Sign up | Login with →

Comments by Paul O Subscribe

On Out On A Limb: Energy Storage To Track Rapid Development Of Marcellus Shale, PV

I have a very hard time viewing people who philosopically and viscerally  oppose the development of such wonderful technologies as any kind of friend to the environment. It is very painful to watch some such folks  at the head of some environmentalist organizations.

August 24, 2015    View Comment    

On Out On A Limb: Energy Storage To Track Rapid Development Of Marcellus Shale, PV

Josh, If the need for "Power Now" is our driving concern, then we should just build lots and lots of Gas fired power stations. I can't see why anyone would select Photovoltaics over Natural Gas in this instance.

However, If the concern is for a Steady/Reliable/Dependable, All-Weather, All-Climate-Zones, Climate Change Proof (will work fine if we got hit by an asteroid that blocked out the sun), undeterred by need for future growth in demand, nearly Inexhaustible and Clean, STAND ALONE-(not requiring other forms of power to prop it up when it's unavailable)-power supply,  that works in any geographic Latitude at any time of the year, then Nuclear is very hard to beat rationally.

BTW Nuclear need not take 10 years to build, ask the Chinese.

August 20, 2015    View Comment    

On Implicit Climate Subsidy Exceeds Profits at 20 Top Fossil Fuel Companies

Agreed. The poor may suffer far worse from removal of fossil power than the rich. The economies of many 3rd World Countries depend on reliable transportation for people and goods. This means electric or diesel trains, diesel trucks, busses

August 15, 2015    View Comment    

On Implicit Climate Subsidy Exceeds Profits at 20 Top Fossil Fuel Companies

From an ordinary Ley Man / Man on the street's point of view, I have just Two questions.

1) What is the cost to all of society of foregoing using Fossil Fuels?

2) What would have been the Consequences if we would have prevented the implementation of  FF to start with.

Why can't the egg-heads, and economists who are supposed to be really very smart, why can't they seem to even  ask these questions?

We are screwed if we don't develop and deploy an affordable, widely deployable, reliable/dependable, there when you flick the switch, replacement for FFs. Isn't this whole line of enquiry pointless until we do this?  


(Hat's off to Bob, seems he's raised this point)

August 15, 2015    View Comment    

On Renewable Tax Extenders Package Set To Emerge From Finance Committee

Thanks for your answer, But do you HONESTLY think that your experience is replicable to  all Americans? Do you sincerely think the Man on the Street can replicate your experience and if not, does that not demonstrate the flaw of Solar advocacy?  If you consider the majority cannot afford the kind of investment required, and live in urban environments not ideally suited for non-utility solar power. 

I must disagree with your characterization of Nuclear power if our goal is to become carbon free while allowing for growth in the economy and the population. However if you were championing Large Scale Utility owned solar power, I do indeed see possibilities,  but if we were to attempt to decarbonise our electrical grid on solar and storage alone sans Nuclear, I seriously doubt that we'd get very far.

August 6, 2015    View Comment    

On Are Small Changes Eating Away at Net Metering?

I accept your explanatio/clarification of decarbonizing the economy (rather than the grid). It did sound as though you said that the addition of an electric car to the home electricity demand helps to decarbonize the grid.

Having said the above, it does strike me that the closeure of Coal Plants is a consequence of Natural Gas plants being used in replacement, and not that of Home Rooftop solar panels. 

If Iwere to be blunt, I see here a  rush to promote rooftop solar that is probably likely more an idealistic, and sentiment based, expensive dream. If we trully  wanted to significantly employ solar power toward grid decarbonization, we would do better to apply our subsidies money toward setting up Large Utility owned solar power plants with some sort of Mandate to the utilities to reduce their carbon emmissions, while limiting the use of Natural Gas. This should result in a  vastly cheaper and more effective/efficient use of sol;ar power. The Utilities are a highly regulated industry after all.

The way we are doing things right now seems more like it's more of an attempt at undermining utilities, and acruing financial benefits to wealthy rooftop solar owners, at the expense of millions of American households that  cannot afford solar panel ownership. Furthermore it is difficult to see how the rooftop paradyim with subsidies and netmetering could ever be expanded to every home in the country. I therefore see it as counterproductive long term.

August 4, 2015    View Comment    

On Are Small Changes Eating Away at Net Metering?

Ivy Main,

Would you care to explain how Home based solar power, and particularly using net metering to subsidize power for charging an electric car, has done anything to decarbonize the grid?

QUOTE, " Wind and solar afford us huge opportunities in decarbonizing the electric grid, reducing pollution, and increasing business opportunities in the nation’s fastest-growing energy sector. If we open up the market instead of constraining it, ever."

As far as I can see, net metering is not in fact displacing any Carbon whatsoever, and the addition of an electric  automobile in the mix actually adds carbon to the grid by introducing additional electricity demand that is not provided by the rooftop solar panels.

What I think I see is a sweet Scam going on here. I could be persuaded otherwise if anyone can show me where there is a one to one correspondence between rooftop solar and reduction in existing carbon based coal/natural-gas sourced electrical power production. Has anyone got any documentation showing net metering reducing Carbon based electrical power generation?

August 4, 2015    View Comment    

On Renewable Tax Extenders Package Set To Emerge From Finance Committee

Seriously, I'd really like to know if your home is powered by solar energy, and if it is not, Why not?

July 31, 2015    View Comment    

On The Post-Partisan Fallacy: Is the Republican Party Incapable of Addressing Climate Change?

Bruce It's the irony, and  it's like this: The Church has been riddicled too many time in the past (denigrating its moral authority), by the non-republicans ( and I am now using terminology similar to the poster's own terminology) So, for me to now take a non-republican endorsement of the pope as anything other than being opportunistic when he/they suddenly start quoting the self-same object of their  former riddicule, is rather difficult.

There are certainly many other authorities the poster may have sited and still gotten the point accross. Afterall, it's not as if the pope is a climatologist or anything, why should anyone, including republicans, listen to any non-spiritual commentary the pope espouses?

Conversely, if the poster believes that the pope is indeed such a reliable leader as to be worth quoting and be listenened to by one and all for guidance, why then limit the pope's authority to only AGW. Why not extend his authority to other matters like abortions as well? 

Would the poster  ever quote the pope on moral dogma to democrats? Somehow I doubt that he would. Shall we then infer that the pope only makes sense on matters to which the poster and democrats wish him to make sense, or only when he seems to buck republicans?

From the direct reference to "republicans" in the comment, one would suspect that the author is a democrat, and as with other democrats he may have  tended to be historically dismissive of much of The Church's dogma.

In any case I believe that the pope is less likely to sway republicans (or anyone else for that matter), than would a scientist who does not act or sound like he/she has an ulterior leftist agenda in tow, such as knee-jerk opposition to nuclear power. 

I say this because that is how I personally came to terms with the reality of AGW. I feel certain that I can persuade most unconvinced conservative lawmakers if I got a chance to talk to them in a non-threatening and non ideological manner. AGW endangers us all after all.

July 6, 2015    View Comment    

On The Post-Partisan Fallacy: Is the Republican Party Incapable of Addressing Climate Change?

1) Some Climate warnings are imagined for sure:  http://dailycaller.com/2015/04/27/prof-claims-global-warming-caused-nepals-earthquakes/ and I don't actually believe the pope is relevant one way or another. (Just my take).

2) I should have put real or imagined in quotes since it was meant as rhetorical, and I personally accept the reality of AGW,

July 3, 2015    View Comment    

On The Post-Partisan Fallacy: Is the Republican Party Incapable of Addressing Climate Change?

We polute, they pay.  Well, not being Catholic myself, I guess I don't really care how catholics view their doctrinal future, however two things come to mind. Setting aside the popularity in the 3rd world of the sentiment that developed nations should  "pay up". 

1) Poorer people tend to be more conservative in their beliefs, and a Pope straying two far left might find himself ignored doctrinally. His popularity only goes so far in terms of beliefs and practices. They probably have far more pressing matters on their dially minds than GW.

2) If the developed nations do end up finding themeslves too burdened financially, their aid contributions to 3rd world countries will suffer. There is a risk then that without western aid, these self-same countries will continue denuding their own forests, burn coal and use oil for energy. They simply wont be able to afford Windmills and solar cells in a way that would significantly develop their economies.

The world has become very intricatly mutually entangled, such that pain in the developed world does/will not neccessarily benefit the 3rd world. Having said this, make no mistake that I am in favor of developed nations doing more to discover and make cheaper, none CO2 emmiting power sources.

I still find it amusing that "non republicans" with a long record of disdain for catholic beliefs now rush to praise a Pope who sings their tune. Wonder how they will recieve the next pope if he is not as left leaning as this one.

 

June 25, 2015    View Comment    

On The Post-Partisan Fallacy: Is the Republican Party Incapable of Addressing Climate Change?

He sure is, but how succesful will he be if he takes a sharp left turn away from the faithful?

 

June 23, 2015    View Comment