• We will be taking the forum down for maintenance at [3:30 PM CDT] - in 25 minutes. We should be down less than 1 hour.
  • 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

Jack Hays said:
The claim was published in Esquire magazine as part of the pro-AGW propaganda campaign.
Click to expand...

You're the one who found it newsworthy. But that's OK, because it demonstrates the absurd nature of most of your posts.
 
[FONT=&quot]Regulation[/FONT]
[h=1]Offshore Wind Tripped Up by the Trump Administration[/h][FONT=&quot]Guest ROTFLMFAO by David Middleton From the too fracking funny files… ENERGY TRANSITIONSTrump admin throws wrench into offshore wind plansBenjamin Storrow, E&E News reporter Climatewire: Monday, August 12, 2019 The Trump administration is ordering a sweeping environmental review of the burgeoning offshore wind industry, a move that threatens to derail the nation’s first major project…
[/FONT]
 
Jack Hays said:
[FONT="][URL="https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/08/15/offshore-wind-tripped-up-by-the-trump-administration/"]
Wind_farm_Denmark-Article.jpg
[/URL]Regulation[/FONT]
Offshore Wind Tripped Up by the Trump Administration

[FONT=&quot]Guest ROTFLMFAO by David Middleton From the too fracking funny files… ENERGY TRANSITIONSTrump admin throws wrench into offshore wind plansBenjamin Storrow, E&E News reporter Climatewire: Monday, August 12, 2019 The Trump administration is ordering a sweeping environmental review of the burgeoning offshore wind industry, a move that threatens to derail the nation’s first major project…
[/FONT]
Click to expand...

Sadly you have a Republican president beholden to the fossil fuel industry.

Donald Trump hopes to save America’s failing coal-fired power plants - Daily chart

A running list of how President Trump is changing environmental policy

While local Republican politicians are seeing the great benefits of renewable energy.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/joshua...n-leaders-love-renewable-energy/#7f4916da3da7

There you are also starting to see a shift among Republicans then it comes to climate change.

Climate Could Be an Electoral Time Bomb, Republican Strategists Fear

Some Republican Lawmakers Break With Party on Climate Change - WSJ
 
Bodhisattva said:
Does this include the hundreds of millions of people living in huts and caves around the world?
Click to expand...

Renewable energy can have a huge positive impact on the poorest in the world and developing countries.

In countries like Bangladesh and Mongolia small scale solar power is dramatically changing the lives of poor people, lighting up their homes with low-cost solar systems. As part of the government’s sustainable development strategy, more than 3.5m solar homes systems have been installed in rural Bangladesh, creating 70,000 direct jobs.

Morocco is setting an example for the African continent. It has a renewable energy target of 42% of total electrical capacity by 2020, has recently established an agency dedicated to solar energy and is working to develop a “super grid” that integrates solar power, wind power, hydropower and biomass.

World Bank: clean energy is the solution to poverty, not coal | Guardian Sustainable Business | The Guardian

"Renewable energy such as geothermal, solar and wind power allow communities to use natural resources to produce green, clean energy on location. This bypasses the community’s need tie into the main electric grid and gives them energy independence. In the event of a natural disaster or significant storm situation, they will have access to electricity sooner as they won’t need to wait for cabling and large-scale infrastructure repairs."

How Communities Living in Poverty Can Benefit From Renewable Energy - PlanetWatch

"But in a massive new study carried out in Gujarat, one of Western India's poorest states, hit hard by drought in recent years, researchers have proposed that solar photovoltaic lanterns could represent a solution for rural communities with insufficient lighting. This is particularly true in India, where the average number of sunny days ranges from 250 to 300 per year, generating a solar energy equivalent greater than the country's total energy consumption. With India's large and growing population, solar lanterns, using the country's abundant sunlight, could be the cleanest and most practical energy alternative available."

Shining a Light on India's Rural Poor - Pacific Standard
 
Bergslagstroll said:
Renewable energy can have a huge positive impact on the poorest in the world and developing countries.

In countries like Bangladesh and Mongolia small scale solar power is dramatically changing the lives of poor people, lighting up their homes with low-cost solar systems. As part of the government’s sustainable development strategy, more than 3.5m solar homes systems have been installed in rural Bangladesh, creating 70,000 direct jobs.

Morocco is setting an example for the African continent. It has a renewable energy target of 42% of total electrical capacity by 2020, has recently established an agency dedicated to solar energy and is working to develop a “super grid” that integrates solar power, wind power, hydropower and biomass.

World Bank: clean energy is the solution to poverty, not coal | Guardian Sustainable Business | The Guardian

"Renewable energy such as geothermal, solar and wind power allow communities to use natural resources to produce green, clean energy on location. This bypasses the community’s need tie into the main electric grid and gives them energy independence. In the event of a natural disaster or significant storm situation, they will have access to electricity sooner as they won’t need to wait for cabling and large-scale infrastructure repairs."

How Communities Living in Poverty Can Benefit From Renewable Energy - PlanetWatch

"But in a massive new study carried out in Gujarat, one of Western India's poorest states, hit hard by drought in recent years, researchers have proposed that solar photovoltaic lanterns could represent a solution for rural communities with insufficient lighting. This is particularly true in India, where the average number of sunny days ranges from 250 to 300 per year, generating a solar energy equivalent greater than the country's total energy consumption. With India's large and growing population, solar lanterns, using the country's abundant sunlight, could be the cleanest and most practical energy alternative available."

Shining a Light on India's Rural Poor - Pacific Standard
Click to expand...

Clean energy is a solution to poverty? I thought that jobs were the solution...
 
[h=2]Two Economists Warn Germany Will See “Completely Different Demonstrations” On Friday As Climate Hysteria Demolishes Industry[/h]By P Gosselin on 18. August 2019
The German automobile industry today continues to be the real engine driving the country’s economy, but that may dramatically change for the worse – soon – according to economists Matthias Weik and Marc Friedrich in a commentary at the online news portal of the Deutsche Mittelstands Nachrichten (German Midsize Companies News – DMN).
The two authors focus on the economic direction of the German economy and how it is seriously threatened by the country’s obsession with climate protection and how policymakers are neglecting its key industry: automobiles.
Weik and Friedrich say that German policymakers are naive, and are in the process of ruining the German economy in their panic to rescue the planet from an alleged climate meltdown.
“Everybody is talking about the climate, yet no one is talking about the economic climate,” Weik and Friedrich say.
“Hard as nails” recession threatens Germany
The two economists warn of a coming recession, one that will be “hard as nails” as the ecological activist onslaught on German industry picks up.
According to the Weik and Friedrich, already “the seasonally adjusted and real order intake of German industry fell by 8.6 percent compared to the same month last year! For the tenth month in a row it is going down!”
“Companies such as Deutsche Bank, BASF, Bayer, Siemens, Thyssen, Ford have begun “massive job cuts or announced plans to do so”.

The two authors say that new buzzwords, such as “unemployment” and “layoffs”, will soon be dominating the media and that “no one will talk about the shortage of skilled workers any more, let alone climate change”.
Climate activist policymakers “negligently gamble away” prosperity
They write that the outlook for Germany’s key industry, automobiles, “is pitch-black” as the assault against the internal combustion engine continues unrelentingly.
The authors write: “If we actually continue to destroy our car industry – which accounts for 21 percent of our GDP – then everyone must be aware of the consequences.”
These consequences would mean economic shock waves not only for Germany, but also for Europe which massively relies on revenues generated by the German automotive industry, the authors explain.

Weik and Friedrich write that Germany’s policies “negligently gamble away” prosperity and that the “coming climate change in the economy will nip all irrelevant sham debates in the bud.”
“People in the streets”…”different demonstrations on Fridays”
They add: “The heated discussions and hysteria are a sign of the famous late Roman decadence and a warning sign of the crash. For many who demonstrate today, there will be no jobs in Germany tomorrow.”
Weik and Friedrich warn that as the “economic climate changes drastically and more and more people are standing in the streets without work […] we will see completely different demonstrations on Fridays. But then it will be too late.”

 
[h=2]Just change one rule — so the world can see what Wind and Solar really cost[/h]
Random power generators. Photo JoNova
​
Wind and solar power are the intermittent freeloaders on the electricity grid. They are treated as if they’re generators, adding power to the grid, but instead they provide something the grid doesn’t need — power that can’t be guaranteed.
Random gigawatts has the illusion of looking useful, but it’s the gift of a spare holiday house you don’t know if you can use til the day before. It’s the spare fridge in the garage that overheats in hot weather, the extra turkey for thanksgiving that might not arrive til the day after. The bills, the storage, the clutter, the chaos.
As I keep saying in RenewablesWorld fuel bills go down, but the land-maintenance-staff-insurance-FCAS-storage-and-capital costs all go up.
RenewablesWorld is a place where a lot more people and machines sit around and watch cat videos on youtube.
Here’s a great plan by Terry McCrann.
[h=3]The one rule that would expose wind power’s true cost[/h]Terry McCrann, The Australian, Business Review
If you wish to sell power into the grid, the NEM or National Energy Market, you will have to guarantee a minimum level of supply and guarantee that minimum level of supply 24/7.
And critically, that minimum level can be no lower than 80 per cent of the maximum amount of energy you will be permitted to sell into the grid.
He gives the example of the 1,000MW wind farm that either has to promise 800MW or more like 200MW. If it’s 800 — which means the team has to buy a gas plant out the back (or a fixed deal with a group that owns one), and if you own that gas plant, you’d just run it, who needs the wind turbines? If it’s 200MW, then you the owner can only profit on sales up to 250MW max.
In the simplest example, you would have to build an (at least) 800MW gas power station next to your wind farm, which you would only use intermittently, on the whim of the weather. Suddenly, wind would not look so cheap; it would be exposed as certainly not being “free”.
Critically, you would not be allowed to sell up to that 1800MW into the grid, using both the gas and the wind turbines when the wind did blow.
And if they did generate 1800MW, the same group would need to blow away the 800MW, or pay for the battery or dam to store it.
Which leads to the obvious question:
Why would I build two so-called power stations, the real gas one and the fake wind one? Why wouldn’t I just build the one, the gas one?
Ur, yes. But in a really rational world you’d just build the one coal-fired station…
But the problem with what McCrann is suggesting is that it only works in that old anachronistic thing called a free market. The RET’s got to go. No renewable energy target to force the transition we don’t need to transit to.
The good thing about McCranns idea is that we could finally find out what wind and solar cost.




 
[h=2]Solar road is $6m epic disaster — 4% capacity, broken and so noisy speed-limits were cut[/h]
Solar Road, Normandy, France | Credit: KumKum
​
Would you like to drive slower, add to noise pollution and waste money? Then solar roads are for you:
[h=3]The world’s first solar road has turned out to be a colossal failure…[/h]Ruqayyah Moynihan and Lidia Montes, Business Insider

  • Two years after the world’s first solar road — the Normandy road in France — was set up, it’s turned out to be a colossal failure, according to a report by Le Monde.
  • The road has deteriorated to a terrible state, it isn’t producing anywhere near the amount of energy it had previously pledged to, and the traffic it has brought with it is causing noise problems.
The original aim was to produce 790 kWh each day, a quantity that could illuminate a population of between 3,000 and 5,000 inhabitants. But the rate produced stands at only about 50% of the original predicted estimates.
Even rotting leaves and thunderstorms appear to pose a risk in terms of damage to the surface of the road. What’s more, the road is very noisy, which is why the traffic limit had to be lowered to 70 kmh.
Despite costing up to roughly $6.1 million, the solar road became operational in 2016.
The 1km road is in Tourouvre-au-Perch, Normandy, France made by Colas.
Leaves fall on the road, then cars grind the leaves on the beautiful polymer surface. The road isn’t angled towards the sun, gets brutally hot, and both reduce efficiency. If the top polymer layer were thicker and tougher, less solar energy would get through. Planting trees beside the road would cool it, but the shade…
Who likes trees anyhow? Not the Greens.
[h=3]Getting 50% worse than expected every year:http://joannenova.com.au/2019/08/so...nd-so-noisy-speed-limits-were-cut/#more-65817Keep reading →
[/h]
 

Paying Much More For Much Less

Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach There’s an interesting and authoritative new study out on the lifespan of those ugly bird-and-bat-choppers yclept “wind turbines”. It’s called “The Performance of Wind Turbines in the United Kingdom and Denmark“. Here’s the Executive Summary, all emphasis is mine: Executive Summary 1. Onshore wind turbines represent a relatively mature technology,…
Continue reading →

[FONT=&quot]Here’s the Executive Summary, all emphasis is mine:[/FONT]
Executive Summary
1. Onshore wind turbines represent a relatively mature technology, which ought to have achieved a satisfactory level of reliability in operation as plants age. Unfortunately, detailed analysis of the relationship between age and performance gives a rather different picture for both the United Kingdom and Denmark with a significant decline in the average load factor of onshore wind farms adjusted for wind availability as they get older. An even more dramatic decline is observed for offshore wind farms in Denmark, but this may be a reflection of the immaturity of the technology.
2. The study has used data on the monthly output of wind farms in the UK and Denmark reported under regulatory arrangements and schemes for subsidising renewable energy. Normalised age-performance curves have been estimated using standard statistical techniques which allow for differences between sites and over time in wind resources and other factors.
3. The normalised load factor for UK onshore wind farms declines from a peak of about 24% at age 1 to 15% at age 10 and 11% at age 15. The decline in the normalised load factor for Danish onshore wind farms is slower but still significant with a fall from a peak of 22% to 18% at age 15. On the other hand for offshore wind farms in Denmark the normalised load factor falls from 39% at age 0 to 15% at age 10. The reasons for the observed declines in normalised load factors cannot be fully assessed using the data available but outages due to mechanical breakdowns appear to be a contributory factor.
4. Analysis of site-specific performance reveals that the average normalised load factor of new UK onshore wind farms at age 1 (the peak year of operation) declined significantly from 2000 to 2011. In addition, larger wind farms have systematically worse performance than smaller wind farms. Adjusted for age and wind availability the overall performance of wind farms in the UK has deteriorated markedly since the beginning of the century.
5. These findings have important implications for policy towards wind generation in the UK. First, they suggest that the subsidy regime is extremely generous if investment in new wind farms is profitable despite the decline in performance due to age and over time. Second, meeting the UK Government’s targets for wind generation will require a much higher level of wind capacity – and, thus, capital investment – than current projections imply. Third, the structure of contracts offered to wind generators under the proposed reform of the electricity market should be modified since few wind farms will operate for more than 12–15 years.
​
[FONT=&quot]Not much more that I can say after that most devastating indictment of wind turbines. In a mere ten years, the UK wind farms are producing less than half of what they produced when they were new.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]So … why do people still want to build wind farms in the UK? The simple answer is … subsidies. . . . [/FONT]

 
Walmart asks Telsa to remove solar panels from 240 stores and pay damages after 7 fire


New rooftop BBQ known as TeslaKebab

Photo from the legal paper. Also known as a “money printer” according to Elon.
​
Walmart installed Tesla solar panels on 240 stores across the US. There have been 7 incidences of fire which Walmart claim has cost them $8.2m and were caused by negligence on Tesla’s behalf. After a spate of fires in 2018 Walmart de-energized all the panels. Then one more caught fire. Now it not only wants damages paid, it wants Tesla to remove all of panels.
It’s not that there is something wrong with solar power, just that it’s complex, unnecessary, unaffordable and the companies that install panels can’t afford to train staff or pay guys who know what they are doing:
Tesla is getting sued by Walmart

Elecktrek @FredericLambert
One of them in 2012, one in 2016, another in 2017, and then three of the fires happened in the first half of 2018 and it eventually led Tesla to de-energize all 240 solar power systems at Walmart stores:
“Fearing for the safety of its customers, its employees, and the general public, and wishing to avoid further damages and store closures, Walmart demanded on May 31, 2018 that Tesla “de-energize” (i.e., disconnect) all of the solar panel systems that Tesla had installed at Walmart sites. Tesla complied, conceding that de-energization of all the sites was “prudent” and recognizing that it could provide no assurances that the deficiencies causing its systems to catch fire were confined to particular sites or particular components.”
​
However, Walmart says that there was one more fire even after Tesla de-energized the systems.
Elecktrek have a full copy of the lawsuit at their site.
Reuters claim Walmart gave Tesla 30 days to fix the situation in July. By August 15th, nothing had happened, except for Musk relaunching his solar business and saying ““It’s like having a money printer on your roof.”
The lawsuit accuses Tesla of having untrained workers putting up shoddy installations and showing “utter incompetence or callousness, or both,” court papers said.
The lawsuit is the latest blow to Tesla’s struggling solar business, which it acquired through its $2.6 billion purchase of SolarCity in 2016. Quarterly installations have plummeted more than 85 percent since the deal, as Tesla has cut its solar panel sales force and ended a distribution deal with Home Depot Inc .
Remember, solar is the future.
Walmart is such a large emitter of greenhouse gases that in 2013 it was emitting almost as much CO2 as Chevron:
Nilima Choudhury
“If Walmart were included in the Greenhouse 100 Polluters Index,” the report said, “a list that is limited to heavy industrial firms, such as oil companies and power plants, the retailer would take the 33rd spot, just a hair behind Chevron, America’s second largest oil company.”
In related news, in 2014 there was this story:
How Walmart Became A Green Energy Giant, Using Other People’s Money . . . .
 
The really big coal plants are also starting to close.

"The giant coal plant on Arizona’s high desert emitted almost 135 million metric tons of carbon dioxide between 2010 and 2017, according to an E&E News review of federal figures.

Its average annual emissions over that period are roughly equivalent to what 3.3 million passenger cars would pump into the atmosphere in a single year. Of all the coal plants to be retired in the United States in recent years, none has emitted more.

The Navajo Generating Station isn’t alone. It’s among a new wave of super-polluters headed for the scrap heap. Bruce Mansfield, a massive coal plant in Pennsylvania, emitted nearly 123 million tons between 2010 and 2017. It, too, will be retired by year’s end (Energywire, Aug. 12).

And in western Kentucky, the Paradise plant emitted some 102 million tons of carbon over that period. The Tennessee Valley Authority closed two of Paradise’s three units in 2017. It will close the last one next year (Greenwire, Feb. 14)."

And Now the Really Big Coal Plants Begin to Close - Scientific American

That having communities, governments, corporations and individuals leading the way in the transition away from fossil fuels have really payed off, with drastically dropping costs for renewables.

Renewable energy costs hit new lows, cheap new power option - Electrek

There even Republicans sees the great benefits of renewable energy.

Why Republican Leaders Love Renewable Energy
 
[FONT=&quot]Alarmism / Emissions[/FONT]
[h=1]Developing nations surging energy use shatters UN & California’s climate alarmism crusade[/h][FONT=&quot]Guest essay by Larry Hamlin California has updated its GHG emissions data for year 2017 showing a decrease of about 5 million metric tons of GHG emissions since 2016. The results of the states latest emissions assessment exposes significant problems regarding the state’s future and unrealistic emissions reduction goals as well as further establishing the…
[/FONT]
 
[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[h=1]Farmington NM Fights to Save Coal-fired Power Plant and Mine[/h][FONT=&quot]Guest cheer-leading by David Middleton H/T to Gary Grubbs City Backs Deal for CCS Technology to Save New Mexico Coal Plant 08/19/2019 | Darrell Proctor The Farmington, New Mexico, city council on Aug. 15 unanimously approved a deal to transfer 95% of the ownership interest of the coal-fired San Juan Generating Station (SJGS) to Enchant…
[/FONT]
4 hours ago August 23, 2019 in Carbon sequestration.
 
Well with David Koch dead now we are at least one small step closer to a sustainable world.
 
[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[h=1]Stormy Weather In Solarville: Amazon Joins Walmart In Saying Its Tesla Solar Panels Spontaneously Ignited[/h][FONT=&quot]From Zerohedge Many people theorized that the bail out “buy out” of Solar City, advocated for and led by Elon Musk, would eventually come back to bite Tesla. And now it looks as though we may be witnessing this first hand, not only in the collapse of Tesla’s solar business, but now in repeated allegations…
[/FONT]
16 hours ago August 26, 2019 in solar power.
 
Jack Hays said:
[FONT="][URL="https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/08/26/stormy-weather-in-solarville-amazon-joins-walmart-in-saying-its-tesla-solar-panels-spontaneously-ignited/"]
amazon-logo_transparent1.png
[/URL][/FONT]
[h=1]Stormy Weather In Solarville: Amazon Joins Walmart In Saying Its Tesla Solar Panels Spontaneously Ignited[/h][FONT="][FONT=inherit]From Zerohedge Many people theorized that the bail out “buy out” of Solar City, advocated for and led by Elon Musk, would eventually come back to bite Tesla. And now it looks as though we may be witnessing this first hand, not only in the collapse of Tesla’s solar business, but now in repeated allegations…[/FONT]
[/FONT][/COLOR]
[URL="https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/08/26/stormy-weather-in-solarville-amazon-joins-walmart-in-saying-its-tesla-solar-panels-spontaneously-ignited/"]16 hours ago August 26, 2019[/URL] in solar power.
Click to expand...


Not a huge deal. Everything is being addressed.

Tesla solar panels caught fire at Amazon warehouse in 2018

However, Walmart and Tesla said in a statement on Thursday that they “look forward to addressing all issues and re-energizing Tesla solar installations at Walmart stores, once all parties are certain that all concerns have been addressed.”
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom