. Wink

What is the life expectancy?

You are arguing my case now. Thanks. Fossil burning vehicles as well as wood fires are major sources of deadly smog pollution in Delhi.

"Delhi, often ranked the world's most polluted capital, faces extremely bad air in winter due to the crop stubble burning, emissions from transport, coal-fired plants outside the city and other industrial emissions, open garbage burning and dust."

Quote:

They built far more coal plants [quote],

yes ...and created a pollution hazard as bad as Delhi's, which is why they are now the world's largest investors in renewable electricity, made possible because they are 5 times richer than poor retarded India. But you display the limit to your ability to explain the wealth difference ...

[quote]India has 281 coal plants for 229.2 GW. China has 1,082 for 1,042.9GW.

Thanks for the figures. Obviously lots of Indians are still burning cow dung for fuel; 700 million Indians still officially living in absolute poverty. China officially exited that category for all its population this year; all Chinese homes are now powered by electricity, which the CCP plans to decarbonize ASAP.

Quote:

And yet you can't cite these converts. AOC couldn't understand her own gibberish

You want me to cite a million names? But here is a colourful refutation of your orthodox flat-earth economics, from prof. James Galbraith.

https://www.jordantimes.com/opinion/james-k-galbraith/whos-afraid-mmt

As anyone who has ever been responsible for legislative oversight of central bankers knows, they do not like to have their authority challenged. Most of all, they will defend their mystique, that magical aura that hovers over their words, shrouding a slushy mix of banality and baloney in a mist of power and jargon.

Priceless.

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21502
Gender: male

Re: The COP26 Failure And More Blah, Blah, Blah
Reply #39 - Nov 15^th, 2021 at 1:18pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 12:05pm:

"Another option could be the use of high-voltage direct current (DC) transmission lines, which can provide higher efficiencies over alternating current (AC) lines. This is a high-cost approach that is most viable for long-distance transmission."

And they still have losses. Just not reactive losses. No new ideas there. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 12:05pm:

A large PV farm in the Pilbara could power all of Australia.

Could? You really have no clue.

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 12:05pm:

We should be leading the world, we have vast areas of useless hot deserts, and a vast coastline in the "roaring forties", for offshore wind turbines.

And we still come back to solar power maintenance and sea borne wind turbine maintenance. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 12:05pm:

From burning Oz-made green ammonia or hydrogen in power plants.

Now all you have to do is build the special containers to do it in bulk. And hope nothing goes wrong. Hydrogen green, blue or grey is explosive at many temperature and leakage points. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 12:05pm:

No doubt free global electricity sounds like "communism" to you.

Nope it is unobtainable. That's why it's called unobtainium. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 12:05pm:

On the contrary, it just changes opportunities to use some resources in different ways.

And all for freeeeee. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 12:05pm:

The whole world is "getting scared" eg, smoke seeping into bedrooms in ALL of Sydney, for weeks on end, in summer 2019....

So the whole world is scared for Sydney? Grin

You do understand Australia has always had bushfires? They need fuel to burn. Failure to clean up forested areas creates more fuel. But numpties like to believe if we lock them up it can't happen. Humans cause most fires. Climate change doesn't cause fires. A match burns at 600-800ºC.

Edit:

data from wiki Bushfires in Australia. 2019-20 season figure is now 18,626.000 Ha

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 12:05pm:

They were your 'shining beacon on the hill' ...until the sudden about-turn 2 months ago.

Wrong again. They were never my 'shining beacon on the hill'. You are just trolling and making sch!t up.

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 12:05pm:

So we are left with YOUR opinion, which is as worthless as mine, when it comes to the facts of AGW climate science.

But I actually look at the science. You obviously don't because you haven't quoted anyone in the past. Wink

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 12:05pm:

ddressed above. You can't attack me on the climate issue, because I'm agnostic...though climate catastrophes do seem to be increasing around the world, which even Murdoch seems to have noticed

Then you should have no trouble providing a reference. Wink

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 12:05pm:

Lets' see: 20,000 sq miles of PV required to power the US. Say 100,000 sq.miles for Africa.. the Sahara is 3.6 million sq. miles. I rest my case.

You can't even provide a link apart from ANU which doesn't address any concerns. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 12:05pm:

Obviously lots of Indians are still burning cow dung for fuel; 700 million Indians still officially living in absolute poverty.

Yes it does. And cheap STABLE electricity supply will help overcome that.thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 12:05pm:

China officially exited that category for all its population this year; all Chinese homes are now powered by electricity, which the CCP plans to decarbonize ASAP.

Actually no. It hopes to reach carbon neutrality by 2060. There is no guarantee.

"China is targeting an ambitious clean energy goal of reducing fossil fuel use to under 20 percent by 2060, according to an official plan published by state media on Sunday."

https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/world/china-aims-to-cut-fossil-energy-use-to-belo...

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 12:05pm:

You want me to cite a million names?

You were the one who cited lauded AOC as understanding MMT. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 12:05pm:

As anyone who has ever been responsible for legislative oversight of central bankers knows, they do not like to have their authority challenged. Most of all, they will defend their mystique, that magical aura that hovers over their words, shrouding a slushy mix of banality and baloney in a mist of power and jargon.

You do realise it applies equally to MMT? Grin

« Last Edit: Nov 15^th, 2021 at 2:47pm by lee »

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics<br
/>

Posts: 15644
Gender: male

Re: The COP26 Failure And More Blah, Blah, Blah
Reply #40 - Nov 15^th, 2021 at 3:17pm

lee wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 1:18pm:

And they still have losses. Just not reactive losses. No new ideas there

So? (ie irrelevant)

Quote:

And we still come back to solar power maintenance and sea borne wind turbine maintenance

yes, good well paying work, ensuring free electricity for all.

Quote:

Now all you have to do is build the special containers to do it in bulk.

Transporting green ammonia (from which green hydrogen is extracted when needed) is as simple as transporting LNG.

Quote:

Nope it is unobtainable.

As unobtainable as authorizing the central bank to spend debt-free money to fund a smart grid in Oz?

Quote:

And all for freeeeee.

Already addressed: see "opportunity costs".

Quote:

So the whole world is scared for Sydney?

Gosh, concrete thinking is difficult to deal with; California wild fires on a vast scale, record floods in Germany and China...

Quote:

You do understand Australia has always had bushfires?

but not in moist rain forests as occurred in 2019.

Quote:

Wrong again. They were never my 'shining beacon on the hill'. You are just trolling and making sch!t up.

Sky News? Alan Jones? - identical views to yours on climate change...

Quote:

But I actually look at the science. You obviously don't because you haven't quoted anyone in the past

Yet your view is disputed by real climate scientists, while I'm agnostic.

Quote:

Then you should have no trouble providing a reference.

Addressed above. You have a majority of climate scientists lining up against you.

Quote:

You can't even provide a link apart from ANU which doesn't address any concerns.

https://www.freeingenergy.com/how-much-solar-would-it-take-to-power-the-u-s/

"Starting with some conservative assumptions from a 2013 National Renewable Energy Labs (NREL) report, we know that it takes, on average, 3.4 acres of solar panels to generate a gigawatt hour of electricity over a year. Given the U.S. consumes about 4 petawatt hours of electricity per year, we’d need about 13,600,000 acres or 21,250 square miles of solar panels to meet the total electricity requirements of the United States for a year.

So... say 100,000 sq miles required in Africa , a fraction of the Sahara (c.3% of total area)

And if we add total potential rooftop solar, your "unobtainable" case is immediately blown away, when that MASSIVE generating capacity is also connected to the grid.

Quote:

Actually no. It hopes to reach carbon neutrality by 2060. There is no guarantee.

And peak emissions by 2035. Unlike OZ, the Chinese actually formulate 5-year plans, and implement them.

Quote:

"China is targeting an ambitious clean energy goal of reducing fossil fuel use to under 20 percent by 2060, according to an official plan published by state media on Sunday."

If that means net zero by 2060, then the statement is correct. However China could also build renewables infrastructure much faster than it plans to, but China has been misled by Western-trained economists who think you need carbon taxes in a market economy to fund the transition, just as the phony 'housing as get-rich-quick' market investment schemes caused the Evergrande catastrophe (but it appears the CCP now has that financial disaster in hand).

Quote:

You were the one who cited AOC

after you replied to someone else who mentioned AOC, who apparently offends you mightily.

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 12:05pm:

Quote:

You do realise it applies equally to MMT?

Not according to professor Galbraith, and thousands like him. eg, professors Harvey, Mitchell, Wray, Tcherneva, Kelton to name a few off the top of my head.

« Last Edit: Nov 15^th, 2021 at 3:22pm by thegreatdivide »

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21502
Gender: male

Re: The COP26 Failure And More Blah, Blah, Blah
Reply #41 - Nov 15^th, 2021 at 3:59pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 3:17pm:

lee wrote Today at 11:18am:
And they still have losses. Just not reactive losses. No new ideas there
So? (ie irrelevant)

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 14^th, 2021 at 5:41pm:

No, but transmission technology is improving all the time.

So no increase in transmission technology then. Wink

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 3:17pm:

good well paying work, ensuring free electricity for all.

You still haven't said who will pay the workers on this free electricity. You have said no taxes.

or perhaps thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 3:17pm:

Transporting green ammonia (from which green hydrogen is extracted when needed) is as simple as transporting LNG.

No it is not. It is much more dangerous.

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 3:17pm:

As unobtainable as authorizing the central bank to spend debt-free money to fund a smart grid in Oz?

or perhaps So we have no money, we pay workers, and it is all freee. ; Grin

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21502
Gender: male

Re: The COP26 Failure And More Blah, Blah, Blah
Reply #42 - Nov 15^th, 2021 at 4:24pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 3:17pm:

Gosh, concrete thinking is difficult to deal with; California wild fires on a vast scale, record floods in Germany and China..

Guess what? California has a history of fires and suffers from the same illogical thinking of locking up the forests and not clearing the fuel load.

Record floods in Germany? Going back how far? The German floods of 1790 or perhaps 1910?

China and the 3 Gorges Dam? Dams will always create floodwaters if not sited correctly.

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 3:17pm:

but not in moist rain forests as occurred in 2019.

Oh you mean like the Blue Mountain fires in 1895 or perhaps those in 1937? Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 3:17pm:

Sky News? Alan Jones? - identical views to yours on climate change...

He must be more cluey than I thought. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 3:17pm:

et your view is disputed by real climate scientists, while I'm agnostic.

And yet you can't cite these scientists or the relevant paper/s. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 3:17pm:

Addressed above. You have a majority of climate scientists lining up against you.

Replied above.

"There is no such thing as consensus science. If it's consensus, it isn't science. If it's science, it isn't consensus. Period.". Consensus is politics.

"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts "

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 3:17pm:

"Starting with some conservative assumptions from a 2013 National Renewable Energy Labs (NREL) report, we know that it takes, on average, 3.4 acres of solar panels to generate a gigawatt hour of electricity over a year. Given the U.S. consumes about 4 petawatt hours of electricity per year, we’d need about 13,600,000 acres or 21,250 square miles of solar panels to meet the total electricity requirements of the United States for a year.

And nothing there about intermittency? You just don't get it. People don't use average power. The demand is when they want it.

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 3:17pm:

And if we add total potential rooftop solar, your "unobtainable" case is immediately blown away, when that MASSIVE generating capacity is also connected to the grid.

And will the this kind and beneficent government change their solar panes for freee as well? Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 3:17pm:

And peak emissions by 2035. Unlike OZ, the Chinese actually formulate 5-year plans, and implement them.

You have heard of the phrase "there is many a slip between cup and lip". Is that like the five year plan that caused so much starvation? Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 3:17pm:

back to the old "coulds" Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 3:17pm:

after you replied to someone else who mentioned AOC, who apparently offends you mightily.

Nope. I cited AOC. I also edited. You were the one lauded her for being a layperson who understood MMT. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2021 at 3:17pm:

Not according to professor Galbraith, and thousands like him. eg, professors Harvey, Mitchell, Wray, Tcherneva, Kelton to name a few off the top of my head.

Wow. You have added two to the original 3 plus Galbraith. it is easy to see you don't follow Feynman's logic in the belief in the ignorance of experts. Grin

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 60422
Gender: male

Re: The COP26 Failure And More Blah, Blah, Blah
Reply #43 - Nov 15^th, 2021 at 4:57pm

Like a football tournament with an official beer, COP26 had an official energy provider: the Griffin wind farm in Perthshire, operated by SSE. Trouble is that for much of the conference it was not paid to generate electricity. Instead, it received £500,000 in ‘constraint payments’, which are given to owners of wind farms when they are generating too much electricity for the grid to absorb. The payments expose a huge hole in Britain’s renewables-heavy energy policy: we have little means of storing energy when the wind is blowing and the sun is shining so that we can use it on dull, windless days.

According to the Renewable Energy Foundation, 3.7 TWh of wind energy in 2020 — enough to power every home in Wales for the whole year — was wasted because the national grid could not accept it. Wind farm owners were paid a total of £274 million in ‘constraint payments’ to turn off their turbines — which was passed on to consumers’ bills.

The problem is exacerbated because over-generous constraint payments have given wind-farm operators a perverse incentive to build in places where there is little demand for electricity: they get paid more when they are not generating electricity than when they are.

If this is what happens when wind is generating 24 per cent of our electricity, as it did last year, imagine the outcome when we try to meet the PM’s ambition of having all our electricity generated by low-carbon sources by 2035 — when we will no longer have any gas-fired power stations as back-up.

It ought to be obvious that wind and solar power cannot form the backbone of the nation’s electricity supply without vast quantities of storage. Yet our national enthusiasm for wind and solar power has run ahead of solving the storage problem. In spite of a boom in battery installations over the past couple of years, most of Britain’s energy storage capacity is in the form of hydro-electric pumped systems built between the 1950s and 1980s in order to improve the efficiency of nuclear power stations (there is another planned for Loch Lochy in the Great Glen but it will take years to build). This is a disarmingly simple way of storing energy: when electricity is plentiful and cheap, during the night, you pump water uphill to a reservoir. When demand is greater during the day, you release it to run downhill, through turbines.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-the-uk-cant-rely-on-renewablesyet

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 60422
Gender: male

Re: The COP26 Failure And More Blah, Blah, Blah
Reply #44 - Nov 15^th, 2021 at 4:59pm

But Britain’s four pumped storage power stations were designed to iron out diurnal cycles in supply and demand, not to supply electricity for days on end when renewables are not delivering the goods. The battery boom has attracted investors after green assets — two investment trusts which specialise in batteries, Gresham House Energy Storage and Gore Street Energy Storage, are both trading at premiums of 15 per cent to their underlying assets — but it has hardly helped Britain to cope with the regular droughts in wind and solar power. According to National Grid ESO — the demerged bit of National Grid which looks after the actual grid — Britain currently has 25.4 GWh of energy storage. Given that we consumed 346,000 GWh of electricity in 2019, this amounts to just 38 minutes’ worth of supply. Imagine that the nation’s electricity was supplied entirely by wind and solar. If the Cup Final was held on a dull and windless day, we wouldn’t even get to half-time before the TV flickered and died.

Big batteries are not without risk, either. Australia has seen vast battery installations in recent years, one of which, the Victoria Big Battery, burst into flames in July, taking 30 fire engines four days to put it out. While big batteries were credited with helping south Australia get by for 29 days in October on wind and solar power alone, that was an especially windy and sunny month. The state’s massive 129 MWh Hornsdale battery will store just 24 minutes’ worth of energy when the adjoining wind farm is working at full pelt.

When you store energy, you have to pay twice: once to generate it and again to store it. In many cases, the latter costs more than the former. A study last December by the US Department of Energy put the lifetime cost of energy from a 100 MW pumped storage system at around $100 (£75) per MWh and that from a lithium ion battery installation at $300 (£225) per MWh. Prior to this autumn’s spike, the wholesale price of electricity was hovering around £60 per MWh.

We are told that wind and solar power are cheap because the price of turbines and panels has crashed. But you can’t have an electricity grid dominated by wind and solar without supplementing it with massive amounts of storage. The cheapest way of storing energy according to the US Department of Energy, by the way, is by using surplus power to fill an underground chamber with compressed air, then releasing it to drive turbines. There has been such a plant operating in the US since 1991 — although it is not an easy solution because it needs a very particular kind of geology.

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 12

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

« Forum

‹ Board

Top of this page