Green Energy Revolution Megathread

[jimmy olsen]

I'm sure the Mono of 1987 was against the Montreal Protocol

http://gizmodo.com/the-ozone-hole-is-finally-healing-1782885459

The Ozone Hole Is Finally Healing
Maddie Stone
Yesterday 2:00pm
· Filed to: everything isn't terrible

Nearly thirty years after an international treaty banned the use of chlorofluorocarbons, the Antarctic ozone hole is finally starting to heal. By mid to late century, it should be fully recovered.

"This is a reminder that when the world gets together, we really can solve environmental problems," Susan Solomon, an atmospheric chemist at MIT, told Gizmodo. "I think we should all congratulate ourselves on a job well done."

Solomon is lead author on a study published today in Science, which presents the clearest evidence yet that the Antarctic ozone hole is showing signs of long-term recovery. The researchers attribute this to the 1987 Montreal Protocol, which banned the use of chlorinated compounds in refrigerator coolants and aerosols, after scientists learned that these chemicals were making their way into the stratosphere and wreaking havoc on Earth's ozone layer.

Scientists have been monitoring the Antarctic ozone hole, which opens every year in late August or early September and reaches its full size by October, since the 1980s. The size of the ozone hole varies widely from year to year, because the chemical reactions that destroy ozone are highly sensitive to changes in sunlight, temperature, and stratospheric cloud cover. For researchers interested in tracking ozone recovery, the challenge lies in pulling a faint signal out of a noisy background.

This problem piqued the interest of Solomon and her co-authors last October, when the ozone hole reached a record size of 23 million square kilometers (9 million square miles); some 20 percent larger than the previous year. "This was very unexpected, and we thought that the reason might have to do with volcanoes," Solomon said, explaining that the aerosols released during volcanic eruptions contribute to polar stratospheric clouds, creating additional surface area for ozone-destroying reactions to occur.

Sure enough, the team was able to show that a string of eruptions at the Calbuco volcano in the southern hemisphere widened the spring ozone hole. But they discovered something else, too. "We learned that the September is not nearly as variable in weather as October, and that it's less sensitive to volcanic activity," Solomon said.

This got the researchers thinking that September may be the best month for teasing out subtle signs of ozone recovery. So they assembled September records from 2000 to 2015, including data on the rate at which the ozone hole opens, its average size and depth, meteorological conditions and volcanic activity.

"We found that because there is less chlorine in the atmosphere, the ozone hole is opening about ten days later than it used to," Solomon said. "That has a huge effect on the September average." Overall, Solomon's analysis showed that the September ozone hole has shrunk by an average of 4.5 million square kilometers (1.7 million square miles) since 2000.

Susan Strahan, an atmospheric chemist at NASA who was not involved with the study, agrees that the evidence is very encouraging. "This is the emergence of a trend," she told Gizmodo, while cautioning that it's a bit early to say exactly how the recovery will play out. That's because the different chlorofluorocarbons present in the atmosphere degrade at different rates, and while some have already vanished, others will stick around for decades to come. Most researchers, however, expect the ozone hole to be fully patched by around 2060.

"It's important," Strahan continued, "because I think a lot of people feel that environmental stories always have bad endings. In this case, the recovery will happen, but it'll take time."

[Monoriu]

The Mono of 1987 did nothing but complete hundreds of multiple choice questions every day to prepare for a certain big exam, for two years straight.  Everything that was covered in the exam would be memorised, and anything that happened outside the syllabus would be completely ignored.  This whatever protocol was certainly outside the syllabus

[jimmy olsen]

Missouri is experimenting with solar power generating roads. If this works out then simple road maintenance will be sufficient for the transition to green energy!

http://www.nbcnews.com/business/autos/missouri-plans-build-solar-panels-road-along-old-route-66-n608676

[11B4V]

 

TIMAY, WHERE'S THE THREAD ON JUPITER? WHO GIVES A FUCK ABOUT SOLAR POWERED ROAD.














DESPICABLE

[Valmy]

And if you thought people were freaking out about EMF fields giving them cancer now

Very cool. Distributed generation is the way of the future.

[jimmy olsen]

More good news.

http://fortune.com/2016/07/05/solar-power-is-finding-its-day-in-the-sun/

Solar Power Is Finding Its Day in the Sun

by  Reuters  JULY 5, 2016, 7:36 AM EDT
E-mail  Tweet  Facebook  Linkedin

So should we stop subsidizing pricey rooftop installations?

Solar power is on pace for the first time this year to contribute more new electricity to the grid than will any other form of energy—a feat driven more by economics than green mandates.
The cost of electricity from large-scale solar installations now is comparable to and sometimes cheaper than natural gas-fired power, even without incentives aimed at promoting environmentally friendly power, according to industry players and outside cost studies.

Buoyed by appeals to self-reliance and environmental stewardship, as well as government subsidies, the early solar industry was dominated by rooftop panels that powered individual homes and businesses. But such small-scale installations are expensive, requiring hefty incentives to make them attractive to homeowners.

Today, large systems that sell directly to utilities dominate. They are expected to account for more than 70% of new solar added to the grid this year, according to industry research firm GTM Research.
The success of large-scale solar has raised questions about the wisdom of continuing incentives for rooftop installations, which remain far more expensive than most other forms of electricity.

Unsubsidized utility-scale solar power costs $50 to $70 per megawatt-hour (or 5 to 7 cents a kilowatt hour), compared with $52 to $78 for the most efficient type of gas plant, according to a 2015 study by investment bank Lazard.

Generating power from residential rooftop panels is far more expensive, ranging from $184 to $300 a MWh before subsidies, the report said.

"If you take a solar panel from someone's rooftop and put it in a field, the amount you would pay for that power drops precipitously," said Matt Freedman, an attorney with California ratepayer advocate The Utility Reform Network. "What's the magic of having it on the rooftop? It's not clear."

Going Big

Many trace the tipping point for utility-scale solar to a 2014 announcement by Austin Energy that it would buy power from a new 150 megawatt solar plant—enough to light and cool 30,000 homes—for 5 cents a kilowatt hour. At the time, it was a record low price for solar power. Since then, projects have brought the price below 4 cents a kWh.

The Austin Energy contract opened a market for big solar in sunny Southeastern states, Jim Hughes, chief executive of utility-scale solar developer First Solar told investors in April.

"The response has been, quite honestly, astonishing," Hughes told them. "The utility world suddenly sat up and took notice and said, I had no idea that's where the cost of solar stood."

Large-scale solar is taking off even in states without policies promoting green power.

Georgia, for example, was the sixth-largest U.S. solar market last year with very little rooftop solar.

"We don't need mandates," said Lauren "Bubba" McDonald, a member of the Georgia Public Service Commission, who is widely credited with helping jumpstart the state's solar industry.

Utilities in states like North Carolina, Texas, and Alabama also are building large-scale solar facilities because it makes financial sense.

"We are seeing large swaths of centralized utility-scale solar be procured primarily because of how cost competitive it is," said Cory Honeyman, who follows the U.S. solar industry for market research firm GTM Research. "That's a different kind of narrative."

Subsidy Scrutiny

Rooftop installers like SolarCity  SCTY -1.58%  enjoyed rapid growth thanks in part to a marketing message that peddles the romance and freedom of generating emissions-free power at home. And, for homeowners in states with favorable policies, rooftop panels can be a good investment, ultimately offering savings.

But the math only works in places with so-called "net metering" laws, which require utilities to buy the electricity rooftop panels generate at prices far above what they pay for centralized power.

To what extent governments and ratepayers should support rooftop solar is a matter of debate in several state legislatures and utility commissions.

Opponents argue that as more homeowners go solar, other ratepayers are left to shoulder the cost of maintaining the electrical grid, which solar owners still use when the sun isn't shining.

Advocates counter that the higher the concentration of rooftop solar systems in a neighborhood, the less a utility has to spend on distribution to shore up grid reliability.

Last year, at least 24 states reviewed or made decisions to study the value of rooftop solar, according to the North Carolina Clean Energy Technology Center, which compiles a database of state renewable energy incentives. The studies aim to determine what benefits, if any, on-site solar delivers above the simple cost of power.

But there is little consensus. In Louisiana and California, for instance, studies commissioned by state regulators found that net metering policies resulted in higher costs for all ratepayers. Studies in Mississippi and Minnesota, on the other hand, found the policy provided a net benefit.

A major difference among the studies is whether they consider as part of the equation the environmental benefits of solar, which can be difficult to quantify.

"I'd put the value of solar in the eye of the beholder," said Brian Lips, who manages the incentives database for the North Carolina Clean Energy Technology Center.

Rooftop solar's dependence on incentives is a key reason investors have punished solar stocks in the last year.

Tesla Motors  TSLA -0.94%  is seeking to take advantage of that weakness by buying rooftop installer SolarCity.

Elon Musk, Tesla's founder and chief executive, also is the chairman of and largest shareholder in SolarCity. Musk has touted the benefits of bundling rooftop solar with home battery storage and electric cars in promoting the takeover.

But many of the electric vehicle maker's shareholders are wary of a deal they see as risky.

And last year hedge fund manager David Tepper sought to block SunEdison  SUNE 0.00%  and TerraForm Power's acquisition of installer Vivint Solar on his assessment that rooftop assets were inferior to solar power plants, which have long-term contracts with utilities.

In a bid to stay relevant, some rooftop solar companies are expanding their repertoire. In May, for instance, SolarCity introduced a set of services for utilities, including development of solar power plants, battery storage, and other grid planning resources.

SunPower said in June it would it would offer solar systems with battery storage to 300 New York homeowners in what would serve as a "virtual power plant" to utility Con Edison.

[Ed Anger]

Elon Musk sucks dicks

[derspiess]

I think burning tires is the next step in the energy revolution.  I mean, they're pretty much free.  And they burn. 

[Savonarola]

I think burning tires is the next step in the energy revolution.  I mean, they're pretty much free.  And they burn.

Derspiess has become Languish's Winnie Mandela.   

[derspiess]

I guess people burn, too.  But I'd rather not go that route if it can be avoided.

[Savonarola]

I guess people burn, too.  But I'd rather not go that route if it can be avoided.

Man up; it's time for an:



Energy revolution; by any means necessary.

[jimmy olsen]

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/07/18/3797907/solar-energy-miracle-charts/

[Monoriu]

I was in Beijing two weeks ago, and I met with various people, including the folks from the 5-year planning office.  We talked about this, and I am just repeating what they said to me.  They said 70% of China's energy generation was from coal, and that's not going to change in the foreseeable future.   They would add solar and wind capacities, yes, but they would add coal capacity too.  Coal in China was cheap, and there was a supply chain that employed millions.  There were too many vested interests, so they wouldn't touch it.  The technology for renewables and nuclear were in the hands of foreigners.  They wanted energy self-reliance, and China was the world's largest producer of coal.  There was scope to burn coal more efficiently, and that would be their focus.  Not replacing coal with solar. 

[The Minsky Moment]

China dominates the planet in solar panel manufacture.  Not even close.
China also installed more new solar generation capacity last year than the US and the entire EU combined.

[Valmy]

China dominates the planet in solar panel manufacture.  Not even close.
China also installed more new solar generation capacity last year than the US and the entire EU combined.

So how is that possible if no coal is being replaced with solar? Maybe they just have all that capacity connected to nothing at all.

The technology for renewables and nuclear were in the hands of foreigners.  They wanted energy self-reliance, and China was the world's largest producer of coal.

That is the most incomprehensibly stupid statement I have ever heard in my life.

Well steam power was invented by foreigners to better not use that technology! Is China going to destroy all its computers and cars as well! We want transportation and data self reliance! We will be the world's largest producer of ox carts and scribes!