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

[LeoThomson]

Solar and Wind can absolutely NOT replace traditional energy generation even if we magically solved the battery storage issue today. The reasons for that have already been listed in various links but to summarize it is economically and environmentally not feasible with current technology level (without sending 90% of civilization back to medieval times)

You are a smart guy with at the minimum some hobby level experience in solar and battery. If you were to design a new home, do you have the skills to go off-grid, without the need for fossil fuels. If not, do you think there are people here who could?

 

[svetz]

environmentally not feasible

Post #831 sums up why it's environmentally imperative.

Post #807 / #808 show why there are probably enough of the critical resources (although TBF I still haven't yet run through storage calculations to be 100% confident we can succeed globally by 2050 for copper and nickel and estimates as sources for total needed batteries vary quite a bit based on assumptions (e.g., Musk deducted the 12% of energy used to transport and refine fossil fuels but Michaux didn't)).

Posts #827, #828, #857 all show why it's far better for the environment than fossil fuels even not considering global warming.

economically... not feasible

Post #761, shows that current costs with LFP are slightly more expensive than nuclear today. Switching to CATL's sodium batteries (which are already in production) reduces the price to under coal-fired power plant costs. If the Edison-like flow battery in post 850 or the Iron-Zync in #851 is real then that brings the costs under natural gas. All these cases are feasible.

 

[aenyc]

Tread Recap, Opposing View

Thread Recap, Opposing View:

If Solar Panels Are So Clean, Why Do They Produce So Much Toxic Waste?​

Not so green: Renewable energy’s land use problem
California Blackouts Have Begun. Thank ‘Green Energy’ | National Review
The Environmental Impact of Lithium Batteries
"Green" Energy Is a Scam. It Isn't MEANT to Work.
Why California’s Climate Policies Are Causing Electricity Blackouts
Electricity Shortage Warnings Grow Across U.S.
Explained: Why Is Electricity So Expensive In Norway Right Now?

Technocracy: The Operating System For The New International Rules-Based Order
The last link should be required reading for anyone who is paying attention.

 

[aenyc]

Post #761, shows that current costs with LFP are slightly more expensive than nuclear today. Switching to CATL's sodium batteries (which are already in production) reduces the price to under coal-fired power plant costs. If the Edison-like flow battery in post 850 or the Iron-Zync in #851 is real then that brings the costs under natural gas. All these cases are feasible.

Jeezus, where is the electricity going to come from? Unicorn farts?

Sodium and Iron Zink are pipe dreams! They are not viable yet, there are many issues to solve, which may or maynot be solved.

More maybes and assumptions. Typical "progressive" thinking in an ivory tower without considering real life experience.

 

[D71]

You are a smart guy with at the minimum some hobby level experience in solar and battery. If you were to design a new home, do you have the skills to go off-grid, without the need for fossil fuels. If not, do you think there are people here who could?

After posting your displayed “200 battery fantasy” you should read more and post less …suggest don’t advise ppl… that is exact reason ppl on the Right don’t want to be onboard with ppl on the Left. Reality vs Leftist Fantasy. When presenting something that will be unpopular it needs to stay attainable with facts and figures for what is available… some things take years to build… anything being built today needs to be future upgradable in modular leggo type form factors.
Small nuke power plants:

U.S. Air Force Base To Be First To Deploy New Nuclear ‘Microreactor’ - Soon Every Town Could Have One

Every branch of the US Military is worried about climate change. They have been since well before it became controversial. Their conclusions are climate change is a significant threat multiplier. So their choice of Eielson Air Force Base to receive its first nuclear microreactor is a good one.

www.forbes.com

edit added: picture did not go through when initially posted

 

[svetz]

Jeezus, where is the electricity going to come from? Unicorn farts?

Via the plan: solar, wind, and a host of other renewables.

Sodium and Iron Zink are pipe dreams! They are not viable yet, there are many issues to solve, which may or maynot be solved.

CATL's sodium batteries are well documented and seem very likely to release this year. But yeah, it's not out yet and the post says so.
Iron-salt flow batteries have been shipping since 2015 and there's independent confirmation of people getting them - but, agreed we don't have actual data on them yet and no independently generated LCOE data that I've seen.
But LFP, wind, and solar do exist, and it's affordable as shown in #761.

More maybes and assumptions. Typical "progressive" thinking in an ivory tower without considering real life experience.

Read the entire post. You'll see numbers representing what's available today along with expectations based on other technologies.
Just ignore the future stuff if it bothers you.

 

[MurphyGuy]

Jeezus, where is the electricity going to come from? Unicorn farts?

Sodium and Iron Zink are pipe dreams! They are not viable yet, there are many issues to solve, which may or maynot be solved.

Pipe dreams? Not viable yet? Ignorance is a disease. Funny thing is, if there was a vaccine for it, you still wouldn't take it.

CATL unveiled its first-generation sodium-ion battery on July 29, 2021, saying a single cell’s single energy density had reached 160Wh/kg, the highest level in the world.

Sodium-ion Batteries Expected in Evs with Ranges of up to 500 Km, CATL Exec Says - Batteries News

Sodium-ion batteries expected in EVs with ranges of up to 500 km, CATL exec says. A CATL executive's words imply that initial sodium-ion

batteriesnews.com

Lithium ion started with very low density as well.

Nice try, but once again, such statements show willful ignorance.

More maybes and assumptions. Typical "progressive" thinking in an ivory tower without considering real life experience.

Since you are conservative, we all understand your fear of change and reluctance to adapt. After all, such is the definition of what it means to be conservative.
Such mentalities also explain the conspiratorial mental health issues. You are seeking comfort. The latest studies suggest it is due to loneliness, lack of friends and rejection by family.

Conspiracy Theorists May Really Just Be Lonely

People prone to believing in elaborate cover-ups could just be seeking more meaning in life

www.scientificamerican.com

Conspiracy theorists are often portrayed as nutjobs, but some may just be lonely, recent studies suggest. Separate research has shown that social exclusion creates a feeling of meaninglessness and that the search for meaning leads people to perceive patterns in randomness. A new study in the March issue of the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology connects the dots, reporting that ostracism enhances superstition and belief in conspiracies.

Damn.. now I have to feel sorry for you nutjobs?

 

[aenyc]

Via the plan: solar, wind, and a host of other renewables.

Already showed you that its not sustainable. We do not have enough solar/wind to cover the requirement at current level. The math is not there.

CATL's sodium batteries are well documented and seem very likely to release this year. But yeah, it's not out yet and the post says so.
Iron-salt flow batteries have been shipping since 2015 and there's independent confirmation of people getting them - but, agreed we don't have actual data on them yet and no independently generated LCOE data that I've seen.
But LFP, wind, and solar do exist, and it's affordable as shown in #761.

Again more and more baloney.
A trial run is completely different then mass scale switch and production, which costs money, money and money. (And all other things already mentioned)

Read the entire post. You'll see numbers representing what's available today along with expectations based on other technologies.
Just ignore the future stuff if it bothers you.

I actually read all your posts and even followed the math. The problem is its all GIGA. All the models are made up. Complete baloney.

Solar can be a complementing tech at best in some niche cases where people are willing to pay out of pocket for independence (Worse with Wind, its just too toxic environmentally given its tiny output).

The rest is complete pipe dream with current level of technology. (Again ignoring the real reasons behind "climate change" scam)

 

[MurphyGuy]

Already showed you that its not sustainable. We do not have enough solar/wind to cover the requirement at current level. The math is not there.



Again more and more baloney.
A trial run is completely different then mass scale switch and production, which costs money, money and money. (And all other things already mentioned)



I actually read all your posts and even followed the math. The problem is its all GIGA. All the models are made up. Complete baloney.

Solar can be a complementing tech at best in some niche cases where people are willing to pay out of pocket for independence (Worse with Wind, its just too toxic environmentally given its tiny output).

The rest is complete pipe dream with current level of technology. (Again ignoring the real reasons behind "climate change" scam)

It's a damn good thing the rest of the world doesn't listen to conspiracy nut jobs with no education then.

 

[svetz]

Already showed you

All of which was disproved, mostly by reading and using the references you provided. See post #827

 

[42OhmsPA]

You are a smart guy with at the minimum some hobby level experience in solar and battery. If you were to design a new home, do you have the skills to go off-grid, without the need for fossil fuels. If not, do you think there are people here who could?

Absolutely there are people that could... I plan to and I'll be sure to have a full thread about it. I'm figuring a 30kw array minimum, 20 of it S, the other 10 split E/SE and SW; ground mounted and optimized for winter production. Battery bank will be 150kwh minimum, diy and prismatic lifepo4 of course, housed in its own concrete 'bunker' below grade. 2 Schneider 6848 pros will be the heart beat. Ideally I find land with a creek that flows year round so I can supplement with hydro, if needed, in the winter months...

 

[MurphyGuy]

You are a smart guy with at the minimum some hobby level experience in solar and battery. If you were to design a new home, do you have the skills to go off-grid, without the need for fossil fuels. If not, do you think there are people here who could?

For anyone with basic engineering knowledge, going off-grid is quite easy.. it's just expensive to do. Batteries have not come down far enough to beat the cost of grid energy. There are a few rare exceptions, but for the rest of us, grid power is cheaper by a long shot.

 

[aenyc]

All of which was disproved, mostly by reading and using the references you provided. See post #827

You haven't disproved anything to anyone.
The links provided require critical thought, as many of them come from dinosaur media aka "credible sources" (lol). They admit the lunacy of the whole ordeal between the lines, but ofcourse still saying that we must double down on it.
None of the elephants have been addressed and they are still there staring at you.

 

[aenyc]

Absolutely there are people that could... I plan to and I'll be sure to have a full thread about it. I'm figuring a 30kw array minimum, 20 of it S, the other 10 split E/SE and SW; ground mounted and optimized for winter production. Battery bank will be 150kwh minimum, diy and prismatic lifepo4 of course, housed in its own concrete 'bunker' below grade. 2 Schneider 6848 pros will be the heart beat. Ideally I find land with a creek that flows year round so I can supplement with hydro, if needed, in the winter months...

This is basically the whole point of Solar for me - SHTF scenario, or rationing scenario. I dont want to be dependent on the system. I have a custom designed Solark 12K centered system with 9.6 KW of panels. Can operate ongrid and offgrid via generator. I am contemplating a few SimpliPhi batteries to make the system double down as a 4ms UPS.

 

[svetz]

How much ESS do we need (P1)​

Still looking into the question of how much ESS is needed to replace 100% of fossil fuels. What I've found in the studies so far is what you'd expect, some areas are abundant with reliable renewables and need no additional ESS, but they're few and far between. Other locations need a lot more.

Fortunately, different geographical regions have a lot of consumption and local historical data, so it's not difficult to solve for any one location. What modelers do is try to stitch it all together to come up with a total number for planning (e.g., is there enough copper and if not what can we do about it). But the datasets aren't necessarily compatible and different assumptions in the different models mean they come up with different numbers. Another aspect of how much is needed is the local grid infrastructure. Having a solid grid infrastructure with nearby neighbors allows them to exchange power during local dunkelfaute, giving them greater flexibility. So, places like where I live (the pointy bottom of Florida) need more storage because we're not surrounded on all four sides by neighbors we could purchase excess power from. On the other hand, we typically don't go for more than a day without sunshine. You'd think we'd have wind farms, but wind here is generally too little or far far too much. The map to the right is the current general usage patterns over extremely wide areas. It's important to note that blue lines is currently artificially low due to fossil fuel heating. It is expected to not only rise above the yellow line in northern areas, but also to extend the curve due to the cold winter evening hours.

The current rush to install batteries isn't from the utility's desire to reverse global warming. It's that they're currently cheaper than running costly peaker plants to meet the evening demand. There are interactive maps like the snapshot below where you can more data on what's happening near you.

You can see the list of all ESS projects as of 3/2021 here or the latest (although a little harder to use) from here.​

Fortunately, no region needs to make the decision today or commit to expensive batteries. Most of the plans are buy-as-you-go, that is perhaps today you install 4 hours of backup as it's cheaper than peaker plants. Then as ESS prices fall over time you add on more over time...but always watching and adjusting as needed before any decommissioning.

Unfortunately, that doesn't help answer the question of where do we need to accelerate exploration & mining to ensure we have resources to get everything in place over the next 30/40 years. Compounding the problem is tech changes, what resources do we really need? Copper and nickel seem the most likely candidates as they're used in most technologies. But materials like lithium might just be a red herring.

 

[aenyc]

Latest UN Climate Doom Report Falsely Claims Global Temperatures Are "Highest for 125,000 Years" – The Daily Sceptic

The UN's latest alarmist report of climate doom calling for accelerated Net Zero claims that current global temperatures are the highest for 125,000 years, but this is false.

dailysceptic.org

There have been one or two concerns of late that the IPCC’s scare tactics have sent half the world doolally with climate fear, especially the impressionable young. These criticisms seem to have been taken on board. UN Secretary General Antonio ‘Code Red’ Guterres hailed SYR as a “survival guide to humanity”. All we need to do, continued the Left-wing Portuguese radical, is for all countries to bring forward their Net Zero plans by a decade. Dr. Friederike Otto from Imperial College specialises in so-called ‘attribution’ studies and the pseudoscience of claiming specific weather events are caused by the activities of humans. She helped write the latest report and was also in optimistic mood telling the BBC: “If we aim for 1.5°C and achieve 1.6°C, that is still much better than saying, it’s too late and we are doomed and I’m not even trying. And I think what this report shows very, very clearly is there is so much to win by trying.”

Back on Planet Reality, it might be noted that there are a number of possible disadvantages connected to removing fossil fuels, a reliable, inexpensive energy supply that powers 80% of global needs, within less than 17 years. Starvation, death, widespread warfare, societal and economic breakdown and rampant disease being just a few that come immediately to mind.

 

[svetz]

The Daily Sceptic ... has published misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines[9] and climate change denial.[10][11][12][13] ref

They should really drop the first 'C' in their name. Some of the fact-checks on them are hilarious.

 

[aenyc]

They should really drop the first 'C' in their name. Some of the fact-checks on them are hilarious.

Like what? Calling out the corrupted ICC?
But now i understand, looks like you are the "vaxx" (aka untested genetic slurry) believer. I rest my case. If before i gave you a tiny bit of doubt, if you are a vaxx believer at this stage in the game, i am afraid its hopeless (or are you a "progressive" shill? i dont know but my gut feeling tells me thats a solid yes)

Wikipedia co-founder says site is now ‘propaganda’ for left-leaning ‘establishment’

Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger has warned that the website can no longer be trusted — insisting it is now just “propaganda” for the left-leaning “establishment.”

nypost.com

Even Dinosaur media admits.

 

[svetz]

...climate-doom report falsely claims global temperatures are highest for 125,000 years

Thanks for another opportunity to show how misdirection is used to sow confusion and make folks believe a false narrative.

First, the IPCC doesn't measure temperatures, write data, or predict anything. They assemble and report on what the science says from around the world. The actual data is from prestigious scientific organizations (e.g., NASA) that run climate models and published scientific data. So "blaming" something on the IPCC is essentially just trying to undermine all of the published data in one go.

It's also well known that the temperature has been higher than now, a few times in the last million years so why would anyone lie about that when it's easy to check? Here's the record for the last million years:

So yeah, the "current" line does look like it crosses over at 125,000 years ago. So, the quote sounds accurate to me.

But who cares? Smoke and mirrors folks, designed to get you to doubt.

In the last million years, the temperature hasn't gone over ~+2C.
The problem is our trajectory has us headed to ~+4C by the end of the century if we continue at our current rate, the rate of temperature increase is currently faster than ever recorded in history.

During the age of Dinosaurs, when the temperature was perhaps 4C degrees higher than today, there were crocodiles living above the Arctic Circle.

The Daily Septic is well known for misquoting and talking things out of context... so what did the IPCC actually say in the SYN report they linked up about 125,000 years ago? I don't know! I searched the entire report for "125" and came back with no hits. Feel free to research it yourself, but sounds like **** made up by ******* for the ******.

 

[aenyc]

I call baloney and you have to stop on selective reading.

"
The Daily Sceptic has reported on a number of science papers that track the higher temperatures in the past, in particular the period since the last ice age started to lift about 12,000 years ago. A sample can be read here, here and here. Earlier this year, a group of European scientists published a paper analysing tree remains that suggested there was a much warmer climate in the Alps during most of the last 10,000 years.

‘Settled’ science, it might be observed, needs consensus from the world and his wife. The recent IPCC minutes, for instance, noted that the SYR team, “should ensure policy relevance and usefulness for policymakers”. Needless to say this is not to the taste of some independent-minded scientists, especially those retired with no need to hustle for state research or Left-wing foundation funds. In fact they can be quite disobliging about the entire IPCC process. In a recent paper titled ‘Challenging “Net Zero” with Science‘, Emeritus Professors William Happer and Richard Lindzen of Princeton and MIT respectively called Net Zero “scientifically invalid and a threat to the lives of billions of people”. In fact they have previously dismissed the peer review system around climate change as a “joke” – pal review, not peer review, they quipped. The IPCC is “government controlled and only issues government-dictated findings”.

“Climate science is awash with manipulated data, which provides no reliable scientific evidence,” they added."



What is a “Global temperature”?

Do government funded data adjusters just stick a thermometer under the earths tongue? So, what was the “global temperature” in 1920? How about 1840? What was it in 1630? Well they won’t know 1630 because that was 100 years before the thermometer was invented. Let’s face it, the temperature record of earth is a total jumble of unreliable sparse thermometer readings, where thermometers were mainly in a few wealthy western countries, very few in poor countries, none in the oceans which is 70% of the planet, and out of all that clutter where they just guess what the temperature was if they have no data, we are expected to believe that some year was one hundredth of a degree warmer than some other year based on readings from non-existent thermometers that were never designed for those type of accuracies.

United Nations people think if they stand at a podium with lots of world press and photographers and simply pronounce TRUTH that TRUTH has now been declared. NOPE, truth cannot be pronounced. Truth needs evidence. This is the biggest pseudo scientific fraud ever perpetrated on an unsuspecting public. Almost everything these people say is a smidgeon of the truth elevated into a planetary emergency with zero evidence.

Everything that happens according to these people is “Not inconsistent with what we would expect in a warmer world”, which basically means everything that happens is caused by humans. This is NOT science. When what you say cannot be falsified it is NOT science. When impending doom relies almost entirely on the output from un-validated fanciful models that have so far been totally wrong then this is NOT science. It is “Official Science” which has simply been declared from a political body, not a scientific one called the IPCC, whose conclusions are all POLITICAL.

Start thinking for yourself


ROFL

EVEN MORE LOL