diy solar

diy solar

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

To answer the question if solar and wind can fix everything with a battery break through we just have to look at price trends.

The financial times reported "China, the dominant solar equipment supplier, doubled production capacity last year to more than 1tn watts and now produces nearly three times more panels than global demand, according to the International Energy Agency and Wood Mackenzie. Global prices for panels have fallen 50 per cent in the past year to as low as 10 cents a watt"

I use about 10kwh per day and if I massively overpanel I don't see how it would be possible for fossil fuels, wind, nuclear or anything else to compete with 10kw of solar panels that would costs me 1000 US dollars plus installation. The grid costs more to deliver the electricity, even if the electricity was given away for free by the power stations.

I see lay people here argue about the scientific consensus regarding man made global warming, but come on now guys, the chances that you know better than thousands of climate scientists is pretty slim. Instead try to focus on reality, the transition is already happening, the equipment is getting better and cheaper. In hindsight it is clear that Carter had the right idea by get the US to lead by funding solar panel development and manufacturing, Reagan thought this was a bad idea and stopped the funding and now China is leading. I don't mind who leads, I want cheap, clean and a reliable source of electricity, I would prefer to get it from a place where people are treated with respect and kindness.
 

Test to Preserve Arctic sea-ice​

The gist is keeping the ice keeps the albedo higher which slows warming.

Record heat: Accelerated warming or El Niño?​


Court Challenge by Fracking Companies Halts SEC Climate Reporting​

Opinion: Who didn't see that coming? The fear is two fold: first it's really bad press for them because they leak a lot and secondly if the feds know your carbon emissions then they can possibly someday tax you for it.

California isn’t on track to meet its climate change mandates​


Bongbong said:
To answer the question if solar and wind can fix everything with a battery break through we just have to look at price trends.
Click to expand...
I agree! To an extent anyway...

In 2023, the cost of renewables with energy storage for the first time fell within the range of gas combined cycle making it more economical in some areas. As prices are still falling, it'll soon be more economical to switch over in most places (ref) and the conversion will be capitalism at its best. That is we'll eliminate a lot of GHGs not to save the planet, but because it was cheaper.

1710595396018.png​


Back when I started the thread I could see how renewables and batteries could eliminate
GHGs from transportation and power generation with favorable economics and even then
it was obvious it was pretty close in terms of cost.

The question for me became more about the GHGs emitted by non-electrical things such as
concrete, steel, farm animals, and farming practices (e.g., soil bacteria getting supercharged from fertilizers).

The problem with the 'standard' image to the right is that it doesn't tell a complete story. For
example, nearly all of "commercial & residential" is home heating which can be replaced
with electrical heat pumps.
total-ghg-2023.png

Similarly, much of industry and agriculture is from the direct burning of fuel for heat. For example, to refine gasoline a portion of the oil is burned to make heat for the distillation columns.

I've learned a lot with the thread. From a 2016 report some of those non-electrical things where we produce GHGs are:

7.2% - Iron & Steel Production​
5.8% - Fugitive Emissions (leaky pipes/tanks/wells )​
5.8% - Livestock & Manure​
4.1% - Agricultural Soils​
3.5% - Crop Burning​
3% - Cement​
1.9% - Landfills​
1.3% - Water Treatment​
​
Again, some of the numbers are a little misleading, for example in iron and steel some of the emissions are from burning fuels that could be replaced with electricity.​
​
On top of GHG production, we've also discovered other human behaviors that impact things. For example, cutting down forests. Even contrails from airplanes actually make a measurable difference (and just changing flight patterns can help a lot). Finally, there are also lots of natural GHG emitters such as volcanoes. Batteries just don't help with everything and it looked like at least a 10% overall shortfall to my non-scientific analysis.

The good news is people are working on solutions to all of the things that a battery can't fix and on carbon capture technology for those we can't eliminate and are over what the natural cycle can eliminate. Many are simple changes to the way we do things and some can save money. Some examples are Green Steel, CarbonCure, Beano for Cows.

The problem is we've delayed too long and it looks like we can't hold the line at 1.5C. There are probably as many people worried the IPCC is too conservative as there are deniers. To make matters worse, we don't even fully understand what inaction is costing us other than a few things (e.g., weather, drought relief).

To help hold the line people are proposing we take more drastic measures. Carbon capture has long been seen as the safest, but it's takes a lot of energy and people are exploring all sorts of options and some are riskier than others. Personally, I like algae just because it's pretty cool. ; -)
 
Last edited:
 
On Elephant number 3 - Grid Capacity and Costs

Electric Transmission Buildout Could Cost Americans Trillions of Dollars​


Though windmills and solar panels get the headlines, the big energy topic in Washington is electric transmission. Whether it is Congress’s newfound interest in permitting reform, the U.S. Department of Energy’s new Grid Deployment Office, or the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC) upcoming final rule on transmission planning and cost allocation, how to build and pay for long-range transmission to connect generators to customers is considered the final piece in the quest to meet net-zero goals.

Like so many issues in Washington, the need for more transmission lines is accepted without question and the costs are not considered. But for American consumers, especially low-income and elderly, as well as small businesses and energy intense manufacturers, building new transmission lines could result in much higher monthly bills and leave them on the hook for stranded assets.

Traditionally, high-voltage transmission lines, consisting of 150-foot lattice towers crossing the landscape for hundreds of miles, were planned for by local utilities to meet their customers’ energy needs and subject to approval by state public utility commissions. But public policy goals to promote renewables are changing how the grid is being developed.

Over the past few years, States established renewable energy mandates; Congress enacted over $1 trillion in taxpayer subsidies for renewable energy; and President Biden issued an executive order setting net-zero goals for electricity generation by 2035. To fulfill these policies, the grid needs new high-voltage transmission lines—lots of them—and they will be expensive.

According to the “Net-Zero America” analysis published by Princeton researchers, achieving net zero goals with 100% wind and solar by 2050 will require an additional $3.5 trillion in capital spending for new transmission lines. If net-zero goals are pursued with a mix of renewables, nuclear, and natural gas generation (which may include carbon capture), then a significant portion of this transmission investment would be unnecessary. Furthermore, a balanced resource mix of dispatchable and renewable resources would enhance grid reliability without overbuilding renewables or transmission.

Contributing to the cost is that renewable projects are often built far away from where the electricity will be consumed. For example, the Midwest is a great place to build windmills, but long-distance transmission lines are needed to deliver their electricity to big population centers on coasts. Not only are these lines capital intensive, but they also require purchasing or condemning private property to site them. Adding insult to injury, many of these transmission lines will not serve the people whose land is used.

Renewable power developers see the potential for selling their electricity in higher priced power systems near urban centers, while also being able to harvest generous taxpayer subsidies. But having to pay for transmission cuts into profits. Furthermore, property owners impacted by the transmission lines are objecting. The solution: a wave of lobbyists and special interests pressing policy makers to eliminate permitting barriers and to socialize the $3.5 trillion cost of building new transmission lines to more Americans.

In response, FERC is engaged in a rulemaking to change transmission planning and cost allocation.Among the proposals is requiring grid planners to consider factors like “geographic zones”, such as wind potential in the Midwest; state and federal “public policy goals”; and “trends” in technology. If adopted, these factors would provide more subjective ways to justify building big, expensive, long-range transmission projects that would be paid for by a broader number of Americans.

With public concerns about costs, transmission advocates now argue that more transmission is needed for grid reliability. Yet, the threat of blackouts is the result of the very net-zero policies that now require more transmission. For example, Maryland’s recent decision to shut down the Brandon Shores coal plant will cause customers across 12 states and the District of Columbia to pay $796 million for new transmission projects to support reliability.

Customers may also be left paying for transmission projects that are no longer needed. New technology, such as small modular nuclear reactors that can be built at existing power plants that already have transmission access, may negate the need for new transmission lines to serve renewable generators. The current push for transmission reform may be another expensive example of Washington trying to solve yesterday’s problem. This is not mere speculation, since 2008 customers have paid $250 million for the PATH transmission line that crossed three states, even though it was never built and never served customers.

It is time for policy makers to reaffirm that the electric grid exists to serve customers, not developers and investors. Transmission planning and cost allocation should be driven by the needs of customers and overseen by the state regulators who are best suited to protect their citizens. At a time when inflation is making its tougher from families and businesses to thrive, imposing additional costs for transmission buildouts for special interests makes little sense.
 
I find it funny when ppl say trust the scientist.

1983
https://twitter.com/x/status/1719441354319679620

1992 ~1999 he was selling vhs tapes about climax change around $40 each. Suckers…. 1 of His homeS had electric billS thousands of dollars back then. Dumbasses.
https://twitter.com/x/status/1579548624090198016

Covid trust the science.
https://twitter.com/x/status/1698373433963303182

Trust the scientist …. Lay Men… snicker. For the Con Game to work it merely requires they gain your “confidence.” First 3 letters …. Of confidence is “con” 🤡 We were suppose to be out of fuel and in death throws of a new ice ages about 3 decades back.

Nobody denies the Earth is going through natural climate change. The sillyness starts when you think can alter it. Go watch movie: Water World. Mostly white ppl in it. Some ppl called it White World. Build a boat.

We have about ~50 million illegals in USA iq around ~85 for majority of those illegals nursing on govt tit ….. 🤣😀 Don’t worry about them….. 🤣

Notice that disaster in previous post doom and gloom. Covers several supposed Planet ending events. Get a box of tissue and bottle of lotion. Doom and gloom.

Carl Sagan plan to drop nukes is in there. I just hope that if it goes the USA vs Russia that we include nuking the whole planet - every country. Fair is fair… EQUALITY. Don’t be mad at me. Carl Sagan said it was only way. He dead now.
 
D71 said:
Might want to let this sink in:
Click to expand...
D71, your guest speaker used homogenous and human's in the same line, IQ 210 (right) :rolleyes:

some would consider losing a bunch of Karen's as a step in the right direction. even with a climate change/fossil fuels topic.
 
Last edited:
TommySr said:
D71, your guest speaker used homogenous and human's in the same line, IQ 210 (right) :rolleyes:

some would consider losing a bunch of Karen's as a step in the right direction. even with a climate change/fossil fuels topic.
Click to expand...
“Trust the science “ he is suppose to have a high iq.
Don’t listen to the lay men. Listen to the ppl that are rated smart.

TommySr said:
some would consider losing a bunch of Karen's as a step in the right direction. even with a climate change/fossil fuels topic.
Click to expand...

Would you redefine your second sentence…not very clear …. More code not direct…. you edited it several times. You really need to control that impulsive behavior to snap post as it is still not clear.
 
Bongbong said:
To answer the question if solar and wind can fix everything with a battery break through we just have to look at price trends.

I see lay people here argue about the scientific consensus regarding man made global warming, but come on now guys, the chances that you know better than thousands of climate scientists is pretty slim. Instead try to focus on reality, the transition is already happening, the equipment is getting better and cheaper.
Click to expand...
this is disingenuous at best, as it is well documented that the supposed "experts" will lie to get more grant money to support their livelihoods... try again you buffoon.

Bongbong said:
In hindsight it is clear that Carter had the right idea by get the US to lead by funding solar panel development and manufacturing, Reagan thought this was a bad idea and stopped the funding and now China is leading. I don't mind who leads, I want cheap, clean and a reliable source of electricity, I would prefer to get it from a place where people are treated with respect and kindness.
Click to expand...
carter put panels on the roof of the whitehouse that created more greenhouse gases and damages and needed money to fix them then what they would ever....ever make. they were like top of the line 10 watt panels at the time, but worthless as an example of good stewardship. Nuke Power something carter was trained in will always be cleaner than any other including solar. it jsut the matter of training, retaining and keeping people who will run the reactor correctly. Navy does it daily with no issues since the 70's so you want to help the environment? go nuke... and have a nice day.
 

Search Engine confirmation bias: You get more of what you click on making it look more real​

Opinion: I'm sure this one will pointed back to me... ; -) When you see those denier links, be sure to investigate who funds the site. It's not hard to prove sites like PragerU, ZeroHedge, dailysceptic, wattsupwiththat are paid for by people who make money by promoting denierism.
The question (and thread) isn't about if it's real or urgent (it is); it's now about what going on in the world about it.

Things are heating up: Congress asks for GeoEngineering plans​

Risky Business: Rogue Startups experimenting with GeoEngineering​

NATO chief says climate change undermines global security​

What is a heat officer?​

Six months after the heat spiked, Caribbean corals are still reeling​

Climate change is fuelling the US insurance problem​

The U.S. is producing more energy than ever before​

1710760672012.png

Why the Urgency?​

We've delayed so long it's not practical for us to hold the line at 1.5°C and our current policies and projections put us on track for 2.5 - 2.9°C. Tipping points were originally thought to start around 2°C, but we're already seeing them (r.g., methane from ice, lower albedo, slowing ocean currents). Biden keeps backsliding on pledges (e.g., mountain valley pipeline approval) and Trump says it's a hoax. It's more urgent than most think.


CAT_2023-12_Graph_2100WarmingProjections.width-1110.png

​
CRS
Reports from the CRS (Congressional Research Service) are some of the most unbiased and neutral information produced for all congressional members so they can make informed decisions when voting. Some of these may interest you:

CRS Report R47583, Is That Climate Change? The Science of Extreme Event Attribution
CRS Report R47172, Geoengineering: Ocean Iron Fertilization
CRS Report R47551, Solar Geoengineering and Climate Change
CRS Report R47300, Ocean Acidification: Frequently Asked Questions
CRS Report R47082, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: Sixth Assessment ReportCRS Rep
CSR Report 47373, Science and Technology Issues for the 118th Congress
A Brief Introduction to the National Flood Insurance Program
What Happens If the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Lapses?
 
Last edited:

U.S. Special Presidential Envoy for Climate​

This is the cabinet level position for climate change. On January 31, 2024, it was announced that John Podesta would take over the seat . They have their own government website, but it's under the U.S. Department of State (which seems odd for a subdivision of National Security). I asked an AI what he was up to:

  1. Implementation of the Inflation Reduction Act:
  2. Chairing the President’s National Climate Task Force:
  3. Global Climate Diplomacy:
    • As a seasoned climate policy expert, Podesta plays a pivotal role in international climate diplomacy.
    • His focus extends beyond U.S. borders, addressing global climate challenges and fostering cooperation with other nations.
  4. Promoting Clean Energy Innovation:
    • Podesta’s role involves promoting clean energy innovation and ensuring its integration into national policies.
    • He collaborates with experts, policymakers, and industry leaders to accelerate the transition to a sustainable energy future.
  5. Advancing Renewable Energy and Electric Vehicles:
In summary, Podesta’s multifaceted responsibilities span domestic and international climate policy, clean energy implementation, and fostering collaboration to combat the climate crisis. His expertise and leadership contribute significantly to the fight against climate change34.
Click to expand...
The $375 billion isn't as much as it sounds as it is spread out over the next decade and is mostly in the form of tax credits. $43 billion of that is targeted to solar, battery, and EV tax credits come from. Not sure if the $375 includes the billions for the Mountain Valley Pipeline or if it's out of other parts of the overall package (yeah, still salty on that one ; -).
 

Where Are the True Environmentalists?​

We have had a week that has exposed the no-limits extremes of the climate campaign.

John Kerry, with his parting shot as Climate Czar, said that the world might feel better about Russia’s actions in the Ukrainian war if they lowered their climate footprint.

The depths of lunacy this reaches know no bounds. It is because of the actions of Kerry and his ilk in the administration Putin has the funds to fight the war in the first place.

In Germany, destroying an ancient forest to put up wind turbines is beyond any rational thought. First of all, you can wreck plenty of open spaces with the turbines. But the removal of 120,000 ancient trees, each taking away 50 lbs of CO2 for six million pounds a year, and the environmental cost of building these monstrosities should have every environmentalist up in arms. Do they realise the effect on the local climate? Forests are a great way to remove CO2 as I mentioned above, and are naturally cooler areas. So if you are afraid of CO2 (I am not, but understand you might be) this shows in no uncertain terms the depths of delusion these people are forcing on others. How this is even considered is beyond me. And if you are an environmentalist how are you not up in arms at this? You have a forest that has survived wars and turmoil. Germany’s forests are supposedly dying because of climate change so they destroy more forests to prevent more climate change. How is this even considered or tolerated? This is just another matter that Dostoevsky was right about.

image-37.png

Then, there is this illustration from the Twitter account True Science PEng, DFP, ADFS, MA, MBA.

image-38.png

The covering of fields with solar panels could actually add to warming. The illustration means microclimates will indeed change. We see this all the time with cities. Not only is there an urban heat island (UHI) with downstream implications. For example, the Philadelphia UHI is a great place to start thunderstorms that then follow the three major highways, U.S. 30, U.S. 322 and the Atlantic City expressway ESE toward the shore. There are major differences in thunderstorm frequency at the NJ shore for instance north of Atlantic City versus south, more to the north enhanced by the effect noted above. But now imagine fields that were covered with cooling vegetation replaced with solar panels that can elevate temperatures to 70°C. Imagine the change to the environment in those areas. The vegetation and animal life be dammed.

But this is because the people pushing this have no love of weather or climate. I have written about this several times. They simply use weather and climate to advance their mission. There is no rational thinking about this. It is getting so bad that the Dostoevsky quote above not only is evident in the irrational policies we are seeing enacted in non-climate issues but is leading to some kind of disorder that is causing societal disruptions we are seeing with climate protesters that are blocking roads or trying to destroy priceless art. Circle back to the destruction of the ancient forest. How is that so different from throwing orange paint on a priceless piece of art as far as an irrational action based on a phony mission?

In the face of all this lunacy, these facts seem to be completely ignored, nicely compiled by man-made climate change skeptic, Graham Keagan:

Since 1900… life expectancy up 130%; literacy percentage up four-fold; population up five fold; GDP per capita up seven fold; poverty down seven fold; death from natural disasters down 50-fold (with five times the number of people on the planet). Civilisation is flourishing!
Click to expand...
There is no rational reason for what is being forced down the throat of the planet. The destruction of an ancient forest should raise alarm bells. Kerry’s parting comments that would imply a carbon footprint reduction would somehow offset aggression that we are indirectly funding by phony climate war policies Kerry advocates should raise alarm bells. The effect of these actions on the environment, the destruction of large areas of nature by the establishment of these fields and the cost of the materials should be obvious. This has nothing to do with climate or weather. It is being pushed by people who have no love of climate, weather, nature or mankind in general.

Dostoevsky was (and is) right. It’s time for rational people to stop this irrationality. I have never thought climate should be a big issue, but what is driving all this is. The motivation for all this is the reduction, if not destruction, of man’s upward mobility — and climate is the tool. Because, in the end, this irrationality is the nail in the coffin of our freedom and is designed for top-down elitist control.
 

Stupid Geoengineering Idea of the Week, No Year, No Decade…of All Time?​

wattsupwiththat.com

Stupid Geoengineering Idea of the Week, No Year, No Decade…of All Time?

These morons are discussing placing billions upon billions of dollars worth of heavy mechanical infrastructure on drifting impermanent ice floes.
wattsupwiththat.com wattsupwiththat.com

These morons are discussing placing billions upon billions of dollars worth of heavy mechanical infrastructure on drifting impermanent ice floes.

I’m having difficulty thinking of an imaginary plan that is more stupid that this one.
 
TommySr said:
google: How many years of oil does Earth have left?


Global consumption of oil is currently estimated at roughly 96.5 million barrels per day. According to OPEC, global demand is expected to reach 109 million barrels per day. Estimations vary slightly, but it is predicted that - if demand forecasts hold - we will run out of oil from known reserves in about 47 years.

say that was 100 years with unknow reserves, when would be the right time to start thinking plan B?

say in 1900 oil could be found seeping out the the earth, by 1980 it needed to be fracked from rocks, or
squeezed from sand, or even drilled miles under some sea. when would be the right time to start thinking plan B?


google: percent of oil used to power personal vehicles

About 526,000,000 results (0.51 seconds)

Search Results​

Private cars and vans were responsible for more than 25% of global oil use and around 10% of global energy-related CO2 emissions in 2022.​

Click to expand...

You expect me to trust google.......you are funny as hell.

1710773268472.png


www.breitbart.com

Google Pauses Ultra-Woke Gemini AI Image Generator Following 'Inaccuracies' in Historical Photos

Google announced it is pausing its ultra-woke Gemini AI image generator, saying the tool has created historical photos with "inaccuracies."
www.breitbart.com www.breitbart.com
 
Looks like VW wants to compete against Tesla's $25k model 2, the model 2's low cost is supposed to be revolutionary in terms of manufacturing. Can't wait to see folks tear them apart on youtube like Monroe is doing the cybertruck.
 
www.bloomberg.com

VW Places Battery Unit IPO on Backburner

Volkswagen AG is pushing back plans to seek outside investors for its battery unit after slower demand for electric vehicles dims prospects for the business, with the industry facing an increasingly daunting reality in the EV transition.
www.bloomberg.com www.bloomberg.com

thedriven.io

"Customer resistance:" Volkswagen cuts EV production as it fails to keep up with market

Volkswagen is blaming ending incentives and inflation for cutting production of its electric vehicles at its factory in Germany. However with European and global EV sales surging to their highest levels in June, is this the real reason?
thedriven.io thedriven.io

The company says the production cuts are due to “strong customer reluctance” to buy their EVs.
According to German newspaper Nordwest-Zeitung, Volkswagen was canceling the late shift in the production of the ID.4 and ID.7 electric SUV and sedan for 14 days. The paper also reported that the three-week holiday for employees working on EVs would be extended by an additional week.
Further to this, Volkswagen also recently announced that 300 of the 1,500 temporary workers at the Emden plant would no longer be employed from August.
“We notice the reluctance of customers in the electrical world very vehemently,” works council chief Manfred Wulff told Nordwest-Zeitung noting that demand is almost 30 per cent below original forecast production figures.

insideevs.com

Mercedes-Benz Delays Its EV Plans, Will Keep Making Combustion Engines

Mercedes-Benz wanted to go fully electric by 2030 but now plans to continue selling ICE cars well into the next decade.
insideevs.com insideevs.com

www.themanual.com

Aston Martin postpones its EV debut due to lack of interest

Although its EV is delayed until at least 2026, Aston Martin says that it will continue to build hybrid cars to maximize the benefits that both types of motors can bring.
www.themanual.com www.themanual.com

www.bmwblog.com

BMW Delays Electric Motorcycle Because People Don't Want One

BMW Motorrad boss Markus Flasch says the company is in no rush to launch an electric motorcycle. The technology is ready but customers are not.
www.bmwblog.com www.bmwblog.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

SenileOldGit
Climate change, COVID, and other things...
7 8 9
Replies
169
Views
4K
Daddy Tanuki
Daddy Tanuki
MurphyGuy
California suing big oil...
Replies
10
Views
440
MTM98290
MTM98290
K
Ground mount with high wind requirements
Replies
5
Views
474
Gold Country Russ
G
S
“Break free of 4S4P” w/ Multiple Battery Banks?
2
Replies
23
Views
1K
sun_of_a...
S
G
Connecting PV and Wind to the same battery
Replies
2
Views
307
400bird
4
Back
Top