• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Most of The World Could Be 100% Powered With Renewables by 2050

Bergslagstroll said:
It's the EU commission that have proposed that nuclear power can be considered a sustainable investment and that gas in some cases could be a short term bridge solution. There those proposal have meet fierce opposition including member states. There one reason for those proposal is the massive influence fossil fuel and nuclear companies have over the EU and the member states.

www.reuters.com

Gas and nuclear industries fight to the end for 'green' EU investment label

The gas and nuclear industries have ramped up lobbying to secure last-ditch changes to European rules defining which investments are sustainable, fearing that exclusion from a new "green" list could deprive them of billions of dollars of funding.
www.reuters.com www.reuters.com

www.transportenvironment.org

Revolving door provides window onto Big Oil’s dirty secret - Transport & Environment

Fossil fuel companies are using their privileged access to EU lawmakers to lobby against the decarbonisation of transport.
www.transportenvironment.org www.transportenvironment.org

www.theguardian.com

Fossil fuel big five 'spent €251m lobbying EU' since 2010

Report comes amid calls for set up of firewall to protect politics from industry influence
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

The study mention storage.

"Energy storage plays a critical role in the transition of the global energy system toward 100% renewables. A combination of both electricity and heat storage technologies cover the energy demand throughout the transition period (see Figure ES-5). Energy storage covers about 23% of the electricity demand and about 26% of heat demand in 2050."

That you have both renewable energy sources that can produce electricity on demand as well as the opportunity to transfer electricity between regions. There you also have many types of energy storage like for example batteries, thermal storage, pump storage hydroelectricity as well as using eclectic vehicles for storage.

There one of many opportunities is heat pumps. That not only can they be a more efficient way for families to both heat and cool their homes but also be used as energy storage to balance the grid.

www.edie.net

Vattenfall exploring high-temperature heat pumps for UK market, BEIS allocates more funding for heat networks - edie

Vattenfall has confirmed plans to launch an innovative heat pump solution in the Netherlands, with a view to a UK launch, while the UK Government has allocated £19m of fresh funding to heat networks.
www.edie.net www.edie.net

heatpumpingtechnologies.org

The Added Value of Heat Pumps for Grid Stability via Demand Response - HPT - Heat Pumping Technologies

As a consequence of the energy transition, the share of electricity generated from variable, intermittent...
heatpumpingtechnologies.org heatpumpingtechnologies.org
Click to expand...
We will still need a bridge to move us from where we are to where we need to be!
 
longview said:
We will still need a bridge to move us from where we are to where we need to be!
Click to expand...

There that bridge can be many different types of renewable energy and energy storage. While at the same time there can be great opportunities for energy efficiency measures. There it can be great economical opportunities for households with for example solar panels, energy storage, heat pumps and energy efficiency measures. While also using their electric car/cars for energy storage.

www.pv-magazine.com

Batteries double CO2 savings of households with PV systems

Photovoltaic systems for single-family homes reduce electricity-related CO2 emissions of the households by 45%, according to EUPD Research. When a battery is added the CO2 emissions can be reduced by up to 85%.
www.pv-magazine.com www.pv-magazine.com

How Much Money Do Heat Pumps Save? — July 2022

In this article we'll look at how much money heat pumps can save you per year.
carbonswitch.co carbonswitch.co

www.energy.gov

Energy-Efficient Home Design

Before you design a new home or remodel an existing one, consider investing in energy efficiency.
www.energy.gov www.energy.gov
 
Bergslagstroll said:
There that bridge can be many different types of renewable energy and energy storage. While at the same time there can be great opportunities for energy efficiency measures. There it can be great economical opportunities for households with for example solar panels, energy storage, heat pumps and energy efficiency measures. While also using their electric car/cars for energy storage.

www.pv-magazine.com

Batteries double CO2 savings of households with PV systems

Photovoltaic systems for single-family homes reduce electricity-related CO2 emissions of the households by 45%, according to EUPD Research. When a battery is added the CO2 emissions can be reduced by up to 85%.
www.pv-magazine.com www.pv-magazine.com

How Much Money Do Heat Pumps Save? — July 2022

In this article we'll look at how much money heat pumps can save you per year.
carbonswitch.co carbonswitch.co

www.energy.gov

Energy-Efficient Home Design

Before you design a new home or remodel an existing one, consider investing in energy efficiency.
www.energy.gov www.energy.gov
Click to expand...
I do not think you grasp the scale of where we are vs where we need to be!
 
Can you imagine the stench on the beaches from dead dish floating ashore?
 
osinneins said:
That would be pretty bad. I'm glad coal is clean these days.
Click to expand...
Clean coal is just not as bad as older designs, but it's still too dirty to furnish our growing power needs.

You could lose the sarcasm you know...
 
Lord of Planar said:
Can you imagine the stench on the beaches from dead dish floating ashore?
Click to expand...
Do you have any real evidence that tidal turbines chop up a lot of fish or are you just guessing?
 
Buzz said:
Do you have any real evidence that tidal turbines chop up a lot of fish or are you just guessing?
Click to expand...
It only takes a few to stink up the beaches.

Do you have evidence it will not happen?

This is very important IMO to determine how many, is any are killed, if we are to proceed with such things.
 
Lord of Planar said:
It only takes a few to stink up the beaches.

Do you have evidence it will not happen?

This is very important IMO to determine how many, is any are killed, if we are to proceed with such things.
Click to expand...
So... you don't have any evidence and are, in fact, just guessing. Typical.

Have you ever been downstream of a hydroelectric producing Dam? I have. And the shores are not littered with dead and chopped-up fish. As a matter of fact, I have fished many times below one and have never personally seen a single fish that was obviously killed by a turbine, and the number of dead fish are no more than what you would normally see on any shore.

Can you show us anything that backs up your assertion?
 
Buzz said:
So... you don't have any evidence and are, in fact, just guessing. Typical.
Click to expand...
Sure, it's a guess. But it's an educated guess.

The likely-hood of it not causing harm to life in the sea is incredible low, and we don't know how extensive it could get.

What if its around the same as raptors being killed by wind farms? Is that acceptable?
Buzz said:
Have you ever been downstream of a hydroelectric producing Dam? I have. And the shores are not littered with dead and chopped-up fish. As a matter of fact, I have fished many times below one and have never personally seen a single fish that was obviously killed by a turbine, and the number of dead fish are no more than what you would normally see on any shore.
Click to expand...
The dams on the Columbia river don't do that to the fish. The turbines are really large and the gaps between the blades and housing is greater than what a fish needs.
Buzz said:
Can you show us anything that backs up your assertion?
Click to expand...
Common sense?

How do I show that to you?
 
Lord of Planar said:
Sure, it's a guess. But it's an educated guess.

The likely-hood of it not causing harm to life in the sea is incredible low, and we don't know how extensive it could get.

What if its around the same as raptors being killed by wind farms? Is that acceptable?

The dams on the Columbia river don't do that to the fish. The turbines are really large and the gaps between the blades and housing is greater than what a fish needs.

Common sense?

How do I show that to you?
Click to expand...

It sure is a shame that wind turbines are taking out birds and bats. Almost as bad as coal and oil.

"Oil and Gas: An estimated 500,000 to 1 million birds a year are killed in oil fields, the Bureau of Land Management said in a December 2012 memo.

Coal: Huge numbers of birds, roughly 7.9 million, may be killed by coal, according to analysis by Benjamin K. Sovacool, director of the Danish Center for Energy Technologies. His estimate, however, included everything from mining to production and climate change, which together amounted to about five birds per gigawatt-hour of energy generated by coal."

(HERE)

I guess the answer is to stop producing power altogether.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Sure, it's a guess. But it's an educated guess.
Click to expand...
Educated? How do you figure? More likely just another SWAG.
Lord of Planar said:
The likely-hood of it not causing harm to life in the sea is incredible low, and we don't know how extensive it could get.
Click to expand...
Yeah... and you don't have any clue but you sure are willing to put out that it is going to be extensive without any real evidence when it could be a minuscule problem.
Lord of Planar said:
What if its around the same as raptors being killed by wind farms? Is that acceptable?
Click to expand...
Well... we have had windfarms for decades now. Are we seeing some huge declines in raptor populations? What about all of the other ways man kills birds. Like planes. Hell... windows kill birds all the time. Have we accepted all of that? Looks to me like we have accepted killing birds for a number of reasons.
Lord of Planar said:
The dams on the Columbia river don't do that to the fish. The turbines are really large and the gaps between the blades and housing is greater than what a fish needs.
Click to expand...
Do you know this for a fact or are you just guessing again?
 
osinneins said:
...and in SWAG what does the "S" stand for?
Click to expand...
Stupid.

It's a term LoP loves to use. And it is something he has accused scientists of doing.
 
Buzz said:
So... you don't have any evidence and are, in fact, just guessing. Typical.

Have you ever been downstream of a hydroelectric producing Dam? I have. And the shores are not littered with dead and chopped-up fish. As a matter of fact, I have fished many times below one and have never personally seen a single fish that was obviously killed by a turbine, and the number of dead fish are no more than what you would normally see on any shore.

Can you show us anything that backs up your assertion?
Click to expand...
Do you know WHY, the fishing is so good below hydroelectric dams, it could be because of the chum! ( and also because migratory fish, tend to collect where they cannot advance)
 
longview said:
Do you know WHY, the fishing is so good below hydroelectric dams, it could be because of the chum! ( and also because migratory fish, tend to collect where they cannot advance)
Click to expand...
It is probably both. That's why you can't actually fish right at the output of the power station. But you can fish right below the gates.

The point is that the dead fish produced is probably nowhere near what LoP was suggesting. And, as usual, he doesn't even care to back up his claims. Just like he almost always does.
 
Buzz said:
It is probably both. That's why you can't actually fish right at the output of the power station. But you can fish right below the gates.

The point is that the dead fish produced is probably nowhere near what LoP was suggesting. And, as usual, he doesn't even care to back up his claims. Just like he almost always does.
Click to expand...
I think they use grates that would keep most larger fish out of the turbines, and those small enough to pass the grates are small enough to go through the turbines safely. That said I am not sure that ocean turbines would not cause some harm, but I think it is unlikely, as the blade speed would be low.
 
osinneins said:
It sure is a shame that wind turbines are taking out birds and bats. Almost as bad as coal and oil.

"Oil and Gas: An estimated 500,000 to 1 million birds a year are killed in oil fields, the Bureau of Land Management said in a December 2012 memo.

Coal: Huge numbers of birds, roughly 7.9 million, may be killed by coal, according to analysis by Benjamin K. Sovacool, director of the Danish Center for Energy Technologies. His estimate, however, included everything from mining to production and climate change, which together amounted to about five birds per gigawatt-hour of energy generated by coal."

(HERE)

I guess the answer is to stop producing power altogether.
Click to expand...
How many of them are endangered raptors?
 
Short term vs. long term, as if most people against wind turbines care more about the actual birds than using them as a point of argument.

Short term with present technology and no type of sonic or physical barriers on wind generators, a lot of birds will die, but how many more birds (and life in general) will die due to climate change from this day forward into the distant future? Maybe even us?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom