0
brenthutch

The case for wind farms

By brenthutch, in Speakers Corner

Recommended Posts

lawrocket    3

lawrocket
Quote

So... I wonder how many of you who think GW is not happening are going to deal with the reality when it jumps up and slaps you up side the head finally.



I’ve been waiting a while on reality. If reality is that the sea level has risen six feet since 1988, well, yeah, I must be living in loco land because try as I might, I haven’t seen it.

If the reality is that hurricanes have gotten stronger, more destructive and more frequent then, well, I must have my head in the sand since no hurricane has made US landfall in greater than three years.

If the reality is that the world is warmer now that it has been at any time in the last 100k years than, well, I gotta take a look at human population and life spans and say, “You know, it looks like this climate isn’t killing nearly as many people as it is killing.”

What is reality, Jeanne? Is reality what is predicted will happen? It depends on the prediction:
(1) Lawrocket will die – Yes, that’s a reality
(2) The universe will continue to become more disorderly – yes. That’s a law. (Note: this assumes a quantum fluctuation does not change the laws of the physics)
(3) The price of postage stamps will rise higher – yes. At least in the short term, but who knows whether they’ll be around in 100 years.
(4) Los Angeles will be Oakland’s neighbor – yes, assuming that Los Angeles and Oakland will still be there in a few hundred thousand/million years.

But then you reach areas where “reality” and “conjecture” are different.
(1) Lawrocket will die before he reaches fifty years of age – yes, it could happen and there is a risk of that but predicting it takes a number of variables into account.
(2) Expansion of the universe will continue to the point where molecules and atoms are ripped apart – Yes, the Big Rip has been theorized but it’s far from certain and we won’t be around to validate it
(3) A first class postage stamp will cost a dollar by 2050 – yes, that certainly seems reasonable but we’re getting too far ahead of ourselves
(4) The Maple Leafs will win another Stanley Cup – okay, nothing says it won’t happen but now you are talking a level of ridiculousness that makes me shake my head.

What is reality, Jeanne? It’s what I see around me. Some people take Nostradamus really seriously. Reality to tens of thousands six months ago was that Jesus was coming and that reality will slap you in the face. Reality for others is that the oceans will rise by ten feet in the next 17 years. Well, at least reality WAS that oceans would rise like that.

Your reality and mine differ. Your reality is predicated on prediction. My reality is predicated on what I see right now. I don’t predict what the world will be in 20 years – otherwise I’d have been a gazillionaire by sinking my student loans into property in 2000 and selling in 2007.

Your reality may yet slap me in the face. Your prediction of the future may indeed come true. But let’s wait until 2050 to discuss it. Neither of us has any evidence of what 2050 was like. We’ve got to get there first. That’s MY reality. Your reality is as valid as that of Kubrick and Clarke in 2001. A nice idea that wasn’t so far-fetched but things sure turned out differently.

So I think it appropriate to spend time worrying about present reality and when 2050 hits, I'll deal with it's reality. Maybe by then I'll be out of debt. There's another prediction, eh?:S


My wife is hotter than your wife.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

billvon    2,991

billvon
>So I think it appropriate to spend time worrying about present reality and
>when 2050 hits, I'll deal with it's reality.

Isn't that how we got into the current mortgage-debt mess? "I got a good deal and a big house right now - I'll worry about interest rates going up in ten years!"

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

rehmwa    2

rehmwa
Quote

Hey I am good with that.. as long as you put the exhaust pipes that spew out the crap that burns my eyes and harms my lungs from gas guzzlers directly into their owners faces.



I'm also good with smokers keeping their window shut while driving.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

mnealtx    0

mnealtx
Quote

>So I think it appropriate to spend time worrying about present reality and
>when 2050 hits, I'll deal with it's reality.

Isn't that how we got into the current mortgage-debt mess? "I got a good deal and a big house right now - I'll worry about interest rates going up in ten years!"



No, not really.

For your analogy to fit, the monthly payment (temp) would be staying the same or barely decreasing while the interest rate (CO2) kept climbing.
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

billvon    2,991

billvon
>For your analogy to fit, the monthly payment (temp) would be staying the
>same . . . while the interest rate (CO2) kept climbing.

And for a while, it was! Problem is that people assumed that would go on forever.

Then they hit the end of their adjustment cap period.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

mnealtx    0

mnealtx
Quote

>For your analogy to fit, the monthly payment (temp) would be staying the
>same . . . while the interest rate (CO2) kept climbing.

And for a while, it was! Problem is that people assumed that would go on forever.

Then they hit the end of their adjustment cap period.



Problem with THAT scenario is that the 'cap' has been surpassed many times (and by many multiples of the 'cap') and yet here we are with a LOWER payment than 1000 years ago.
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazon    7

Amazon
Quote

Quote

So... I wonder how many of you who think GW is not happening are going to deal with the reality when it jumps up and slaps you up side the head finally.



I’ve been waiting a while on reality. If reality is that the sea level has risen six feet since 1988, well, yeah, I must be living in loco land because try as I might, I haven’t seen it.

If the reality is that hurricanes have gotten stronger, more destructive and more frequent then, well, I must have my head in the sand since no hurricane has made US landfall in greater than three years.

If the reality is that the world is warmer now that it has been at any time in the last 100k years than, well, I gotta take a look at human population and life spans and say, “You know, it looks like this climate isn’t killing nearly as many people as it is killing.”

What is reality, Jeanne? Is reality what is predicted will happen? It depends on the prediction:
(1) Lawrocket will die – Yes, that’s a reality
(2) The universe will continue to become more disorderly – yes. That’s a law. (Note: this assumes a quantum fluctuation does not change the laws of the physics)
(3) The price of postage stamps will rise higher – yes. At least in the short term, but who knows whether they’ll be around in 100 years.
(4) Los Angeles will be Oakland’s neighbor – yes, assuming that Los Angeles and Oakland will still be there in a few hundred thousand/million years.

But then you reach areas where “reality” and “conjecture” are different.
(1) Lawrocket will die before he reaches fifty years of age – yes, it could happen and there is a risk of that but predicting it takes a number of variables into account.
(2) Expansion of the universe will continue to the point where molecules and atoms are ripped apart – Yes, the Big Rip has been theorized but it’s far from certain and we won’t be around to validate it
(3) A first class postage stamp will cost a dollar by 2050 – yes, that certainly seems reasonable but we’re getting too far ahead of ourselves
(4) The Maple Leafs will win another Stanley Cup – okay, nothing says it won’t happen but now you are talking a level of ridiculousness that makes me shake my head.

What is reality, Jeanne? It’s what I see around me. Some people take Nostradamus really seriously. Reality to tens of thousands six months ago was that Jesus was coming and that reality will slap you in the face. Reality for others is that the oceans will rise by ten feet in the next 17 years. Well, at least reality WAS that oceans would rise like that.

Your reality and mine differ. Your reality is predicated on prediction. My reality is predicated on what I see right now. I don’t predict what the world will be in 20 years – otherwise I’d have been a gazillionaire by sinking my student loans into property in 2000 and selling in 2007.

Your reality may yet slap me in the face. Your prediction of the future may indeed come true. But let’s wait until 2050 to discuss it. Neither of us has any evidence of what 2050 was like. We’ve got to get there first. That’s MY reality. Your reality is as valid as that of Kubrick and Clarke in 2001. A nice idea that wasn’t so far-fetched but things sure turned out differently.

So I think it appropriate to spend time worrying about present reality and when 2050 hits, I'll deal with it's reality. Maybe by then I'll be out of debt. There's another prediction, eh?:S


Contrary to what Mikee posts.. based on his reading of denier sites... glacial ice is melting... and the melting is accelerating. Since I moved here to the American Alps back in the 1970's I have seen a lot of glaciers completely dissapear. That is observed... and since I used to climb on them... I know first hand that they are now melted and gone. The greenland icesheet.. yup record melts.. and accelerating... so within your kids lifetimes... you might just see a really cool new inland sea right there in Fresno. Do you think that might then affect you???

I will be dead by 2050... even the life clock prognosticator thingie .. with my lifestyle... only gives me to 93.5 years of age...but I hope I live long enough to see all you deniers.. eating crow.... and whining incessantly about WE_SHOULDA_SEEN. I guess by then you will be denying that anyone tried to do anything about it.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

kelpdiver    2

kelpdiver
Quote

you might just see a really cool new inland sea right there in Fresno. Do you think that might then affect you???



come, now. Even the super doomer types have backed off the tens of feet of predicted sea level rise, content rather now to tell us how bad a few feet will be.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazon    7

Amazon
Quote

Quote

you might just see a really cool new inland sea right there in Fresno. Do you think that might then affect you???



come, now. Even the super doomer types have backed off the tens of feet of predicted sea level rise, content rather now to tell us how bad a few feet will be.



Hey at least you will have lots of new dive opportunities.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

jonstark    8

jonstark
Quote

>To equal the amount of energy dispensed by a single neighborhood gas station in
>a single day you would have to completely cover an entire county with solar cells.

Interesting claim. Let's do the math:

Let's take a filling station that sells 15,000 gallons of gas a day. (about 1000 gasoline sales a day, or a little less than one a minute.) That's 36 kilowatt-hours per gallon chemical energy, which translates to 12 kilowatt-hours per gallon effective energy (since cars are about 33% efficient thermodynamically.)

To put it another way, a gas station delivers about 180 megawatt-hours a day of useful energy.

What would we need to replace that energy with solar? Take the same useful energy as applied to an electric vehicle:

EV's are about 85% efficient, charger-to-wheels. So for 180 mwhr's useful energy we'd need 211 mwhrs of delivered energy. Here in San Diego we get 6 hours of direct sun a day on average, so we'd need 35 megawatts of solar panels. Modern panels are 150 watts per square foot, so we'd need 235,000 square feet of panels. That's a square 485 feet on a side.

The closest gas station to me (Amoco) is in a mini mall with a Bevmo, a pizza place etc. The parking lot for the mini-mall is 300x700, or 210,000 square feet. Thus by covering that one parking lot you'd get almost all the power needed to run that gas station if if were an EV charging station dispensing the same amount of useful energy.

Now cover the buildings themselves with panels as well and you'd cover the needs of the station.





Sorry Bill but I feel that you create an incorrect impression.

The gas station dispenses the equivalent of 540,000 kilowatt hours of energy in a day at your 15,000 gallon rate.

How many square feet of solar panels would it take to match, watt for watt, in your 6 hours/day of Southern California sunshine? My math is shaky but I come out with 3,6000,000 square feet of solar panel. Not quite a county but a large area none-the-less.

Please don't get me wrong. I am a proponent of solar arrays, wind, wave, nuke (eek!), etc.

I have a couple of acquaintances with 500+ square feet of panels on their roofs who will have them paid off within the second year and pay nothing for electrical use. They got government grants to get them installed which offset some of the initial outlay.

This is another area of discussion though. Is it worth it for all of to have to pay for the grants for a few of us to get solar panels? The power companies, state and federal governments will have to pass the costs of these grants on to tax payers and consumers. There's part of the initial pain and dismay that we will have to bear.

jon

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

billvon    2,991

billvon
>The gas station dispenses the equivalent of 540,000 kilowatt hours of
>energy in a day at your 15,000 gallon rate.

Yes. That's thermal energy; that's the amount of energy you'd get if you used it to heat your house. However, since cars are about 33% efficient (pump to wheels) it means that 180,000 kilowatt-hours of _usable_ energy is delivered.

>How many square feet of solar panels would it take to match, watt for
>watt, in your 6 hours/day of Southern California sunshine?

It would take 705,000 square feet of panels if you want to replicate the thermal energy instead of the usable energy. That's a square 840 feet on a side, or a big mall parking lot.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

sundevil777    102

sundevil777
Quote

>Diesel engines typically blow soot from the start.

They used to. Not any more.



I've seen plenty of late model, quite expensive vehicles (VW, Mercedes Benz) blowing loads of soot with every acceleration. I understand that it is only my observations, but it doesn't seem like an aberration.
People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

lawrocket    3

lawrocket
[Reply]Contrary to what Mikee posts.. based on his reading of denier sites... glacial ice is melting... and the melting is accelerating. Since I moved here to the American Alps back in the 1970's I have seen a lot of glaciers completely dissapear. That is observed... and since I used to climb on them... I know first hand that they are now melted and gone.



When you say "melted" it seems an interesting choice of words. Ablated may be a good word. Slid downhill and didn't have enough snow to accrete what was being lost? "Melted" is a dramatic oversimplification of what occurred. Also add the different processes involved in the ablation of glaciers and the picture is tricky.

But I'm also sure that people living in 1870 would have looked at the glaciers of the 1930's and bemoaned the shrinkage. Much like those who would have viewed the lassive glaciers in Yosemite Valley would be saddened to see that nothing is left to remind us except El Capitan, etc.


[Reply] The greenland icesheet.. yup record melts.. and accelerating...



It's also accreting at a record rate. Because AS A WHOLE the ice sheet is I'm stasis. Large portions of the Greenland coast have receding ice. Good thing there's a whole inland of ice getting thicker because there's a lot more snow and it's colder. Ice melting a lot where the avergae temperature is below 20 degrees fahrenheit seems kinda strange, doesn't it? You'd expect more ice - especially if there is warming.

[Reply] so within your kids lifetimes... you might just see a really cool new inland sea right there in Fresno. Do you think that might then affect you???



So the ocean is going to rise 350 feet in the next hundred years? Damn! I didn't know that. I guess I really have been living in a fantasy world that is at odds with rality. To think that my mom's house with be ocean front in five years. But in then intill be completely submerged. That's a smack in the face by reality right there, all right. So if by 2021 the ocean hasn't risen 35 feet (or even one foot) then iwe'll check "reality."

By the way, the Revelation is tomorrow. It was predicted mathematically. I question that reality, too.

[Reply].but I hope I live long enough to see all you deniers.. eating crow.... and whining incessantly about WE_SHOULDA_SEEN.



Here I was hoping I'm right. And youre hoping for worldwide disaster so you can say you're right? Sweet Jesus! That's some hardcore misanthropy.

[Reply] I guess by then you will be denying that anyone tried to do anything about it. [\reply]

And there's a greater chance that when nothingh happens you'll say, "Thank God I was there. It would have been hot had we not done something about it."


My wife is hotter than your wife.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

lawrocket    3

lawrocket
Quote

>So I think it appropriate to spend time worrying about present reality and
>when 2050 hits, I'll deal with it's reality.



Yep. And we're dealing with reality. I called for the housing bubble to burst in April, 2004. http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1031778#1031778

It happened. I saw it coming. I think everyone did. We just didn't know when or how big it would be. But it seems the machinations of it were much simpler.

I think climate is a bit more complicated than economics. Although the economics of climate are similar. "It's gonna cost a fortune."


My wife is hotter than your wife.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazon    7

Amazon
Quote

[Reply]Contrary to what Mikee posts.. based on his reading of denier sites... glacial ice is melting... and the melting is accelerating. Since I moved here to the American Alps back in the 1970's I have seen a lot of glaciers completely dissapear. That is observed... and since I used to climb on them... I know first hand that they are now melted and gone.



When you say "melted" it seems an interesting choice of words. Ablated may be a good word. Slid downhill and didn't have enough snow to accrete what was being lost? "Melted" is a dramatic oversimplification of what occurred. Also add the different processes involved in the ablation of glaciers and the picture is tricky.

But I'm also sure that people living in 1870 would have looked at the glaciers of the 1930's and bemoaned the shrinkage. Much like those who would have viewed the lassive glaciers in Yosemite Valley would be saddened to see that nothing is left to remind us except El Capitan, etc.


[Reply] The greenland icesheet.. yup record melts.. and accelerating...



It's also accreting at a record rate. Because AS A WHOLE the ice sheet is I'm stasis. Large portions of the Greenland coast have receding ice. Good thing there's a whole inland of ice getting thicker because there's a lot more snow and it's colder. Ice melting a lot where the avergae temperature is below 20 degrees fahrenheit seems kinda strange, doesn't it? You'd expect more ice - especially if there is warming.

[Reply] so within your kids lifetimes... you might just see a really cool new inland sea right there in Fresno. Do you think that might then affect you???



So the ocean is going to rise 350 feet in the next hundred years? Damn! I didn't know that. I guess I really have been living in a fantasy world that is at odds with rality. To think that my mom's house with be ocean front in five years. But in then intill be completely submerged. That's a smack in the face by reality right there, all right. So if by 2021 the ocean hasn't risen 35 feet (or even one foot) then iwe'll check "reality."

By the way, the Revelation is tomorrow. It was predicted mathematically. I question that reality, too.

[Reply].but I hope I live long enough to see all you deniers.. eating crow.... and whining incessantly about WE_SHOULDA_SEEN.



Here I was hoping I'm right. And youre hoping for worldwide disaster so you can say you're right? Sweet Jesus! That's some hardcore misanthropy.

[Reply] I guess by then you will be denying that anyone tried to do anything about it. [\reply]

And there's a greater chance that when nothingh happens you'll say, "Thank God I was there. It would have been hot had we not done something about it."



No.. MELTED is the right word... in winter.. there is snow there.. in summer... all the accumulation even in the best snow years....MELTS.. as in glacier gone.. no longer forming the ice that was there... not 10000 years ago... but 30... all melted.
Call it what you want to... but I have seen it.. on all the mountains up here... in glaciers in AK... and in other parts of the world I have traveled to while climbing. Its not "misanthropy" as you call it... too many stupid people do not wish to see what is staring them in the face... most of them are not going to have the skills to live in that very different world.