This just in (well, three days ago): July 2015 the warmest month in history

[piasabird]

It was not the warmest month in the history of Illinois. On earth we have only been recording temperatures for about 200 years. It was in the 50's this morning.

We had a really cool spring also. The corn in Illinois is going to be a bumper crop this year in some places.

It is hot every year in July.

 

[K1052]

Actually the oil companies stand to make far more from natural gas sales once major coal fired plants are forced offline. Once natural gas demand is increased so will the prices.

The larger picture is that they want to stifle renewable energy across the board not fight each other for the fossil energy market in this venue.

NG is already supplanting huge amounts of coal generation without any appreciable favorable (to producers) movement on NG pricing.

 

[OverVolt]

I don't really feel the need to refute a study on carbon emissions done by the oil industry which serves as the source of an 'article' by a anti renewable energy lobbying front.

Neither are credible sources.

To be honest the oil industry seems to have the most realistic analysis of energy consumption and use. BP says there they have 53.3 years of oil at current technology levels. The oil industry does a better job of forecasting oil consumption and inventory than the climate scientists do. The climate scientists have no idea what they are doing with regards to any actual solutions to the problem they propose. They are the proverbial guy at work who is complaining but can't ever come up with any solutions.

How many miles do you have on your car? Is it electric? How many tons of goods do you buy per year that are transported by truck? Exactly.

 

[K1052]

I doubt anyone that posts in here will ever see renewable energy supply more than 15% of the total demand of the US. Currently it's less than 5%.

Many states have RPS that meet or well exceed 15% by 2020 or 2025.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

The larger picture is that they want to stifle renewable energy across the board not fight each other for the fossil energy market in this venue.

NG is already supplanting huge amounts of coal generation without any appreciable favorable (to producers) movement on NG pricing.

Wait until it has to be more than double what it currently is and then we can discuss how much it affects the price.

http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=427&t=3

Major energy sources and percent share of total U.S. electricity generation in 2014:

• Coal = 39%
• Natural gas = 27%
• Nuclear = 19%
• Hydropower = 6%
• Other renewables = 7%
  • Biomass = 1.7%
  • Geothermal = 0.4%
  • Solar = 0.4%
  • Wind = 4.4%
• Petroleum = 1%
• Other gases < 1%

 

[K1052]

Wait until it has to be more than double what it currently is and then we can discuss how much it affects the price.

http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=427&t=3

Would now be a good time to point out that renewables are within 2% of that 15% which we'll never live to see?

Anyway NG isn't making up all the coal power replacements because of RPS, as demonstrated by the expansion of non-hydro renewables.

 

[shira]

Wait until it has to be more than double what it currently is and then we can discuss how much it affects the price.

http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=427&t=3

Energy from photovoltaics is growing geometrically. Just how fast is still an educated guess, but the guesses are getting larger over time. From Wikipedia:

Several market research and financial companies foresee record-breaking global installation of more than 50 GW in 2015. China is predicted to take the lead from Germany and to become the world's largest producer of PV power by installing another targeted 17.8 GW in 2015. India is expected to install 1.8 GW, doubling its annual installations. By 2018, worldwide photovoltaic capacity is projected to doubled or even triple to 430 GW. Solar Power Europe (formerly known as EPIA) also estimates that photovoltaics will meet 10% to 15% of Europe's energy demand in 2030.

The EPIA/Greenpeace Solar Generation Paradigm Shift Scenario (formerly called Advanced Scenario) from 2010 shows that by the year 2030, 1,845 GW of PV systems could be generating approximately 2,646 TWh/year of electricity around the world. Combined with energy use efficiency improvements, this would represent the electricity needs of more than 9% of the world's population. By 2050, over 20% of all electricity could be provided by photovoltaics.

 

[piasabird]

In Hawaii they have lots of solar panels because the cost of oil and electricity is higher there. If we were to raise the cost of electricity via a carbon tax it could be detrimental to the power companies. Or the federal government could just give the power companies a mandate to use about 25% green energy in whatever form seems beneficial to them, whether that is wind, solar or hydro or some new type like ocean wave generators or whatever they can dream up.

Instead of putting solar panels on single dwelling units, maybe trying to target warehouses might work better. I read an article about a company that converted an old factory in a city and they had problems with stray bullets breaking the solar panels.

Maybe the power company can target homes to put solar panels on. Another Idea is to design new home construction so all the roofs are at the proper angle and face the proper direction for maximum solar power advantage. One thing I dont see in the USA is any kind of logical approach to urban planning. I am reminded that Salt Lake City was laid out originally with double wide avenues.

 

[sandorski]

Almost everything you buy is transported by truck. Wrap your little mind around that.

"I'm driving my electric car to the store to save the planet"

Yeah good luck with that. Everything in the store was transported by a 8-15 liter 6-12 cylinder direct injection supercharged diesel.

....and?

 

[OutHouse]

hottest month on record? where? it was perfect here in Denver and below normal.

 

[WHAMPOM]

hottest month on record? where? it was perfect here in Denver and below normal.

Got your backyard confused with the planet?

 

[Jaskalas]

Energy from photovoltaics is growing geometrically. Just how fast is still an educated guess, but the guesses are getting larger over time. From Wikipedia:

By 2050, over 20% of all electricity could be provided by photovoltaics.

And we'll be 2 degrees warmer at over 500ppm?

 

[Chaotic0ne]

Oh noes!! Those poor polar bears!!

 

[Cozarkian]

Instead of putting solar panels on single dwelling units, maybe trying to target warehouses might work better. I read an article about a company that converted an old factory in a city and they had problems with stray bullets breaking the solar panels.

Solar expansion should focus on public buildings in the Southwest deserts. For example, build covered parking for teachers at schools and put panels on top. Do the same for courthouses and city hall. Private companies can follow suit.

The nice advantage of solar is we don't need to ruin large swaths of the environment to build large plants, we can add panels in already developed space.

Planning residential developments for future solar is also a nice idea.

 

[shira]

To be honest the oil industry seems to have the most realistic analysis of energy consumption and use. BP says there they have 53.3 years of oil at current technology levels. The oil industry does a better job of forecasting oil consumption and inventory than the climate scientists do. The climate scientists have no idea what they are doing with regards to any actual solutions to the problem they propose. They are the proverbial guy at work who is complaining but can't ever come up with any solutions.

How many miles do you have on your car? Is it electric? How many tons of goods do you buy per year that are transported by truck? Exactly.

The basis of your criticism of climate scientists is absurd. Climate scientists study the Earth's climate and describe what's happening and what will happen under various scenarios. It's beyond their purview to propose specific solutions. That's the job of political leaders and innovators.

 

[OverVolt]

The basis of your criticism of climate scientists is absurd. Climate scientists study the Earth's climate and describe what's happening and what will happen under various scenarios. It's beyond their purview to propose specific solutions. That's the job of political leaders and innovators.

Finding an efficient renewable energy replacement is indeed science's responsibility :/.

 

[shira]

And we'll be 2 degrees warmer at over 500ppm?

If the only thing humanity does differently between now and 2030 is to shift 20% of electricity generation from fossil fuels to PV, then the Earth will be be warmer, but it won't be as warm is if humanity had done nothing.

Or are you saying that unless PV solves 100% of the problem, it's not worth doing PV at all?

But of course, the growth of PV isn't the only thing happening to mitigate climate change. Other technologies will contribute to reducing the use of fossil fuels as well as increasing energy efficiency. Not to mention tweaks to existing technologies that will reduce emissions of greenhouse gases.

Of course, it's likely that the earth will continue to warm anyway, because of the presence of greenhouse gases already in the atmosphere. But isn't less warming better than more warming?

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Hey, you want full equality, get your ass into the sewers and coal mines.

how about they get their asses into the medical field, or science or law... oh wait. They're there and doing very well, not getting equal pay for equal work, but why should they, they're wimmen!

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

hottest month on record? where? it was perfect here in Denver and below normal.

Clearly there's no drought in California, It's been raining here in Illinois and the fields look great. No way California is dealing with inclement weather conditions.

 

[shira]

Finding an efficient renewable energy replacement is indeed science's responsibility :/.

Just look at the gross intellectual dishonesty you've committed here. You wrote in your previous post:

The climate scientists have no idea what they are doing with regards to any actual solutions to the problem they propose.

You criticized CLIMATE scientists for not proposing solutions. And now, suddenly, you're blaming "science."

But science as a whole is proposing all sorts of "solutions," from air-scrubbers to better batteries and photovoltaics, to better wind techologies and better/safer nuclear powerplant designs. Or do you also want scientists to also become politicians and put in place carbon taxes and other policies that put burdens on people and businesses? I have a feeling you'd be criticizing THOSE "solutions," wouldn't you?

 

[bshole]

Clearly there's no drought in California, It's been raining here in Illinois and the fields look great. No way California is dealing with inclement weather conditions.

I dunno, in the 19th century before global warming far more than 100 million died of famines brought on by drought. I don't believe a single American died of drought related starvation in the 20th century. Perhaps a few millions died of drought related starvation world wide but its threat as a life threatening menace has been completely eliminated in the first world and greatly reduced in the third world. Global warming is saving us all! Jesus we are in the middle of this horrific drought in California and I haven't noticed any prices going up on ANYTHING.... its barely even an inconvience! As a side note, we could feed much of Africa with all the corn that we are currently converting to ethanol at the behest of climate modelers....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_famines

 

[OverVolt]

..

 

[Blue_Max]

how about they get their asses into the medical field, or science or law... oh wait. They're there and doing very well, not getting equal pay for equal work, but why should they, they're wimmen!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F30lWAiD_3A
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3TR_YuDFIFI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T09Bx6xoHSQ

Thoroughly debunked by thousands of experts, but enjoy your brownie points for kissing up.

Now, back to our regularly scheduled program.

 

[IGBT]

And in other news alarmist eco-KOOKS still waiting for Y2K.

 

[Blue_Max]

And in other news alarmist eco-KOOKS still waiting for Y2K.

Calling those people concerned about the direction we're likely headed "kooks" only shuts down discussion. Small changes now will have greater effect than giant changes in 30-50 years when the need is critical.

This requires discussion and a little action. Name-calling to END that discussion is a poor choice. If you don't think there's a problem - prove there isn't one IN that discussion.