SoCalGas leak -- opportunity for solar?
Collapse
X
-
-
-
Yeah, see
More than a dozen local power plants rely on the now idle Aliso Canyon storage facility for gas to fire generators. Gas shortages could lead to outages on peak-demand days.
The mood here is pretty anti-natural-gas now as a result of the leak itself, and SoCalGas's mishandling of it.
Seems like a good opportunity for energy efficiency and increased solar penetration.Comment
-
Given that > 95% of climate scientists, > 90% of meteorologists banks, > 90% of biophysical scientists, many insurance companies and banks, and even the Surgeon General all agree that man-made climate change is a serious risk, I don't think moving away from fossil fuels is something to put down as foolish "activism". It's wise planning.
There's lots of evidence of the consensus:
http://www.ibtimes.com/six-major-us-banks-urge-global-leaders-adopt-climate-change-agreement-2116755Six major U.S. banks, including Bank of America, Goldman Sachs and Citi, urged leaders meeting in New York Monday to adopt a strong climate agreement.
Being a big business, the insurance industry is a strong backer of free enterprise and its laissez-faire leaders. But a rift could be developing now that some major carriers are staking claims in the climate change cause while many of their congressional backers have remained skeptical of the science. For insurers, [...]
The climate change consensus extends beyond climate scientists, J S Carlton, Rebecca Perry-Hill, Matthew Huber, Linda S Prokopy
John Abraham: 96% of AMS members realize climate change is happening, and most understand humans are responsible
Obama administration report details the diversity of risks and claims global warming is a far more challenging danger than polio virus in some cases
And of course it's undeniable that the polar ice caps are melting, and that average temperatures are rising; the measurements are clear.
The fossil fuel industry will of course fund studies, candidates, and astroturf campaigns against doing anything about the problem, just as the tobacco companies did.
And the conspiracy-theory section of the web and of American politics will say anything that resonates with people who are unhappy with the needed changes.
But America's way of life depends on not letting the denialists stop needed progress.
Comment
-
Given that > 95% of climate scientists, > 90% of meteorologists banks, > 90% of biophysical scientists, many insurance companies and banks, and even the Surgeon General all agree that man-made climate change is a serious risk, I don't think moving away from fossil fuels is something to put down as foolish "activism". It's wise planning.
There's lots of evidence of the consensus:
http://www.ibtimes.com/six-major-us-banks-urge-global-leaders-adopt-climate-change-agreement-2116755Six major U.S. banks, including Bank of America, Goldman Sachs and Citi, urged leaders meeting in New York Monday to adopt a strong climate agreement.
Being a big business, the insurance industry is a strong backer of free enterprise and its laissez-faire leaders. But a rift could be developing now that some major carriers are staking claims in the climate change cause while many of their congressional backers have remained skeptical of the science. For insurers, [...]
John Abraham: 96% of AMS members realize climate change is happening, and most understand humans are responsible
Obama administration report details the diversity of risks and claims global warming is a far more challenging danger than polio virus in some cases
And of course it's undeniable that the polar ice caps are melting, and that average temperatures are rising; the measurements are clear.
The fossil fuel industry will of course fund studies, candidates, and astroturf campaigns against doing anything about the problem, just as the tobacco companies did.
And the conspiracy-theory section of the web and of American politics will say anything that resonates with people who are unhappy with the needed changes.
But America's way of life depends on not letting the denialists stop needed progress.
What I do not agree with is where the focus is pointed to try and stop it. I feel that a lot of people have been made to believe through those articles and fear tactics that they can stop climate change.
Even if all fossil fuel by products released by humans could be stopped immediately, IMO the climate change will not be stopped. There is a lot of "natural momentum" in climate change and trying to stop what is happening would be like putting up a paper fence to stop a train. The earth has gone through this multiple times in the past and has survived. Us humans need to find a way to adapt and we will.
If you want to spend money to save the planet then focus on finding ways to hold back the sea level, utilize farming in regions that has warmer climate, improve the infrastructure of our power grid, build additional RE generation, make nuclear power generation cheaper and safer.
Anyone who believes that RE will provide 100% of all the power we consume around the world, 24/7 365 days a year for decades to come are full of "cool aid" because they believe that tripe that is being printed.
Now that being said, I truly hope you and your neighbors do not have black outs due to the issue with natural gas in the Southern CA region.Comment
-
I feel that a lot of people have been made to believe through ... that they can stop climate change.
Even if all fossil fuel by products released by humans could be stopped immediately, IMO the climate change will not be stopped. There is a lot of "natural momentum" in climate change and trying to stop what is happening would be like putting up a paper fence to stop a train. ...
Anyone who believes that RE will provide 100% of all the power we consume around the world, 24/7 365 days a year for decades to come are full of "cool aid"
But if we don't stop, it'll keep warming a lot more, and that's going to cause serious disruption -- stuff like extreme weather, drought, famine, and war. Kind of like we're starting to see already, actually.
And we don't have to fully stop burning fossil fuel. A 90% reduction on average would be fine. Even 80% would be pretty good. No kool-aid needed.
What baffles me are people who say we shouldn't reduce fossil fuel use at all. It'd be relatively easy to reduce our use by 30% in ten years, and it would have demonstrable benefits, yet they are adamantly opposed. Truly strange.
Comment
-
As you have said before some people just don't like change.
I am ok with changing things for the right reasons, but some things can't be stopped or slowed down no matter how much effort is put into the problem.
Better to find a way to live and adapt with the "change" because mother nature is bigger and stronger than humans.Comment
-
One last thought. And it is something we should all think about. Using solar to generate power is a good thing. But what if the sun output is reduced due to blockage?
Over the past week there have been a few "earth burps" that have deposited a lot of ash into our atmosphere. The world is due for a big "belch" and if that happens you will need 10 times the amount of solar panels to generate the same amount of electricity for years.
What is the "plan" to adapt to that issue?Comment
-
Comment
-
Comment
-
Comment
-
But IMO very few of the big problems are 100% human made.Comment
-
And in your opinion is science the right tool for telling whether manmade co2 emissions are causing / will cause climate change?Comment
-
Given that > 95% of climate scientists, > 90% of meteorologists banks, > 90% of biophysical scientists, many insurance companies and banks, and even the Surgeon General all agree that man-made climate change is a serious risk, I don't think moving away from fossil fuels is something to put down as foolish "activism".
Natural gas is the lowest carbon, cleanest combustion-based fuel source we have, and the third cleanest baseline power source we have. The cleanest is hydro, and the second cleanest is nuclear. Unfortunately you can't put dams wherever you want, and nuclear has been effectively shut down by a different sort of foolish activisim. Solar and wind are great, but they need to be backed up by baseline generation.
Thus in the short term, if you want to move to cleaner/lower carbon sources of power with more renewables in the mix, we will need to use MORE natural gas, not less. If activists prevent that from happening, then they are indeed foolish - because their activism will be having the opposite effect that they desire.
Comment
-
If I took a picture of a 60 year old doing a single stupid act would that provide me with an accurate story of the person's entire life and accomplishments?
Over the years there has been a wide range of measuring instruments with multiple degrees of accuracy. IMO the problem is that some people are trying to connect a hand full of data points collected over maybe a hundred years (using instruments that were not very accurate) to come up with an answer the they consider to be "totally true and factual".
That would be like believing that for the 60 year old, a single picture will provide a true and factual representation of his life.
The earth has been around for billions of years but very very little "good" data has been and can be collected to provide the answers for a extremely complex process like climate changeComment
Comment