Green Energy Revolution Megathread

[Admiral Yi]

The fuel that, say, Hong Kong chooses should be based on cost and reliability considerations, not carbon emissions.

This is a very different position than your previous one about inability to affect the outcome.

[Monoriu]

The fuel that, say, Hong Kong chooses should be based on cost and reliability considerations, not carbon emissions.

This is a very different position than your previous one about inability to affect the outcome.

I am talking about different entities.  I did mention I was talking about me personally in my previous post.  Here I am talking about Hong Kong as a matter of public policy .  Hong Kong of course can choose its electricity generating fuel mix.  In matters of public polocy, air quality shoulud be a consideration.  For me personally, I don't give me damn if they make mice run on wheels to give me electricity, as long as the price is the same. 

[Admiral Yi]

I am talking about different entities.  I did mention I was talking about me personally in my previous post.  Here I am talking about Hong Kong as a matter of public policy .  Hong Kong of course can choose its electricity generating fuel mix.  In matters of public polocy, air quality shoulud be a consideration.  For me personally, I don't give me damn if they make mice run on wheels to give me electricity, as long as the price is the same.

If you don't give a damn, then why do you think Hong Kong should take air quality into consideration? 

Should Hong Kong take global warming into consideration?

[Monoriu]

If you don't give a damn, then why do you think Hong Kong should take air quality into consideration? 

Should Hong Kong take global warming into consideration?

Huh?  Of course the government should take the welfare of its citizens into consideration, and of course welfare includes air quality.  I don't give a damn, but the government should.  I am only responsible for me.  The government is responsible for the city. 

Hong Kong should not take global warming into consideration because Hong Kong cannot affect its outcome.  But, say the United Nations should.  If I were a UN staff officer I would be telling everybody to switch to solar and wind immediately

[Admiral Yi]

Huh?  Of course the government should take the welfare of its citizens into consideration, and of course welfare includes air quality.

Do you mean you don't care about air quality but other residents do? 

Hong Kong should not take global warming into consideration because Hong Kong cannot affect its outcome.  But, say the United Nations should.  If I were a UN staff officer I would be telling everybody to switch to solar and wind immediately

The UN has no enforcement authority.  Carbon emissions are under the jurisdiction of sovereign states, and therefore any efforts to curtail them have to be voluntary.

[Monoriu]

Do you mean you don't care about air quality but other residents do? 

Well, it affects everybody, but only the government is in any capacity to act. 

The UN has no enforcement authority.  Carbon emissions are under the jurisdiction of sovereign states, and therefore any efforts to curtail them have to be voluntary.

That's why I think any efforts to combat global warming will fail.  Everybody's optimal solution is to ignore it.  You will betray me, and I will betray you in the biggest prisoners' dilemma ever.  We are doomed

[dps]

Air pollution exists, whether or not global warming does (and whether or not global warming is natural or man-made).  I come down pretty much on the side of it's a natural phenomena, so when I advocate other technologies, it's certainly not because I have an agenda involving global warming.  Personally, I actually favor nuclear, but really, coal is about the worst way to generate electricity.  You are correct that coal is a much more mature technology compared to solar, wind, and even nuclear, but then again, swords are a more mature technology than firearms, but no one is advocating that the U.S. Army replace the M-16 with the gladius, either.

[Maladict]

Can we temp ban Mono every Monday morning? It's a sufficiently depressing time period already. 

[Valmy]

First I don't think coal is inferior.

I am saying it is and we, here in Texas, will prove it. We are going to make a fortune selling our cheap more efficient energy to the rest of the country that will still be using more expensive fuel-based energy.

It is an established technology that is relatively inexpensive, easy to set up, with a stable supply chain.

It is established, yes. Coal plants are very tricky engineering enterprises, as they are supposed to be managing a giant fireball after all. How managing a giant fireball and super heated water is easy and inexpensive I don't know.

If global warming isn't a consideration, coal is a very viable choice in public policy.  Solar and wind are still not mainstream, they require specific know-how and a new supply chain needs to be set up.

There is no fuel supply chain. Which is the entire point. Coal is an inferior policy choice as we here in Texas are going to show. We are going to make it mainstream and make a shit load of money in the process.

I also have a lot of doubt over the claimed advantages.

Wait and see.

Let's face it, you guys are doing it for global warming.

No we aren't. We don't believe in that here.

If that is discounted, I don't believe that coal is totally uncompetitive.

Well it is more expensive and less efficient.

Secondly, I am not saying "Coal is the future!!!111".  I am saying, despite the claim that a green energy revolution is supposed to be happening, many governments are still choosing coal.

Governments are notorious for wasting money on backwards and antiquated thinking yes.

Once built, the coal power stations will run for decades.

Even if it produces more expensive and less competitive power? Sure I bet the people who are producing energy with modern technology will enjoy screwing those people using coal plants by being able to sell cheaply produced energy at high prices.

In Europe, the governments are using solar and wind to replace coal.  In Asia, they are building lots of solar panels, but an even greater amount of coal power capacity at the same time.

The situations in Euroland and India and China are very different. They don't need to add massive amounts of capacity. In Asia they need the power NOW so they are building crap that is going to be obsolete in a very short time.

Whatever climate goals that you guys want to achieve may well be unattainable.

Not really relevant to what I am saying...but sure.

[Admiral Yi]

Well, it affects everybody, but only the government is in any capacity to act. 

You left this line of thinking behind when you said what Hong Kong should do.  Your opinion about what Hong Kong should do has no relation to your ability to affect the outcome.

[The Brain]

I heard that Taiwan decided to go for more coal power. Morans.

[Monoriu]

I heard that Taiwan decided to go for more coal power. Morans.

Politics.  The Nationalists which ruled Taiwan in the second half of the 20th century wanted nuclear power.  The opposition wanted to be nuclear-free and campaigned on that pledge, among others.  They won the election, so they are going coal.  For them, the choice is between coal and nuclear. 

[The Larch]

http://phys.org/news/2016-06-coal-decline-renewables.html

Mapping coal's decline and the renewables' rise



Even as coal-fired power plants across the U.S. are shutting down in response to new environmental regulations and policy mandates, defenders of the emissions-heavy fuel still have cost on their side. Coal, after all, is cheap—or so it seems. This perception makes it difficult for alternative, low-carbon energy sources like solar and wind to compete.
A new study from MIT researchers, however, shows that coal's economic edge may soon be far thinner than we think. In a working paper for the MIT Energy Initiative, graduate students Joel Jean, David C. Borrelli, and Tony Wu show how replacing current coal-fired power plants with wind and solar photovoltaic generation facilities could provide benefits for the environment and for bottom lines in the near future.

[MadImmortalMan]

Aww, they're retiring the coal plant in Valmy, NV? 

[Valmy]

Aww, they're retiring the coal plant in Valmy, NV? 

Valmy always favors the newest technologies

By 2030 we are going to start retiring our natural gas plants as well so you know it is not all about global warming.