So atmospheric CO2 concentrations respond to ordinary least squares linear trends rather than actual SST?
Comment on Week in review – science and technology edition by opluso
↧
↧
Comment on Week in review – science and technology edition by Jim D
They mostly respond to emissions, of course.
↧
Comment on Week in review: policy and politics edition by aplanningengineer
Not far from your proposal Mosomo, for a power system there is a significant distinction between generating resources that are synchronous rotating machines and those using electronic emulation. Hydro, nuclear, coal, gas, thermal solar, geothermal are preferred resources in this classification providing among other factors much needed inertial mass. Solar PV and wind besides being intermittent do not provide other benefits associated with rotating in synchronism with the power system. For storage pumped hydro and compressed air operate in synchronism but not batteries.
↧
Comment on Week in review – science and technology edition by opluso
I think CO2 levels are closely tied to ocean temperatures by gas equilibrium considerations once you remove net sources like volcanoes or fossil fuels…
Perhaps I misunderstood your “closely tied” reference. We probably agree that the increase in atm CO2 since 19th c is due to anthro-emissions.
↧
Comment on Week in review: policy and politics edition by AK
AK, if you can think of a way of switching off a huge coal furnace and associated steam turbines etc at the flick of a switch, and back on again at a moment’s notice, […]
So how long does it take? An hour? (See Jim D’s comment above.) And, in an integrated system, how much pumped hydro does it take to fill in the difference? Or gas?
↧
↧
Comment on Week in review: policy and politics edition by AK
@Peter Lang…
Not really. I’m much more interested in utility-grade solar. Off-grid may be important from a sociological standpoint, but, even if it becomes much more decentralized, IMO there’ll be a grid where there’s civilization.
↧
Comment on Week in review: policy and politics edition by Danny Thomas
AK,
Re:”We’ve actually got a question of fact here: do coal plants continue burning coal when they’re not supplying energy?”
“And constantly flipping the switch cuts the lifetime of its furnaces. So the company tries to keep the plant running at a minimum of 40-per-cent capacity, come rain or shine. ”
(Best answer I could find) http://e360.yale.edu/feature/on_the_road_to_green_energy_germany_detours_on_dirty_coal/2769/
↧
Comment on Week in review – science and technology edition by Jim D
Yes, the majority is from the emissions, and the net is into the oceans as a result, hence acidification. However, in the absence of emissions, there is the chemical equilibrium to consider, but that effect is relatively small in the last century.
↧
Comment on Week in review: policy and politics edition by kim
So worried about whether to worry about birds or the environment that they can’t spare the worry to worry about poor people, who are neither worried about birds or the environment.
Hey, give ’em cheap energy and the poor can worry about birds and the environment. That’ll free up the guilt-ridden to worry about something else.
=============
↧
↧
Comment on Week in review: policy and politics edition by Jim D
The Germans don’t switch them off entirely but can cycle to low production rates quite quickly. I linked that above somewhere.
↧
Comment on Week in review: policy and politics edition by AK
Thanks Danny.
You might want to see Jim D's link <a href="http://judithcurry.com/2015/04/04/week-in-review-policy-and-politics-edition/#comment-690373" rel="nofollow">above</a> for an alternate view of Germany.
As I understand it, coal can ramp in under an hour, between the 40% capacity and somewhere close to 100%. This still means that substantial coal burning will continue. I guess as solar and wind increase their penetration, the coal will have to switch to gas, or they'll have to add considerable pumped hydro (or other storage technology).
My guess is they'll have to invent a new financial risk allocation system to allow owners of plants with limited up-time to recover part of their capital costs in assurance payments.
Unless, of course, storage technology finds a quick breakthrough. Which isn't impossible but shouldn't be counted on. IMO.
↧
Comment on Week in review: policy and politics edition by Danny Thomas
Jim D,
Yes, it was stated they cycled down to a base of 40% in the article you offered and if I recall it stated that was improved from 60% before. I could find nothing about an “idle” state. I guess that capability doesn’t exist at this point with the technology.
↧
Comment on Week in review: policy and politics edition by Jim D
No, coal can’t do that, but gas can, as far as I know. Better to replace coal with gas where you can. Cleaner too.
↧
↧
Comment on Week in review: policy and politics edition by sarastro92
Jim D… Try reading the link Judith Curry provided above, “Debacle: As Germany Adds 70 Gigawatts Of Green Electricity, Its Fossil Fuel Capacity Reaches New Record High! ‘… My comments were reflecting these facts, namely that as green energy generating capacity explodes, so do fossil fuel based generating plants… that’s what the Germans have “figured out” … now it’s your turn to “figure out”
↧
Comment on Week in review: policy and politics edition by Turbulent Eddie
No, coal can’t do that, but gas can, as far as I know. Better to replace coal with gas where you can. Cleaner too.
Hoo-ray!
We agree. Gas is most importantly cheaper, cleaner, more flexible, and for those who think it matters, much lower in CO2 output than coal.
↧
Comment on Week in review: policy and politics edition by Jim D
Part of Germany’s problem is that they have limited themselves after Fukushima by turning away from nuclear power. The fossil fuel increase would have been nuclear if they had stuck with it. This is a part of their energy policy that could have been better. There are safe nuclear options nowadays. France is mostly nuclear and even exports power.
↧
Comment on Week in review: policy and politics edition by sarastro92
Thanks Danny. “The fundamental requirement for an energy source designed to be turned to when renewables can’t deliver is that it can be switched on and off quickly. But lignite plants are very slow to switch. Kerstin Schilling, information officer at Vattenfall’s Schwarze Pumpe lignite power plant, said it takes that facility up to eight hours to power up. And constantly flipping the switch cuts the lifetime of its furnaces. So the company tries to keep the plant running at a minimum of 40-per-cent capacity, come rain or shine. ”
The greenies still won’t face reality … but no surprise…
↧
↧
Comment on Week in review: policy and politics edition by Jim D
At the risk of drawing jokes, I like the gas-wind combo, which sounds like a severe digestive disorder.
↧
Comment on Week in review: policy and politics edition by jferguson
AK quote:
These won’t last forever, but between existing pumped storage capacity, the potential for expanding pumped storage using existing dams…
Existing dams? I’m having trouble imagining how this would work. For example at Hoover, where do you get the water to pump into the lake? If you shut off the flow through the generators, there is not likely to be any water at its base to pump. There likely are some dams on estuaries which could work this way but maybe not that many.
I really must be missing something here. Oh, This was in the politics and policy edition not the science and tech thread.
↧
Comment on Week in review: policy and politics edition by Mark M
Australian Power Consumption Load Curves
There are two distinct peaks on that winter diagram. In the morning — breakfast, showers, turns on the heaters etc – and then again in the afternoon and evening — when people come home and turn on the heaters, stoves, microwaves, washing machines and dryers.
Without rearranging our biological clocks, or reforming our civilization, there’s no real possibility of ‘flattening out’ the two humps.
Renewable power just cannot fill those unmovable daily time-slot requirements.
http://joannenova.com.au/2012/05/a-nation-still-drawing-18000mw-in-its-sleep-cant-go-solar/
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
