The climate change consensus extends beyond climate scientists

[RedDevil]

Originally Posted by freebeard

[fuel shortage and house damage due to extreme rain deficit and low water levels in rivers] is an interesting set of problems. This ground that collapses if it dries out is already below sea level?

Some of it, but that's relatively easy to solve if the rivers and lakes have some reserve (you don't let in sea water - it devastates crops on farm land etc).
In the east the land lies above sea level; mostly peat and clay layered with ancient beaches and dunes that have been pushed up into hills at the end of giant glaciers coming down from Scandinavia during the last ice age. They lie well above the big rivers so only rain replenishes the water there, but we had so little of that his year and so much heat that at some places the deficit is more than half a meter.

Then the ground is rather soggy, and fully waterlogged if you go deep enough.
Big structures need foundations on concrete poles going 30 to 50 meters deep into the ground, but smaller structures can be built on the first layer of sand - sometimes requiring hardly any foundation at all. But in times of drought the tree roots deplete the water under the top sand strata, and the peat (ancient buried marshlands) start to shrivel making the top sag down.

Even some dikes were under threat, as they used to be just heaped up clay and stones on top of the original marshy peat, which was pressed solid - until it dries out... but after a collapse caused a minor flooding some 15 years ago these are monitored and sprayed when needed.

[sendler]

Another look at the scale of primary total energy consumption. The world still gets 30 times more energy from burning wood than from solar.
.
.

.
.

[sendler]

Explosive growth in wind and solar? Barely visible. Updated to 2017. For those that think solar and wind can ever replace fossil fuels.
.
Population and GDP fit almost the same curve.
.
.

.
.

[RedDevil]

We have work to do.

That's the situation 1 or 2 years back, but what is the direction we are heading?



If solar maintains that rate for the next 26 years it would increase 11.545 times, surpassing our total energy needs within 15 years. It is unlikely it will keep growing at that rate, but hey.

Actually I expect geothermal will start to rise soon. I read about some initiatives that sound very promising.

One of my colleagues has a friend who owns a mansion in the woods, where Shell had set up a test location. It took millions to build and almost €20,000 a year to operate, but it provides heat for over 30 big houses in the area.
The average heating bill easily exceeds €1000 (more than half in tax) here, so at least the operational costs are easily covered.

[All Darc]

This graphic representaion it's a little trick, will confuse some people, since they put solar on top, giving the impression (for not well informed people) that the eco alternative energy sources are producing more energy than coal.

Hydropower can't be so low, since on Brazil we have more than 50% of our energy from hydropower.



Solart will have a boom, but it can't keep growing without energy storage. While the minority of people have solar it's easy to sell the excess produced by day to get credits to pay for the energy took from grid by night. But when more than 40% ou 50% of people get solar, this trick will no longer be possible.
The solution are the new low cost and high density batteries coming.

Originally Posted by sendler

.
.

[sendler]

Originally Posted by RedDevil

We have work to do.

That's the situation 1 or 2 years back, but what is the direction we are heading?

.
.
The chart below was data from only one year ago. How much more than next to nothing is it this year? 1.5 times .003 is still next to nothing
.
.

.
.

Originally Posted by RedDevil

If solar maintains that rate for the next 26 years it would increase 11.545 times, surpassing our total energy needs within 15 years. It is unlikely it will keep growing at that rate, but hey.

Sorry. I think you are somehow being greenwashed. Right now it is easy to increase by a certain percentage year on year when you start with next to nothing. The progression of solar and wind will become more linear. 15 years for solar to replace all energy? I'm very sorry. How do you get such an absurd statement?
.
Solar is currently listed as 450TWh out of 150,000 TWh. Which is .3%. Even if you were to stop making the common mistake of saying "energy" when you mean to say "electricity", which is 20% of total energy, solar is currently only 1.5%. IEA is forecasting solar to be 15% of total energy by 2050.

[All Darc]

What is the efficience of this system of energy storage bellow ?



I don't know, but I bet it's very low. It loss energy during conversion to electricity, during pump's motor efficience loss, during conversion again to ellectricity when the water move bellow again moving turbines.

I bet it's not more than 30% efficient.

[RedDevil]

Originally Posted by sendler

Sorry. I think you are somehow being greenwashed. Right now it is easy to increase by a certain percentage year on year when you start with next to nothing. The progression of solar and wind will become more linear. 15 years for solar to replace all energy? I'm very sorry. How do you get such an absurd statement?
.
Solar is currently listed as 450TWh out of 150,000 TWh. Which is .3%. Even if you were to stop making the common mistake of saying "energy" when you mean to say "electricity", which is 20% of total energy, solar is currently only 1.5%. EIA is forecasting solar to be 15% of total energy by 2050.

Sorry, I think you misread it. I was clear about it being unrealistic that solar energy will continue to grow at 43.3% annually, but (and because) IF IT DID, that exponential growth would reach extreme values.

The point is that the conditions right now allow for such an expansion. Sooner or later there will be limits; no roofs left to cover with PV panels, overproduction, lack of material or building capacity, etc. But until that happens and with no other big changes, the growth may well continue on exponentially and the now very small production % may suddenly get quite substantial.
At 43.3% solar power would more than double every 2 years.
I would not mind that in the least.

At 21.4% wind power doubles every 4 years. It would take a while to get really big, but for now it is leading solar.
If they both keep growing exponentially for just 8 years or so to come their effect would become quite noticeable.

[All Darc]

Solar need some things to get better and keep growing reaching a good point in energy production :

-Affordable energy storage for night and for moments of low sun or weather blocking most of the sun. If everyone get solar panels they will no longer able to cell excedent energy from day to pay for grid energy at night.
Unless we count the industry activity, for home solar systems sells energy to them to get credits, we need to thinks the credits system can't keep going after 40% or 50% of people get solkar panels. But industry would probably reach solar panels before ordinary consumers, since large systems are cheaper (per kw) than home systems.

-Lower cost for inversors and stabilizer, the devices required to convert electricity voltage and current. The prices for such devices are already nearly the price of the solar panels itself, since the solar panels cost get cheaper every years but the inversors hadn't the same reduction.

-Better efficience. With solar panels cost decreasing the cost for roof adaptation and instalation got more and more significative for the total cost of a home solar panel system. So if home solar panels could reach 30% efficience, instead of 16% efficince of the most used for home systems, the cost of roof adaptation and instalation would be relatively reduced for kw produced.
Architects could start study to include solar systems, by designing homes that would be quite easier to adapt to solar projects.

Solar heaters also help, like solar water heaters for showers and for swin pools. Even some solar cookers could help, for example, in Australia, where right now some people are so in trouble with energy bills that some middle class people are eating cold food from yersterday to avoid increase energy bill with cooking. And I remamber that there are solar cookers that work even 5 hours after sundow, since it heats a salt during day, melt it, and the heat energy from it can warm or cook food hours later.





If the battery project I mentioned it's really true about a battery converts heat to ellectricity, solar panels could have a thin plate battery, or many thin plate batteries in a shape of a heatsink, to convert the heat energy from the solar panels, increasing the energy production of each panels, and also cooling the panels.
That would be perfect, cheap energy storage and also a little of energy production. But I don't know the limit of heat it can convert per battery. It's not like you throw it on fire and get a huge energy, no way, but it's more like a small coin battery convert energy for a LED. So a Large thin plate could convert energy to 1000 LEDs, let's say, and 5 thin plate, arranged like a heatsink converts energy to 5000 LEDs.

[redpoint5]

I've seen no evidence of a battery breakthrough.

There is nothing to suggest PV panels will achieve 30% efficiency in residential applications.

None of the huge problems have been resolved.