Some Good News on Climate Change Maybe

[Illurion + 894]

30 minutes ago, Meredith Poor said:

In the existing circumstances of snow on solar panels, I'm not surprised at the behavior of the utilities. They're used to keeping coal plants running during extreme events, but it hasn't occurred to them to put bodies out in solar farms to brush off the panels.

Categorically deciding that 'this will never work' ignores the eventuality of storage - storage over periods of weeks or months. Consider the size of 'power storage' on the scale of oil tanks in places like Henry, OK, or the various tank farms in Houston or Louisiana. People are designing batteries that work on the same scale.

Solar panels (or at least the silicon ones) are, incidentally, infrared LEDs. Running current through them means that they could illuminate the snow, perhaps with enough heat to melt it. This is also something that probably didn't occur to the people that designed the farm. It's a technical problem, not a fundamental barrier.

Make excuses all you want,  but the STORAGE you talk about DOES NOT EXIST..........!

Using LEDS to melt the snow is a nice idea.    But as you can see it isn't being done......!

Stick to reality...................   That is what the article talks about........    REALITY.......

 

DESPITE WHAT YOU STATED,  YOU OBVIOUSLY DID NOT READ THE ARTICLE..........

IF YOU HAD,  you would have read THIS:

..............................

During their testimony, Xcel Energy representatives stated that the company’s solar panels only produced 8 to 10 percent of their potential output because of snow cover.

"Yet, Xcel wants to build more solar because they get a guaranteed 7.5 percent profit on every dollar they spend on power plants, including solar panels, whether they produce electricity or not.

Some naive observers assume that the fact that utilities lobby to be required to build wind and solar facilities means they must be a good idea.     On the contrary: if they were a good idea, utilities wouldn’t have to lobby to be forced to construct them.

It is all about the rate base. Any capital expenditure that goes into a utility’s rate base provides a guaranteed return.     Whether the expenditure makes any sense in terms of providing reliable energy is another matter altogether."

 

...........................

In other words,   it is all about companies building things in order to GET MONEY FROM THE GOVERNMENT.........

The Companies get paid even if what they build doesn't work as it is supposed to............

[MUI + 92]

Why does the ELECTRIC truck in the picture have an exhaust pipe AND a radiator, AND air cleaners? The article linked to the post claims the mfgr removed the diesel engine and replaced it with batteries and an electric motor for propulsion. 

Did they get tired and just didn't remove the radiator, exhaust system, and intake air filtration system?

Or is this some kind of hoax???

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,129]

3 hours ago, Guillaume Albasini said:

Check this one :  https://electrek.co/2017/09/17/electric-dumper-truck-worlds-largest-ev-battery-pack/

 

When people like you can do basic MATH and SHOW it, then the world will actually listen. Since you cannot read  or do math, I did it for you... well some of it for you....

Article: 700KWh batter pack... Cannot use the bottom 20% or top 10% for an actual battery capacity of ~500KWh of usable energy storage.... has an 800HP engine Komatsu 605-7 has a 552KW engine..... and it uses all of that power climbing out of holes in the ground. 

How long will it run...   Lets see if a genius like you can do simple division...

NOW REALITY: Those trucks operate 24/7/365.  Even assuming only 50% full power Req... Do the math.

EDIT: This is not a bulldozer...

Edited March 6, 2019 by Wastral

[Guillaume Albasini + 851]

2 hours ago, Wastral said:

When people like you can do basic MATH and SHOW it, then the world will actually listen. Since you cannot read  or do math, I did it for you... well some of it for you....

Article: 700KWh batter pack... Cannot use the bottom 20% or top 10% for an actual battery capacity of ~500KWh of usable energy storage.... has an 800HP engine Komatsu 605-7 has a 552KW engine..... and it uses all of that power climbing out of holes in the ground. 

How long will it run...   Lets see if a genius like you can do simple division...

NOW REALITY: Those trucks operate 24/7/365.  Even assuming only 50% full power Req... Do the math.

EDIT: This is not a bulldozer...

Please read the article if you can read. This one is not for climbing out of holes but for bringing rocks down from a hill and it converts the potential energy when braking.

As the eDumper will transport its freight on a short stretch up and down the hill, it is expected to become a “zero energy vehicle”, meaning its charge is generated through recuperation. The eDumper will transport lime and marl rocks from a higher mining area to a lower processing plant and the partners estimate that the fully loaded descent will generate a load of braking energy, largely sufficient for the empty return journey uphill.

I'm not saying this truck will replace all the  mining trucks but if the mine is located at a higher altitude than the processing plant it could save huge amounts of fuel, reduce costs and air pollution. This is a a prototype and the tech will improve over time. I'm aware that in many mines the processing plant is located at a higher level than the mining site and in those cases using electric trucks will be more challenging but I'm rather confident it will happen in a not so distant future. The International Council on Mining and Metals aims to achieve greenhouse gas-free vehicles for surface mining by 2040.

The underground mines will be the first to convert to electric trucks. Goldcorp is already operating the world’s first new all-electric mine in Ontario. 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mining-electric-goldcorp/first-new-all-electric-mine-dumps-diesel-cuts-costs-pollution-idUSKBN1JH2FI

Reducing the use of diesel fuel could have significant cost benefits for the industry: as much as 40 percent of an underground mine’s energy outlay is spent on powering gigantic ventilation systems to remove pollutants from tunnels.

http://www.mining.com/web/electric-vehicle-revolution-goes-underground-mine-truck/

https://electrek.co/2018/03/16/all-electric-40-tonne-truck-mining-artisan-vehicles/

 

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

9 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Wastral and others, here is some ancient advice from the very beginnings of the intertubes...

I have actually found @Red to be the most factual on this forum. Although he does present his argument very direct. 

It strikes me that there is a big confusion between accepting climate science and mitigation costs. Red is talking about climate science. I have not a single political opinion from on what mitigation acts should be taken. 

Why do you and others always assume and go on the offense? 

[Meredith Poor + 883]

10 hours ago, Wastral said:

http://www.nlcpr.com/SolarInsolation.php

4X difference.  You are not going to do anything to a panel that is going to pull in 2KWh/m^2 on a perfectly clear day.  That is 20c retail... Wholesale that is 6c per square meter, best case. 

Suggest you look up the enthalpy of water and how much snow is on a m^2 of panel and how much energy required to melt it and then compare to how much is pulled in....  Assuming of course it is not being frozen as quickly by outside air....

Not that Minnesota is cold or anything...  Only thing that is possible economics wise is for the panels to be mounted on a rod swivel allowing them to "dump" their snow load. 

This doesn't make any mention of storage. In the summer Minnesota is getting 5 to 6 KWH per day per square meter.

As a general rule, wind works better the farther one is from the equator. Vast amounts of heat are absorbed by the oceans in the tropics, and then that heat is radiated at the poles. This produces vast amounts of wind in the northern and southern latitudes.

[Meredith Poor + 883]

9 hours ago, Illurion said:

Thanks for making my point........

You admit you do not read conservative media.....

 

TRUE stories like these ARE IGNORED BY THE LIBERAL FAKE NEWS MEDIA........

Conservative Media is more informative....

I don't 'read' doctrinaire literature at either end of the spectrum. 'Truth' is often less a matter of what people say, but what they leave out. People are really good at shopping their statistics. They are also skilled at making money telling people what they want to hear.

[Meredith Poor + 883]

9 hours ago, Illurion said:

Make excuses all you want,  but the STORAGE you talk about DOES NOT EXIST..........!

Using LEDS to melt the snow is a nice idea.    But as you can see it isn't being done......!

Stick to reality...................   That is what the article talks about........    REALITY.......

 

DESPITE WHAT YOU STATED,  YOU OBVIOUSLY DID NOT READ THE ARTICLE..........

IF YOU HAD,  you would have read THIS:

..............................

During their testimony, Xcel Energy representatives stated that the company’s solar panels only produced 8 to 10 percent of their potential output because of snow cover.

"Yet, Xcel wants to build more solar because they get a guaranteed 7.5 percent profit on every dollar they spend on power plants, including solar panels, whether they produce electricity or not.

Some naive observers assume that the fact that utilities lobby to be required to build wind and solar facilities means they must be a good idea.     On the contrary: if they were a good idea, utilities wouldn’t have to lobby to be forced to construct them.

It is all about the rate base. Any capital expenditure that goes into a utility’s rate base provides a guaranteed return.     Whether the expenditure makes any sense in terms of providing reliable energy is another matter altogether."

 

...........................

In other words,   it is all about companies building things in order to GET MONEY FROM THE GOVERNMENT.........

The Companies get paid even if what they build doesn't work as it is supposed to............

The reality in 1941 was that nuclear power didn't exist. The reality in 1952 was that there was no such thing as a silicon PV cell. The reality in 1968 was that no human had ever landed on another celestial body. Just keep quoting your realities....

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,129]

4 hours ago, Guillaume Albasini said:

Please read the article if you can read. Epic SNIP

Trucks going downhill.....

 

Reality: Mines, by and large, are not found at the top of mountains. 

Are you trying to make me laugh?  Thanks. 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,129]

3 hours ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

I have actually found @Red to be the most factual on this forum.

Quote one.... We will be waiting till the heat death of the universe while you search...

[Guillaume Albasini + 851]

1 hour ago, Wastral said:

Reality: Mines, by and large, are not found at the top of mountains. 

Are you trying to make me laugh?  Thanks. 

You can laugh... we'll see who have the last laugh.

 

Each time an energy transition happens you'll find some people unable to see the coming revolution.

Robert Thurston, a U.S. steam engine expert, opined in 1894, no less, that horses are not only “self-feeding, self-controlling, self-maintaining and self-reproducing, but they are far more economical in the energy they are able to develop from a given weight of fuel material, than any other existing form of motor.”

You are a XXIst century Robert Thurston.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

18 minutes ago, Guillaume Albasini said:

You can laugh... we'll see who have the last laugh.

 

Each time an energy transition happens you'll find some people unable to see the coming revolution.

Robert Thurston, a U.S. steam engine expert, opined in 1894, no less, that horses are not only “self-feeding, self-controlling, self-maintaining and self-reproducing, but they are far more economical in the energy they are able to develop from a given weight of fuel material, than any other existing form of motor.”

You are a XXIst century Robert Thurston.

Are you talking about this Robert Thurston?  He seems to be more an advocate of motorized technology, including steam over horses.  Where did you get that quote?  There does seem to be a lot written about the man but I didn't see that (doesn't mean it doesn't exist, just that I didn't see it  )

IF this were a new technology that we were discussing, you might have something about skeptics and new technology.  Sadly, this technology is not new and, although the application looks nice and even promising for niche operations, this is just a re-hash of applications known about and experimented with for a 100+ years.

[Guillaume Albasini + 851]

I found the Thurston quote in a very interesting  2013 article by  Andrew Nikiforuk

"The Big Shift Last Time : From Horse Dung to Car Smog Lessons from an earlier energy transition."

https://thetyee.ca/News/2013/03/06/Horse-Dung-Big-Shift/

It's true that electrical cars are more than 100 years old but battery technology is improving quickly.  And a given situation like horses are more economical than motors or ICE trucks are better than electric trucks can change quickly than expected.

 

 

 

 

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

11 minutes ago, Guillaume Albasini said:

I found the Thurston quote in a very interesting  2013 article by  Andrew Nikiforuk

"The Big Shift Last Time : From Horse Dung to Car Smog Lessons from an earlier energy transition."

https://thetyee.ca/News/2013/03/06/Horse-Dung-Big-Shift/

It's true that electrical cars are more than 100 years old but battery technology is improving quickly.  And a given situation like horses are more economical than motors or ICE trucks are better than electric trucks can change quickly than expected.

 

 

 

 

I hope you're right.  Batteries as we know them are SO yesterday, and have been for a long long time.  I'm serious.  I'd venture to say that few purchases give a feeling of too-expensive-won't-last like batteries (especially at Christmas, as always) as we have known them just during my lifetime.  Before that was notably worse, of course, so there have been vast improvements.  In my field of aviation there has been a great deal of progress, especially with the roll-out of the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, but I was hoping it would go much farther than it has so far.  Billions of $$ in research and development have gone into finding the new tech; maybe someday soon!  I had a look into the battery packs in the latest Tesla and frankly I wasn't all that impressed, unfortunately.  Essentially, IMHO, it just seems that they are making current battery tech more efficient, together with more efficient electric motor/drive systems, and packing the rechargeable AA's in there by the 100's.  Nothing earth shattering there.

[NickW + 2,714]

15 hours ago, Wastral said:

No, your mower is not electric.  Your joke of a yard is tiny.  Yes, I have an electric Ryobi mower.  My yard is also miniscule.  It also mows extremely SLOWLY requiring a battery change half way through on my tiny yard and requires that I take twice as long mowing the yard. 

No, chainsaws are not electric, jokes they claim are chainsaws are used for pruning are electric and only a home owner who never or barely ever uses it will ever buy one. I have an electric Ryobi pruning saw, yea team.... never use it. 

Battery powered hand tools for light construction work?  Great.  Anything requiring duration or heavy duty?  Hell no.  Not even close. 

And no, there is not a battery powered Bulldozer who require 150HP or 500HP running all day long.  Same reason there is not a truck with these requirements.

Cranes, electric?  They don't move and are fixed in place at ports and have been electric for the last century.  All other cranes, not one of them is battery powered and won't be as cranes already push the road weight limit.   You going to buy a castrated crane or for same weight class buy a larger crane getting you more jobs.... 

As for your Rivian joke of a truck... no it is not a truck.  It is a glorified passenger vehicle in the shape of a vehicle whom actually does work.  You buy a truck to HAUL a LOT of heavy things, not people. If electric were viable in trucking, UPS, FED EX would be all over them.  Actually, they are trying.  Of course most they have "bought" is because of government bribes .... in reverse and they are NOT trucks, they are small delivery vans.  Fact is they can't haul a load.  But since UPS is constrained by VOLUME not load, electric may eventually actually work for them for local delivery for the same reason most people can use an electric bike, scooter, and car; short driving distances.  Super short distances like trucking in a port? Yea, will work well until the port has a giant bump in traffic and oops. sorry we can't unload your ship, our trucks are charging... ICE, if you have a surge, you can got 24/7.  At least in a port they are effectively a forklift, just bigger and possible. 

Now, if battery density increases 2X?  Or can develop a battery which also becomes part of the structure? Yea, then we are talking.  Until then, dreams are nice. 

PS: As for farming: Don't make us laugh.  Farming requires the machines to work 24/7 for 2-4 weeks straight during planting/harvest, so unless the cost of the machine can drop 50% allowing everyone to own twice as many tractors... SOL.  Of course if someone can create a catalyst which can help turn electricity into diesel.......

Why do you buy crap? 

I work for one of the biggest rail companies in the UK. 

75-80%  of our track verge clearance is done with battery powered chainsaws. We keep some petrol saws for the largest jobs but routine work is undertaken using electric. Does the same job but reduces operator exposures to vibration, noise and exhaust emissions

We even arc weld tracks in tunnels using battery packs on a wagon as a power source because this massively reduces exhaust emission exposure from diesel gensets. 

[NickW + 2,714]

5 hours ago, Wastral said:

Reality: Mines, by and large, are not found at the top of mountains. 

Are you trying to make me laugh?  Thanks. 

A better description would be Quarries. Its not becoming to mock forum members whose first language may not be English. 

This rail line, using the same principle is a net exporter of electricity to the grid. 

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

If the Australian rail lines from the Pilbara to the Coast where electric and regen braking was used then they too would be net exporters. 

[MUI + 92]

I can see where a large truck like this would work where the quarry is uphill from the loading site and the regenerative braking system could supply enough power to charge the batteries for the return (empty)  trip uphill, but..... then reality/real world conditions set in and quarries that would like to use this tech cannot since they are lower than their loading sites (all of them are digging large holes in the ground after all) and they have to resort to trucks fueled by hydrocarbons to move the materials.

Don't get me wrong here. I am not a "hater" of all things new. I am simply a proponent of using what works the best for the money spent to use it without some lousy government agency sticking their nose into private business affairs.

There should not be emotion or politics involved in this issue. Inventions or innovations should be considered for use or adoption by industry by merit alone.If something better than what I am currently using comes along and I don't embrace it then my competitors will leave me behind and you won't see me again.

The marketplace is pretty efficient when it comes to sorting out idiots.

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,129]

2 hours ago, NickW said:

A better description would be Quarries. Its not becoming to mock forum members whose first language may not be English. 

This rail line, using the same principle is a net exporter of electricity to the grid. 

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

If the Australian rail lines from the Pilbara to the Coast where electric and regen braking was used then they too would be net exporters. 

Horay! You can find an exception.... Bravo!  You have a niche product...  Follow the economics. 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,129]

2 hours ago, NickW said:

Why do you buy crap? 

I work for one of the biggest rail companies in the UK. 

75-80%  of our track verge clearance is done with battery powered chainsaws. We keep some petrol saws for the largest jobs but routine work is undertaken using electric. Does the same job but reduces operator exposures to vibration, noise and exhaust emissions

We even arc weld tracks in tunnels using battery packs on a wagon as a power source because this massively reduces exhaust emission exposure from diesel gensets. 

Ah, the new bogey man.... diesel fumes...  Gotta love socialist government jobs that do not have to align with economics...   Track verge clearance are micro branches.  Less than 5 minutes of work.  Yup Bravo, a niche product.  Of course what you failed to mention is that REAL work parties with petrol chainsaws etc go up and down the lines every year clearing doing all of the real work and no, they do not use electric. Leaving you the piddly twiddly crap that falls down. 

[Illurion + 894]

8 hours ago, Meredith Poor said:

The reality in 1941 was that nuclear power didn't exist. The reality in 1952 was that there was no such thing as a silicon PV cell. The reality in 1968 was that no human had ever landed on another celestial body. Just keep quoting your realities....

You still don't get it..........

I like solar.......... 

BUT SOLAR IS NOT THE FUTURE..........    even if the storage problem was resolved................

 

NONE OF THE CURRENT OPTIONS ARE THE FUTURE.......

 

My best guess is that the FUTURE POWER SOURCE FOR HUMANS IS EITHER 'FUSION",  or something that has not even been dreamed of yet.............

 

Everything else is a waste of time.........   and a waste of money...........

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,129]

6 hours ago, Guillaume Albasini said:

You can laugh... we'll see who have the last laugh.

 

Each time an energy transition happens you'll find some people unable to see the coming revolution.

Robert Thurston, a U.S. steam engine expert, opined in 1894, no less, that horses are not only “self-feeding, self-controlling, self-maintaining and self-reproducing, but they are far more economical in the energy they are able to develop from a given weight of fuel material, than any other existing form of motor.”

You are a XXIst century Robert Thurston.

So no, you refuse to admit you did not do the basic math which was obvious in the article you posted.  Rather hold a micro exception up as the new "reality" as an energy transition inflection point.  No one here is saying electric will not do the work.  The question, as with any product is, upfront cost. If you have to buy 3X as many trucks to do the job, this is not economical.  The problem with batteries today is the exact same problem they have always had.  Energy Density. 

It used to be when discussion equipment, people could actually do math, but now that the climate fear mongers are whining, math and economics gets thrown out. 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,129]

2 hours ago, NickW said:

 Its not becoming to mock forum members whose first language may not be English.

Language is not being mocked Dude. Posting lies is being mocked as they should.  Exceptions are cute white lies. 

[mad-trader + 25]

I have no idea where to put this =>  Fukushima  (nuke plant) Disaster VR game seems  a bit over the top.   
C-Net just pushed this to me.  3/6/19

https://www.cnet.com/news/inside-a-fukushima-reactor-how-vr-gave-me-a-scary-real-experience/

[NickW + 2,714]

59 minutes ago, Wastral said:

Ah, the new bogey man.... diesel fumes...  Gotta love socialist government jobs that do not have to align with economics...   Track verge clearance are micro branches.  Less than 5 minutes of work.  Yup Bravo, a niche product.  Of course what you failed to mention is that REAL work parties with petrol chainsaws etc go up and down the lines every year clearing doing all of the real work and no, they do not use electric. Leaving you the piddly twiddly crap that falls down. 

Respirable particulates and gaseous diesel exhaust emissions do harm whether your politics are left or right. I'm afraid in the real world of science the political argument you make is null and void. 

RE Chainsaws. As I said 75-80% of the work is done using electric. A heavier petrol unit is used for larger jobs. This makes sense - why burden workers with heavier, noisier, polluting equipment when a safer alternative will do 4/5th's of the work in the same time

Its generally a good idea not to let 'Giant Redwoods' reach maturity on rail verges hence the tree stock have diameters upto about 150 mm which the electric chainsaws cope quite well with. Anything bigger - get the petrol out. 

 

[NickW + 2,714]

55 minutes ago, Wastral said:

Language is not being mocked Dude. Posting lies is being mocked as they should.  Exceptions are cute white lies. 

Its not a lie. your retort to Guillame was that most mines are not on top of mountains. This is true however I suspect the majority of mines are at altitude and are open cast. 

The regenerative braking as described would work ok in these type of mines see below but the best applications are going to be rail bringing ore down to sea level. I gave an example of the Iron Ore mines in the Pilbara but I suspect there are many other examples around the world.