Renewable energy

[clarinetbcn]

2013, really?

As you suspected, really.

Institute for Energy Research - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

IER is often described as a "front" for the fossil fuel industry; it was initially formed by Charles Koch, receives donations from many large companies like Exxon, and publishes a stream of reports and position papers opposing any efforts to control greenhouse gasses. Thomas Pyle, president of the IER and its offshoot American Energy Alliance (AEA), was appointed to the US Department of Energy's transition team after the 2016 United States elections.

In 2016, Thomas Pyle, president of IER and AEA, was appointed to the US Department of Energy's transition team after the 2016 United States elections. On 15 November, he delivered a memo entitled "What to Expect from the Trump Administration" which has been described as a "fossil fuel industry wish list". It called for withdrawing from the 2015 Paris Agreement, overturning the Clean Power Plan, opening federal lands to exploitation for coal and oil development, and rolling back CAFE fuel economy standards.[5]

 

[WelshGas]

2013, really?

Have you anything better to offer?

 

[WelshGas]

As you suspected, really.

Institute for Energy Research - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

IER is often described as a "front" for the fossil fuel industry; it was initially formed by Charles Koch, receives donations from many large companies like Exxon, and publishes a stream of reports and position papers opposing any efforts to control greenhouse gasses. Thomas Pyle, president of the IER and its offshoot American Energy Alliance (AEA), was appointed to the US Department of Energy's transition team after the 2016 United States elections.

In 2016, Thomas Pyle, president of IER and AEA, was appointed to the US Department of Energy's transition team after the 2016 United States elections. On 15 November, he delivered a memo entitled "What to Expect from the Trump Administration" which has been described as a "fossil fuel industry wish list". It called for withdrawing from the 2015 Paris Agreement, overturning the Clean Power Plan, opening federal lands to exploitation for coal and oil development, and rolling back CAFE fuel economy standards.[5]

And?

 

[clarinetbcn]

As you suspected, really.

Institute for Energy Research - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

IER is often described as a "front" for the fossil fuel industry; it was initially formed by Charles Koch, receives donations from many large companies like Exxon, and publishes a stream of reports and position papers opposing any efforts to control greenhouse gasses. Thomas Pyle, president of the IER and its offshoot American Energy Alliance (AEA), was appointed to the US Department of Energy's transition team after the 2016 United States elections.

In 2016, Thomas Pyle, president of IER and AEA, was appointed to the US Department of Energy's transition team after the 2016 United States elections. On 15 November, he delivered a memo entitled "What to Expect from the Trump Administration" which has been described as a "fossil fuel industry wish list". It called for withdrawing from the 2015 Paris Agreement, overturning the Clean Power Plan, opening federal lands to exploitation for coal and oil development, and rolling back CAFE fuel economy standards.[5]

The U.S is dealing with the consequences of a large part of the population having lost the critical ablilty to distinguish between fact and fiction, between objective information and Trump's fake news. Let's not join this Trump supported fake institute in disseminating false information.

 

[Robadoba]

For example the extremely strong magnets used in wind turbines.
It is a good objective article to read - don’t shoot the messenger.

...waahaha...
The Telegraph - objective hahaha...
love it!

 

[WelshGas]

...waahaha...
The Telegraph - objective hahaha...
love it!

And? Got anything better to offer?

 

[Robadoba]

And? Got anything better to offer?

..yeah - I read a great article in the Mail the other day about how it would be really good if we were all more open minded, and kind to each other...

 

[66tim99]

Is hydrogen the tortoise that will win the race?
Toyota Mirai

 

[WelshGas]

..yeah - I read a great article in the Mail the other day about how it would be really good if we were all more open minded, and kind to each other...

Easy to rubbish someone's post, much more difficult to come up with some facts or evidence of your own. Even if people take issue with your offering. It's called Debating.

 

[Wildcamper]

Is hydrogen the tortoise that will win the race?
Toyota Mirai

That is quite possible, but a question remains: where is the hydrogen to come from? Most will say via hydrolysis of water, ok where is the electricity to come from? Nuclear - ok that works. Wind - ummmm? How many thousands of wind turbines would be needed? Solar - ummmm? How many thousands of acres of land would need to be covered? Cover all roofs with panels - would that work? - it might. Other technology? Splitting of water using sunlight with a catalyst - TiO2?

 

[Robadoba]

Easy to rubbish someone's post, much more difficult to come up with some facts or evidence of your own. Even if people take issue with your offering. It's called Debating.

...not rubbishing the post, nor debating it - just sarcastically commenting on the right wing press & media's typically subjective opinion pieces...
Lighten up pal!
We're gradually destroying the planet - but at least we're alive... for now.
Until the next coronavirus comes, and then the next, and the next after that....
wuhuhuhahahaha

 

[Sunstoner]

So

Neodymium used in high strength magnets that are necessary for high efficiency electric motors. Hugh environmental damage caused in its extraction in China, do a search there are a lot of articles. For the UK alone, if all cars were EVs then neodymium mining and extraction would need to increase by a factor of 10 - UK alone!. The acid lakes will never support life! Cobalt (not a rare earth) required for high efficiency batteries, even Tesla has said that use if Cobalt is unsustainable. Most Cobalt comes from central Africa, and then from conflict zones. Terrible working condition for the mostly female and child workers. Is an EV life saved in the West worth an African or Chinese life lost in Cobalt/Neodymium extraction. Then lithium from South America. Again huge environment damage. Don't take my word do your own research.

What is the answer here? I dont expect thee answer but you know what I mean, the alternative for power? many more fields of solar? every house with panels and a cart shed for the horses?

 

[WelshGas]

So

What is the answer here? I dont expect thee answer but you know what I mean, the alternative for power? many more fields of solar? every house with panels and a cart shed for the horses?

There is only one solution based on the science and what we are capable of doing now - Consume Less.
All we are doing is looking for ways to carry on our present level of consumption, of things, of energy and resources and the problem each way we go we encounter or will encounter significant environmental problems.
Maybe Nuclear Fusion?

The Law of Unintended Consequences is alive and well.

 

[Bellcrew]

There is only one solution based on the science and what we are capable of doing now - Consume Less.
All we are doing is looking for ways to carry on our present level of consumption, of things, of energy and resources and the problem each way we go we encounter or will encounter significant environmental problems.
Maybe Nuclear Fusion?

The Law of Unintended Consequences is alive and well.

And the road to hell is paved with good intentions, it was ever thus.

 

[willwander]

Is hydrogen the tortoise that will win the race?
Toyota Mirai

Hydrogen is promising, however...
More than 95% of all hydrogen is currently produced from fossil fuels.
Current Hydrogen fuel cells wear out quicker than batteries.

Main issue is currently that the lifecycle of producing green hydrogen by electrolysis, storage, transportation, then converting back to electricity using fuel cells has poor levels of efficiency in terms of both energy and cost.

 

[Californication69]

Like the Nordic country’s. @Sunstoner
Drill a hole down 200m, send water down one pipe, get steam back in the return pipe.
Free ish power.
Electric from generators.
Hot water for everything that’s needing hot water and also heat exchanger to heat fresh water to drink.

 

[Robadoba]

There is only one solution based on the science and what we are capable of doing now - Consume Less.
All we are doing is looking for ways to carry on our present level of consumption, of things, of energy and resources and the problem each way we go we encounter or will encounter significant environmental problems.
Maybe Nuclear Fusion?

The Law of Unintended Consequences is alive and well.

"Consume Less"
Hit the nail well and truly on the head my friend - never a truer word said.

 

[willwander]

There is only one solution based on the science and what we are capable of doing now - Consume Less.
All we are doing is looking for ways to carry on our present level of consumption, of things, of energy and resources and the problem each way we go we encounter or will encounter significant environmental problems.
Maybe Nuclear Fusion?

The Law of Unintended Consequences is alive and well.

I agree we need to consume less energy, there is no reason why we can't do this in parallel with developing renewable energy.

Nuclear fusion...
We already have a zero cost, zero maintenance, fully working fusion reactor capable of supplying all our energy needs for free...it's called the sun.

 

[WelshGas]

Like the Nordic country’s. @Sunstoner
Drill a hole down 200m, send water down one pipe, get steam back in the return pipe.
Free ish power.
Electric from generators.
Hot water for everything that’s needing hot water and also heat exchanger to heat fresh water to drink.

But that's a very niche solution, possible because of the geology and small population. They cannot utilise this capability without other countries making all the hardware for them to utilise this capability. They don't produce the drill equipment, pumps, generators or electric vehicles.
As far as I am aware there is No method of producing electricity, as a base energy, and utilising it, that has No impact on the climate or environment globally.

 

[Velma's Dad]

So

What is the answer here? I dont expect thee answer but you know what I mean, the alternative for power? many more fields of solar? every house with panels and a cart shed for the horses?

For primary energy, the answer is largely quite simple and it's a combination of wind and solar. While objectors have banged on for years that it will never happen (either with vested interests in the fossil fuel status quo, or just reactionary by temperament) it has nevertheless quietly been growing in scale. In UK and many other countries wind no longer needs a subsidy.

Solar PV costs have plummeted in the past decade and still falling. Yes we'll have to get used to fields covered in panels in the near term, although concentrated solar (CSP) is starting to show promise I think.

In five years' time more than half the UK's electricity generation will come from renewables and they are already bigger than gas I think.

The installed base of coal generation in some parts of the world, notably China, remains an obstacle to global net zero in generation, however CCS may become a factor (it can remove 80-90% of emissions from a coal-fired power plant) if there is political intent on China's part. They certainly don't lack the technical ability to do it and already have had large-scale pilots operating for several years.

Transportation is a different matter, debated (sometimes to exhaustion) on other VWCOC forums.

 

[GrumpyGranddad]

...waahaha...
The Telegraph - objective hahaha...
love it!

The point is that the devastating pollution being caused in a growing number of locations around the globe from the extraction of Rare Earths is indisputable.

Will now let you get back to your highly ‘objective’ media feeds - maybe The Guardian or the BBC.

Whahaha love it!

 

[briwy]

The pay back on energy input to produce a wind farm is 3 to 6 months. 1 to 3 years for solar. Both have an expected lifespan of 25 years.

Wave power had investment until they realised it didn’t work, energy is too dispersed , tidal is promising but is currently more expensive than wind. current tidal schemes have high environmental impact.

Hmm. Not too sure about that. Are you talking of land based or offshore because there is a big difference?

 

[Velma's Dad]

The point is that the devastating pollution being caused in a growing number of locations around the globe from the extraction of Rare Earths is indisputable.

Will now let you get back to your highly ‘objective’ media feeds - maybe The Guardian or the BBC.

Whahaha love it!

I haven't read the Sunday Telegraph piece you cited because it's paywalled. However I must admit the reactionary slant of much of the Telegraph's content (not admittedly that I've read much recently, as I say) makes me inclined to give it no more objectivity than the Guardian. So that's my centrist biases on the table...

On the general point, yes it's clear there is serious environmental pollution already being caused in some places by extraction of REE (and let's not forget that REE mining has been growing since the early 1990s due mainly to the growing in demand for consumer electronics - which we're all happily using to read this thread - as well as medical equipment, only lately added to by demands for wind turbine magnets).

I don't know whether the Telegraph article attempts to balance that against the massive damage caused by oil and coal extraction in many parts of the world but if not then it's a very one sided analysis. Just to take one example, the devastation of large parts of the Delta region in Nigeria by oil extraction at huge scale and with profound effects on people's lives over decades.

The answer, surely, is for governments to be held primarily responsible for protecting their people from harm from any extractive industries permitted to operate in their countries and for multinational businesses (whether oil and gas or rare earth mining operators) to be held to account by us, as best we're able including through our elected representatives.

Incidentally, did the Telegraph article note that there is huge potential for recycling of REE from the first generation of wind turbine magnets, as they reach the end of their operating lives? That is forecast to reduce substantially the need for primary extraction over time even though recycling methods are I believe still only at an early stage of R&D.

 

[willwander]

Hmm. Not too sure about that. Are you talking of land based or offshore because there is a big difference?

Fair point. I expect the payback is variable, depending on location and conditions.

 

[GrumpyGranddad]

I’ve re-read the article (Telegraph Magazine - Saturday) and to be perfectly honest i don’t see any political bias in it. It’s certainly not ‘dissing’ renewables in favour of oil, so no obvious vested interests being promoted.