Zero-emission vehicles, their batteries & subsidies/rebates for them.- No politics regarding the subsidies!

[Ron Texas]

@samsa I will have to agree 80% fossil fuel is a little high, but no way renewables are at 27% by generation. That number is either incorrect or based on nameplate capacity. Actual output is much less. Remember, the energy used to mine and refine lithium and other raw materials comes from coal and oil. That part of the carbon cycle is front ended.

Meanwhile the first large scale solar panel installations are reaching the end of their useful life. The panels contain toxic materials like cadmium and there is no means to recycle these items. It's complex because special equipment is needed to extract the toxic materials without breaking glass.

It's nice to say BEV batteries will be recycled but nobody has thought about what it will be like to recycle millions of them each year, how much energy it will take or what to do with the leftovers. Most of the thinking on decarbonization assumes a fantasy of cheap unlimited non-nuclear renewable energy soon. The world is not on track for that goal ever.

I'm not responding to the remainder of your rantings. Perhaps your son should join ASR.

 

[Ron Texas]

I would have thought that this is precisely a perfect use case for PV solar panels: they produce electricity at the time of day and in the time of year when you need it most. I have no idea, but are they popular?
This seems a much more favourable situation than what we have in Northern Europe, where our solar panels produce a lot of electricity in the summer, but electricity demand is biggest in the dark and cold winter months. For us, wind power is more important, as the wind is stronger in winter, but it is not something individual households can produce, so we need a grid with high capacity.

Wind is the dominant renewable in Texas. The PV panels help in the afternoon, but peak power usage continues until 9PM. Wind output is highest at night. That leaves gaps to be filled by natural gas or nuclear. Note there have to be three separate investments in generation which means electricity is going to be very expensive. That cost is hidden by subsidies in the US. In Germany it is not so they pay a lot more for electricity. Nuclear is the only way to produce carbon free electricity 24/7 and without the land use problems of wind and solar.

 

[Willem]

I agree that we will need nuclear, and perhaps a bit of natural gas for power generation, on top of as much wind and solar as is possible. In addition, here in Europe the grid is becoming increasingly international, to compensate temporary shortages in one country with surplusses elsewhere. I happen to be a great fan of the market and using the price mechanism (this already works very well on the international wholesale market), but at end user level that will only work if we too have variable pricing, and smart devices. I expect this to materialize within the next few years. We can already have variable pricing contracts, but those do not make that much sense if your appliances are still dumb. Anyway, with the current supply issues I expect all of this to happen sooner rather than later. In the Netherlands major efforts are under way to expand the grid's capacity with new transmission lines etc. even if that takes time, and I expect that the same is being planned in other EU countries. We just have to adapt quickly. Right now, I already see a lot of home insulation projects (other than next week we do not have to worry much about air conditioning).

 

[rdenney]

I would have thought that this is precisely a perfect use case for PV solar panels: they produce electricity at the time of day and in the time of year when you need it most. I have no idea, but are they popular?
This seems a much more favourable situation than what we have in Northern Europe, where our solar panels produce a lot of electricity in the summer, but electricity demand is biggest in the dark and cold winter months. For us, wind power is more important, as the wind is stronger in winter, but it is not something individual households can produce, so we need a grid with high capacity.

Don’t underestimate the load requirements in the tropics, and southeast Texas (including Houston) is officially tropical—much farther south than anywhere in Europe. I grew up in an un-air-conditioned mid-century suburban house. Two or three cold showers a day (or a swimming pool) were how we survived in the summer. Evaporative cooling doesn’t work there—too humid. The (now-conditioned) 1200-square-foot house I grew up in has a bigger cooling plant than my 2400-square-foot house in Virginia, and it can get hot here, too.

Houses of that vintage were poorly insulated by current standards, particularly for heat retention. Natural gas heat is common but lots of houses are electrically heated. Winter can still make a bigger grid demand than summer, if 2021 is any indicator.

You are right, though—it’s going to take the combined effect of many sources stall scales.

Rick “people used to be more resilient because they had to be” Denney

 

[samsa]

@samsa I will have to agree 80% fossil fuel is a little high, but no way renewables are at 27% by generation. That number is either incorrect or based on nameplate capacity. Actual output is much less.

I gave my source (FERC May 2022 report). Renewables were actually 29.3% by generation in April 2022.

If you want to claim a different number, cite a source for one.

Remember, the energy used to mine and refine lithium and other raw materials comes from coal and oil. That part of the carbon cycle is front ended.

Been there, done that.

Meanwhile the first large scale solar panel installations are reaching the end of their useful life. The panels contain toxic materials like cadmium and there is no means to recycle these items. It's complex because special equipment is needed to extract the toxic materials without breaking glass.

It's pretty ironic to cite the (perfectly valid) end-of-life issues with photovoltaics, in the same breath as advocating for more nuclear (which we do need), with their astronomically greater end-of-life issues (not to mention all the spent fuel rods produced during their useful lifetime). Next you're going to claim that wind farms are bird abattoirs.

Most of the thinking on decarbonization assumes a fantasy of cheap unlimited non-nuclear renewable energy soon. The world is not on track for that goal ever.

I will post one graph (data source), plotting total installed renewable generating capacity (in MW), for the US, EU and China over the past decade.

China went from 302 GW to 1.02 TW over that period, making the rest of the world look like they are standing still.

 

[Willem]

Rick, you are right and I don't underestimate the climate in the southern USA: I lived and worked in North Carolina for a while (and enjoyed it). I know North Carolina is not Texas, but even so. It was the humidity that got at me. For me, the science about climate change is clear and undeniable (I am an economic historian who published on past climates), so I think the challenge is to devise strategies for the earth to survive what is happening now, because I do believe the danger is clear, and also that we are approaching the kind of tipping point that in the past went with very rapid change (ie.e. within a few decades). The challenge is that it is also clear that our modern prosperity owes a lot to the use of fossil fuels - see the work of Sir Tony Wrigley, Continuity , Chance and Change. So we have to reinvent ourselves, and that is tall order. The social challenge is to make sure that the poorest people do not suffer most.

 

[Gorgonzola]

The answer to "why" is political and somewhat of a tradition. Texas is the only state of the US which was a republic before joining the union. The independent spirit is evident. Things are worse in other states namely all of New England, the Pacific Coast and Hawaii.

A fact little appreciated by Americans is that all the original 13 colonies were very substantially self-governing before the Declaration of Independence. In fact it was the British Parliament's impingement on the self-governance that initiated the drive for independence and the war thereof. There's not really a damned thing special about Texas.

The jealousy of the newly-constituted states regarding the self-governance they had pre-independence resulted in the weak union and, arguably, the political impasse it enjoys today.

(Moderator: Too political? Delete if you see fit.)

 

[blueone]

I will post one graph (data source), plotting total installed renewable generating capacity (in MW), for the US, EU and China over the past decade.

View attachment 218413

China went from 3.02 MW to 1.02 TW over that period, making the rest of the world look like they are standing still.

Perhaps, but China is also constructing numerous coal generation plants, and while the US relative contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions is falling, China's, India's, and Africa's are increasing.

Insight: COP26 aims to banish coal. Asia is building hundreds of power plants to burn it

On the coastline near India's southern tip, workers toil on a pier carrying a conveyor belt that cuts a mile into the Indian Ocean where the azure waters are deep enough for ships to berth and unload huge cargoes of coal.

www.reuters.com

As of 2019, US greenhouse gas emissions were 14% of the global total - and falling, with the relative reduction mostly due to the displacement of coal generation by natural gas and renewables.

Each Country's Share of CO2 Emissions

Which 20 countries emit the most carbon dioxide? You may be surprised.

www.ucsusa.org

I don't understand this ritualistic fixation on reducing US emissions, when in a few years we'll probably be hovering at about 10% of the global total emissions. Making the US a net zero emitter immediately won't move the needle much if the rest of the world doesn't follow. And net zero immediately is impossible. I think we should focus more on mitigation investments and technologies, because the 1.5C objective is likely unachievable.

Cutting Carbon Emissions Is Harder Than the Glasgow Climate Pact Thinks

The COP26 demands that we reduce global emissions by two-fifths in just nine years

spectrum.ieee.org

 

[Laserjock]

@blueone gets it

 

[samsa]

China's and the USA's CO₂ emissions over the same period (source):

 

[Laserjock]

A fact little appreciated by Americans is that all the original 13 colonies were very substantially self-governing before the Declaration of Independence. In fact it was the British Parliament's impingement on the self-governance that initiated the drive for independence and the war thereof. There's not really a damned thing special about Texas.

The jealousy of the newly-constituted states regarding the self-governance they had pre-independence resulted in the weak union and, arguably, the political impasse it enjoys today.

(Moderator: Too political? Delete if you see fit.)

Texas history is different

One example

 

[Gorgonzola]

View attachment 218422

Texas history is different

One example

I say, Give Texas back to Mexico !!

 

[Laserjock]

I say, Give Texas back to Mexico !!

Lol, I have been to Michigan but not to Canada. Have you spent time in Texas?

 

[Blumlein 88]

I say, Give Texas back to Mexico !!

What about a trade, USA takes Canada, and Canadiens get Texas? Population would only go up by 30% in Texas, and Texans get to spread out in Canada. Then Canadiens could decide if they want to merge with Mexico or not. The flag stays at 50 stars and the Texans get an even bigger state than they already have.

 

[blueone]

What about a trade, USA takes Canada, and Canadiens get Texas? Population would only go up by 30% in Texas, and Texans get to spread out in Canada. Then Canadiens could decide if they want to merge with Mexico or not. The flag stays at 50 stars and the Texans get an even bigger state than they already have.

Whatever you're smoking, it must be really good stuff!

 

[Doodski]

What about a trade, USA takes Canada, and Canadiens get Texas? Population would only go up by 30% in Texas, and Texans get to spread out in Canada. Then Canadiens could decide if they want to merge with Mexico or not. The flag stays at 50 stars and the Texans get an even bigger state than they already have.

Nada. Canada becomes the additional 13 states as they exist today and a super country is formed with a super massive economy. The first of it's kind. Not sure about French language laws though. Quebec is a bit of a conundrum.

 

[Ron Texas]

A fact little appreciated by Americans is that all the original 13 colonies were very substantially self-governing before the Declaration of Independence. In fact it was the British Parliament's impingement on the self-governance that initiated the drive for independence and the war thereof. There's not really a damned thing special about Texas.

The jealousy of the newly-constituted states regarding the self-governance they had pre-independence resulted in the weak union and, arguably, the political impasse it enjoys today.

(Moderator: Too political? Delete if you see fit.)

You are ill informed. I repeat only Texas was a republic, the original 13 colonies were not until the US constitution was adopted. I'm noticing a few of the members here are going out of their way to disagree with me. Looks to me that I have stirred up a swarm of climate alarmists who are willing to go to great lengths to drive me out of the discussion.

 

[Ron Texas]

@blueone thank you for those links and comments. I prefer to call the carbon cutting a religion although I suppose "ritualistic" fits in with that view. Many attempts at carbon are likely to fail because they depend on a carbon free grid which isn't going to happen.

 

[Blumlein 88]

You are ill informed. I repeat only Texas was a republic, the original 13 colonies were not until the US constitution was adopted. I'm noticing a few of the members here are going out of their way to disagree with me. Looks to me that I have stirred up a swarm of climate alarmists who are willing to go to great lengths to drive me out of the discussion.

Are you willing to move to Canada if there is a swap? We'll call it the state of Canexas or something. Canadiens can decide if they want to rename Texas.

 

[blueone]

Nada. Canada becomes the additional 13 states as they exist today and a super country is formed with a super massive economy. The first of it's kind. Not sure about French language laws though. Quebec is a bit of a conundrum.

Quebec seems to be a conundrum even to Canadians. I remember the referendum in 1995.

Quebec referendum of 1995 | Canadian Politics, History & Results

Quebec referendum of 1995, referendum held in the Canadian province of Quebec on October 30, 1995, that proposed sovereignty for the province within a new economic and political partnership between Quebec and the rest of Canada. The referendum was defeated by a margin of only 1 percent, or fewer

www.britannica.com

And of course, there has been talk, oh lots of talk, about some provinces becoming US states.

FRUSTRATED PROVINCES PONDER STATEHOOD

Most American fifth-graders can rattle off the names of the New England states: Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine. Now there’s talk up here about New England

buffalonews.com

There's definitely reoccurring weirdness on both sides of the border.