"Green" energy. Not so green.

[ABMax24]

I'm not drinking your Koolaid.

That's okay, you can ignore fact all you want. In the same way the people that are coming for your guns do.

 

[snochuk]

How is it hypocritical, how can you make something using energy with any other source of energy other than oil, gas and coal if those other sources haven't been built yet? Horses at one point hauled parts to the Ford factory to make Model T's, does that mean that was hypocritical too?

Cars are built with over 3000 lbs of materials, including plastics, aluminum, steel, rubber, lead, copper, and various other materials, this has never been an issue in the over 100 years vehicles have been on the roads. Why is it all of a sudden an issue when 100 lbs of metals like lithium and cobalt are now being incorporated into batteries for these same cars?

I'd also suggest that "expert" find a new career. California has already exceeded 30% of it's electricity from renewable sources and is headed to 50%.

I think what Snopro means is that green energy is not clean energy, "clean" is just a myth.
The mining and purification process of the specialized metals creates more pollution and surface decimation than oil and gas processes like SAG D.
How does lithium and cobalt get disposed of and recycled and what does it do to environment compared to rusting iron or re-smeltered.
The green energy myth has a tint of brown to it and needs further refining to get that brown bullchit out of it.
Green is not clean, just an alternate dirty if you actually dig into its basics.

Also green energy is still non-sustainable (maybe one day but not yet) on its own, look at what happened in Germany when subsidies pulled!
I am all for finding green energy but let's call what we have what it actually is - green with a hit of brown.

We still need fossil fuels for a while yet, unless person is a yuppie socialist leftie dreamer unable to detect a hit of subsidized brown.........
Snopro will not be plugging in his 500hp tractor for a while yet, well maybe the bock heater.

 

[ABMax24]

I think what Snopro means is that green energy is not clean energy, "clean" is just a myth.
The mining and purification process of the specialized metals creates more pollution and surface decimation than oil and gas processes like SAG D.
How does lithium and cobalt get disposed of and recycled and what does it do to environment compared to rusting iron or re-smeltered.
The green energy myth has a tint of brown to it and needs further refining to get that brown bullchit out of it.

Also green energy is still non-sustainable (maybe one day but not yet) on its own, look at what happened in Germany when subsidies pulled!
I am all for finding green energy but let's call what we have what it actually is - green with a hit of brown.

We still need fossil fuels for a while yet, unless you are a yuppie socialist dreamer unable to detect a hit of subsidized brown.........

I don't think there's been any assertion anywhere in this thread that any form of renewable energy comes without it's drawbacks. There is a lot of information being thrown around on here to show that it does take energy and materials to build these renewable energy projects which it does, but it is trying to be spun as a reason to discontinue the use of all renewable energy. The problem is the entire picture needs to be seen, and most of the posts contain only enough information to support the members own view.

Renewable energy is also coming to the point of being self-sustaining. Alberta now has 2 solar farms that were recently built subsidy-free. The renewable energy sector is reaching the break-even point. I'd expect within the next 5 years for many more of these to be built.

I'm not in any way saying we have the capability of walking away from oil and gas right now. But the fact is we do have the technology now to start displacing some of it, and if it makes economic sense why wouldn't we?

https://www.prairiesunlight.com/no-subsidies

 

[X-it]

So all that poison that is killing those people along the river, does that just vanish once it hits the ocean? Good thing you skipped over that 3rd paragraph.

 

[ABMax24]

So all that poison that is killing those people along the river, does that just vanish once it hits the ocean? Good thing you skipped over that 3rd paragraph.

So China's lack of regard for the safety of it's citizens, workers, or the environment is something new?

 

[X-it]

How else you going to get your so called green energy

 

[snochuk]

I don't think there's been any assertion anywhere in this thread that any form of renewable energy comes without it's drawbacks. There is a lot of information being thrown around on here to show that it does take energy and materials to build these renewable energy projects which it does, but it is trying to be spun as a reason to discontinue the use of all renewable energy. The problem is the entire picture needs to be seen, and most of the posts contain only enough information to support the members own view.

Renewable energy is also coming to the point of being self-sustaining. Alberta now has 2 solar farms that were recently built subsidy-free. The renewable energy sector is reaching the break-even point. I'd expect within the next 5 years for many more of these to be built.

I'm not in any way saying we have the capability of walking away from oil and gas right now. But the fact is we do have the technology now to start displacing some of it, and if it makes economic sense why wouldn't we?

https://www.prairiesunlight.com/no-subsidies

I agree with a lot of what you say but that article is a sales pitch.
Clean and waste free.....hmmmmmm not even close for the production and system overall life cycle of 5-25 years depending on solar components and degradation rates of power containment systems.
What is the power containment system for a city or even a highrise??????
I want to see the AC to cool that battery room during a busy discharge cycle , lol.
Then how do we recycle or just burry the waste?
Green while operating as an energy source, you bet!, Clean? Hell no.
We build solar farms in Ontario and are about to start in Alberta.
Solar is a brown alternate to keep greenies happy- not a clean alternate.

 

[jhurkot]

I agree with a lot of what you say but that article is a sales pitch.
Clean and waste free.....hmmmmmm not even close for the production and system overall life cycle of 5-25 years depending on solar components and degradation rates of power containment systems.
What is the power containment system for a city or even a highrise??????
I want to see the AC to cool that battery room during a busy discharge cycle , lol.
Then how do we recycle or just burry the waste?
Green while operating as an energy source, you bet!, Clean? Hell no.
We build solar farms in Ontario and are about to start in Alberta.
Solar is a brown alternate to keep greenies happy- not a clean alternate.

If solar isn't clean, what is?

 

[Bogger]

If solar isn't clean, what is?

Nothing.... That's the point.

Energy can neither be created nor destroyed only transformed. I believe solar has it's place in small low draw applications such as LED street lamps, single off grid housing and RV etc... but to provide the on demand power requirements of a city or large grid is just not practical - maybe supplement but that's about it. The raw earth minerals required for solar provide their own downside with mining and disposal but that's not to say that fossil fuels are the best solution, they are simply the best currently available solution. Hydro is also good after you have built the dam and flooded the required reservoir. Nuclear is likely the cleanest source per MWH, very little waste generated but the stuff that is generated is bad chit. I have no use for wind, I don't believe the initial manufacture and install will ever be offset by the power generated not to mention the harm to wildlife - Suncor kills 9 ducks and is prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law yet turbines decimate entire populations of protected birds and bats.

I do believe that new innovations will continue to decrease the emissions from fossil fuels, create improved storage capacity for solar power storage and newer technologies will decrease the consumption of individual appliances and products which is all good stuff and the investment in R&D is crucial. I don't believe "the scientist who discovered the key to zero emission hydrogen engines was found murdered" conspiracies, and yes that technology exists it is just not practical for consumer applications, at this point.

Fossil fuels are our most accessible and reliable power source at this time so rather than "phase it out" we should be working to improve it, as well as other forms of emerging technologies.....I don't agree with "leaving the coal in the ground" because technically we are not, we are just exporting it countries who still use it in less efficient applications.

Society needs to find a middle ground that balances the energy needs of the planet with the environmental and economical realities..... China's and India have emerging middle classes who want the same modern day conveniences we have now that they can afford it, and no one will be able to stop them. We need to secure all our energy production requirements then start looking at how we will protect and better market our fresh water supply.

 

[Caper11]

The green movement is nothing but a money grab and smoke in mirrors, always has been.

Want to go green? than go back to the way things were before all pf this fancy technology.

 

[ABMax24]

Nothing.... That's the point.

Energy can neither be created nor destroyed only transformed. I believe solar has it's place in small low draw applications such as LED street lamps, single off grid housing and RV etc... but to provide the on demand power requirements of a city or large grid is just not practical - maybe supplement but that's about it. The raw earth minerals required for solar provide their own downside with mining and disposal but that's not to say that fossil fuels are the best solution, they are simply the best currently available solution. Hydro is also good after you have built the dam and flooded the required reservoir. Nuclear is likely the cleanest source per MWH, very little waste generated but the stuff that is generated is bad chit. I have no use for wind, I don't believe the initial manufacture and install will ever be offset by the power generated not to mention the harm to wildlife - Suncor kills 9 ducks and is prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law yet turbines decimate entire populations of protected birds and bats.

I do believe that new innovations will continue to decrease the emissions from fossil fuels, create improved storage capacity for solar power storage and newer technologies will decrease the consumption of individual appliances and products which is all good stuff and the investment in R&D is crucial. I don't believe "the scientist who discovered the key to zero emission hydrogen engines was found murdered" conspiracies, and yes that technology exists it is just not practical for consumer applications, at this point.

Fossil fuels are our most accessible and reliable power source at this time so rather than "phase it out" we should be working to improve it, as well as other forms of emerging technologies.....I don't agree with "leaving the coal in the ground" because technically we are not, we are just exporting it countries who still use it in less efficient applications.

Society needs to find a middle ground that balances the energy needs of the planet with the environmental and economical realities..... China's and India have emerging middle classes who want the same modern day conveniences we have now that they can afford it, and no one will be able to stop them. We need to secure all our energy production requirements then start looking at how we will protect and better market our fresh water supply.

You make a lot of valid points. Technology can continue to help clean-up current energy production, but there is only so much left to go, some technologies are already approaching the maximum theoretical efficiencies that are possible. Look at diesel pickups for instance, the new engines are using up to 8 injection events in one combustion cycle in an effort to maximize efficiency and reduce emissions. Power generation is approaching the same, natural gas combined cycle power plants have exceeded 60% efficiency, the bulk of the gains have already been realized.

Renewable technology is much younger and has a lot more gains to be realized. Battery technology is also coming a long ways, there are hundreds of companies in North America working on different approaches to the problem, and like Edison's light bulb it only takes one to get it right.

What is really going to drive the change though is cost. When battery powered cars become cheaper to fuel from solar panels than owning a comparable gasoline powered car the phase out will happen. As you said it will be based on economic realities. This is already happening on islands with no natural resources. In places like Hawaii or many Caribbean islands there are profitable businesses displacing diesel generation with wind and solar due to the high cost of importing fuel. They are also pushing the use of energy storage, Hawaii is installing a fair number of utility scale batteries.

 

[Caper11]

"Green" energy. Not so green.

You make a lot of valid points. Technology can continue to help clean-up current energy production, but there is only so much left to go, some technologies are already approaching the maximum theoretical efficiencies that are possible. Look at diesel pickups for instance, the new engines are using up to 8 injection events in one combustion cycle in an effort to maximize efficiency and reduce emissions. Power generation is approaching the same, natural gas combined cycle power plants have exceeded 60% efficiency, the bulk of the gains have already been realized.

Renewable technology is much younger and has a lot more gains to be realized. Battery technology is also coming a long ways, there are hundreds of companies in North America working on different approaches to the problem, and like Edison's light bulb it only takes one to get it right.

What is really going to drive the change though is cost. When battery powered cars become cheaper to fuel from solar panels than owning a comparable gasoline powered car the phase out will happen. As you said it will be based on economic realities. This is already happening on islands with no natural resources. In places like Hawaii or many Caribbean islands there are profitable businesses displacing diesel generation with wind and solar due to the high cost of importing fuel. They are also pushing the use of energy storage, Hawaii is installing a fair number of utility scale batteries.

Cannot have “renewables” without fossil fuels. Look what it takes to make solar panels and all these so called green products.

The problem is with Human habits, always has been.

 

[jhurkot]

Re: "Green" energy. Not so green.

Cannot have “renewables” without fossil fuels. Look what it takes to make solar panels and all these so called green products.

The problem is with Human habits, always has been.

I think you’re forgetting the part about the solar panel generating clean electricity for 25 years.

 

[X-it]

Re: "Green" energy. Not so green.

There are some questions i would like answered


1. What is in that lake that has grown so large it can be seen from space and how toxic is it?
2. How many people died along the river and what concentration did it take to kill them and what are the dying from?
3. When in ends up in the ocean is it water soluble, will it rain that toxic waste sh!t. What concentration in the sea food will it take to kill people?
4. That half dump truck load of toxic waste sitting on your roof what's your plan for getting rid of it?
5. How much of this toxic waste is in our land fill already and is it leaching into our drinking water?

 

[ABMax24]

Re: "Green" energy. Not so green.

There are some questions i would like answered


1. What is in that lake that has grown so large it can be seen from space and how toxic is it?
2. How many people died along the river and what concentration did it take to kill them and what are the dying from?
3. When in ends up in the ocean is it water soluble, will it rain that toxic waste sh!t. What concentration in the sea food will it take to kill people?
4. That half dump truck load of toxic waste sitting on your roof what's your plan for getting rid of it?
5. How much of this toxic waste is in our land fill already and is it leaching into our drinking water?

What dump truck load of toxic waste? Have you ever even seen a solar panel? Solar panels can be recycled, they have an aluminum frame, 2 glass sheets with the thin silicon solar cells sandwiched between and a couple copper wires. There is no highly toxic waste in them that you keep talking about.

There are millions of tons of toxic waste sitting in landfills everywhere, and has been for many decades and it grows on a daily basis, but for some reason you and many other members of this forum only now care about it because it might have some small link to renewable energy.

If you actually wanted answers to these questions you'd look it up, a quick google search will give you the answers you're looking for. But instead you use your ignorance on the topic to reinforce your belief that there is some monster hiding in renewable energy, and when anyone answers your question you find a way to disregard the answer or ask something different to re-assert your view, and when you don't get an answer you must assume you're right?

 

[X-it]

Re: "Green" energy. Not so green.

I think i will believe what these guys are saying it has 300 times more toxic waste than nuclear, than what you have to say.

https://energycentral.com/c/ec/are-we-headed-solar-waste-crisis

 

[ABMax24]

Re: "Green" energy. Not so green.

I think i will believe these guys saying it has 300 times more toxic waste than nuclear, than what you have to say.

https://energycentral.com/c/ec/are-we-headed-solar-waste-crisis

I knew you would, your questions are rhetorical, your wisdom is infallible.

But that article states steel and glass as about 75% of this "waste" that need to be disposed of, last time I checked both those materials are already highly recyclable. It also negates the fact that the solar cells themselves are recyclable.

You're welcome to have your own view, but renewable energy is coming whether you like it or not.

 

[snochuk]

Re: "Green" energy. Not so green.

I think i will believe these guys saying it has 300 times more toxic waste than nuclear, than what you have to say.

https://energycentral.com/c/ec/are-we-headed-solar-waste-crisis

Makes fossil fuels look like clean energy.....lol.

Alternates are still about how to make$$$$ with clean perception.....but that is where the clean part ends.
Man has not found clean energy yet, we just need to get as clean as possible.
I would rather deal with carbon plants can use over heavy metal leeching issues.
Especially when water vapor is the fastest increasing GHG.
Wonder what the % of the atmosphere is Co....lol.
And what %of that is affect by Canada.......

Don't go lookin X-it, you will find the truth , again

 

[X-it]

Re: "Green" energy. Not so green.

Hopefully it is not the tax payer paying for the clean up of this so called renewable ..if it can be done!!!. A massive toxic waste dump being hidden by the proponents. It does not take any vision to see whats coming for this dirty resource. Of coarse you would not answer any of the questions, that would mean you would have to dig in and do some research and take off those rose colored glasses.

 

[ABMax24]

Re: "Green" energy. Not so green.

Hopefully it is not the tax payer paying for the clean up of this so called renewable ..if it can be done!!!. A massive toxic waste dump being hidden by the proponents. It does not take any vision to see whats coming for this dirty resource. Of coarse you would not answer any of the questions, that would mean you would have to dig in and do some research and take off those rose colored glasses.

I have done more research than most on the topic. Why should I post my answers to your questions? Just so you can ignore them and then post up another link of some site that supports your belief?