Official Global Warming thread (merged)

[NorthDallas40]

You say you're not moving the goalposts related to whether China is investing in clean energy but ignore the statistics of where they are doing so because they're also still building coal plants. The claim isn't that they're only producing clean energy but that they're making a significant investment in it. Go back up and re-read what was said and stop making a strawman to attack.

I also found where they added 120GW of wind and solar in 2020. More wind than the rest of the world combined last year.

What is the claim that we would cripple ourselves in basic energy costs by transitioning to clean energy based on?

you’re welcome.

And Texas illustrated how reliable clean energy is this week. And don’t even start with the “but other states do it” broke ass narrative. Go read the professional opinion and article writeups I put in the Ted Cruz thread on how to handle renewables for base load capacity budgeting. Any solar or wind capacity MUST be offset by a non environmental dependent generation source so as to insure the capacity is available for grid demand.

China is still building coal plants faster than we can decommission ours. They have more capacity in development to add to their existing capacity than our entire existing coal capacity.

But sure China is committed to clean energy...

China has 250 GW of coal-fired power under development - study

 

[Roustabout]

you’re welcome.

And Texas illustrated how reliable clean energy is this week. And don’t even start with the “but other states do it” broke ass narrative. Go read the professional opinion and article writeups I put in the Ted Cruz thread on how to handle renewables for base load capacity budgeting. Any solar or wind capacity MUST be offset by a non environmental dependent generation source so as to insure the capacity is available for grid demand.

You do understand that there were failures the in conventional electrical grid as well. Gas lines freezing? Supply lines and transformers freezing? Even a nuclear power plant went offline due to weather. So, stop the bullsh!t narrative.

Texas had a private grid with little to no accountability for emergency preparedness.

 

[NorthDallas40]

You do understand that there were failures the in conventional electrical grid as well. Gas lines freezing? Supply lines and transformers freezing? Even a nuclear power plant went offline due to weather. So, stop the bullsh!t narrative.

Texas had a private grid with little to no accountability for emergency preparedness.

I know exactly what happened in Texas I live here. None of what you said offsets my statement on green energy capacity must be offset by other more reliable generation sources. Green produced less than 3-4GW thru the cold period.

The nuke plant tripped a safety sensor due to cold but was quickly repaired.

As far as a “private grid” go read the National Review article on that being a total red herring too.

And China added coal capacity at a 2:1 plus ratio over solar or wind... but yeah they are committed to green energy Thats the same logic as when your wife brings home a $500 hand bag she bought for $250 that she didn’t need but all she can say is “but I saved $250!”

 

[Roustabout]

I know exactly what happened in Texas I live here. None of what you said offsets my statement on green energy capacity must be offset by other more reliable generation sources. Green produced less than 3-4GW thru the cold period.

As far as a “private grid” go read the National Review article on that being a total red herring too.

And China added coal capacity at a 2:1 plus ratio over solar or wind... but yeah they are committed to green energy Thats the same stupid logic as when your wife brings home a $500 hand bag she bought for $250 that she didn’t need but all she can say is “but I saved $250!”

true, but that’s not why Texas failed. They have other sources and they FAILED. Gas? Failed. Coal? Failed. Nuclear? Failed. Every conventional source had areas knocked offline. Period.

Maybe, just maybe, Texas had a once in a lifetime natural disaster.

 

[NorthDallas40]

true, but that’s not why Texas failed. They have other sources and they FAILED. Gas? Failed. Coal? Failed. Nuclear? Failed. Every conventional source had areas knocked offline. Period.

Maybe, just maybe, Texas had a once in a lifetime natural disaster.

Like I said go read the article. Texas’s issues lie mainly in fuel delivery to the natural gas generation plants. The net result is the same but that isn’t an indictment of natural gas power generation.

Texas needs to take corrective action. But adding or winterizing our solar and wind better damn well not be part of that action

Oh and no coal and nuke ran like all stars. I dropped this graph in the other thread.

 

[Roustabout]

Like I said go read the article. Texas’s issues lie mainly in fuel delivery to the natural gas generation plants. The net result is the same but that isn’t an indictment of natural gas power generation.

Texas needs to take corrective action. But adding or winterizing our solar and wind better damn well not be part of that action

I didn’t say it was. I’m for fossil fuels. I’m also against false narratives. I’ve read about a dozen articles on Texas.

The problem with all power in Texas is that none of the energy providers faced penalty for not being prepared for extreme scenarios. For example, they do make wind turbines that have defrost systems. They use them in Northern climates.

I’m my opinion this was a once a generation weather event and those things tend to tax the system to failure. If you build your grid for those scenarios you spend billions of dollars and you can still have failure.

 

[NorthDallas40]

I didn’t say it was. I’m for fossil fuels. I’m also against false narratives. I’ve read about a dozen articles on Texas.

The problem with all power in Texas is that none of the energy providers faced penalty for not being prepared for extreme scenarios. For example, they do make wind turbines that have defrost systems. They use them in Northern climates.

I’m my opinion this was a once a generation weather event and those things tend to tax the system to failure. If you build your grid for those scenarios you spend billions of dollars and you can still have failure.

The bolded is in conflict. Again go read the national review article. That broke ass narrative is being falsely pushed. If you add solar or wind it must be offset with a reliable source which today mostly means natural gas. That statement is not qualified by any season. And that is the opinion of professionals tasked with developing, managing, and maintaining our whole national power grid.

And go read the post you quoted after I edited. Nuke and coal were all stars. As usual.

 

[Roustabout]

The bolded is in conflict. Again go read the national review article. That broke ass narrative is being falsely pushed. If you add solar or wind it must be offset with a reliable source which today mostly means natural gas. That statement is not qualified by any season. And that is the opinion of professionals tasked with developing, managing, and maintaining our whole national power grid.

And go read the post you quoted after I edited. Nuke and coal were all stars. As usual.

Sorry, but I’ve looked at the breakdown of power and even in areas where renewables aren’t even used, the grid failed. That’s a fact. Texas CHOSE to handle their grid and ignore federal suggestions. Were you in Texas in 2011? They had a less severe event that led to rolling blackouts and pointed out the deficiencies. Nothing was done about it/ So, when you say “National” power grid you should think about that.

As a conservative, I’m not going to rely on heavy politicized sources like NR.

 

[Wafflestomper]

you’re welcome.

What did this have to do with my comments?

And Texas illustrated how reliable clean energy is this week. And don’t even start with the “but other states do it” broke ass narrative. Go read the professional opinion and article writeups I put in the Ted Cruz thread on how to handle renewables for base load capacity budgeting. Any solar or wind capacity MUST be offset by a non environmental dependent generation source so as to insure the capacity is available for grid demand.

I haven't paid attention to that thread recently and don't intend to sift through it for some NR article. If you want to post it here I'll read it.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

just stopped by to say Global Warming is the biggest scam ever created

I'll take wuFlu pandemic for 1000 Alex.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

I think he's still at Mar-a-Lago

Lol.



TDS, alive and well.

 

[Wafflestomper]

Lol.



TDS, alive and well.

Oh please. I was just patronizing Justin (or whatever he calls himself now). He has BDS at least as bad as anyone here ever had TDS.

 

[NorthDallas40]

Sorry, but I’ve looked at the breakdown of power and even in areas where renewables aren’t even used, the grid failed. That’s a fact. Texas CHOSE to handle their grid and ignore federal suggestions. Were you in Texas in 2011? They had a less severe event that led to rolling blackouts and pointed out the deficiencies. Nothing was done about it/ So, when you say “National” power grid you should think about that.

As a conservative, I’m not going to rely on heavy politicized sources like NR.

Yes I was here in 2011. And that’s a dumb stance to take on the NR article it’s literally Q&A with industry professionals it gives their direct answers.

The graphs I showed are actuals on temp and generation capacity.

And I’m not defending our utility commissions or state government. I’m saying the politicalization of this event as any kind of pro green energy narrative is completely misguided which is what has been happening.

Yes we need to make some corrections to our grid on base load generation capacity to insure reliability in all seasons. That automatically excludes green energy.

Also as stated by the professionals if Texas were attached to the grid in this case it could had resulted in even more issues. Nobody had reserve and all were running at capacity. It’s in the article!

 

[NorthDallas40]

What did this have to do with my comments?

It shows that your statement on China caring about green energy is BS. They are adding coal at a 2:1 plus ratio to green.

I haven't paid attention to that thread recently and don't intend to sift through it for some NR article. If you want to post it here I'll read it.

It’s there if you want to go read it. It’s in the last two or three pages. Search by my username. No I’m not going to spoon feed you FFS

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

UN: Huge changes in society needed to keep nature, Earth OK

Tell it to the Chinese.

 

[Weezy]

I highly doubt China cares about the environment. They are likely investing in all technologies (and stealing technologies) to expand technology exports. And they also use it to expand their influence, particularly in poor nations where they are using outrageous loan terms and builds to leverage rare Earth metals.

I doubt they invest too much past 10% wind or solar because your grid can't take it without backup.

 

[Roustabout]

Yes I was here in 2011. And that’s a dumb stance to take on the NR article it’s literally Q&A with industry professionals it gives their direct answers.

The graphs I showed are actuals on temp and generation capacity.

And I’m not defending our utility commissions or state government. I’m saying the politicalization of this event as any kind of pro green energy narrative is completely misguided which is what has been happening.

Yes we need to make some corrections to our grid on base load generation capacity to insure reliability in all seasons. That automatically excludes green energy.

Also as stated by the professionals if Texas were attached to the grid in this case it could had resulted in even more issues. Nobody had reserve and all were running at capacity. It’s in the article!

Again, the reality is that you had a once in a century weather event. The issues in Texas weren’t because the state utilized green energy options. Areas that had none of those options still collapsed. Even if they could have kept producing power you still had major collapse in the supply chain.

 

[NorthDallas40]

Again, the reality is that you had a once in a century weather event. The issues in Texas weren’t because the state utilized green energy options. Areas that had none of those options still collapsed. Even if they could have kept producing power you still had major collapse in the supply chain.

I agree with everything but the last sentence. If all of our fossil fuel generation could get fuel we would have been fine even with intermittent outages in that fossil fuel. Or maybe that is what you were saying?

Texas needs to harden its baseline capacity to deliver reliable power in all seasons. And they need to tell anybody that brings up green energy to STFU and go sit in the corner.

 

[Wafflestomper]

It shows that your statement on China caring about green energy is BS. They are adding coal at a 2:1 plus ratio to green.

The original argument--the one you interjected your opinion into--is that China is investing in green energy. They added more wind capacity last year than the rest of the world combined. That's investing in green energy. They also added 40-something GW of solar last year. That's investing in green energy too.

It’s there if you want to go read it. It’s in the last two or three pages. Search by my username. No I’m not going to spoon feed you FFS

Lol. You go off on a tangent not really related to the topic we were discussing and then expect me to search some other thread for a link you posted? If you want to argue some other point here then stop being lazy and argue it here and not in some other thread. Or don't; I don't really GAF.

 

[MG1968]

The original argument--the one you interjected your opinion into--is that China is investing in green energy. They added more wind capacity last year than the rest of the world combined. That's investing in green energy. They also added 40-something GW of solar last year. That's investing in green energy too.



Lol. You go off on a tangent not really related to the topic we were discussing and then expect me to search some other thread for a link you posted? If you want to argue some other point here then stop being lazy and argue it here and not in some other thread. Or don't; I don't really GAF.

Then China shouldn’t ever be exempted from climate treaty goals. But we all know they continue to get a pass.

 

[NorthDallas40]

The original argument--the one you interjected your opinion into--is that China is investing in green energy. They added more wind capacity last year than the rest of the world combined. That's investing in green energy. They also added 40-something GW of solar last year. That's investing in green energy too.



Lol. You go off on a tangent not really related to the topic we were discussing and then expect me to search some other thread for a link you posted? If you want to argue some other point here then stop being lazy and argue it here and not in some other thread. Or don't; I don't really GAF.

Your argument is complete tripe. China is paying lip service to green energy while doubling down on coal. They are adding coal at 2:1 over green energy. That statement is in this thread. And you’re the lazy nimrod here. Do you need somebody to wipe your ass while you change forum threads too FFS?

 

[Rickyvol77]

What science are you speaking of? What specific claims made collectively by climate scientists have been proven wrong again and again?

Acid rain, ozone layer holes, global cooling, "coastal cities will be underwater by 2010", again and again and again

 

[Wafflestomper]

Your argument is complete tripe. China is paying lip service to green energy while doubling down on coal. They are adding coal at 2:1 over green energy. That statement is in this thread. And you’re the lazy nimrod here. Do you need somebody to wipe your ass while you change forum threads too FFS?

If paying lip service to green energy involves leading the world in it then I guess you're right. Between Q2 2019 and Q2 2020 they 1) decreased overall output; 2) decreased fossil; 3) increased wind; 4) increased solar; and 5) increased nuclear. The fact that they're still building coal plants isn't much of a surprise given the abundance of coal in China, the industrialization and urbanization efforts, and the relative poverty of Chinese citizens. We'd probably still be building coal plants if it were cheaper than gas.

But I'll ask you again: where does the bar lie for when we give a **** about what China is doing? If shifting to clean energy is prudent for our future then shouldn't we be doing it instead of waiting for them to hit some arbitrary percentage of fossil to renewable power output ratio?

I'm not going to do the ****ing legwork for making whatever point it is that you're trying to make here. How about this: theres a retort to whatever linked opinion piece you're so taken with and unwilling to provide in this thread in [insert journal here]. Enjoy!

 

[VolStrom]

The original argument--the one you interjected your opinion into--is that China is investing in green energy. They added more wind capacity last year than the rest of the world combined. That's investing in green energy. They also added 40-something GW of solar last year. That's investing in green energy too.



Lol. You go off on a tangent not really related to the topic we were discussing and then expect me to search some other thread for a link you posted? If you want to argue some other point here then stop being lazy and argue it here and not in some other thread. Or don't; I don't really GAF.

Have you ever seen the pictures of the smog in China's big cities, it's worse than Pittsburgh was in the early 1900's during its heyday when the street lights turned on during the daytime.

 

[Wafflestomper]

Acid rain, ozone layer holes, global cooling, "coastal cities will be underwater by 2010", again and again and again

The first two of those are actually a thing so I'm not sure what specifically you object to. With respect to the ozone layer hole, we stopped using certain chemicals to prevent further damage to it.

Can you point to any scientific literature where the consensus among climate scientists was that global cooling was something we should have been worried about or that coastal cities would be underwater by 2010?