Deaths from climate change

[cyrano]

Seems the same suit, the same posture...

Nah, he's too thin in your pic...

 

[user 37518]

 

[cyrano]

Any straw to cling to...

In some areas, where the local grid is too unreliable, too distant, or too weak, diesel generators provide the power to the field coils when starting up. Once the windmill reaches a certain rpm, the field coils are powered by it's own generator.

On some smaller windmills, startup power is provided by batteries.

Nothing new.

Some Chinese generators don't need that startup power, because they use enormous permanent magnets in stead of field coils. Simpler, robuster, but not exactly the thing you'd want in a 200m high windmill because of size and weight.

You'd think an engineer would know such important details, wouldn't you?

Both sides are investing. The amount of crap propaganda has gone up considerably. And the tone is nastier and nastier.

 

[user 37518]

Any straw to cling to...

In some areas, where the local grid is too unreliable, too distant, or too weak, diesel generators provide the power to the field coils when starting up. Once the windmill reaches a certain rpm, the field coils are powered by it's own generator.

On some smaller windmills, startup power is provided by batteries.

Nothing new.

Some Chinese generators don't need that startup power, because they use enormous permanent magnets in stead of field coils. Simpler, robuster, but not exactly the thing you'd want in a 200m high windmill because of size and weight.

You'd think an engineer would know such important details, wouldn't you?

Both sides are investing. The amount of crap propaganda has gone up considerably. And the tone is nastier and nastier.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

Any straw to cling to...

In some areas, where the local grid is too unreliable, too distant, or too weak, diesel generators provide the power to the field coils when starting up. Once the windmill reaches a certain rpm, the field coils are powered by it's own generator.

On some smaller windmills, startup power is provided by batteries.

Nothing new.

Read the article. Diesel generators were needed to de-ice (presumably using resistive heating elements in the blades) before the wind turbine could run. Just another reality of "free energy" with "zero emissions." And of course there's the lubricants, hydraulic fluid (for variable pitch mechanism and brakes), bird strikes, and visual scarring.

Some Chinese generators don't need that startup power, because they use enormous permanent magnets in stead of field coils. Simpler, robuster, but not exactly the thing you'd want in a 200m high windmill because of size and weight.

You'd think an engineer would know such important details, wouldn't you?

Read the article.

Both sides are investing. The amount of crap propaganda has gone up considerably. And the tone is nastier and nastier.

One side can't concede that TANSTAAFL.

 

[JohnRoberts]

I have been following this global warming drama since back when everybody was arm waving about an impending "global winter". Just to cover the unpredictability, they changed the screed to "climate change" just to be safe in case temps dropped some.
==
Bjorn Lomborg one of the smartest guys in this debate has a new book.. "Best Things First" where he lists 12 things we should focus on first that would help the most people cost effectively.
==
The Texas power grid suffered from multiple structural/operational flaws (including deregulation). Of course everybody tries to draw simple answers to complex problems.

JR

PS: I still read the WSJ and I get angry when I see them routinely repeat climate lore as if it was fact. We see the same thing in politics when people exist inside news silos with everybody leaning the same way. Bad climate science has been included in the education/indoctrination of the younger generation.

 

[Matador]

Remind me exactly why we are supposed to be outraged in this case? Texas used diesel generators to restart frozen natural gas plants several years ago during one of their extended power outages due to weeks-long sub-freezing temperatures. Those turbines in Scotland service millions of homes: so if on balance, a handful of diesel generators kept power flowing to millions of homes seems like maybe a good harm-reduction tradeoff.

Or is this another perfect-is-always-the-enemy-of-the-good situation?

 

[JohnRoberts]

Remind me exactly why we are supposed to be outraged in this case? Texas used diesel generators to restart frozen natural gas plants several years ago during one of their extended power outages due to weeks-long sub-freezing temperatures. Those turbines in Scotland service millions of homes: so if on balance, a handful of diesel generators kept power flowing to millions of homes seems like maybe a good harm-reduction tradeoff.

Or is this another perfect-is-always-the-enemy-of-the-good situation?

I decline to watch such info-videos but I followed the TX grid issues a while back. They were over reliant on sun shining/wind blowing, green energy sources that were not adequately reliable when the sh__ hit the wind turbines. This too is all manageable with more robust back-up power supplies. It will cost slightly more but a worthwhile expense to deliver a reliable 24/7 grid.

The deregulation priced the more reliable energy sources out of the market so some adult thinking was needed. This is one of the few good things that government regulation should provide.

JR

 

[user 37518]

Remind me exactly why we are supposed to be outraged in this case? Texas used diesel generators to restart frozen natural gas plants several years ago during one of their extended power outages due to weeks-long sub-freezing temperatures. Those turbines in Scotland service millions of homes: so if on balance, a handful of diesel generators kept power flowing to millions of homes seems like maybe a good harm-reduction tradeoff.

Or is this another perfect-is-always-the-enemy-of-the-good situation?

Yeah, lets keep promoting zero emissions while at the same time Diesel engines are used to keep the windmills going, maybe if the "Just stop oil" freaks dont find about them, they will stop throwing soup at paintings.

 

[fazer]

Bjorn Lomborg one of the smartest guys in this debate has a new book.. "Best Things First" where he lists 12 things we should focus on first that would help the most people cost effectively.

Been following Bjorn for a while. He does have a handle on taking care of people now first and climate second. The ridiculous nature of making electric cars, (the feel good solution )that only serves an elite doing my part answer while the bulk of people in poverty will never find a solution with this pet project. They need cheap energy now to survive and be able to eat and pay for energy. And this punish the farmers stupidity goes over like a lead balloon with food prices already beyond the many. But the people a hundred years from now will what, will have better life at the expense of today. Bjorn deals with the now and first things first.

 

[Matador]

Yeah, lets keep promoting zero emissions while at the same time Diesel engines are used to keep the windmills going, maybe if the "Just stop oil" freaks dont find about them, they will stop throwing soup at paintings.

So let's see if we can put things into perspective. If sources are to be believed:

During December 60 turbines at Arecleoch and 11 at Glenn App were de-energised due to a cabling fault originating at Mark Hill wind farm. In order to get these turbines re-energised diesel generators were running for upwards of six hours a day.
...
Sixty turbines at Arecleoch Wind farm and 11 at Glenn App near Cairnrayn in South Ayrshire were affacted and connected to six huge diesel generators. The windfarms are operated by Scottish Power Renewables, a subsidiary of Spanish-based Iberdrola, which operates 1183 onshore turbines which can produce enough electricity to power two million homes.
...
Over 4000 litres of oil leaked from hydraulic units on turbines and sprayed over the countryside.

So let's assume those 6 hours per day applied to every day in December. So that's 186 hours those 6 generators were running. There are 8,760 hours in a year, so the 6 generators ran for 2.1% of the year. 71 total turbines were effected, out of 1183, which is 6% of the fleet. Scotland delivered roughly 7 TWh in 2020 via wind power.

To deliver that total energy in a year, would require, the energy equivalent of:

1) Coal: 1.12 pounds per kWh, equivalent 7.8 billion pounds of coal
2) Natural gas: 7.36 cubic feet/kWh, equivalent to 51 billion cubic feet of natural gas
3) Petroleum : 0.08 gallons/kWh, 560 million gallons of petrol per year, or 2.1 billion liters

So again, just to be sure, 4000 liters leaked to provide 7 TWh is outrageous, but 2.1 billion liters burned isn't?

 

[user 37518]

So let's see if we can put things into perspective. If sources are to be believed:



So let's assume those 6 hours per day applied to every day in December. So that's 186 hours those 6 generators were running. There are 8,760 hours in a year, so the 6 generators ran for 2.1% of the year. 71 total turbines were effected, out of 1183, which is 6% of the fleet. Scotland delivered roughly 7 TWh in 2020 via wind power.

To deliver that total energy in a year, would require, the energy equivalent of:

1) Coal: 1.12 pounds per kWh, equivalent 7.8 billion pounds of coal
2) Natural gas: 7.36 cubic feet/kWh, equivalent to 51 billion cubic feet of natural gas
3) Petroleum : 0.08 gallons/kWh, 560 million gallons of petrol per year, or 2.1 billion liters

So again, just to be sure, 4000 liters leaked to provide 7 TWh is outrageous, but 2.1 billion liters burned isn't?

Is that bogus calculation supposed to mean something? First, you are assuming that 4000 liters were used to provide 7 TWh, that is not what I am reading, what I am reading is that 4000 leaked, not that only 4000 liters were used to energize the turbines, 4000 liters is what my car uses in a year. Second, it is irrelevant, because you are omitting the fact that they are using diesel turbines to keep the windmills going, can't you see the irony?

As I said, and not only me, but many more, that wind is not a sustainable form of energy (even more ironic, since they are referred to as sustainable energies), they are just meant to make the woke left feel good. And governments are willing to stick a diesel engine to keep the mill going and give the appearance that it works.

You forgot to compute how much this costs, having 71 mills, which are extremely expensive all by themselves, with diesel engines running to keep them going. Do you find anything cost effective with this approach? Do you think this is a good business? Cant you see how ridiculous this is?

 

[Matador]

Is that bogus calculation supposed to mean something? First, you are assuming that 4000 liters were used to provide 7 TWh, that is not what I am reading, what I am reading is that 4000 leaked, not that only 4000 liters were used to energize the turbines, 4000 liters is what my car uses in a year. Second, it is irrelevant, because you are omitting the fact that they are using diesel turbines to keep the windmills going, can't you see the irony?

4000 liters leaked WHILE providing 7 TWh: if you read the story, the complaint was that the turbines leaked hydrolic fluid, not that the diesel generators leaked. And i'll go out on a limb and say that less than 2.1 billion liters were used to power those 6 generators for those 186 hours.

Every single power generation type maintains auxiliary power sources to deal with various situations. Nuclear power plants all have diesel generation capability, even natural gas and petroleum plants have such capacity for startup purposes or when grid conditions don't allow for cold starting directly from the grid. Even the original story said that the only reason generation was necessary was due to a grid fault, meaning that it was likely that without that fault no generation would have even been needed.

You forgot to compute how much this costs, having 71 mills, which are extremely expensive all by themselves, with diesel engines running to keep them going. Do you find anything cost effective with this approach? Do you think this is a good business? Cant you see how ridiculous this is?

And fossil fuel plants also have such costs, so why do you discount them to zero for fossil fuel plants but not wind generation?

Why is perfection always the enemy of the good?

 

[user 37518]

4000 liters leaked WHILE providing 7 TWh: if you read the story, the complaint was that the turbines leaked hydrolic fluid, not that the diesel generators leaked. And i'll go out on a limb and say that less than 2.1 billion liters were used to power those 6 generators for those 186 hours.

Every single power generation type maintains auxiliary power sources to deal with various situations. Nuclear power plants all have diesel generation capability, even natural gas and petroleum plants have such capacity for startup purposes or when grid conditions don't allow for cold starting directly from the grid. Even the original story said that the only reason generation was necessary was due to a grid fault, meaning that it was likely that without that fault no generation would have even been needed.



And fossil fuel plants also have such costs, so why do you discount them to zero for fossil fuel plants but not wind generation?

Why is perfection always the enemy of the good?

It doesn't matter how many liters were used. It is ridiculous and innefective. Also you have to agree that the zero emissions plan is ridiculous, that fossil fuels are needed, and that wind and solar are not the answer. Also, don't you think it is ironic? This is simply political, if these people had any sense, they would destroy the windmills and build nuclear power plants instead, but no, they have to use diesel engines because the left wants wind

 

[cyrano]

Spare them, dear lord, for they know nothing...

It's not as if the ICE has been outlawed. Mercedes and others have been testing ICEs running on hydrogen for a long time. A friend who's the dean for the chemistry department at a local university, drives an Audi on hydrogen. Took a while to get it, but it's been reliable. Of course, there isn't an infra for filling up yet, but it works well with the twelve experimental refill stations in the country. And her Audi has a 1.000 km (600 miles) range, so with a little planning it'll go anywhere.

Meanwhile a company in The Netherlands has developed a cheap, small, electric city car that charges from the onboard solar cells. That's the second one.

The technology is changing on a daily base. If you only want to see the negative you stopped learning. And that's sad. Very sad.

 

[scott2000]

Why is perfection always the enemy of the good?

If you only want to see the negative you stopped learning. And that's sad. Very sad.

I'm going to use these if anyone complains about my grilling this weekend...lol

 

[Matador]

It doesn't matter how many liters were used. It is ridiculous and innefective. Also you have to agree that the zero emissions plan is ridiculous, that fossil fuels are needed, and that wind and solar are not the answer.

So it sounds like if there was no fault on the grid, and those wind turbines hadn't needed a diesel generator to run for 186 hours, you would be on board with wind generation, since no fossil fuels would have been burned? Or are you opposed purely on ideological grounds?

To be clear again: diesel generation at a nuclear (or petroleum) plant is ok, but unacceptable for a wind farm?

Otherwise it means those nuclear power plants you want cannot have diesel generators either, because we need to be consistent in our standards, si? So the nuclear power plants will need smaller nuclear power plants in cases of emergencies. However those smaller plants will also need even smaller plants to start up the backup plants.

Also, facilities for long term high-level radioactive waste dry storage for spent fuel rods cannot be powered by fossil fuels, and therefore need their own nuclear power plants, with backup nuclear power plants, and backups to those backups. Transportation of waste from the plant to the dry storage areas must also need nuclear powered trucks and rail cars, which must tow the backup nuclear plants behind them.



"Zero emissions" is a goal, that in order to achieve requires a trajectory of where we are and where we want to be. Nobody starts a diet by saying "I want to lose 100 kilos", then loses 50 kilos, then declares "I haven't hit my 100 kilo target, I'm still 50 kilos too heavy, this is no different than going back to eating whatever I want."

 

[user 37518]

Spare them, dear lord, for they know nothing...

It's not as if the ICE has been outlawed. Mercedes and others have been testing ICEs running on hydrogen for a long time. A friend who's the dean for the chemistry department at a local university, drives an Audi on hydrogen. Took a while to get it, but it's been reliable. Of course, there isn't an infra for filling up yet, but it works well with the twelve experimental refill stations in the country. And her Audi has a 1.000 km (600 miles) range, so with a little planning it'll go anywhere.

Meanwhile a company in The Netherlands has developed a cheap, small, electric city car that charges from the onboard solar cells. That's the second one.

The technology is changing on a daily base. If you only want to see the negative you stopped learning. And that's sad. Very sad.

"Forgive them, Father, for they do not know what they are doing". I guess you were trying to quote that, but it seems that it is you who do not know anything about it to even bother to get the quote right.

Also, you are making a strawman about Mercedes cars and what not, can we get back to diesel engines being used to make windmills work?

 

[JohnRoberts]

Spare them, dear lord, for they know nothing...

You motivated me to buy the new Lomborg book while I do not expect any surprises. BTW zero emissions is not on his list...

Governments and philanthropists should focus on the 12 smartest things. Fix tuberculosis, malaria, and chronic disease, tackle malnutrition, improve education, increase trade, implement e-procurement, and secure land tenure. This will, at a low cost, improve the world amazingly.

“The cost is $35 billion a year. Spent on the 12 best solutions it could make the world’s poor incredibly much better off.

The benefits include saving 4.2 million lives each year and generating $1.1 trillion more for the world’s poor,” highlights Bjorn Lomborg.

It's not as if the ICE has been outlawed. Mercedes and others have been testing ICEs running on hydrogen for a long time. A friend who's the dean for the chemistry department at a local university, drives an Audi on hydrogen. Took a while to get it, but it's been reliable. Of course, there isn't an infra for filling up yet, but it works well with the twelve experimental refill stations in the country. And her Audi has a 1.000 km (600 miles) range, so with a little planning it'll go anywhere.

actually some states are working on that...

California Governor Gavin Newsom signed an executive order requiring that all new passenger cars and trucks sold in the state from 2035 be zero-emissions vehicles

Meanwhile a company in The Netherlands has developed a cheap, small, electric city car that charges from the onboard solar cells. That's the second one.

golf carts that do that have been around for a while. EVs were invented before fossil fuel powered vehicles, but never became dominant because of poor energy density of batteries vs fossil fuel.

The technology is changing on a daily base. If you only want to see the negative you stopped learning. And that's sad. Very sad.

The anti-humanity anti-fossil fuel movement is worse than sad, it is harming poor people around the world.

JR

 

[ruffrecords]

"Forgive them, Father, for they do not know what they are doing". I guess you were trying to quote that, but it seems that it is you who do not know anything about it to even bother to get the quote right.

Also, you are making a strawman about Mercedes cars and what not, can we get back to diesel engines being used to make windmills work?

And anyway, you have to ask by what process is the hydrogen is created (electrolysis??) However it is done, the enrgy you get out from the hydrogen will be leass than the enrgy it takes to make it. So where does that energy come from?. Seems to me there is a tendency to avoid basic physics questions when disussing net zero.

Cheers

Ian