Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

World governments vow to end fossil fuel era


seeder

Recommended Posts

World governments vow to end fossil fuel era at UN climate signing ceremony

Representatives of more than 170 countries endorse Paris agreement to cut carbon emissions, with France’s president saying: ‘There is no turning back’

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/apr/22/un-climate-change-signing-ceremony

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I was listening to the radio on the way to work today, and Jeff Merkley our Federal Senator, said he supports the "Keep it in the Ground" campaign. So.... When 90% of the electricity and transport in the US grinds to a halt, what is he going to say then? Until we have enough solar/geothermal/hydro/wind/nuclear power plants to run what we have now.... not to even mention that population will increase by 50% over the next century... then we can look at closing down coal plants. Till the infrastructure exists it is just stupid to support "Keeping it in the Ground". It is a fine ideal, but it just isn't practical.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Br Cornelius

Yeah, I was listening to the radio on the way to work today, and Jeff Merkley our Federal Senator, said he supports the "Keep it in the Ground" campaign. So.... When 90% of the electricity and transport in the US grinds to a halt, what is he going to say then? Until we have enough solar/geothermal/hydro/wind/nuclear power plants to run what we have now.... not to even mention that population will increase by 50% over the next century... then we can look at closing down coal plants. Till the infrastructure exists it is just stupid to support "Keeping it in the Ground". It is a fine ideal, but it just isn't practical.

Unless you set it as your strategic policy objective and then put in place a plan of how to achieve it, you will never take the steps to achieve the goal. No one is advocating simply stopping using fossil fuels tomorrow, they are advocating an accelerated phasing out of fossil fuels from the energy mix - which is an achievable goal. Also there is little chance that America will see its population increase by 50% by the next century since Africa and certain parts of Asia are the only areas left with rapidly increasing population demographics. Almost all developed countries have gone into reverse regarding population growth.

By making a firm commitment that a zero fossil fuel economy is your objective the politicians are signaling the market that that is where the bulk of the infrastructure investment will be funneled - which allows them to make their own strategic plans to meet the countries objectives. The symbolic act is a very important step along the way and represents the first serious commitment by the international community to address the reality of the drivers of climate change, which in itself is important to signal to the people of the world.

America is coming off the fence.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless you set it as your strategic policy objective and then put in place a plan of how to achieve it, you will never take the steps to achieve the goal. No one is advocating simply stopping using fossil fuels tomorrow, they are advocating an accelerated phasing out of fossil fuels from the energy mix - which is an achievable goal. Also there is little chance that America will see its population increase by 50% by the next century since Africa and certain parts of Asia are the only areas left with rapidly increasing population demographics. Almost all developed countries have gone into reverse regarding population growth.

By making a firm commitment that a zero fossil fuel economy is your objective the politicians are signaling the market that that is where the bulk of the infrastructure investment will be funneled - which allows them to make their own strategic plans to meet the countries objectives. The symbolic act is a very important step along the way and represents the first serious commitment by the international community to address the reality of the drivers of climate change, which in itself is important to signal to the people of the world.

America is coming off the fence.

Br Cornelius

Yeah, I understand that we need to start drawing down from fossil fuels, but people simply supporting stopping using them is not a Plan. I want to see a Plan. And not some stupid carbon-tax, or other political short term fix. I want to see a plan for the production of the energy demands we're going to need.

Making a plan is simple, but fulfilling it is hard. But, first I want to actually see a plan, before we talk about fulfilling anything.

Sure, politicians are well known for being steel spined enforcers of their promises. I don't think politicians patting themselves on the back for something written on a paper will cause the energy industry to flop over and give in.

Edited by DieChecker
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Br Cornelius

Yeah, I understand that we need to start drawing down from fossil fuels, but people simply supporting stopping using them is not a Plan. I want to see a Plan. And not some stupid carbon-tax, or other political short term fix. I want to see a plan for the production of the energy demands we're going to need.

Making a plan is simple, but fulfilling it is hard. But, first I want to actually see a plan, before we talk about fulfilling anything.

Sure, politicians are well known for being steel spined enforcers of their promises. I don't think politicians patting themselves on the back for something written on a paper will cause the energy industry to flop over and give in.

Well you obviously aren't paying much attention. On the back of this policy coal has floored as an investment opportunity as all the clever money floods into solar and wind. You see words do have consequences and simply stating your intent can have profound impacts on events.

The plan is been implemented as we speak - but you simply aren't paying much attention.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well you obviously aren't paying much attention. On the back of this policy coal has floored as an investment opportunity as all the clever money floods into solar and wind. You see words do have consequences and simply stating your intent can have profound impacts on events.

The plan is been implemented as we speak - but you simply aren't paying much attention.

Br Cornelius

Bah. We had our local city handing out tax breaks to several solar corporations, and three took up the offer, but two went out of business as they were even getting started. Solarworld built a campus and factory not a mile from where I am sitting, and it has constantly been on again, off again. Hot, and then cold. Hiring hundreds, and then laying off hundreds. I don't see it growing right now. I don't see it being heavily invested in. What I do see is we still have almost all the same coal plants running that were running twenty years ago.

Point me some articles Br....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Br Cornelius

Bah. We had our local city handing out tax breaks to several solar corporations, and three took up the offer, but two went out of business as they were even getting started. Solarworld built a campus and factory not a mile from where I am sitting, and it has constantly been on again, off again. Hot, and then cold. Hiring hundreds, and then laying off hundreds. I don't see it growing right now. I don't see it being heavily invested in. What I do see is we still have almost all the same coal plants running that were running twenty years ago.

Point me some articles Br....

A simple graph should suffice:

1-large-vc-funding-in-renewable-energy-tracking-the-new-normal.jpg

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/articles/2013/04/vc-funding-in-renewable-energy-tracking-the-new-normal.html

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A simple graph should suffice:

1-large-vc-funding-in-renewable-energy-tracking-the-new-normal.jpg

http://www.renewable...new-normal.html

Br Cornelius

A graph from THREE years ago? Is this supposed to prove something you said? It shows a clear decline over the last year and a half of the graph.

Edited by DieChecker
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Br Cornelius

A graph from THREE years ago? Is this supposed to prove something you said? It shows a clear decline over the last year and a half of the graph.

So only a graph that continuously goes up is significant to you. I suppose that explains your climate skeptism.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It'll still be decades before that's a this becomes a reality.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So only a graph that continuously goes up is significant to you. I suppose that explains your climate skeptism.

Br Cornelius

Your claim was that the Energy Industry had stopped funding coal and was switching over to alternatives in a BIG way. Your graph in no way supports that argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bah. We had our local city handing out tax breaks to several solar corporations, and three took up the offer, but two went out of business as they were even getting started. Solarworld built a campus and factory not a mile from where I am sitting, and it has constantly been on again, off again. Hot, and then cold. Hiring hundreds, and then laying off hundreds. I don't see it growing right now. I don't see it being heavily invested in. What I do see is we still have almost all the same coal plants running that were running twenty years ago.

Solar is not yet economically competitive. By fall it will be competitive with coal at 10 cents per kwh, but that's just the battle of the cellar-dwellers - oil is at eight cents and wind and gas-fired turbines are at seven cents with wind expected to each 3.5 in a few years. Solar has some running to do just to catch up. Things look good for it to replace oil in a few years, but gas and wind are still well ahead.

I think energy industries are waiting for new wind technologies to become available. When that happens, we'll see a major building boom in wind. The same will probably happen with solar, if and when it closes the gap with wind.

Also, you have to have lots of sunshine to make solar work well. Great prospects in Arizona, but in Ireland - not so much.

Doug

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

while I love the idea.. I do not think it will really get into motion.. until there is a geo political change.

we are talking billions of tax payer funds being spent on setting this up.. and no political party will be willing to spend to much into it.. because they only look at spending on things that will get them back into office for another term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

while I love the idea.. I do not think it will really get into motion.. until there is a geo political change.

we are talking billions of tax payer funds being spent on setting this up.. and no political party will be willing to spend to much into it.. because they only look at spending on things that will get them back into office for another term.

It will be private capital that puts wind (and probably solar) into general use. The Plains and Eastern DC Line, now under construction, is being paid for with private funds. Government funding is neither needed, nor because of the strings that come attached to it, wanted.

Wind implementation is following the standard practice for new technologies. The government gets things off the ground with basic research and some seed money. Industry takes over once it's clear there's money to be made. This happened with electricity a hundred years ago. It is happening with space right now and energy is following suit.

Very little tax money is being spent on energy conversion. We could probably do more, but there's a Republican congress that, like you say, thinks they won't get elected if they spend money on making energy cheaper. Actually, because coal is a major "campaign (that's pronounced "bribe") contributor, they may be right.

We need to implement a fee-and-dividend system on carbon. A fee is charged to carbon producers based on the amount of carbon they are producing. This is paid at the wellhead, mine mouth or port-of-entry. Citizens do not pay it directly, but they do pay it in the price of products they purchase.

It is not a tax. The difference between a fee and a tax is what happens when you don't pay it. With a tax, the government can take your property and sell it to recover the money and can put you in jail for failure to comply. But with a fee, the penalty is limited to not being able to use the service. To avoid paying the fee, you simply refuse to buy the product. No penalty beyond that. But of course, if you don't buy gasoline, your car quits running. If you don't pay the gas bill, they turn off your heat. So there's a lot of pressure to pay up, or get inventive about not using these products - and that's exactly what the govt is hoping you'll do.

The other difference between this particular fee and a tax is that this fee is refunded to every citizen equally in a dividend. Regional Economic Modeling Inc estimates that the dividend would start at about $10 per person per month and rise to about $100 per person per month over a 20-year period. I think maybe it would rise faster. No money would be held back for administration or taxes.

Taxes that try to "control" CO2 pollution by taxing high-carbon items are not very effective. That's because you need a market for the system to influence and if people have no money to spend, then there is no market. Also, consider that the atmosphere belongs to everyone. I breath it; you breath it. Private companies DO NOT have a right to pollute it without our consent. The carbon fee is our license for the use of our air. They can pay it or go out of business - I don't care which.

We are rapidly reaching the point where the public generally recognizes we need to do something. We need to get effective ideas out there if we are to prevent ineffective ones from being implemented.

Doug

Edited by Doug1029
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Solar is not yet economically competitive. By fall it will be competitive with coal at 10 cents per kwh, but that's just the battle of the cellar-dwellers - oil is at eight cents and wind and gas-fired turbines are at seven cents with wind expected to each 3.5 in a few years. Solar has some running to do just to catch up. Things look good for it to replace oil in a few years, but gas and wind are still well ahead.

I think energy industries are waiting for new wind technologies to become available. When that happens, we'll see a major building boom in wind. The same will probably happen with solar, if and when it closes the gap with wind.

Also, you have to have lots of sunshine to make solar work well. Great prospects in Arizona, but in Ireland - not so much.

Doug

Doug, I greatly appreciate your input.

Would you say BC's statement here is correct or perhaps exaggerated?

Well you obviously aren't paying much attention. On the back of this policy coal has floored as an investment opportunity as all the clever money floods into solar and wind. You see words do have consequences and simply stating your intent can have profound impacts on events.

The plan is been implemented as we speak - but you simply aren't paying much attention.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doug, I greatly appreciate your input.

Would you say BC's statement here is correct or perhaps exaggerated?

Coal is facing a lot of political opposition, as well as the prospect of taxes or fees on it that will make it economically less efficient than it already is. We have closed a bunch of coal-fired plants in the US in the last few years, partly because of old, worn out plants being decommissioned and partly because of competition from wind. Even if Obama's initiative doesn't go through this time, it will probably be revived in the next Congress and there will be more closings of coal plants unable to meet the emissions requirements. Why build another coal plant under those conditions?

So, basically, I agree with BC.

Doug

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was reading up on Solar World. Who have a big manufacturing facility here in Hillsboro Oregon, by Portland. They just hired up 200 more people and have expanded their production ability, so now they can produce about 500 MW of panels in a year. And this is one of the leading Solar companies, and this is their premier facility, I think. Which means they can just about replace one coal plant per year. There are about 580 coal plants running at about 500 MW in the US, with a total production ability of about 320,000 MW. So we just need to build 60 of these solar production facilities and have them go non stop for 10 years, in order to build out the current energy needs.

When I see a the "Energy Industry" make a plan to do that, I'll start supporting it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Br Cornelius

I was reading up on Solar World. Who have a big manufacturing facility here in Hillsboro Oregon, by Portland. They just hired up 200 more people and have expanded their production ability, so now they can produce about 500 MW of panels in a year. And this is one of the leading Solar companies, and this is their premier facility, I think. Which means they can just about replace one coal plant per year. There are about 580 coal plants running at about 500 MW in the US, with a total production ability of about 320,000 MW. So we just need to build 60 of these solar production facilities and have them go non stop for 10 years, in order to build out the current energy needs.

When I see a the "Energy Industry" make a plan to do that, I'll start supporting it.

You analysis is rather selective to say the least.

Firstly almost all solar production capacity is based in China and that is where almost all of Americas installed capacity will come from.

Secondly we are in the early ramping up stage of solar production which means your example production plant will very soon be one of many on American soil.

Thirdly you have completely ignored the much more significant contribution that wind power is making to the energy mix and is growing year on year.

I suggest you let your dismissive view slide and replace it with a more reality based one.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I see a the "Energy Industry" make a plan to do that, I'll start supporting it.

It's not production capability that's the problem; it's markets. Once we improve markets for solar panels, we'll get the production. And markets are influenced by prices, so solar is still at a disadvantage. In case you're keeping track, there has been a major improvement in solar efficiency in the last year. That's probably why they built that plant near you.

As for plans: the tobacco industry has plans to take over the pot market as soon as it becomes legal nationally. They've even got patented strains of marijuana and contract farmers to grow it. These plans have been in place since the 70s. Want to bet that the power industry doesn't already have plans for a wind and solar-powered future?

Nexterra is already building windmills by the hundreds. But it also owns gas wells and gas-fired generating plants AND it owns Florida Power. It owns the entire production chain. Now there's a major powerline under construction. I don't know if Nexterra is part of that, but I'll bet they'll be using it. And ten years ago nobody knew about these plans. You only find out about them after construction starts.

Doug

Edited by Doug1029
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not production capability that's the problem; it's markets. Once we improve markets for solar panels, we'll get the production. And markets are influenced by prices, so solar is still at a disadvantage. In case you're keeping track, there has been a major improvement in solar efficiency in the last year. That's probably why they built that plant near you.

As for plans: the tobacco industry has plans to take over the pot market as soon as it becomes legal nationally. They've even got patented strains of marijuana and contract farmers to grow it. These plans have been in place since the 70s. Want to bet that the power industry doesn't already have plans for a wind and solar-powered future?

Nexterra is already building windmills by the hundreds. But it also owns gas wells and gas-fired generating plants AND it owns Florida Power. It owns the entire production chain. Now there's a major powerline under construction. I don't know if Nexterra is part of that, but I'll bet they'll be using it. And ten years ago nobody knew about these plans. You only find out about them after construction starts.

Doug

We have a lot of wind turbines in the Columbia Gorge, and the thing with them is that because they share a lot of the transmission lines with the hydro dams, that they often get idled, which is a shame. I think there is a project underway to upgrade the infrastructure of the power lines so this doesn't have to happen all the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You analysis is rather selective to say the least.

Firstly almost all solar production capacity is based in China and that is where almost all of Americas installed capacity will come from.

Secondly we are in the early ramping up stage of solar production which means your example production plant will very soon be one of many on American soil.

Thirdly you have completely ignored the much more significant contribution that wind power is making to the energy mix and is growing year on year.

I suggest you let your dismissive view slide and replace it with a more reality based one.

Br Cornelius

I do agree that wind and solar are both becoming popular, but my point was we'll need around a decade to get switched over and that is if the Industry starts now and doesn't slack off.

I can tell you though that the almost 100,000 coal miners in the US aren't going to like it. There isn't going to be 100,000 solar/wind power jobs for them to move into.

EDIT: A few links by you to back up your talk will always go a long way to proving your points BC. Saying something is so, isn't the same as it being so.

Edited by DieChecker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Br Cornelius
EDIT: A few links by you to back up your talk will always go a long way to proving your points BC. Saying something is so, isn't the same as it being so.

Like you are so diligent in doing yourself, and like you actually read any that I do share with you without simply ignoring what they say.

Don't make me laugh Diechecker.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wind farms require maintenance. There's some jobs at least.

But regardless, just drove through Texas and there were a whole ton of turbines out there. Many. The juxtaposition of windmills and nodding donkeys was poetic, to say the least. Present and future of energy during the transition.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Br Cornelius

Just read about saltwater batteries, a new technology which puts offgrid living in reach of everyone.

What with this and Teslas home battery banks I can see a lot of people cutting the grid tie.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.