- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
Unlimited Power!!
Because it was being artificialy suppressed.
Now we need to figure out how to suck emissions out of the air with it.
The current most scalable way to do that is to give cities a budget to plant trees everywhere they can.
I would love a $Billion in green energy research, but 1000 cities getting $Million budgets to plant thousands of trees and maintain them over the next 15 years would be better
We should start buying farms in the Califoirnia Valley where they are essentially abusing water rights - and plant massive forests. It would take a fraction of the water to accomplish this and reduce desertification. Eat some of the smog from LA & SD, give the millions of residents a desert forest to camp in, and so on. Expensive plan but one I would vote for.
Not that this is a bad thought, it’s great and we should do that, but it’s not enough. We essentially burned the growth of millions of years of broken down stuff as oil, and that carbon went into the atmosphere. We need to retrieve millions of years of organic growth and put it back into the ground.
I’ve seen ideas of seaweed farms with the purpose of growing them and then sinking them in the ocean depths to get them out of the cycle. I suspect something would learn to live off them though.
If we had a way to make oil from the carbon in the air directly plus an energy input, and then a way to pump that back where we got it is what we need. Maybe there could be a crop that makes this conversion somehow. Like maybe grow something to make ethanol and then convert that. Labor and energy intensive but that’s what it will take since we just used all the energy.
I guess. I’m just sceptical that people will actually not cut them down later.
I want carbon dioxyde turned into something less profitable to turn into coal again.
Trees have a life cycle, and city trees need maintenance.
The most carbon negative thing would be to prune the trees throughout their lifetime to maximise canopy uplift and spread, which maximises ground shading. Shred the prunings and the dead trees and stuff the shreds into old decommissioned bulker ships, and sink the ships in the deep ocean, sequestering the carbon in the wood into an anoxic environment where it won’t rot.
Tree shreddings being mulched into gardens just eventually rot and decompose back into CO2 through bacterial action.
Sinking the densest logs of mature trees into the ocean would sequester that carbon for tens of thousands of years
In old forests most co2 is absorbed by mycelium underground. Leave a varied forest alone and it will.tale care of this process on its own.
Cutting them down after a long period is fine. The real need is cooling and CO2 reduction over the next 20 years by which society should be mostly carbon neutral.
the next 20 years by which society should be mostly carbon neutral.
lol
lmao
I have it on good authority that if you filter air though the corpse of a billionaire, much of the pollutants are removed.
Build 75m tall towers in every city and fill them basement to roof with hepa filters.
Bring new meaning to the term “skyscraper”
The key is to have something that the masses would use. Something disguised as another product, powered by renewables.
Radical, but probably expensive AF
HEPA would remove particulate but not CO2 or methane emissions, which are what drive climate change.
We’d have some clean ass air for sure though.
Independence from the billionaire fascists that want to control my energy is worth paying a premium for. The fact that it’s also cheaper is a nice bonus though.
Saving money on your bills is not like increasing your income, there is no tax on reducing your outgoings and depending where you are Solar pays off in about 5 to 7 years and your expecting it to be 80% as good at 25 years. In terms of capital investments its one of the most reliable places to put money and get a decent return. Annualised ROI is about 6% for that 25 years but then the panels are still going to work a lot longer just at a bit less output.
Great news for everyone who likes energy.
( 😆 )
Great news for every living being on earth.
Generally yes. Although technically, there could be some species that won’t be affected by changing climates as much as us humans and our fragile infrastructure.
My quip was mostly about the O&G industry constantly using “energy” to mean the “fossil fuels” subset.
Nothing will be completely unaffected, but it may not actively harm everything equally.
i wonder how this will affect the grid. it will for sure flatten out the curve during the day, maybe even leading to excess capacity we’d have to burn off. what magnitude of storage would we need to actually use all the extra power?
I don’t think one really has to burn off solar capacity? Just raise the inverter input to match the voltage and no current will flow. Would be kind pointless to waste the capacity though, I think Sweden or somewhere had success with melting salt with excess power.
are you thinking of the finnish sand battery?
Hmmm, this has been part of the debate since solar power started up. Batteries both grid and home size are being installed all over. The cost is falling rapidly and the grid forming batteries are providing all the services of a power station.
there are still pretty big problems with them though, like materials and cost. i’d love it if every home could top up the grid but the forming inverters are bulky and costly for individuals. hopefully used traction batteries can start making up the difference in cost but personally i’d rather see more large-scale solutions like pumped hydro.
also, anecdotally, as someone in a country where we were already basically fossil-free, with a 50-50 split between hydro and nuclear, installing more renewables has coincided with the grid becoming less stable. the rapid fluctuations in available power has seemingly driven up energy costs. i theorise it’s because larger variations in grid frequency is more taxing on the hardware.
the rapid fluctuations in available power has seemingly driven up energy costs. i theorise it’s because larger variations in grid frequency is more taxing on the hardware.
You need batteries for this which in turn make things cheaper and more reliable overall.
you need to get those batteries from somewhere.
Whats your point? Yes when you build something you need to get said something from somewhere.
that here, there are no plans for integrating battery technology into the grid, no plans for where to get them, and no system to regulate their use. what we do have is lots of old pumped hydro facilities that were shut down because they were “not profitable enough”.
I mean ya, if you don’t have plans to do it, then it doesn’t happen, but batteries are what help stabalize solar/wind input. If they have decided to go into solar/wind and you’re having grid instabilities because of it, they should build batteries.
The batteries also help with the Nuclear plants since they often don’t run at full capacity overnight which is wasted energy as they need to spin them down. If you have batteries you can also be storing that during the evening, which means you need less solar during the day.
Pumped hydro and grid-scale battery storage seem to be the two main methods.
Pumped hydro accounts for 95% of grid scale storage. It’s the only thing viable for significant energy storage with batteries taking on more of a capacitor role.
The reason pumped hydro is 95%
(if that’s true)is because until very recently batteries weren’t a viable option and available in the scale required.That’s no longer the case. There’s limits to where you can do pumped hydro, but pretty much anywhere you can drop a solar array down, you can drop a substantial amount of batteries.
Batteries are going to dwarf pumped hydro in the not so distant future.
Edit: To put this into perspective, the USA has ~553 GWh of pumped storage. Tesla alone in the USA has 1 40GWh factory running, and a 50GWh factory about to come online, so they’ll have a yearly 90GWh install capacity, 130GWh if you include the China factory. Then there’s BYD, CATL, Panasonic and LG all doing battery storage, and things like Sodium batteries are about to come online at scale that are even cheaper.
https://www.energy.gov/cmei/water/hydropower-market-reports (553 source)
That’s because of capitalism. Pumped hydro has huge startup costs and a long payoff period, but runs basically forever. That’s not good next quarter stock market returns.
Batteries are exactly the disposable need to be completely thrown out and re bought every 5-10 years that the private sector loves to sell the government.
Pumped hydro beats batteries $/KwH before the first time you have to throw them all out every time.
You talk about China, and they’re doing exactly what I said. They’re building pumped hydro capacities over 10x their battery storage capacity.
Again I’m not against batteries they’re a great complimentary technology for surge demand and local backup. But nothing beats the simplicity and efficiency of moving water from a mountain Lake to a valley lake.
Commercial scale grid batteries last 15-20 years and can be deployed in months not years, and the permitting is dramatically less. The grid batteries will be up and earning profits before you even break ground on those pumped hydro locations.
But yes I’m sure once you build the pumped hydro it can be cheaper over decades. Also unless they’re a closed loop system, they’re susceptible to drought which could impact their usage in the future.
Massively increased long-distance transmission lines between different climates are a must. A lot of investments are being made there but it turns out building thousands of miles of high voltage lines is a pretty slow process now that it isn’t the 50s and 60s.
It is economical to store the surplus, so it will happen.
My utility provider gives lower rates during 1000 to 1500. People are setting their washing machines (timers), air conditioner (house as a thermal battery), oven (not all stuff, but some) etc on a timer. I’m sure some companies could adjust their processes to take advantage of excess solar: run more equipment and harder in preferential times, etc.
There are products like UPS+battery which are trying to add battery storage to well matched products and these might go a long way to provide a 1-5% storage for most houses and companies in future, just enough to tide over the duck curve in mornings and evenings.
Hopefully the rest can be managed by the utility providers
that only works for people who own their homes, unfortunately.
Lol what is that latest preduction? “Sure, solar production has risen like never before, but surely now the production will plateau.”
With all these data centres driving demand, probably not any time soon.
Aren’t they mostly running on fossil fuels?
Yeah, because they also run at night…
Solar while day gas during the night is a very common scheme. Works well with solar and wind because gas turbines can spin up very quickly.
LLM datacencers just don’t care about the environment, nor costs past a year or so and prioritize speed over everything. They can’t be bothered getting more land and permits for renewables.
They’d be in the perfect position to cut their gas use in half with 2 years roi, or to two thirds or less with maybe 5 years roi. I suppose even they don’t think it can continue on like this.
Depends who the study is funded by - if it’s fossil fuels, then yes.
listen, I have been wrong every time, but this time, when I make the same prediction that has been wrong every time previously, you’re gonna feel real dumb for doubting me
Are these selected bad predictions? I find it hard to believe some of them, but when they are cherry picked it would make sense.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Energy_Agency#Bias_against_renewable_energy seems they’re just biased against solar
This seems to support my assumption. All those “predictions” are from there same source. This is not a general “predictions were wrong”. Just from that one source, which is rather obvious after the first few fails.
Even calling those things predictions is a bit too much really. Just flat line the future, a complete discontinuity from the previous trend… what the fuck.
Yeah, these guys are paid clowns 🤡
We are entering times of energy abundance.
War, sanctions and oil crisis all make solar more attractive
But that would also make countries energy independent. So can’t have that.
For the life of me I can never figure out how countries don’t see renewables, and solar in particular, as a national security issue.
Distributed electricity? Yes please.
They do, everyone does. The psychopaths in the oil industry lobby govrrnments for slow uptake, and literally kill people to stay where they are.
It’s corruption. Anyone with the power to make that decision is compromised in some way.
Money and control, solar gives too much freedom to the end user.
Were that the issue, home solar would be illegal wheras instead it was federally subsidized for years. The truth is simple, oil money buying politicians.
I mostly agree, but all those cloud connected inverters talking to Chinese servers are giving me the heebie-jeebies.
To the
moonsun!!If only we could be so grossly incandescent!
\ [T] /
who’s making the predictions, the petrol industry?
The predictions aren’t even doing linear regression, feels like taking 10 year old data and fitting on current trend
Especially 2012-2020 seems ridiculous. “Its been an exponential growth until now but it will probably instantly stop here and stay constant”.
The US elected a guy and party that was hell bent cancelling subsidies and making installing solar and wind more expensive.
Same happened with electric car adoption in the last 2 years.
a toddler with a sharpie you say?
Exactly we’ve been held back massively by their propaganda, they should be punished for the damages they did and are still doing but who am I kidding…
Its almost like solar panels last forever and are easy to make at scale or something.
The only thing left to do is make them affordable and efficient. ~$2 per watt is ridiculous. Solar panels need to either get better at absorbing light, or the price needs to come down.
Actual raw panel cost is way below that and has been for years. It’s the rest of the supporting infrastructure and critically the skilled labor required to install it that keeps the overall cost annoyingly sticky above $2/w
I recall that some asian country (I can’t remember if it was Japan or China) used recycled glass to make solar road tiles that work like chain LEDs. These were porous enough to let water seep through, yet strong enough to handle several years of being a road surface. The practical upshots of this are myriad; The dark color aids in snow melt, the tiles are easy to replace, and cheap to produce, they can have other infrastructure wired to their reverse side, such as data fibre, or even battery packs to store excess charge and most importantly, when applied at scale they are both the the power generator and distribution network combined. There was even talk of making them piezoelectric, so that traffic driving over them would also generate useable current.
Fucking solar roadways… when will this thing die?
https://interestingengineering.com/innovation/solar-roadways-engineering-failure
They already are affordable enough to be the cheapest source of energy in many places
Cheapest as in “over the lifecycle”, not initial investment.
They are depending on your locale cheaper than fence panels of equivalent size. So building a fence from solar is cheaper than building a fence and it generates electricity.
Jan 1, 2027 Governments pay homeowners to stop introducing solar energy to the grid.
Who tf made that last prediction?
Yeah I know it’s been growing exponentially over the last few years and the last prediction was higher than this and it blew through that one but I really think this is the absolute plateau. Maybe like 1MW more but that’s it …
All the displayed predictions are equally stupid and just look like gas and fuel lobby copium.
TBF we’re talking about the industry that tricked the entire globe into thinking leaded gasoline was safe. Falsified data. Hired scientists to lie in congress. All while fully knowing the dangers.
This is much more sinister than copium.
tricked the entire globe
With one exception:
In 1956, the Soviet Union banned leaded gasoline in large cities, such as Moscow, Leningrad, Baku, Odessa, Kiev and tourist areas of the Caucasus and Crimea
Ehh, this month’s been slow for me. Haven’t seen the sun for a week now.
Positively basking in it RN
