Solar and Wind Will Not "Save" the Climate

[NickW + 2,714]

4 minutes ago, BuddaonTiger said:

Anyone, who wants govt. to interfere in society and economy, is a socialists.  The right and left paradigm is an artificial construct, in order to keep people fighting and distracted.  There is only 2 sides and they are tyranny or Liberty.  You've already chosen tyranny.

You are the Commie Finder General 😄

[BuddaonTiger + 12]

3 minutes ago, NickW said:

You are the Commie Finder General 😄

Hahahaha!  You show me a picture of Vincent Price???????  Project communism/marxism/leninism much. 

[Red + 252]

8 minutes ago, jaycee said:

You cannot say weather patterns are predicable in the future you are flogging a dead horse here as I said renewables promoters do not take into account reality, and in this case the reality is one they are proposing!

Yes we can.  Climate has been modelled for decades, and the power of computing has immensely improved reliability.

It seems your realty is vastly different from both governments and the private sector who have already invested billions of dollars and are now scaling up to trillions into renewables capacity.

[NickW + 2,714]

9 minutes ago, jaycee said:

Regardless of where the sun rises and sets there is cloud cover, rain etc which will all be different in a globally warmed world.

Out global warming scientists tell us those winds will actually be hurricane force they tell us that every year during hurricane season how global warming is making them more frequent and stronger, wind turbines are not very good in hurricanes i suggest and you will be doing a lot of renewing of them after.

You dont need to move conventional power stations though as they have their fuel taken to them.Regards moving renewables thats all very well but what about if the country you live in cannot get enough power from renewable due to the changed global weather patterns making their use limited? 

You cannot say weather patterns are predicable in the future you are flogging a dead horse here as I said renewables promoters do not take into account reality, and in this case the reality is one they are proposing!

Whatever change happens it won't be overnight - it will be over decades and the selection and siting of Wind and solar resources can adjust to that change. 

Modern wind turbines are designed to withstand Category 5 Hurricanes. They close down and turn to minimise their surface area facing the wind direction. 

[NickW + 2,714]

1 minute ago, BuddaonTiger said:

Hahahaha!  You show me a picture of Vincent Price???????  Project communism/marxism/leninism much. 

Yes....... playing the Witchfinder General a historical character who sought out imaginary enemies based on nonsense claims. 

 

[jaycee + 348]

Red you have turned up didn't notice you there.

OK lets dance.

So you are saying the weather patterns of global warming are 'very predicable'? No.  Is that your "guess"?

No you clearly said weather patterns are 'very predicable'. Please give me the accurate long term forecast for the world once global warming increases. I know you cant so basing power production on renewables is a risk.

Changing to wind and solar when the world is about to have its weather patterns turned on their head seems rather risky no? First, wind and solar investment has been occurring for a good while now and globally the energy mix in in "transition".  Second, increased warming will add energy to the surface winds and therefore continue to benefit wind farms.  Finally, the sun will keep shining, so it seems your question was based on ignorance.

 In the future there is no cloud cover, no rain etc again tell me the long term forecast accurately. Faster winds yes keep hearing that every year during hurricane season wind turbines fall down in hurricanes and certainly will not operate correctly in strong winds so is faster winds actually a good thing? Please accurately predict the wind strength during global warming for me. Not me that's ignorant I am afraid wishful thinking that everything will work out exactly as you plan seems more like ignorance.

Only following your logic here, as with most of the renewables lobby it is not well thought out as I repeatedly try to get you to and others here to face upto.  We live in a world which is market driven.  What aspect of that do you not understand? 

A lot more than you clearly, if you think world markets are efficient then you have not got a clue dear boy. They constantly make mistakes and  invest in the wrong thing, shale oil in the US is a good example right now.

Everything will work first time and cost no money seems to be the renwables point of view logical thought and counter argument is frowned upon.  ?? Whaaaaaaaaat? There are clearly people who, like you, continue to make nonsense claims because they are devoid of facts.  And that's separate from not putting together a logical sense.

I have a lifetimes experience of actually working on large industrial projects and none of them go exactly to plan and the more untried equipment used the bigger the cock up and you want to change the world to renewables and it will be alright on the night, really Red?

I will have to leave it at that I have a busy day tomorrow and for a few days. Always fun chatting to you

Bye

[jaycee + 348]

10 minutes ago, NickW said:

Modern wind turbines are designed to withstand Category 5 Hurricanes. They close down and turn to minimise their surface area facing the wind direction. 

OK before a go a quick one then.

Wind turbines close down in much lower speeds than a cat 5. How do they withstand a flying house hitting them by the way? Would love to see that test. How do solar panels get on in hurricanes by the way? Can they do Cat 5?

[NickW + 2,714]

Just now, jaycee said:

OK before a go a quick one then.

Wind turbines close down in much lower speeds than a cat 5. How do they withstand a flying house hitting them by the way? Would love to see that test. How do solar panels get on in hurricanes by the way? Can they do Cat 5?

For starters turbines don't tend to be built too close to houses so by the time the house reaches the turbine its bits of broken timber. 

Most solar panels are certified to survive 140mph winds. 

https://news.energysage.com/solar-panels-hail-hurricanes/

When I used to work in Darwin loads of people had solar - in a zone where Hurricane force winds are quite common. 

BTW - Cat 5's are quite rare. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

40 minutes ago, NickW said:

Yes but its through a basic understanding of 'Fisiks' that you gain an empirical appreciation of the radiative forcing effect of CO2.

I'm well aware there are other gases  higher up the radiative forcing index, which should be addressed as well but CO2 is the biggie as far as volumes go. 

You evidently know nothing about Geology (as per previous comment)

You know nothing about biology either because raising CO2 only works if you have adequate levels of other nutrients and water. This is why this trick works well in commerical Greenhouses but not so well in the global environment. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Earth  

 

Increased CO2 is a major factor in worldwide plant growth. We just had a record bumper crop following several other bumper crops in the corn and soybean country of America. CO2 is associated with increased plant growth and animal size throughout geologic history. 

Edited February 7, 2019 by ronwagn
addition

[NickW + 2,714]

12 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Earth  

N2 and O2 are pretty much transparent when it comes to infrared, and  UV.  

That 0.0407% of CO2 raises the Earth temperature by about 59 degree F

Edited February 7, 2019 by NickW

[ronwagn + 6,290]

1 minute ago, NickW said:

N2 and O2 are pretty much transparent when it comes to infrared, UV and visible light. 

That 0.0407% of CO2 raises the Earth temperature by about 59 degree F

According to what studies. I think you are forgetting about water vapor also. I am sure glad that we have that 59 degrees or most of us would all be dead. 

[NickW + 2,714]

1 minute ago, ronwagn said:

According to what studies. I think you are forgetting about water vapor also. I am sure glad that we have that 59 degrees or most of us would all be dead. 

No one has argued for a CO2 free atmosphere

No - I haven't forgotten about water vapour - without that the temperature would be more like Mars. 

[NickW + 2,714]

15 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Earth  

 

Increased CO2 is a major factor in worldwide plant growth. We just had a record bumper crop following several other bumper crops in the corn and soybean country of America. CO2 is associated with increased plant growth and animal size throughout geologic history. 

I will keep this simple  - because other nutrients are available by virtue of fertilisers and irrigation if needed. You can't apply this on a global scale to the natural environment. 

[NickW + 2,714]

11 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

According to what studies. I think you are forgetting about water vapor also. I am sure glad that we have that 59 degrees or most of us would all be dead. 

https://eesc.columbia.edu/courses/ees/climate/lectures/radiation/

https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/faq/abs_temp.html

[Red + 252]

38 minutes ago, jaycee said:

Red you have turned up didn't notice you there.

OK lets dance.

So you are saying the weather patterns of global warming are 'very predicable'? No.  Is that your "guess"?

No you clearly said weather patterns are 'very predicable'. Please give me the accurate long term forecast for the world once global warming increases. I know you cant so basing power production on renewables is a risk.

Changing to wind and solar when the world is about to have its weather patterns turned on their head seems rather risky no? First, wind and solar investment has been occurring for a good while now and globally the energy mix in in "transition".  Second, increased warming will add energy to the surface winds and therefore continue to benefit wind farms.  Finally, the sun will keep shining, so it seems your question was based on ignorance.

 In the future there is no cloud cover, no rain etc again tell me the long term forecast accurately. Faster winds yes keep hearing that every year during hurricane season wind turbines fall down in hurricanes and certainly will not operate correctly in strong winds so is faster winds actually a good thing? Please accurately predict the wind strength during global warming for me. Not me that's ignorant I am afraid wishful thinking that everything will work out exactly as you plan seems more like ignorance.

Only following your logic here, as with most of the renewables lobby it is not well thought out as I repeatedly try to get you to and others here to face upto.  We live in a world which is market driven.  What aspect of that do you not understand? 

A lot more than you clearly, if you think world markets are efficient then you have not got a clue dear boy. They constantly make mistakes and  invest in the wrong thing, shale oil in the US is a good example right now.

Everything will work first time and cost no money seems to be the renwables point of view logical thought and counter argument is frowned upon.  ?? Whaaaaaaaaat? There are clearly people who, like you, continue to make nonsense claims because they are devoid of facts.  And that's separate from not putting together a logical sense.

I have a lifetimes experience of actually working on large industrial projects and none of them go exactly to plan and the more untried equipment used the bigger the cock up and you want to change the world to renewables and it will be alright on the night, really Red?

I will have to leave it at that I have a busy day tomorrow and for a few days. Always fun chatting to you

Bye

Weather patterns and global warming are different concepts - you confused them.

Climate is changing and that pattern is being modelled.  The aggregate changes in energy from changing climate are predictable.  

Unfortunately you cannot present questions which make sense, so I cannot answer them directly.  For example, this is a total nonsense: "In the future there is no cloud cover, no rain etc again tell me the long term forecast accurately."

I never said world markets were efficient - straw man argument from you.

I really do not care what you have worked on.  In this are you are proven clueless.

 

 

[NickW + 2,714]

45 minutes ago, jaycee said:

Red you have turned up didn't notice you there.

OK lets dance.

So you are saying the weather patterns of global warming are 'very predicable'? No.  Is that your "guess"?

No you clearly said weather patterns are 'very predicable'. Please give me the accurate long term forecast for the world once global warming increases. I know you cant so basing power production on renewables is a risk.

Changing to wind and solar when the world is about to have its weather patterns turned on their head seems rather risky no? First, wind and solar investment has been occurring for a good while now and globally the energy mix in in "transition".  Second, increased warming will add energy to the surface winds and therefore continue to benefit wind farms.  Finally, the sun will keep shining, so it seems your question was based on ignorance.

 In the future there is no cloud cover, no rain etc again tell me the long term forecast accurately. Faster winds yes keep hearing that every year during hurricane season wind turbines fall down in hurricanes and certainly will not operate correctly in strong winds so is faster winds actually a good thing? Please accurately predict the wind strength during global warming for me. Not me that's ignorant I am afraid wishful thinking that everything will work out exactly as you plan seems more like ignorance.

Only following your logic here, as with most of the renewables lobby it is not well thought out as I repeatedly try to get you to and others here to face upto.  We live in a world which is market driven.  What aspect of that do you not understand? 

A lot more than you clearly, if you think world markets are efficient then you have not got a clue dear boy. They constantly make mistakes and  invest in the wrong thing, shale oil in the US is a good example right now.

Everything will work first time and cost no money seems to be the renwables point of view logical thought and counter argument is frowned upon.  ?? Whaaaaaaaaat? There are clearly people who, like you, continue to make nonsense claims because they are devoid of facts.  And that's separate from not putting together a logical sense.

I have a lifetimes experience of actually working on large industrial projects and none of them go exactly to plan and the more untried equipment used the bigger the cock up and you want to change the world to renewables and it will be alright on the night, really Red?

I will have to leave it at that I have a busy day tomorrow and for a few days. Always fun chatting to you

Bye

I will put it you again Jaycee as you conveniently ignore anything that challenges your position - take a look at this. 

https://www.bmreports.com/bmrs/?q=generation/windforcast/out-turn

Notice how the outurn closely mirrors the initial and last forcasts. This demonstrates the modelling and predictability of wind outputs. The industry is getting very good at it. 

[DanilKa + 443]

On 2/4/2019 at 10:53 PM, NickW said:

These issues are not unique to EV's. Cold weather significantly affects ICE fuel economy too.

I fill the wifes car every week (Toyota Hybrid) to full and set the fuel economy gauge to measure it (geek that I am). She normally manages around 50 mpg in mild winter weather but during the winter blizzards in late Feb 2018 the fuel economy fell to 43mpg. On a 10 gallon tank that would change the range from 600 miles to 430miles.

Likewise I recall treating the door handles with WD40 because they were freezing up.

At least with ICE you know if car starts (true, same hassles as it relies on battery) - your range won't be a moving target and you are likely at arrive to point B.

[Personal Coach + 16]

Wind Energy and Solar need to be renamed from "Renewable Energy" to what they really are: "Intermittant Energy Sources".   Where I live less than 1% of the electricity in my outlets is from wind/solar.  Fossil Fuels built our modern world.  

 

Photo Credit:  Illustration: Bryan Christie Design

Edited February 7, 2019 by Personal Coach

[NickW + 2,714]

6 minutes ago, DanilKa said:

At least with ICE you know if car starts (true, same hassles as it relies on battery) - your range won't be a moving target and you are likely at arrive to point B.

The Hybrid is an ICE - the example I gave shows their is considerable variation in the fuel economy and therefore range of the vehicle. 

I know there is a typo in that post of mine - I said 600 when I should have said 500 miles. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

33 minutes ago, NickW said:

I will keep this simple  - because other nutrients are available by virtue of fertilisers and irrigation if needed. You can't apply this on a global scale to the natural environment. 

Oh yes, I can. It is simple botany. 

Edited February 7, 2019 by ronwagn

[NickW + 2,714]

2 minutes ago, Personal Coach said:

Wind Energy and Solar need to be renamed from "Renewable Energy" to what they really are: "Intermittant Energy Sources".   Where I live less than 1% of the electricity in my outlets is from wind/solar.  Fossil Fuels built our modern world.  

 

For clarity perhaps you should add that 1 cubic mile of oil is 27-29 billion barrels of oil / 10 months production of oil. 

[DanilKa + 443]

3 minutes ago, NickW said:

The Hybrid is an ICE - the example I gave shows their is considerable variation in the fuel economy and therefore range of the vehicle. 

and Hybrid is what I'm driving. Camry has ~3x better mileage compared to Prado.

[NickW + 2,714]

3 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

Oh yes, I can. It is simple biology. 

Which clearly you don't understand

If the water or nutrients are not there to match the increase in CO2 then biology significantly restricts growth. Its called a limiting factor.

If you disbelieve this concept then why would we ever need to irrigate plants or feed them nutrients. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

19 minutes ago, NickW said:

Which clearly you don't understand

If the water or nutrients are not there to match the increase in CO2 then biology significantly restricts growth. Its called a limiting factor.

If you disbelieve this concept then why would we ever need to irrigate plants or feed them nutrients. 

You are just being silly and do not understand botany. Even the atmosphere contains nutrients. Have you heard of bacteria and aerophiles? Transpiration? Read up. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bromeliaceae

Edited February 7, 2019 by ronwagn

[Personal Coach + 16]

I am amused by people who say "CO2 is Pollution", and those who want "Carbon Sequestration" to rid the air of "dangerous CO2".   It tells me they are poorly educated. 

CO2 is a 100% normal, natural and ESSENTIAL part of our ecosystem. Humans and other animals produce vast amounts of CO2 within our bodies.  Plants and trees absorb the CO2 as an essential nutrient, and they produce Oxygen for us in return.  This is called a Symbiotic Relationship.  

Did you know the air we inhale is less than 0.04% CO2, but the air we exhale is 4%-5% CO2 ?   We are all CO2 Makers, and the plants and trees love it.