| Scary Windmills 10:13 - Oct 23 with 2003 views | onehunglow |
According to Don ,a big cause of cancer then?
Fumes from a Windmill.
Prof...where are you Sir.Report back on this |  |
| |  |
| Scary Windmills on 17:00 - Oct 27 with 305 views | Boundy |
| Scary Windmills on 15:27 - Oct 27 by Catullus |
I didn't sau that, I thought you didn't want to believe the BBC...until they post something you agree with eh?
It's not even what you make it out to be though. It's saying it's not a silver bullet, not an instant cure for what ails the planet. Obviously we must all play a part. There is much more that must be done. That won't happen as long as people refuse to believe in the damage humans are doing. |
Well back to the topic in hand , yes there is an environmental impact where wind, solar in fact any new technology being developed will have an impact somewhere , the question is which has the least ongoing impact on the planet . If someone thinks digging up coal then burning it is nicer to the environment compared to wind,sun of wave energy then there is no hope . Aberthaw b station only recently closed and the life of it was only extended due to scrubbers having to be fitted to reduce the emissions . And guess what the major supply for its coal was the Fos y fran open cast site near Merthyr , a massive undertaking a blot on the landscape. | |
| "In a free society, the State is the servant of the people—not the master." |
| |
| Scary Windmills on 17:38 - Oct 27 with 295 views | Scotia |
| Scary Windmills on 17:00 - Oct 27 by Boundy |
Well back to the topic in hand , yes there is an environmental impact where wind, solar in fact any new technology being developed will have an impact somewhere , the question is which has the least ongoing impact on the planet . If someone thinks digging up coal then burning it is nicer to the environment compared to wind,sun of wave energy then there is no hope . Aberthaw b station only recently closed and the life of it was only extended due to scrubbers having to be fitted to reduce the emissions . And guess what the major supply for its coal was the Fos y fran open cast site near Merthyr , a massive undertaking a blot on the landscape. |
I'm currently dealing with a potential opencast mine extension.
It's environmental impacts are large and irreversible. | | | |
| Scary Windmills on 17:57 - Oct 27 with 292 views | Gwyn737 |
| Scary Windmills on 17:38 - Oct 27 by Scotia |
I'm currently dealing with a potential opencast mine extension.
It's environmental impacts are large and irreversible. |
Where is it Scotia? (If you’re allowed to say) | | | |
| Scary Windmills on 19:09 - Oct 27 with 277 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Scary Windmills on 15:27 - Oct 27 by Catullus |
I didn't sau that, I thought you didn't want to believe the BBC...until they post something you agree with eh?
It's not even what you make it out to be though. It's saying it's not a silver bullet, not an instant cure for what ails the planet. Obviously we must all play a part. There is much more that must be done. That won't happen as long as people refuse to believe in the damage humans are doing. |
I thought you might acccept something from the BBC.
So do you admit that Wind Turbines & Solar can't achieve net zero?
Also that to do so we need to change society completely as outlined by ER and Greta? | | | |
| Scary Windmills on 19:15 - Oct 27 with 273 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Scary Windmills on 14:05 - Oct 27 by Scotia |
Climate isn't stable. It never will be and we aren't attempting to control it. There has never been a species emitting massive quantities of fossil Co2 into the atmosphere derived from deposits laid down over the entire geological record before. Those emissions are destroying the climate that they are dependent on, either directly or indirectly. We need to minimise our impact not control climate.
I'm (edit) not arguing with them, they have written an article that isn't relevant to climate change or this thread.
You've posted it because you or the forum you saw it on don't understand that it isn't relevant. [Post edited 27 Oct 2020 15:39]
|
How can the "ideal world for humans" that is 5 degrees C warmer than now not be relevant to climate change.
The world will spend Trillions of dollars every year to prevent global warming of 2 degrees C above the little ice age and about 1 degree warmer than now by 2100.
When the climate optimum is 5 degrees warmer than now.
You cannot see the futility of wasting that money which could be used to really improve the world? [Post edited 27 Oct 2020 19:19]
| | | |
| Scary Windmills on 19:21 - Oct 27 with 269 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Scary Windmills on 17:38 - Oct 27 by Scotia |
I'm currently dealing with a potential opencast mine extension.
It's environmental impacts are large and irreversible. |
Irreversible?
Are you certain about that? | | | |
| Scary Windmills on 19:24 - Oct 27 with 266 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Scary Windmills on 17:00 - Oct 27 by Boundy |
Well back to the topic in hand , yes there is an environmental impact where wind, solar in fact any new technology being developed will have an impact somewhere , the question is which has the least ongoing impact on the planet . If someone thinks digging up coal then burning it is nicer to the environment compared to wind,sun of wave energy then there is no hope . Aberthaw b station only recently closed and the life of it was only extended due to scrubbers having to be fitted to reduce the emissions . And guess what the major supply for its coal was the Fos y fran open cast site near Merthyr , a massive undertaking a blot on the landscape. |
Do either you or scotia understand the same devastation that is caused by mining the materials for Turbines, electric motors and batteries?
Or is it OK because it is not happening in the UK? | | | |
| Scary Windmills on 19:25 - Oct 27 with 266 views | Groo |
| Scary Windmills on 19:32 - Oct 23 by A_Fans_Dad |
I am surprised that you did not understand what the President actually said.
It was "I know more about wind than you do,' the president touted. 'It's extremely expensive, kills all the birds, is very intermittent, it's got a lot of problems, and they happen to make the windmills in both Germany and China. And the fumes coming up, if you are a believer in carbon emission, the fumes coming up to make these massive windmills is more than anything were talking about with natural gas, which is very clean.'
Which covers the whole manufacturing process from making Rare Earth magnets to everything else. |
Natural gas is a very finite resource. The idea is to get renewable sources of energy going now, before its too late and we have no alternatives while going through the teething issues. |  |
| Groo does what Groo does best |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Scary Windmills on 19:26 - Oct 27 with 266 views | Scotia |
| Scary Windmills on 19:15 - Oct 27 by A_Fans_Dad |
How can the "ideal world for humans" that is 5 degrees C warmer than now not be relevant to climate change.
The world will spend Trillions of dollars every year to prevent global warming of 2 degrees C above the little ice age and about 1 degree warmer than now by 2100.
When the climate optimum is 5 degrees warmer than now.
You cannot see the futility of wasting that money which could be used to really improve the world? [Post edited 27 Oct 2020 19:19]
|
That's a conversation ender. It's always been clear you don't understand climate but that is an incredibly naive comment.
You really understand so little that you don't realise how little you understand.
I wouldn't expect a statement like that from anyone over the age of 13. | | | |
| Scary Windmills on 20:01 - Oct 27 with 258 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Scary Windmills on 19:26 - Oct 27 by Scotia |
That's a conversation ender. It's always been clear you don't understand climate but that is an incredibly naive comment.
You really understand so little that you don't realise how little you understand.
I wouldn't expect a statement like that from anyone over the age of 13. |
Say's you, without a scrap of evidence.
You know what the Holocene climate optimum was and the temperatures involved. [Post edited 27 Oct 2020 20:03]
| | | |
| Scary Windmills on 20:10 - Oct 27 with 256 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Scary Windmills on 19:25 - Oct 27 by Groo |
Natural gas is a very finite resource. The idea is to get renewable sources of energy going now, before its too late and we have no alternatives while going through the teething issues. |
Do you think that renewables can replace Coal & Gas worldwide? | | | |
| Scary Windmills on 22:07 - Oct 27 with 243 views | Boundy |
https://www.iea.org/reports/global-energy-review-2020/renewables
Renewable energy has so far been the energy source most resilient to Covid‑19 lockdown measures. Renewable electricity has been largely unaffected while demand has fallen for other uses of renewable energy. In Q1 2020, global use of renewable energy in all sectors increased by about 1.5% relative to Q1 2019. Renewable electricity generation increased by almost 3%, mainly because of new wind and solar PV projects completed over the past year and because renewables are generally dispatched before other sources of electricity. Along with depressed electricity demand, power grids have managed heightened shares of wind and solar PV. The use of renewable energy in the form of biofuels declined in Q1 2020 as consumption of blended fuels for road transport fell.
We estimate that total global use of renewable energy will rise by about 1% in 2020. Despite supply chain disruptions that have paused or delayed activity in several key regions, the expansion of solar, wind and hydro power is expected to help renewable electricity generation to rise by nearly 5% in 2020. This growth is smaller than anticipated before the Covid‑19 crisis, however. A faster recovery would have a minimal impact on renewable energy production, though it would enable more new renewables-based projects to be completed. If recovery is slower, renewable energy would still increase, making renewables the energy source the most resilient to the Covid‑19 current crisis.
In Q1 2020, the global use of renewable energy was 1.5% higher than in Q1 2019. The increase was driven by a rise of about 3% in renewable electricity generation after more than 100 GW of solar PV and about 60 GW of wind power projects were completed in 2019. In addition, wind availability was high in Europe and the United States in Q1 2020. Renewables are also resilient to lower electricity demand because they are generally dispatched before other electricity sources due to their low operating costs or regulations that give them priority.
The share of renewables in global electricity generation jumped to nearly 28% in Q1 2020 from 26% in Q1 2019. The increase in renewables came mainly at the cost of coal and gas, though those two sources still represent close to 60% of global electricity supply. In Q1 2020 variable renewables — in the form of solar PV and wind power — reached 9% of generation, up from 8% in Q1 2019.
On an hourly basis, variable renewables met a higher share of electricity demand throughout most of Q1 2020. Before lockdown measures were implemented, shares of variable renewables were similar or higher due to favourable weather conditions, projects completed in 2019 and limited electricity demand growth. Once lockdown measures were put in place, electricity demand fell while levels of wind and solar PV held steady. This led to a noticeable step up in variable renewables’ share of demand. Multiple regions have seen record-high hourly shares of variable renewables in electricity demand during lockdowns, including Belgium, Italy, Germany, Hungary, and eastern parts of the United States. Since strict social distancing measures began in Germany on March 22, the share of variable renewables has been consistently higher than in the same period in 2019. Overall, electricity systems have been able to deal with increasing shares of variable renewables over the past few months because most markets have already experienced higher levels in summer months when solar PV penetration increases significantly.
First quarter of 2020 - compared with first quarter of 2019 | |
| "In a free society, the State is the servant of the people—not the master." |
| |
| Scary Windmills on 22:09 - Oct 27 with 243 views | Scotia |
| Scary Windmills on 20:01 - Oct 27 by A_Fans_Dad |
Say's you, without a scrap of evidence.
You know what the Holocene climate optimum was and the temperatures involved. [Post edited 27 Oct 2020 20:03]
|
A scrap of evidence for what? I'm dealing with what you have posted.
To give you something to think about the world looked very different during the carboniferous and there were no humans.
According to that paper for a while though it was ideal for the flora and fauna of the time that had gradually adapted to the environment over millions of years.
This was 300 million years ago and you expect climate change to deliver the same over the course of the next 1000 years?
No living thing influenced climate as we are but there was still mass extinction events.
How does any of this apply to the current situation? | | | |
| Scary Windmills on 00:32 - Oct 28 with 232 views | DJack |
Another report thatshows that we are going in the right direction with our energy needs
Utility-scale battery storage costs decreased nearly 70% between 2015 and 2018.
The average energy capacity cost of utility-scale battery storage in the United States has rapidly decreased from $2,152 per kilowatthour (kWh) in 2015 to $625/kWh in 2018. Battery storage systems store electricity produced by generators or pulled directly from the electric power grid and redistribute the power later as needed. At the end of 2018, the United States had 869 megawatts (MW) of installed battery power capacity (the maximum amount of power a battery can provide at a given moment) and 1,236 megawatthours (MWh) of battery energy capacity (the total amount of energy that can be stored by a battery).
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=45596 |  |
| It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. - Carl Sagan |
| |
| Scary Windmills on 11:24 - Oct 28 with 209 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Scary Windmills on 22:07 - Oct 27 by Boundy |
https://www.iea.org/reports/global-energy-review-2020/renewables
Renewable energy has so far been the energy source most resilient to Covid‑19 lockdown measures. Renewable electricity has been largely unaffected while demand has fallen for other uses of renewable energy. In Q1 2020, global use of renewable energy in all sectors increased by about 1.5% relative to Q1 2019. Renewable electricity generation increased by almost 3%, mainly because of new wind and solar PV projects completed over the past year and because renewables are generally dispatched before other sources of electricity. Along with depressed electricity demand, power grids have managed heightened shares of wind and solar PV. The use of renewable energy in the form of biofuels declined in Q1 2020 as consumption of blended fuels for road transport fell.
We estimate that total global use of renewable energy will rise by about 1% in 2020. Despite supply chain disruptions that have paused or delayed activity in several key regions, the expansion of solar, wind and hydro power is expected to help renewable electricity generation to rise by nearly 5% in 2020. This growth is smaller than anticipated before the Covid‑19 crisis, however. A faster recovery would have a minimal impact on renewable energy production, though it would enable more new renewables-based projects to be completed. If recovery is slower, renewable energy would still increase, making renewables the energy source the most resilient to the Covid‑19 current crisis.
In Q1 2020, the global use of renewable energy was 1.5% higher than in Q1 2019. The increase was driven by a rise of about 3% in renewable electricity generation after more than 100 GW of solar PV and about 60 GW of wind power projects were completed in 2019. In addition, wind availability was high in Europe and the United States in Q1 2020. Renewables are also resilient to lower electricity demand because they are generally dispatched before other electricity sources due to their low operating costs or regulations that give them priority.
The share of renewables in global electricity generation jumped to nearly 28% in Q1 2020 from 26% in Q1 2019. The increase in renewables came mainly at the cost of coal and gas, though those two sources still represent close to 60% of global electricity supply. In Q1 2020 variable renewables — in the form of solar PV and wind power — reached 9% of generation, up from 8% in Q1 2019.
On an hourly basis, variable renewables met a higher share of electricity demand throughout most of Q1 2020. Before lockdown measures were implemented, shares of variable renewables were similar or higher due to favourable weather conditions, projects completed in 2019 and limited electricity demand growth. Once lockdown measures were put in place, electricity demand fell while levels of wind and solar PV held steady. This led to a noticeable step up in variable renewables’ share of demand. Multiple regions have seen record-high hourly shares of variable renewables in electricity demand during lockdowns, including Belgium, Italy, Germany, Hungary, and eastern parts of the United States. Since strict social distancing measures began in Germany on March 22, the share of variable renewables has been consistently higher than in the same period in 2019. Overall, electricity systems have been able to deal with increasing shares of variable renewables over the past few months because most markets have already experienced higher levels in summer months when solar PV penetration increases significantly.
First quarter of 2020 - compared with first quarter of 2019 |
Yes it is quite clear from this statement.
"Renewables are also resilient to lower electricity demand because they are generally dispatched before other electricity sources due to their low operating costs or regulations that give them priority. "
Not the low operating costs which I will get to next, but regulated priority.
They are always used before calling upon other sources.
A completely biased market.
Lower operating costs brought about by penalising fossil fuels with carbon taxes, in the case of the UK £18/Mw and subsidising renewables.
Of course wind and solar had a bigger share of a smaller market.
And you think this is a good thing to raise the overall cost of electricity.
Notice anything about the Chart comparing the growth of renewables?
2018 = 7.5%
2019 = 7.0%
2020 = 4.9%
Doesn't appear to be expanding quite like all the words suggest.
There is also a slight problem with the investment in renewables compared to fossil fuels, in 2018 the investment of $300Billion = about 51Gw of wind power which is the plated value and Solar = about 102Gw of installation.
But that is not what you get for your money, for onshore wind you get 20-30% of it and offshore 30-40%. For Solar you get 10-25%.
But none of it removes current fossil fuel Back Up generation, so as the demand increases, due to intermittency the backup has to increase as well, so you get double the investment costs.
Currently Wind and Solar are about 7% of world generation, only another 9 times as much needed plus backup of course for zero carbon. | | | |
| Scary Windmills on 11:30 - Oct 28 with 206 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Scary Windmills on 22:09 - Oct 27 by Scotia |
A scrap of evidence for what? I'm dealing with what you have posted.
To give you something to think about the world looked very different during the carboniferous and there were no humans.
According to that paper for a while though it was ideal for the flora and fauna of the time that had gradually adapted to the environment over millions of years.
This was 300 million years ago and you expect climate change to deliver the same over the course of the next 1000 years?
No living thing influenced climate as we are but there was still mass extinction events.
How does any of this apply to the current situation? |
I see you choose to totally ignore the Holocene optimum of 500-9000 years ago which duplicated those earlier conditions and met the 5C requirement for the optimal planet.
That is what is relevant, humans thrived during that period as they did during the Medieval and the Roman warm periods. | | | |
| Scary Windmills on 11:59 - Oct 28 with 198 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Scary Windmills on 00:32 - Oct 28 by DJack |
Another report thatshows that we are going in the right direction with our energy needs
Utility-scale battery storage costs decreased nearly 70% between 2015 and 2018.
The average energy capacity cost of utility-scale battery storage in the United States has rapidly decreased from $2,152 per kilowatthour (kWh) in 2015 to $625/kWh in 2018. Battery storage systems store electricity produced by generators or pulled directly from the electric power grid and redistribute the power later as needed. At the end of 2018, the United States had 869 megawatts (MW) of installed battery power capacity (the maximum amount of power a battery can provide at a given moment) and 1,236 megawatthours (MWh) of battery energy capacity (the total amount of energy that can be stored by a battery).
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=45596 |
Yes they do NOT generate power they store power, ie they are only required to cover intermittency, they are a parasitic storage.
US annual electricity generation is 4100000 GW or 4100000000 MW, 10% of which is renewables. So 410000000 MW of renewables. That is 410000000/365 = 1123288 MW/day or 46804 MW/hour or 780 MW/minute.
So your battery backup will last for just over 1 minute.
Brilliant.
Your batteries at a cost of 1236000 x $625 = $772,500,000 will last a minute, what a complete and utter waste of 3/4 of a Billion dollars.
But hey it's green. | | | |
| Scary Windmills on 13:20 - Oct 28 with 187 views | Scotia |
| Scary Windmills on 11:30 - Oct 28 by A_Fans_Dad |
I see you choose to totally ignore the Holocene optimum of 500-9000 years ago which duplicated those earlier conditions and met the 5C requirement for the optimal planet.
That is what is relevant, humans thrived during that period as they did during the Medieval and the Roman warm periods. |
So you expect me to jump from a period 300 million years ago which is completely irrelevant to anthropogenic climate change to another completely irrelevant time 9000 years ago.
I like going on holiday to the med in the summer is that relevant? | | | |
| Scary Windmills on 13:51 - Oct 28 with 179 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Scary Windmills on 13:20 - Oct 28 by Scotia |
So you expect me to jump from a period 300 million years ago which is completely irrelevant to anthropogenic climate change to another completely irrelevant time 9000 years ago.
I like going on holiday to the med in the summer is that relevant? |
I honestly don't care what jumps you make.
Yes, I wonder why so many people want to retire and go on holidays to warmer climates?
Can't be anything to do with the fact that we all originated in Africa I suppose. | | | |
| Scary Windmills on 14:01 - Oct 28 with 176 views | Boundy |
So to summarise , no in normal operation turbines do not emit cancerous emissions . | |
| "In a free society, the State is the servant of the people—not the master." |
| |
| Scary Windmills on 14:04 - Oct 28 with 173 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Scary Windmills on 14:01 - Oct 28 by Boundy |
So to summarise , no in normal operation turbines do not emit cancerous emissions . |
If you are referring to Trump's statement he did not say that they did.
Try listening instead of jumping on what the MSM say's he said. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
