diy solar

diy solar

Can Solar & Wind Fix Everything (e.g., Climate Change) with a battery break-through?

I am all for Svetz, Murphy and Leo and the like eating bugs to their hearts content to fight climate change.
As long as we don't have to.

Yup. Women can't even be women anymore when you have women like Murphy, Leo and Svets around.
 


And look, they are ALL in on it. All you need to know

 
Do not forget the money people, BlackRock, StateStreet and Vanguard cartels
We may need to cordon off those cities after 2024. The US may be balkanized if the vote is tampered with again.

There is already a pretty interesting experiment going on in the US between Democrat run cities and conservative cities. People are voting with their feet as to which ideaology and environment they like better. Where are people fleeing from, and where are they going?
 
If you are anywhere in the city (blue OR red), you are vulnerable to the great reset.
I would not put my trust in the uniparty. They seem to make a lot of promises but they all quickly forget about them when their paycheck is being threatened by the real controllers.
 
We may need to cordon off those cities after 2024. The US may be balkanized if the vote is tampered with again.

There is already a pretty interesting experiment going on in the US between Democrat run cities and conservative cities. People are voting with their feet as to which ideaology and environment they like better. Where are people fleeing from, and where are they going?
You already know the answer to that question. With that said lock up more states for the electoral votes and it will be one party rule.
 
...I would be more concerned with global cooling more than global warming...
Electrification by itself isn't quite enough to halt global warming. Fortunately, we already have every bit of technology we need to halt global warming from anthropomorphic change; and new discoveries occur every day that help to reduce costs around eliminating the remaining ones.

But do we have the technology to combat climate cooling? Seems like if it happened we could revert to producing GHGs pretty easily and it seems well-proven to do the trick.

I have seen articles that say we have already entered a period when the Earth should be cooling based on 'natural' climate change (e.g., Milankovitch cycle), which makes sense given the distance between the peaks in the graph below. The temperature however is still going up.

But, I don't think we have to worry. At net-zero the temperature change is exceedingly slow. Based on the past and where we're at now it'll be >1000 years before it could be a problem. For example, from the graph below you can see that in the last cycle after the global peak temperature was reached there was a moderate period of ~20,000 years.


co2_left_072623.gif
 
Last edited:
Electrification by itself isn't quite enough to halt global warming. Fortunately, we already have every bit of technology we need to halt global warming from anthropomorphic change; and new discoveries occur every day that help to reduce costs around eliminating the remaining ones.

But do we have the technology to combat climate cooling? Seems like if it happened we could revert to producing GHGs pretty easily and it seems well-proven to do the trick.

I have seen articles that say we have already entered a period when the Earth should be cooling based on 'natural' climate change (e.g., Milankovitch cycle), which makes sense given the distance between the peaks in the graph below. The temperature however is still going up.

But, I don't think we have to worry. At net-zero the temperature change is exceedingly slow. Based on the past and where we're at now it'll be >1000 years before it could be a problem. For example, from the graph below you can see that in the last cycle after the global peak temperature was reached there was a moderate period of ~20,000 years.


co2_left_072623.gif
So you believe that in 73 years CO2 increased about 100 PPM and you believe it is all caused by humans and the earth has nothing to do with the increase? And that a 100 Parts Per Million is meaningful?
 
I am all for Svetz, Murphy and Leo and the like eating bugs to their hearts content to fight climate change.
As long as we don't have to.
I prefer my bugs to be scrambled or sunny side up.
 
Reminds me of the old Charleton Heston movie Soylent Green.

Chickens eat bugs and make eggs, so in essence, eggs are just concentrated bugs...

I hang one of those bug zappers over a 55 gallon drum that has been cut down so its only a pan about 3 inches tall.. When the bugs hit the zapper, they fall into the pan.. every morning, the chickens make a straight line to that bug zapper for breakfast. After they clean it out, they head back to the coop to lay an egg..

So I don't see what the big hoopla is about eating bugs.. I eat them every day.. preferably sunny side up or scrambled.
 
We may need to cordon off those cities after 2024. The US may be balkanized if the vote is tampered with again.

There is already a pretty interesting experiment going on in the US between Democrat run cities and conservative cities. People are voting with their feet as to which ideaology and environment they like better. Where are people fleeing from, and where are they going?
 
So you believe
No one should care what I believe as I'm not an expert. They should look at observable facts and what experts who study the field say.
Mainly, at this point in this thread, I just try to answer questions I think I can help with and post headlines to current news so people can stay up on what's happening.

... in [the last] 73 years CO2 increased about 100 PPM
You probably referring to the NASA chart to the right as it shows roughly that.

Since the late 50's we've been able to directly measure it, before that we use ice cores as ice traps CO2, so it's a fairly good way to determine CO2 concentration (within 2 ppm according to scientists).
co2_left_072623.gif

...you believe it is all caused by humans and the earth has nothing to do with the increase
No one sensible would believe that, other than humans there are lots of naturally occurring sources. Even when humans get to net zero, there will always be natural occurrences of GHG formations which could continue to add to the levels. Humans just add to it enough to tip the balance where it builds up over time. Keep in mind the half-life of CO2 is measured in centuries.

Humans have been working both ends of the balance equation; we not only put more GHGs into the air, but we've also been destroying carbon sinks (e.g., forests). So, CO2 levels in the atmosphere and oceans have no choice but to increase until the natural sinks once again balance out to the creation of GHGs.

But it's important not to panic. Yes, it's probably the most urgent invisible crisis we face, but we have everything we need to fix the problem. We just need to do it. Ideally, we do it in such a way that it actually makes life better (e.g., Renewables being cheaper than fossil fuels, more reliable energy sources, better infrastructure, more reliable transport, less soil erosion, not destroying communities or hurting the small guys (e.g., small farmers/ranchers)).
 
Last edited:
(may I add that its the goal! Failure is the goal, so that they can ration energy and thus control you)


“Green Breakdown: The Coming Renewable Energy Failure”​



Can wind, solar, and batteries replace the hydrocarbon fuels that power our modern industrialized society? Steve Gorham’s new book, Green Breakdown, shows why a forced transition to renewable energy—the Net Zero agenda—is costly, dangerous, and destined for failure. Integrating science, economics, and history, Steve Gorham’s most recent book exposes the weaknesses in green-energy planning and predicts a coming renewable-energy failure.

Green Breakdown is a complete discussion of all facets of the proposed renewable transition, including power plants, home appliances, electric vehicles, ships, aircraft, heavy industry, carbon capture and storage, and the hydrogen economy. Charts, graphs, and references to numerous studies are used to support the analysis. At the same time, the large collection of cartoons, images, and quotes grabs the attention of the reader.

From the Introduction:

“An engineer who attended one of my recent presentations told me his wife had returned her electric vehicle (EV) to Tesla, the manufacturer. Her EV would not charge during the cold Cleveland winter of January 2022. Also in January, more than 100 insurance companies sued Texas electrical grid operator ERCOT because of the grid failure that happened in February 2021 due to the cold weather. The failure resulted in hundreds of deaths and tens of billions of dollars in damages. Former Swiss Environmental Minister Simonetta Sommaruga, seeking ways to reduce energy use, recently advised people to ‘shower together.’ These examples point to growing problems with the world’s rush to transition to renewable energy.”
Use this link to read the rest of the book’s introduction: Introduction.pdf (secureserver.net)

Green Breakdown alerts the reader to these and other questions:

  • After almost $4 trillion spent globally on renewable energy from 2000 to 2018, why were coal, oil, and natural gas still providing 81 percent of world energy in 2018, the same share as in 1991?
  • If electricity produced by wind and solar is cheaper, why do Denmark and Germany, the European nations with the most wind and solar capacity per person, have the highest electricity prices?
  • Since electricity produced by burning biomass emits at least 50 percent more carbon dioxide per megawatt of power than burning coal, why is biomass considered zero emissions?
  • If global warming makes storms more frequent, why does data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration show that hurricane land falls in the United States have been slightly declining since 1850?
  • Since less than five watt-hours of every million watt-hours of US electricity consumption are stored in grid-scale batteries, how can batteries solve the problem of wind and solar intermittency?
Here is text from the conclusion of Chapter 10 of Green Breakdown, which is titled “Energy Crisis and the Seeds of Failure”:

“Output from nuclear power grew rapidly from 1956 to 1980. Leaders projected that nuclear would become the dominant source of global electricity. But the nuclear industry ran into cost, safety, and waste concerns as it grew larger. Similarly, wind, solar, and EVs have grown quickly and are projected to dominate the world’s energy systems. When energy sources are small, they can grow rapidly with little negative effect on the overall energy system. But as they grow larger, negative side effects can slow and then halt penetration.
Wind and solar now face mounting problems with poor electrical power reliability from intermittency, local opposition to vast land requirements, transmission infrastructure shortages, and rising electricity bills for rate payers. Electric vehicles encounter rising battery metal costs and charging issues. Biofuels require increasing amounts of land and provide negligible emissions reductions. Accelerating demands for mined metals and rising end-of-life wastes for wind, solar, and EVs sprout as major cost and environmental issues. The push for carbon capture and hydrogen fuel faces insurmountable cost, transport, and scale barriers. With all these problems and the negative side effects, the transition to renewable energy is headed for failure.”
Green Breakdown, like my other books, contains many quotes from scientists, political and business leaders, environmental groups, the United Nations, and other organizations. My website contains an updated list of more than 800 eco-quotes in 37 categories, compiled from his four books. You can find this eco-quote list here: Eco-Quotes – Steve Goreham

Here are a few examples:

“Utah School Gives Kids ‘Disgusting’ Insects to Eat in Class for Climate Assignment on Cows Killing Earth” —Fox News, Mar. 6, 2023
“Increased levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) have helped boost green foliage across the world’s arid regions over the last 30 years through a process called CO2 fertilization, according to CSIRO research.” —Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, July 3, 2013
“Bill Gates Issued a Stark Warning for the World: ‘As Awful as This Pandemic is, Climate Change Could be Worse’” —Business Insider, Aug. 5, 2020
“Adults keep saying, ‘We owe it to the young people to give them hope.’ But I don’t want your hope. I don’t want you to be hopeful. I want you to panic. I want you to feel the fear that I fear every day. And then I want you to act. I want you to act as if you would in a crisis. I want you to act as if the house was on fire because it is.” —Greta Thunberg, panel presentation at the World Economic Forum, Jan. 25, 2019
“California Asks Residents Not to Charge Electric Vehicles, Days After Announcing Gas Car Ban” —MyStateLine.com, Aug. 31, 2022
“We have arrived at a moment of decision. Our home—Earth—is in danger. What is at risk of being destroyed is not the planet itself, of course, but the conditions that have made it hospitable for human beings.” —Al Gore, former US Vice President, statement to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Jan. 28, 2009
“Swedish Scientist Advocates Eating Humans to Combat Climate Change,” “After Söderlund’s presentation, 8% of the audience raised their hands when asked if they would be willing to try human flesh.” —Think Big, Sep. 8, 2019
Green Breakdown is now available from Amazon or bookstores. Ebooks are available from Amazon, Apple, Google, and Barnes and Noble. Steve will send you a signed copy if you buy from his website: Steve Goreham

Please pick up a copy and learn the likely future of the demanded energy transition.
 
Back
Top