How is green energy made?

Wehatebadgers

Active member
Joined
Apr 19, 2021
Messages
116
Reaction score
73
Points
28
So how do we make this without fossil fuels? Honest question? Oh and how is electricity made?
 


saintpaulguy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
10,832
Reaction score
5,342
Points
113
Spinning a turbine. You can use water, wind, or steam. For as cool as nuclear power is, it’s basically a teapot.
 

Wehatebadgers

Active member
Joined
Apr 19, 2021
Messages
116
Reaction score
73
Points
28
How are the turbines made? How are they transported to sites and installed?
 



Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
12,615
Reaction score
5,564
Points
113
How are the turbines made? How are they transported to sites and installed?

What you are implying is the exact reason we need to go green faster on the low hanging fruit.
You're right we cannot as of now do everything without Fossil Fuels, to use that as an excuse not to do anything is just plain stupid and nonsense.

I am not overly worried about global warming. But how in a Conservatives mind does it make sense to use up the finite resources of the world as fast as we can when sunlight/ wind are free and can't be used up in a material sense?

Yea Conservatives aren't selfish....
Give me a break.
 

TRF Guy

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 1, 2019
Messages
1,105
Reaction score
568
Points
113
From Prager University


Here’s what many people believe:

One: The planet is warming catastrophically because of certain human behaviors.

Two: Thanks to powerful computers we can project what the climate will be like 20, 40, or even 100 years from now.

Three: That if we eliminate just one behavior, the burning of fossil fuels, we can prevent the climate from changing for as long we like.

Each of these presumptions—together, the basis of our hubris regarding the changing climate—is either untrue or so far off the mark as to be useless.

Yes, it’s true that the globe is warming, and that humans are exerting a warming influence upon it. But beyond that, to paraphrase a line from the classic movie The Princess Bride, “I do not think ‘The Science’ says what you think it says.”

For example, government reports state clearly that heat waves in the US are now no more common than they were in 1900.

Hurricane activity is no different than it was a century ago.

Floods have not increased across the globe over more than seventy years.

Greenland’s ice sheet isn’t shrinking any more rapidly today than it was 80 years ago.

Why aren’t these reassuring facts better known?

Because the public gets its climate information almost exclusively from the media.

And from a media perspective, fear sells.

“Things aren’t that bad” doesn’t sell.

Very few people, and that includes journalists who report on climate news, read the actual science. I have. And what the data—the hard science—from the US government and UN Climate reports say is that… “things aren’t that bad.”

Nor does the public understand the questionable basis of all catastrophic climate change projections: computer modeling.

Projecting future climate is excruciatingly difficult. Yes, there are human influences, but the climate is complex. Anyone who says that climate models are “just physics” either doesn’t understand them or is being deliberately misleading. I should know: I wrote one of the first textbooks on computer modeling.

While modelers base their assumptions upon both fundamental physical laws and observations of the climate, there is still considerable judgment involved. And since different modelers will make different assumptions, results vary widely among different models.

Let’s just take one simple, but significant assumption modelers must make: the impact of clouds on the climate.

Natural fluctuations in the height and coverage of clouds have at least as much of an impact on the flows of sunlight and heat as do human influences. But how can we possibly know global cloud coverage say 10, let alone 50 years from now? Obviously, we can’t. But to create a climate model, we have to make assumptions. That’s a pretty shaky foundation on which to transform the world’s economy.

By the way, creating more accurate models isn’t getting any easier. In fact, the more we learn about the climate system, the more we realize how complex it is.

Rather than admit this complexity, the media, the politicians, and a good portion of the climate science community attribute every terrible storm, every flood, every major fire to “climate change.” Yes, we’ve always had these weather events in the past, the narrative goes, but somehow “climate change” is making everything “worse.”

Even if that were true, isn’t the relevant question, how much worse? Not to mention that “worse” is not exactly a scientific term.

And how would we make it better?

For the alarmists, that’s easy: we get rid of fossil fuels.

Not only is this impractical—we get over 80% of the world’s energy from fossil fuels—it’s not scientifically possible. That’s because CO2 doesn’t disappear from the atmosphere in a few days like, say, smog. It hangs around for a really long time.

About 60 percent of any CO2 that we emit today will remain in the atmosphere 20 years from now, between 30 and 55 percent will still be there after a century, and between 15 and 30 percent will remain after one thousand years.

In other words, it takes centuries for the excess carbon dioxide to vanish from the atmosphere. So, any partial reductions in CO2 emissions would only slow the increase in human influences—not prevent it, let alone reverse it.

CO2 is not a knob that we can just turn down to fix everything. We don’t have that ability. To think that we do is… hubris.

Hubris leads to bad decisions.

A little humility and a little knowledge would lead to better ones.

I’m Steve Koonin, former Undersecretary for Science in the Obama Administration, and author of Unsettled: What Climate Science Tells Us, What It Doesn't, and Why It Matters, for Prager University.
 

Angry

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
2,447
Reaction score
824
Points
113
Unsettled was a good book if you like data and facts without the hysteria.
IMO by the time climate change is relevant we’ll have better geothermal engineering capabilities.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
12,615
Reaction score
5,564
Points
113
CO2 is not a knob that we can just turn down to fix everything. We don’t have that ability. To think that we do is… hubris.
You're right, but its not a binary choice.

We don't have perfect data or a perfect solution so we should just use up fossil fuels as fast as we can.
Yea that makes sense.
Today right...
 



oak_street1981

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
3,710
Reaction score
515
Points
113
How are the turbines made? How are they transported to sites and installed?

They are made in Amish workshops, transported by teams of oxen or draft horses, and lifted by kites or tall dutch people on naturally constructed platforms to get installed.

John Kerry or Al Gore's trusted #2 sometimes show up to audit these green activities.
 

Wehatebadgers

Active member
Joined
Apr 19, 2021
Messages
116
Reaction score
73
Points
28
They are made in Amish workshops, transported by teams of oxen or draft horses, and lifted by kites or tall dutch people on naturally constructed platforms to get installed.

John Kerry or Al Gore's trusted #2 sometimes show up to audit these green activities.
👍👍 we are all for making a better world but we need fossil to do it!
 


Wehatebadgers

Active member
Joined
Apr 19, 2021
Messages
116
Reaction score
73
Points
28
And no one of any consequence has said that we don't.
🤷🏼‍♂️
But you hate pipelines! All good paying jobs from the laborers to the welders. They can change to green but it’s gonna be a long time. Witch is good I agree but let’s give it some time and do it right
 



Wehatebadgers

Active member
Joined
Apr 19, 2021
Messages
116
Reaction score
73
Points
28
Not that anybody on here actually knows how electricity is made. Are we able to even handle electric cars with our current grid?
 

saintpaulguy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
10,832
Reaction score
5,342
Points
113
But you hate pipelines! All good paying jobs from the laborers to the welders. They can change to green but it’s gonna be a long time. Witch is good I agree but let’s give it some time and do it right
We are against foreign oil.
 









Wehatebadgers

Active member
Joined
Apr 19, 2021
Messages
116
Reaction score
73
Points
28
It’s like the chicken and the egg argument. Your right they are foreign you got me. So let’s suck the Dick in the Middle East
 

saintpaulguy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
10,832
Reaction score
5,342
Points
113
It’s like the chicken and the egg argument. Your right they are foreign you got me. So let’s suck the Dick in the Middle East
We can choose to produce domestically. We can choose to buy at the spot price internationally, or we can choose a favored nation situation with Canada. The pipeline isn’t energy independence.
 

Wehatebadgers

Active member
Joined
Apr 19, 2021
Messages
116
Reaction score
73
Points
28
We can choose to produce domestically. We can choose to buy at the spot price internationally, or we can choose a favored nation situation with Canada. The pipeline isn’t energy independence.
We can produce domestically that has been proven.
 


Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
12,615
Reaction score
5,564
Points
113
But you hate pipelines! All good paying jobs from the laborers to the welders. They can change to green but it’s gonna be a long time. Witch is good I agree but let’s give it some time and do it right
Not reason to build a pipeline to bring in the dirtiest foreign oil, Canadian tar sands.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
12,615
Reaction score
5,564
Points
113
So why is Biben begging OPEC for more
Politics and they have capacity they can turn on. I say leave prices high and make the US oil industry great again.
🤷🏼‍♂️
Not that anybody on here actually knows how electricity is made. Are we able to even handle electric cars with our current grid?
It's not like we will just flip a switch and all be driving electric cars. That said the grid has tremendous off peak capacity that can be utilized and it turns out that's when most cars would be charging. We get to more fully utilize the grid we already have. It's a win win.
 





Top Bottom