Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Go Back   Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community > Main Forums > The Off Topic Forum

View Poll Results: What role do humans play in contributing to climate change?
Humans are the primary contributor to climate change 396 62.86%
Humans contribute to climate change, but not the main cause 165 26.19%
Not sure 37 5.87%
Climate change is a hoax 32 5.08%
Voters: 630. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 04-30-2024, 01:33 PM   #3281
iggy_oi
Franchise Player
 
iggy_oi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure View Post
Solar really isn't the answer. It is a stop gap solution until we develop an energy source that doesn't require massive resources like solar does.

But for now its a good answer. Just like natural gas.
Yeah Iím not disagreeing that natural gas should also be part of the short term solution. But I also think that solar is going to be a comparatively much bigger part of the long term solution, albeit at a more expensive upfront cost. Homes that are generating their own electricity with solar panels canít install natural gas panels to do the same.
iggy_oi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2024, 01:34 PM   #3282
Azure
Had an idea!
 
Azure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleK View Post
Switching from coal to natural gas and increasing renewable penetration can't possibly be the solution, especially considering that Alberta hit a record low for emissions intensity THIS WEEK.
This can't possibly be true. I thought Alberta is going in the wrong direction emissions wise?
Azure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2024, 01:36 PM   #3283
Azure
Had an idea!
 
Azure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by iggy_oi View Post
Yeah Iím not disagreeing that natural gas should also be part of the short term solution. But I also think that solar is going to be a comparatively much bigger part of the long term solution, albeit at a more expensive upfront cost. Homes that are generating their own electricity with solar panels canít install natural gas panels to do the same.
Solar efficiency is still terrible, so with more advancements it'll likely become much better.

But because it needs the sun to function, and the simple fact is that the sun doesn't shine all day, so you don't actually have consistent power production all day, it means it can't be used as baseload power.

Therefore it is a fill in solution only. Anyone who thinks differently is delusional.
Azure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2024, 01:47 PM   #3284
Bill Bumface
My face is a bum!
 
Bill Bumface's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure View Post
Therefore it is a fill in solution only. Anyone who thinks differently is delusional.
Absolutely, but to say it can't play a significant part is also dillusional. Cooling loads are a perfect one to be roughly matched to high solar producing conditions in our climate.

But yeah, all aboard the nuke train - woowooooo!
Bill Bumface is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2024, 03:06 PM   #3285
Street Pharmacist
Franchise Player
 
Street Pharmacist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Salmon with Arms
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleK View Post
Switching from coal to natural gas and increasing renewable penetration can't possibly be the solution, especially considering that Alberta hit a record low for emissions intensity THIS WEEK.
Uk switched from coal to gas and increased renewables too and is inching close to 50% of power from renewables. Emissions were down 16% in 2023 all due to gas consumption decreasing due to more renewables coming on board

https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/uk...l?guccounter=1
Street Pharmacist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2024, 11:24 PM   #3286
#-3
#1 Goaltender
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure View Post
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/de...id=FirstUpdate

Wait, wait, wait, I thought we were told switching from coal to natural gas is NOT the solution?
Just want to help out, I found the problem with the statement.

I think if you were to ask any real environmentalist they would say;

We need to get off coal as fast as possible gas or not, overbuild wind and solar, develop pumped hydro and gravity towers, improve syngas and direct carbon extraction tech. We need to build warehouses for half spent batteries that aren't efficient enough anymore, but are paid down as capital assets and still store energy. We need to encourage massive advancements in Ag-tech with the explicit goal of re-wilding land. We probably need to seed the sky with reflectors during dry heat waves. We need to accept and start building out Nuclear. We need to do it all and more. And with the likely path towards about $20T in annual economic lose to climate impacts, it's uneconomical not to do it all.

Last edited by #-3; 04-30-2024 at 11:31 PM.
#-3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2024, 11:39 PM   #3287
DoubleK
Franchise Player
 
DoubleK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Seattle, WA
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure View Post
Solar efficiency is still terrible, so with more advancements it'll likely become much better.

But because it needs the sun to function, and the simple fact is that the sun doesn't shine all day, so you don't actually have consistent power production all day, it means it can't be used as baseload power.

Therefore it is a fill in solution only. Anyone who thinks differently is delusional.
I'm seeing proposals for Wind/Solar hybrids + energy storage that are looking at bidding into capacity auctions. While 100% of the output wouldn't be dispatchable, it would be considered baseload power.

They are close on price, but not quite economic yet.
__________________
It's only game. Why you heff to be mad?
DoubleK is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to DoubleK For This Useful Post:
Old 05-01-2024, 06:16 AM   #3288
Ozy_Flame

Posted the 6 millionth post!
 
Ozy_Flame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Exp:
Default

https://twitter.com/user/status/1785275213770318004
Ozy_Flame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2024, 07:20 AM   #3289
edslunch
Franchise Player
 
edslunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure View Post
Getting off coal is easy. We have the technology to do it. Unfortunately the rest of the word doesn't, and it should be our responsibility to help them do it.

Unfortunately our government wants to virtue signal instead.

What specifically is holding back LNG in Canada? Pipelines? Tanker bans? Regulations? Lack of investment confidence? Everyone complains that weíre not doing anything but they seem to not be doing anything about it. Where is the business pressure on this?
edslunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2024, 07:36 AM   #3290
Street Pharmacist
Franchise Player
 
Street Pharmacist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Salmon with Arms
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleK View Post
I'm seeing proposals for Wind/Solar hybrids + energy storage that are looking at bidding into capacity auctions. While 100% of the output wouldn't be dispatchable, it would be considered baseload power.



They are close on price, but not quite economic yet.
Are they economic with a price on carbon (I know you're talking about in the US where there is no carbon price)?

Battery prices are absolutely tumbling as are PV modules due to insane oversupply. CATL has said their prices for their lithium phosphate batteries will be USD$56/kWh this year. For context, it was $128 in 2022 and $107 in 2023. PV module prices are already 20% lower in April than even just December. Nuts!

The US has high tariffs of course for these cheap Chinese products, but this will mean Even more aggressive build out globally. Solar PV manufacturing capacity is expected to be 1100 GW in 2024 and 1300 GW in 2025. Last year 400 GW were installed and at last 550 GW this year. Crazy oversupply with warehouse full and companies having negative margins just to keep factories open. Batteries are even worse. Batteries prices will fall by 50% this year due to an absolutely massive oversupply with a still giant pipeline of new production capacity to come online.

I don't think it'll be long before we see unsubsidized "baseload" PV/battery +/- wind being very competitive
Street Pharmacist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2024, 08:34 AM   #3291
Fuzz
Franchise Player
 
Fuzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Exp:
Default

Quote:
University of Queensland researchers have built a generator that absorbs carbon dioxide (CO2) to make electricity.



Quote:
“This nanogenerator is made of two components: a polyamine gel that is already used by industry to absorb CO2 and a skeleton a few atoms thick of boron nitrate that generates positive and negative ions,” Dr Wang said.
Quote:
“We could make a slightly bigger device that is portable to generate electricity to power a mobile phone or a laptop computer using CO2 from the atmosphere,” Professor Zhang said.

“A second application on a much larger scale, would integrate this technology with an industrial CO2 capture process to harvest electricity.”
https://www.technology.org/2024/05/0...ainable-power/

Pretty cool stuff. Obviously very early, but if it can be developed, and it looks fairly cheaply, this could have many applications.
Fuzz is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Fuzz For This Useful Post:
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:48 AM.

Calgary Flames
2023-24




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021