The climate change consensus extends beyond climate scientists

[hydrive]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

How are we supposed to use less power while at the same time adopting electric vehicles or plug in hybrid?

Places like where I work use some where around 400,000 to 500,000 KwH per day and they are a model of efficiency, most of the motors are on drives, for a cost of around 8 to 10 million dollars and maintenance cost of 20,000 to 50,000 dollars per years.
They're not going to use any less power.

This is why nuclear has to be part of the solution. But don't count wind and solar out, they are good for additions to the grid. I'm not sure why anyone would be against them, while they cannot replace the current grid they can supplement it and provide tremendous benefits. Especially as the cost continues to come down.

[oil pan 4]

I don't count out solar. I have been formally educated on wind and solar power generation. Just an associates.

The cost of wind power is likely to go up as all the good spots get taken. A good place for a wind farm has easy highway access and is near a substation, or at least near power lines that can handle incoming wind power.
Otherwise you have to run power lines and build roads for miles, then build a substation to tie into the existing power grid, assuming the existing power lines don't need to be upgraded. That right there can double the cost of wind farm.
If miles of power lines need to be upgraded then the actual wind turbines them selves can easily become 1/4 to 1/3 of the total cost.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by sendler

You can't will products into existence just by deciding to do it. Or having a demand for it. There are vast physical constraints involved with battery production long before we ever get near to a grid scale storage solution. We will see cornucopian supply/ demand models springing leaks on many key resources in the next couple decades.

Many messengers consider that it will take nothing less than a war declaration to accelerate production.
When 'problems' don't exist,there's no need of solutions.

[sendler]

It will take a worldwide focused effort similar to what the USA did during World War II. But not just for a few years. From now on, forevermore. To soften the landing from this energy peak that we now enjoy from fossil fuel. Everything has to change. And we will still run out of critical resources for 10 billion people.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

I expect supply of these minerals to be like the supply of oil. Price dictates the "effort" given towards mining the resource. If the price goes high enough, they will figure out ways to extract minerals in increasingly difficult areas.

There's no such thing as running out, only pricing that makes consumption cost prohibitive.

I've only had marketing 101.'What the market will bear' was the metric accepted universally back then for pricing.
It can have absolutely no connection to the actual cost of production,plus a 'reasonable' net profit.
Costs for extractive industries can grow to such a degree that it doesn't pay to bring it to the surface.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by sendler

We might be able to scrape up enough for 10 billion people to have 500 Wh each for an e-bike or scooter board and run some lighting when they are not riding them.
.
We are currently consuming 17 TW continuous average. 400TWh to store 1 day's worth. Still 200 even if full electric conversion happens to be twice as efficient. 20 world GigaFactories for 60 years. The world will be one big pit mine before we are done.

One scenario,is to interconnect the entire planet on the same grid,allowing daytime to power night time,as Earth rotates.Plus wind,hydro,tidal,wave,geothermal,nukes,etc..

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

Sendler- I'm not disagreeing with the problem, only taking a less concerned outlook on things since humanity has a way of addressing problems as they come. Technology will continue to advance on all fronts, which should improve efficiency of energy consuming devices, provide alternative storage solutions, improve mining capabilities, and who knows what else the future holds.

I tend to share your pessimistic outlook on batteries being a viable grid storage solution and alternative energy replacing primary generation.

I wonder what our grid consumption looks like with all those Bitcoin farms powered off?

AeroStealth mentioned a recent power failure in Australia,where Tesla's grid-tied batteries kicked in seamlessly to pick up the grid load.Nobody suffered any interrupted service.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

Wait till the green flag fliers see the mining and processing techniques for rare earth elements and what's left over from processing. They will be begging for hydraulic fracturing and nuclear power.

I'm a green-flag flier.Do you have any prima facia evidence I'd want to check out?

[sendler]

Originally Posted by aerohead

One scenario,is to interconnect the entire planet on the same grid,allowing daytime to power night time,as Earth rotates.Plus wind,hydro,tidal,wave,geothermal,nukes,etc..

How much wire does this take to transmit 17TW across oceans? Many of these ideas sound great until you do the math.

[Xist]

Are we going to argue about transmission losses again?