bjack on 23/7/2023 at 18:31
On the topic of nuclear, back in the late 70s “breeder reactors” were sort of the "new best thing”. You convert U238 into plutonium then use that in a reactor. Of course there is the little problem of weapons grade Pu being created in relatively large quantities, but I’m sure the US and other governments would have extra special security in place (lol).
As for using electric cars to help power the grid, well... I’m not too keen on giving away my limited charge cycles just to support the grid. Now if the batteries were leased and you get credit for the “sell back” to the grid, and battery replacement is always free (minus labor), then I'll start to listen. But building cars that have non-removable batteries (Telsa) and then using these as UPSs for the grid is akin to lending out an extra room in your house and not taking into account the extra wear and tear that results.
I did read a quick blurb about sodium batteries becoming more feasible. Some pretty promising claims are being made about them. I’m hoping they’ll prove to be viable and help reduce the horrible range problems with EVs.
I’m much more in love with hydrogen. It is more dangerous storage-wise in some ways when compared to gasoline, but it has all of the advantages of unlimited range. I can live with getting 300 miles on a tank, then spending 5 minutes filling up to go another 300. And the bonus is how H can reduce the need for batteries. Excess power generated by other means can be used to make H, where is can be stored and then burnt in turbines at night. The H can be compressed and then distibuted by H burning trucks.
Are EVs viable? Of course they are and are decent transport for most trips. I’m still in the market for one for local use. However, I still need a gas car for long range. I’ve made 4 x 2000m miles trips in the last year and had very little time available for each trip. For brevity (not that this post is brief by any means), I will not go into why flying was out of the question. I had to drive 2000 miles RT in 5 days. Under no circumstances would an EV been able to do that.
I live in a very EV friendly part of the USA, at least politically. However, the current infrastructure cannot support the current number of EVs on the road. Most people in the Pacific NW (Seattle WA area) charge at home and sometimes at work. Parking lot charging stations are few and far between and always in use. Try driving down I5 from Seattle to Los Angeles in an EV and finding an unoccupied fast charger. It is likely you’ll drive 250 miles and have to call it a night. My 18 hour drive one way would turn into a 4 day journey.
I wish batteries could be standardized and interchangable. You pull into an EV station, pull out your pack, and replace it with a fresh one. Telsa was strongly considering this, but gave up on the idea. Yes, making 1 or 2 types of battery units would be confining/consticting to improvements, but it is a solution to range issues. Ownership of the battery, leases, and what if you get a bum battery in exchange? All problems that can be solved, but it would have to be a collective effort between all manufacturers. I don’t see that happening without government intervention and that usually results in the least optimal solution being adopted.
But with hydrogen, these problems go away, but others pop up. We don’t have a distribution system for H an it’s not well suited for pipelines. Lot’s of other issues. BMW found out last century that H acts like an acid in some cases. It loves to eat aluminum. Fuel cells are supposedly a better choice, but expensive to build. While burning it in an IC engine is a choice, NOx still can form.
But back on topic: geo-engineering to reduce CO2 and other green house gasses may be helpful, but might have negative impacts. Possible unintended consequences are my concern. Relying on AI to help try to predict outcomes is risky. AI is not going to know the unknown factors. One must sweat the small stuff. One never knows if what looks to be an insignificant factor is actually a straw that breaks the camel’s back.
Cipheron on 23/7/2023 at 22:29
Here's a cool thing they're trialing in Germany, with delivering power directly to road vehicles using the same technique normally used for electric trains:
[video=youtube;_3P_S7pL7Yg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3P_S7pL7Yg[/video]
So the trucks only need the batteries or hybrid for the last-mile stuff at each end of he journey. This would reduce the weight needed too, thus saving more energy.
Azaran on 24/7/2023 at 15:57
Something that's very misleading is the average increase of temperature. The earth has supposedly increased an average of 1 degree or so over the last century, and an additional degree over the next one is said to lead to new extremes.
In practice, this innocuous 1 degree actually leads to extreme increases, sometimes (
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/hot-poles-antarctica-arctic-70-and-50-degrees-above-normal) 40 c above normal.
A typical winter day in my area is easily 5 or 6 cº above what it was in the 90's
heywood on 26/7/2023 at 14:50
Very true. The atmosphere is pretty massive, warming the whole thing by 1C would take the energy of about 4 million ICBM warheads. But that's just the tip of the iceberg in terms of the effects we're causing, because the vast majority of excess heat is being absorbed by the oceans, land, and ice caps, not the atmosphere. Overall, it's a tremendous amount of extra energy in the biosphere and it's no wonder the weather is becoming increasingly chaotic. Our chosen warming metric doesn't represent it very well.
Until recently, a lot of people have been thinking "I don't live on the coast, so I'm not affected by sea level rise, and 2-3C warmer temps on average throughout the year wouldn't be too bad." Hopefully, they're getting wise to the fact that the increasing mean temperature isn't the biggest danger, it's the increasing variance.
And regarding those trucks, I am kind of surprised that mail & package delivery vehicles and small box trucks used for local routes haven't electrified already. They're an ideal use case because they make short trips from a home base and wouldn't require charging on the go, and because they usually do a lot of stop & go and spend periods of time idling. You could really save a lot on fuel and maintenance costs. Same with squad cars for city police departments.
bassoferrol on 27/7/2023 at 15:31
China, India and Russia are really worried about this.
We must help them out.
heywood on 28/7/2023 at 14:48
(
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_renewable_electricity_production)
#1 China leads the world in renewable energy production with 1.7M GWh.
#2 United States is second with 630k GWh.
#3 Brazil
#4 Canada
#5 India
#6 Germany
#7 Russia
#8 Japan
#9 Norway
#10 Turkey
Yes, China is still building coal plants. Renewables are up to about 24% of China's total, which is behind most of Western Europe but far ahead of the United States at 14%. The US has the lowest percentage of renewables of any country in that top 10 list, behind Russia and India.
Besides, the climate doesn't care about borders, and India damn well better worry about it.
EDIT: I see Spain at 38%, which is respectable.
Cipheron on 28/7/2023 at 23:40
Also keep in mind the USA's emissions per capita are double that of China, on top of the USA having a lower uptake of renewables, and China being a signatory to the Paris Accords, whereas Trump refused to be involved.
Also, China was set 2030 goals for the amount of solar wind power. They actually pushed forward, and are on target to hit that in 2025, 5 years ahead of schedule:
(
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jun/29/china-wind-solar-power-global-renewable-energy-leader)
Quote:
China is shoring up its position as the world leader in renewable power and potentially outpacing its own ambitious energy targets, a report has found.
China is set to double its capacity and produce 1,200 gigawatts of energy through wind and solar power by 2025, reaching its 2030 goal five years ahead of time, according to the report by Global Energy Monitor, a San Francisco-based NGO that tracks operating utility-scale wind and solar farms as well as future projects in the country.
It says that as of the first quarter of the year,
China's utility-scale solar capacity has reached 228GW, more than that of the rest of the world combined. The installations are concentrated in the country's north and north-west provinces, such as Shanxi, Xinjiang and Hebei.
... they literally made more solar plants than the total rest of humanity combined. That really puts the argument that we should slack off because China isn't willing to play their part in perspective.
Azaran on 31/7/2023 at 14:13
This has been going around, the(
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-a-mega-ocean-current-about-to-shut-down/) potential collapse of the weakening Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation.
Quote:
Previous studies have found that the current, known as the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, or AMOC, is weakening over time, but that it's unlikely to collapse before the end of the century. The new study marks the first time that researchers have tried to pin down when the AMOC could stop working — the authors said it could be anytime between 2025 and 2095.
Quote:
If the current weakens enough, it can eventually cross a threshold of no return, causing the system to collapse. In fact, scientists believe it's happened before. Studies of the Earth's ancient climate suggest that the AMOC probably shut down around 13,000 years ago, during a natural warming period when large volumes of melting ice were pouring into the ocean.
But some scientists say there's reason to believe standard climate models may be underestimating the AMOC's weakening.
Quote:
If the AMOC shuts down, it would have widespread global consequences, scientists say.
Many studies predict a significant cooling over parts of Europe, Thornalley said — potentially by as much as 5 or 10 degrees Celsius. Tropical rain belts might shift their positions, causing some regions to experience more droughts and others to suffer more floods.
Rahmstorf added that the North Atlantic may see a major increase in rising seas. If the AMOC can't ferry large volumes of water around the world, the ocean may absorb less carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Parts of the deep ocean may receive less oxygen. Marine ecosystems could change in ways scientists are still trying to understand.In short, there could be dramatic consequences. But it's still a matter of debate whether those looming alterations could happen within the next few decades.
mxleader on 6/8/2023 at 09:28
One of the best ways to ensure that new coal is produced would be to warm the planet to what it was during the carboniferous period and kill off all the lignin eating fungi. Then Earth could produce new coal over the next 60 million years. Follow me for more renewable resource ideas.
