Renewable Energy + Battery Storage = Fossil Fuels Obsolete, Even Natural Gas
- Thread starter ttystikk
- Start date
ginjawarrior
Well-Known Member
Yes you would need batteries to go along with the best case scenario of 3/5 the area of Arizona
But you will still need 3/5 of Arizona
As I said he was very generous in adding efficiency in getting that number
Power companies might be able to make a quick cheap buck by putting up a solar farm but untill we're at the stage of adding thousands of square km a year we won't be doing anything to address the problems of climate change
Cheapest is meaningless unless we actually kick our co2 habit
ginjawarrior
Well-Known Member
Per unit of power nuclear is safer than anything we've ever had and it's the most regulated
Nuclear isn't that expensive per kWh
It's just the initial cost of building the stations
You guys are just repeating the happy clappy lie that all it takes is a handful of solar panels on your roof to fix climate change
You couldn't be more wrong
ANC
Well-Known Member
A constant load like an LED is easy to calculate for...
But I think for most people to save money... is to build a small DC element hot water geyser and run that off a solar panel.
(I know, you are asking why not just get a solar geyser? Well, because they suck in low light, and in good light then can only get so hot.
But I think for most people to save money... is to build a small DC element hot water geyser and run that off a solar panel.
(I know, you are asking why not just get a solar geyser? Well, because they suck in low light, and in good light then can only get so hot.
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
ginjawarrior
Well-Known Member
Not at all what?
Care to point out anywhere in that link that backs up your vacuous "not at all" statement?
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
Down, boy. There's lots of good info in there about power generation and use in there.
Rooftop solar can indeed handle a healthy chunk of demand, especially residential demand.
No one here is arguing that it's the whole solution.
ginjawarrior
Well-Known Member
So you didn't have a point with posting that link?
You were just trying to appear smart alongside your un backed "not at all" statement
Nothing in that link disproves any I have said nor does it support anything you've claimed
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
Between thirty and fifty percent of all our generated in the US is used residentially. That's the part that rooftop solar can address directly, without using more land.
No one said it was the whole answer.
Try not to be so black and white in your thinking; it's self limiting.
ginjawarrior
Well-Known Member
let's not forget the electric cars and trucks etc...
Residential is a small part of total electrical usage
With in turn is a small part of total power usage
Rooftop solar will be a very small step towards the total budget especially as rooftop is one of the least efficient ways of collecting solar
You've all completely written off nuclear as part of the solution
If you want to add wind into equation you need land the size of california to power the usa
What exactly is the solution if you don't use nuclear?
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
Private cars also powered by rooftop solar.
There's lots of wind power out there. Performance of both solar and wind is improving, rendering those back of napkin calculations obsolete.
Bottom line? I don't want nuclear pollution to be my legacy.
ginjawarrior
Well-Known Member
You'll have to take up efficiency with the laws of thermodynamics...
The without hot air link I posted goes into it in alot of detail and is generous with future efficiency numbers
It is nothing but magical thinking on your part pretending that there will be some sort of magic bullet some time in the future
In the meantime climate change is getting worse and we're doing next to nothing to solve it
ANC
Well-Known Member
I guess that is one of those South Africanisms... Like we call traffic lights a robot...
A geyser in a house, is the tank thing that heats your water.
I agree with the no nuclear on my watch sentiment.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Nuclear power is under priced relative to risk. You can close your eyes, stop your ears and induce a delusional state on yourself but that won't change the fact that actuaries work for the people who want to get the project done. Lobbyists use the most favorable numbers and coprorations swear that nothing can go wrong until it does. THEN they say that nothing is perfect.
Solar is the better answer. Everything you complain about for solar is really just a matter of the lack of will. The experience the world community has had with nuclear power plants shows it's not worth the risk. Nothing has changed.
I can't help but point out to you that your argument was first based upon Thorium reactors. When that was overwhelmingly shot down by facts you moved on to other nuclear vapor ware. Conventional power from coal is too harmful for the environment. The crap you push is too. Solar is the only sustainable option for producing most -- not all -- of power for the world's commerce and population
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Who knows. The guy has gotten stuck on other completely unrelated topics using a false argument and just he hangs in there even when his position was shown to be unarguably false.
Next up, nuclear reactors in space that beam energy to earth stations. Or maybe energy scoops that dip directly into the sun. He might as well go for the gold when it comes to defending nuclear based upon tech that isn't sufficiently developed for commercial use and probably will never be.
doublejj
Well-Known Member
if we put as much $$ into solar as we subsidize oil and coal, then solar would soon be leading the pack. you are right it's only a matter of will.
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
In the face of recent news that says Tesla is shaking down its suppliers for 'retroactive rebates', can Musk keep Tesla alive?
Make no mistake about my motives; I really want to see him succeed. The reality is that things look awfully dicey right now.
Other than the fact that he likes to continually fuck with the electronics and software of cars that customers have bought and own without their permission, I think his company makes decent cars.
It remains to be seen if he can do it profitably enough to stay in business.