Bernie Sanders releases a REAL Climate Change Plan

[mysticjbyrd]

Replacing capacity going offline isn't the same as adding capacity. Even with Germany's heroic efforts wind is still only up to a bit over 12% of total German electric generation. Again, if you're going to advocate for solutions that will cause large economic disruption you can at least be clear-eyed about the trade-offs and not sugar coat the upside. You're being a complete head case if you advocate for a fossil fuel free econony but you likewise don't recognize that's at least a couple generations away with current technologies and maintaining anything even close to our current lifestyles. 99.9% of the rest of us don't feel like reverting to North Korean quality of life so you can indulge your childish fantasies that don't recognize reality.

By 2050, it aims to meet 80 percent of electricity needs with renewables such as wind, solar and biogas, which now generate around a quarter.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2015-10-german-power-output-tops-total.html#jCp

 

[1prophet]

The faith in it is insanity.

Perhaps to some of us it is insanity,

but I'm sure there are hundreds of thousands if not millions in the middle east that have wished we had got over our insanity and developed nuclear energy further, instead of causing instability, dictatorships or outright bombing them for oil, and that doesn't include all the dead who have perished for that quest for non nuclear energy.

 

[mysticjbyrd]

Perhaps to some of us it is insanity,

but I'm sure there are hundreds of thousands if not millions in the middle east that have wished we had got over our insanity and developed nuclear energy further, instead of causing instability, dictatorships or outright bombing them for oil, and that doesn't include all the dead who have perished for that quest for non nuclear energy.

We aren't importing coal from the middle east.

 

[Moonbeam]

Perhaps to some of us it is insanity,

but I'm sure there are hundreds of thousands if not millions in the middle east that have wished we had got over our insanity and developed nuclear energy further, instead of causing instability, dictatorships or outright bombing them for oil, and that doesn't include all the dead who have perished for that quest for non nuclear energy.

We get 1% of our electricity from oil. Are you suggesting we should have built nuclear cars.

 

[Accord99]

By 2050, it aims to meet 80 percent of electricity needs with renewables such as wind, solar and biogas, which now generate around a quarter.

Given that Germany already has ~40 GW of wind and ~40 GW of solar nameplate capacity despite only have a peak of demand of around 80 GW, Germany will never get to 80%, without electricity storage that doesn't exist today, because the vast majority of that electricity would go to waste as there would be nobody to use it.

On the other hand, if Germany did not decide to reduce their nuclear power plants and instead built up like France, then they probably would have effectively decarbonized their electricity by now and have CO2 intensity of 80 g/kWh, rather than the 400-500 g/kWh they have today thanks to the brown and black coal that they still need to burn due to the unreliability of wind and solar. Their electricity also wouldn't be among the most expensive in the world.

 

[Subyman]

Are you suggesting we should have built nuclear cars.

Sign me up! Mr. Fusion under the hood

 

[zinfamous]

Please try reading.



He said beef consumption isn't the problem. He's not advocating lower total beef consumption, he's just talking about getting rid of "factory farms" as if they're some kind of inherent evil, and that somehow by having a bunch of hippies raise cattle instead of evil corporate overlords that somehow the environmental impact will be reduced.

"Responsible" farming would have a massive environmental impact if we tried to feed the world's population that way. Science and "factory farms" provide vastly more food per acre than traditional farming. You may disagree with the methods or ethics, but the increased food output can't be denied.

The person I was responding to isn't thinking logically, he's spouting talking points and repeating jargon.

I think you are ignoring the primary reason why factory farming is the problem.

And I know exactly what you are doing. You have labeled this poster a "filthy hippie progressive liberal asshole." He is now and forever in this category for you, therefore the preconceived biases which you only allow to enter your interpretation of people is triggered.

Instead of understanding his comment: "What is the actual issues with factory farming"? You translate thusly:

Hippie prog liberal says: factory farms bad

> Hippie proggie always thinks corporation = bad

--logic basis lacking in theory; based fundamentally on populist definitions of good/evil--

> therefore, hippie thinks corporate = evil. base argument without logic, and completely on passion.

This is what you do, all the fucking time. You make an assumption of what you must imagine your enemy is thinking, and color their statement within your infantile filter.

This clarification that you posted is nothing more than that: "See! He said small farms are better: he's just talking about getting rid of "factory farms" as if they're some kind of inherent evil, and that somehow by having a bunch of hippies raise cattle instead of evil corporate overlords that somehow the environmental impact will be reduced."

No, he isn't. That is you failing to understand a fucking thing about the reality behind the argument. You are a simple-thinking individual. The world is black and white. Hippies = simple thinking in my mind, therefore my black/white filter works!

He never made the argument that factory farms should be replaced simply because they are evil. You did. And you'll never admit it, but you absolutely did that.

 

[buckshot24]

If that is true Zin then Beef IS the problem but he said it wasn't the problem.

 

[zinfamous]

If that is true Zin then Beef IS the problem but he said it wasn't the problem.

what is the cogniitve hole that you guys are experiencing, here?

he said: factory farming is the problem.

not beef. He directly said that.

The absolute primary reason that factory farming is the problem is due to the sheer volume of the operation: land used for nothing but beef, resources to feed the beef, and yes: the cow farts in mass quantities.

That is a volume problem. Not a beef problem.

This isn't complicated.

All of this is part of "getting rid of factory farms."

that is what that entails. It isn't his problem that you guys don't get it.

 

[Jaskalas]

That is a volume problem. Not a beef problem.

This isn't complicated.

Volume problem... as in the volume necessary to feed the human population at a reasonable price?

 

[flexy]

By 2050, it aims to meet 80 percent of electricity needs with renewables such as wind, solar and biogas, which now generate around a quarter.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2015-10-german-power-output-tops-total.html#jCp

Germany is so obsessed with alternative energies, subsidies etc. that in times where there is very strong winds in some areas they produce TOO MUCH energy from wind turbines which then cannot be fed into system due to lack of infrastructure. (Or in other words: The building of power lines etc. for the created energy trails behind the actual number of alternative power plants)

In 2014/2015 Germany had to "destroy" literally billions in € worth of unused energy because of that - with the ABSTRUSE result that of course the consumer pays for this "destroyed" energy w/ increased energy cost.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-08-18/germany-struggles-too-much-renewable-energy

http://cleantechnica.com/2015/10/29...erated-almost-double-the-amount-from-nuclear/

Slight correction: I try to remember the article I read...they had/have to shut-down wind power plants in stormy weather..and it's this shut-down and the related costs which increased energy prices.

 

[buckshot24]

what is the cogniitve hole that you guys are experiencing, here?

he said: factory farming is the problem.

not beef. He directly said that.

The absolute primary reason that factory farming is the problem is due to the sheer volume of the operation: land used for nothing but beef, resources to feed the beef, and yes: the cow farts in mass quantities.

That is a volume problem. Not a beef problem.

This isn't complicated.

All of this is part of "getting rid of factory farms."

that is what that entails. It isn't his problem that you guys don't get it.

HAHAHA

It absolutely is a beef problem if you want to reduce the amount produced.

 

[mysticjbyrd]

Germany is so obsessed with alternative energies, subsidies etc. that in times where there is very strong winds in some areas they produce TOO MUCH energy from wind turbines which then cannot be fed into system due to lack of infrastructure. (Or in other words: The building of power lines etc. for the created energy trails behind the actual number of alternative power plants)

In 2014/2015 Germany had to "destroy" literally billions in € worth of unused energy because of that - with the ABSTRUSE result that of course the consumer pays for this "destroyed" energy w/ increased energy cost.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-08-18/germany-struggles-too-much-renewable-energy

http://cleantechnica.com/2015/10/29...erated-almost-double-the-amount-from-nuclear/

Slight correction: I try to remember the article I read...they had/have to shut-down wind power plants in stormy weather..and it's this shut-down and the related costs which increased energy prices.

But you explained the problem yourself, their infrastructure isn't up to snuff. It's not a real problem. It's hardly even an argument... What's the point? Switching to green energy might cost money? Yah, and? Inaction is not a real option! What's more, spending money to upgrade your infrastructure is a boom to the economy!

Do you know how much money we waste on what amounts to corporate welfare? Hell, the US would be well on it's way to a green energy grid if we spent the money we wasted on these endless wars on our infrastructure.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

what is the cogniitve hole that you guys are experiencing, here?

he said: factory farming is the problem.

not beef. He directly said that.

The absolute primary reason that factory farming is the problem is due to the sheer volume of the operation: land used for nothing but beef, resources to feed the beef, and yes: the cow farts in mass quantities.

That is a volume problem. Not a beef problem.

This isn't complicated.

All of this is part of "getting rid of factory farms."

that is what that entails. It isn't his problem that you guys don't get it.

lol. If the problem is that American demand for beef is so high that it necessitates use of factory farming, then the most obvious and direct issue is American demand for beef. Ergo, "beef is the problem". Unless you're saying that grass-fed cows actually use less land than factory farms? Because that's totally counter-intuitive and probably nonsense. The issue is beef; as long as people are willing to pay $ for it, farmers will continue raising cows. If you want to reduce the carbon emissions from farms, it means either placing limits on the number of cows allowed, taxing beef significantly, or any other method that discourages the beef consumption problem.

 

[mysticjbyrd]

lol. If the problem is that American demand for beef is so high that it necessitates use of factory farming, then the most obvious and direct issue is American demand for beef. Ergo, "beef is the problem". Unless you're saying that grass-fed cows actually use less land than factory farms? Because that's totally counter-intuitive and probably nonsense. The issue is beef; as long as people are willing to pay $ for it, farmers will continue raising cows. If you want to reduce the carbon emissions from farms, it means either placing limits on the number of cows allowed, taxing beef significantly, or any other method that discourages the beef consumption problem.

America would be far healthier with less beef. Maybe it's time for a sin tax to fix the problem, if we as a society won't do it ourselves.

 

[buckshot24]

America would be far healthier with less beef. Maybe it's time for a sin tax to fix the problem, if we as a society won't do it ourselves.

Is beef the problem or not?

 

[realibrad]

Is beef the problem or not?

No. The problem is that the prices for this product does not reflect the true cost. The price of a product being lower means you are likely to see an increase in consumption. Because the price is incorrectly low, beef is being produced in inefficient ways and over consumed.

If chicken were artificially low then you would see am increase in inefficient polluting ways. Likely less polluting than beef but that goes into a whole other discussion.

 

[Darwin333]

It is impossible to push a significant amount of solar/wind energy into the current US grid system. We would need a complete rebuilding of that infrastructure to do that.

I am an expert and business owner in the solar field and I can attest to the above. The grid, especially on a distributive power approach, simply can't "see" the power being produced in real time. So we can throw however many MW of solar panels on roofs as we want but they won't be able to take a single MW of baseline power production offline. I know this is old news but I still say that we should have spent the entirety of the stimulus package on building a new nationwide power grid to replace our currently aged and antiquated grid. A project that will cost us roughly $1.5T so it's unlikely to be funded or even affordable anytime soon. That would have allowed us to efficiently use distributive power generation.

I also have a very strong background in roofing and I really believe in the idea of distributive generation. We have metric tons of unused space on top of just about every house and building in the country. It requires zero new real estate, we can integrate them into the actual roofing systems and the panels actually extend the lifetime of the roof while in a lot of cases reduce the amount of energy (in heat) that is transferred into the building which reduces the HVAC use. On commercial flat roofs the new integrated systems actually protect the roofing system underneath it extending the life of the roof. Your typical Walmart roof lasts 30-35 years, think of the amount of panels you could fit on one and then think about all of the other big box stores out there with at least 3/4 of the floor space as unused space on the roof.

We still need a vastly upgraded grid to properly utilize it though and even then we will need some sort of baseline power generation. Our choices are basically coal, nat gas or nuclear and that isn't going to change anytime soon. Even if we could find a storage method that was even kind of efficient we would need so much of it and so much extra generation that it makes it impractical.

 

[OverVolt]

No. The problem is that the prices for this product does not reflect the true cost. The price of a product being lower means you are likely to see an increase in consumption. Because the price is incorrectly low, beef is being produced in inefficient ways and over consumed.

If chicken were artificially low then you would see am increase in inefficient polluting ways. Likely less polluting than beef but that goes into a whole other discussion.

So they lose money on beef!?



Why on earth do they still produce it then?

 

[buckshot24]

What is the "true cost" of producing beef?

 

[MongGrel]

I take it Buckshot is yelling prove it again.

I just saw the name on the last post and thought I'd take a look.

 

[chucky2]

I am an expert and business owner in the solar field and I can attest to the above. The grid, especially on a distributive power approach, simply can't "see" the power being produced in real time. So we can throw however many MW of solar panels on roofs as we want but they won't be able to take a single MW of baseline power production offline. snip.

So let me ask you this: Take a large area like Chicago in the midwest. Do the grid upgrade, and slap solar on the roofs of all these buildings (residential and business/public alike). Now turn down the on-demand jet generators and the nuke plant...just power from solar.

Forget the summer, focus just on the 5 colder months (Nov - March). Can the solar on a residential roof provide the electricity demands for that dwelling? How will that work with snow? With a couple weeks straight of persistent cloud cover?

 

[OverVolt]

So let me ask you this: Take a large area like Chicago in the midwest. Do the grid upgrade, and slap solar on the roofs of all these buildings (residential and business/public alike). Now turn down the on-demand jet generators and the nuke plant...just power from solar.

Forget the summer, focus just on the 5 colder months (Nov - March). Can the solar on a residential roof provide the electricity demands for that dwelling? How will that work with snow? With a couple weeks straight of persistent cloud cover?

I don't think the unions in Chicago would ever allow it. Wouldn't even get off the ground.

 

[BoberFett]

I think you are ignoring the primary reason why factory farming is the problem.

And I know exactly what you are doing. You have labeled this poster a "filthy hippie progressive liberal asshole." He is now and forever in this category for you, therefore the preconceived biases which you only allow to enter your interpretation of people is triggered.

Instead of understanding his comment: "What is the actual issues with factory farming"? You translate thusly:

Hippie prog liberal says: factory farms bad

> Hippie proggie always thinks corporation = bad

--logic basis lacking in theory; based fundamentally on populist definitions of good/evil--

> therefore, hippie thinks corporate = evil. base argument without logic, and completely on passion.

This is what you do, all the fucking time. You make an assumption of what you must imagine your enemy is thinking, and color their statement within your infantile filter.

This clarification that you posted is nothing more than that: "See! He said small farms are better: he's just talking about getting rid of "factory farms" as if they're some kind of inherent evil, and that somehow by having a bunch of hippies raise cattle instead of evil corporate overlords that somehow the environmental impact will be reduced."

No, he isn't. That is you failing to understand a fucking thing about the reality behind the argument. You are a simple-thinking individual. The world is black and white. Hippies = simple thinking in my mind, therefore my black/white filter works!

He never made the argument that factory farms should be replaced simply because they are evil. You did. And you'll never admit it, but you absolutely did that.

What in the fuck are you babbling on about? That's an impressive amount of spin to try to cover for you lack of comprehension of what was posted.

 

[shady28]

The average person farts 30 times a day
The average fart is 25cc
Total volume of fart per person per day = 750cc


Cows burp and fart about 750 Liters of gas / day, about 1000 times more than a human.

I propose all cows have fart collectors, and methane collection facilities be setup for transfer of those farts to methane power generation facilities.

These collect about half of the gasses cows emit.

Cow fart collector :