Things are Starting to Heat Up - Part XIII 27

[dik]

For earlier threads, see:
thread1618-496010
thread1618-496614
thread1618-497017
thread1618-497239
thread1618-497988
thread1618-498967
thread1618-501135
thread1618-504850
thread1618-506948
thread1618-507973
thread1618-510266
thread1618-512015


-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[Tmoose]

Just sayin' .

 

[JoshPlumSE]

Step back from the trees... coal production (and by extension coal consumption, 'cause I don't see people storing mountains of coal) has soared in recent history (30 years) to a level (and at a rate) which is unsustainable.

No I don't see that happening. Take a look at Australia, a country that has aggressively moved away from coal power. But, they still mine it. It's a win-win for the politicians. They get to "virtue signal" to their environmental base about all the good they're doing by getting rid of coal power. But, they don't take much of a hit with coal industry, because they still get to mine as much of it as they want..... as long as they export it to other countries.

LOL. This is the EXACT type of "solutions" we can expect government to come up with for our concerns about fossil fuel emissions.

 

[GregLocock]

Realistically, if Australia stops mining black coal, Indonesia cheers and starts mining its brown coal.

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

 

[TugboatEng]

LOL. This is the EXACT type of "solutions" we can expect government to come up with for our concerns about fossil fuel emissions.

The irony is that the climatologists are always warning about the future but are always very short sighted in their actions.

 

[Rputvin]

It is much more environmental friendly to mine the coal and freight it over the ocean so it can power industry making fidget spinners that are freighted back to your country to be put in the garbage, which is freighted back to massive landfills where they burn the garbage to supplement the coal to make more fidget spinners.

China sure is doing something right, but I'm not sure it has to do with renewable energy...

 

[dik]

Rputvin, not quite correct...

“China Invests $546 Billion in Clean Energy, Far Surpassing the U.S.

China accounted for nearly half of the world's low-carbon spending in 2022, which could challenge U.S. efforts to bolster domestic clean energy manufacturing”

https://www.scientificamerican.com/...llion-in-clean-energy-far-surpassing-the-u-s/

“China on course to hit wind and solar power target five years ahead of time

China on course to hit wind and solar power target five years ahead of time

Beijing bolstering position as global renewables leader with solar capacity more than rest of world combined

China is shoring up its position as the world leader in renewable power and potentially outpacing its own ambitious energy targets, a report has found.
China is set to double its capacity and produce 1,200 gigawatts of energy through wind and solar power by 2025, reaching its 2030 goal five years ahead of time, according to the report by Global Energy Monitor, a San Francisco-based NGO that tracks operating utility-scale wind and solar farms as well as future projects in the country.”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jun/29/china-wind-solar-power-global-renewable-energy-leader

“Owing to its reliance on coal for two-thirds of its electricity supply, China emits more greenhouse gases per year than any other country. Its electricity-related emissions alone roughly equal those of the entire United States economy, and China is planning to speed construction of new coal plants in 2023.

At the same time, China is adding new renewable projects to the grid roughly as fast as the rest of the world combined. In 2020, it added three times as much wind and solar capacity than the U.S. did the same year. In just the first half of 2022, it invested another U.S.$100 billion in solar and wind and plans to add record amounts of wind and solar in 2023.”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/energy...ina-qa-with-expert-jiang-lin/?sh=74acc7723072

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[JoshPlumSE]

dik -

First, you are assuming that China's numbers are correct. Aren't you? I think that is a very dubious claim since China almost never releases data where they look bad.

That being said, the most important thing to remember is that China is NOT doing this for the benefit of the earth. They are doing it for their benefit alone. They are trying to rapidly increase the standard of living of their citizens. That means providing energy (of all kinds) as quickly as possible. They will re-route and dam rivers regardless of environmental consequences. They will burn coal and build strip mines as much as they can to meet their goals.

Mankind is inherently selfish. So, that it not inherently bad, just human nature. But, it would be wrong to look at their actions and think.... "wow, look at what China is doing for the world, they are leading the way in clean energy." Not at all.

They are also expanding their CO2 emissions at a rate that far outstrips any other country in the world. They will continue to do so as long as it is in their best interests. They are also committing literal "genocide" against the Uyghurs. We have the a whole generation of activists that are convinced that Israel is evil because they are in a land conflict with the Palestinians. But, no one in the US complains about China's treatment of the Uyghurs for some reason.

 

[TugboatEng]

Per capita, China's genocide rate is lower than Israel.

 

[JoshPlumSE]

Per capita, China's genocide rate is lower than Israel.

LOL.

 

[dik]

Josh... I don't know where the data comes from. Satellite monitoring is somewhat consistent with their output... Coal is an ugly form of fossil fuel, but there are other fossil fuels that contribute to the footprint. Their carbon footprint is increasing at a faster rate than the US, but, on a per capita basis, they are still behind at nearly half the US. The US will continue as long as it is in their best interests, too. Their implementation of alternative energy greatly exceeds that of the US.

In the last few decades, they have brought hundreds of millions out of poverty... this likely has an impact on their carbon footprint. There is a real disconnect on how the Chinese are portrayed when you look at the current state of their infrastructure.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[SwinnyGG]

Thought I'd check in on this thread.

Yep, same arguments, no one has learned anything.

See y'all in another 6 months.

 

[JoshPlumSE]

The US will continue as long as it is in their best interests, too.

The US is a totally different situation because, it's not a dictator that decides what the priorities for our country are. In the US, every single person gets to make a choice about how to live their lives as far as CO2 emissions go. Right? What's driving the reduction (not increase) in CO2 emissions in the US? Is it government policy? Maybe that plays a part... Though I am skeptical. Certainly, it has helped switch us towards coal.

Instead, I'd argue that the biggest reason is that the CONSUMER in the US wants to reduce their carbon emissions. And, the market is rising up to meet those demands. Last year, I got solar panels on my house. This year, we bought a hybrid car that easily gets 2 or 3 times the gas mileage as our older cars. Altogether, that's probably 80 grand we've spent with an eye on reducing our carbon footprint in a single year. Now, my family can afford to do those things. But, we're not just flushing our money down the toilet. We see value in it as well. Value in the short term, value in the long term. It's like when someone decides to make a 'moral' choice to become a vegetarian or start eating healthier. It might be expensive, it might be inconvenient, but EACH PERSON gets to make that decision for his or her self.

There are plenty of people in the US who cannot afford to install solar panels or buy a hybrid car or such. They will likely not be reducing their CO2 emissions because it's not in their best interests. But, for many of us, it is. Which is why the US has been reducing our CO2 emissions so successfully over the last 10 or 20 years. In fact, our country's CO2 emissions are down to what they were in the early 1990s(approximately). That is a HUGE change in our consumption of energy. It should not be ignored.

Nor should the fact that Chinas are approximately 4 times what they were in the same time period. You see how that difference clearly demonstrates how china doesn't care about reducing CO2 emissions overall. They care about increasing their standard of living. Maybe they'll get to the point where they start reducing their CO2 emissions. But, right now, the entire 1st / western world could cut their CO2 emissions by 30% and that would likely be entirely offset by CO2 emission increases by China and India.

 

[dik]

Don't kid yourself... your method of the courts overturning the government, may even be worse... check the difference in US Covid deaths compared to China's or other Western countries... Modified Harley... 'Live Free and Die'.

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/f...-emissions-from-power-plants-what-comes-next/

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[JoshPlumSE]

check the difference in US Covid deaths compared to China's or other Western countries.

You do understand that the US probably dramatically over stated their covid deaths. And, that China almost certainly under-reported their Covid deaths? Right.

I think Covid (it's origins, death toll, and such) is a case where you can really, really not trust ANYTHING that China reports to be anywhere close to what really happened. LOL.

I suppose your argument is really that BECAUSE China is an authoritarian country, they could be much more successful in moving towards clean energy. But, remember that only happens if they genuinely care if there is massive climate change in the world. Other countries starve to death or such. I don't have any reason to believe they care about this at all.

Now, my point about the USA (and most western democracies) is that each of us can have a minor effect on our own. And, if those of us who want to have a positive effect on CO2 emissions demonstrate a reasonable about of economic DEMAND, the the market will develop the SUPPLY of CO2 reducing products for us. The cost of those products will go down and the efficiency will go up. And, the world eventually gets better or people adjust to the new world without anyone being forced to commit economic suicide.

 

[TugboatEng]

If we take a look at renewable energy milestones we may see a pattern.

The solar panel - Fritts - USA
The wind turbine generator - Brush - USA
The lithium ion battery - Goodenough - USA
The water turbine generator - Francis - USA

Do Socialist countries like China have any such contributions?

 

[dik]

by half a million to take them outside the rest of the western countries... tell me another one...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[dik]

See my post of Feb 12...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[hokie66]

They don't need to invent anything, when they can steal it.

 

[TugboatEng]

Yeah? I'm on track to hit my solar and wind target too in that I intend to install no wind or solar on my house in the next 5 years. Dik, you're an engineer. If you set a target of half of your buildings not falling down in 5 years is that a good target?

 

[bradrs]

by half a million to take them outside the rest of the western countries... tell me another one...

is that a per capita comparison?