Will The Global Warming Hysterics Never Tire Of Being Wrong?

[Teallaura]

It's big. We can nitpick how its described. I am not wrong in the waste from coal power plants being order of magnitudes greater than what would be produced by photovoltaics.

It's not a nitpic when you're claiming an impoundment is miles long when in fact it's much, much smaller.

We can recycle ash - it actually replaces other forms of strip mining. Yeah, there's more of it now - but what do we do with the photovoltaics as they pile up over the years?

And what about the mining practices to reach the materials needed for photovoltaics? The US no longer mines them - other, less environmentally minded countries have taken over the market.

[Sparko]

Generally, by mixing it into concrete I know, which is needed because it turns out the landfills were leaching heavy metals out into the water streams, and creating landfills that don't leak like that is expensive when you have to store several container ships worth of waste. Its a good initiative, and I support it.

As for photovoltaic storage, those waste products will have to be handled sensibly as well. Some of them like thin-film solar panels can be easily recycled others like silicon panels can, but its more expensive than simply landfilling them. At any rate, we won't have a problem landfilling them. It will be an insignificant fraction compared to the huge muck ponds those coal power plants create.

what about lithium battery disposal (and production?) I hear it is bad on the environment mining the stuff and then having to dispose of it later too. really bad. And once we have billions of electric cars on the road...

[Leonhard]

It's not a nitpic when you're claiming an impoundment is miles long when in fact it's much, much smaller.

Alright, alright, I'll grant that the impound doesn't extend to the horizon. Now, will you grant that one million tons are less than four hundred million tons?

We can recycle ash - it actually replaces other forms of strip mining. Yeah, there's more of it now - but what do we do with the photovoltaics as they pile up over the years?

Start recycling it. It's silicon and metal with plastic. It can be recycled, it's just not economically feasible at the moment. The question is rather whether there is an urgent need for it. Since its a tiny fraction of the output of the coal power plants, it could take decades or centuries before the landfills become significant, if even then.

The heavy metals can be leached and recycled and it been done. Currently landfilling is just cheaper. With advocation for stricter controls, this could change. But there is nothing impossible about recycling them.

And what about the mining practices to reach the materials needed for photovoltaics? The US no longer mines them - other, less environmentally minded countries have taken over the market.

I think of all the concerns this is the most significant one. And it's a fair concern.

[Leonhard]

what about lithium battery disposal (and production?) I hear it is bad on the environment mining the stuff and then having to dispose of it later too. really bad. And once we have billions of electric cars on the road...

Most of the lithium batteries for cars will be in service for many decades. After they're done being in a car they'll likely be bought up and used for grid storage for a couple of more decades. Right now disposal is the best option because battery technology is undergoing a lot of development. So if you set up a process to recycle one type of battery, it will be useless in a decade.

I won't underplay that this is problematic. Like with fly ash sludge we'll have to store the spent batteries. However, the footprint will be a lot less so I think it's manageable. At least it shouldn't be criticized harder than the coal industry.

[oxmixmudd]

It would depend on what they mean by "other use." Cow poke mentioned turning some strip mines into parks. Or maybe turn it into farm land. Is that bad? Land put to solar/wind farms is permanently unusable for as long as the power farm exists there. A strip mine will probably only last 10 years or so before it is mined out and they have to reclaim it.

Not for wind farms. They have a relatively small footprint, with 95% or more of the land on the wind farm itself still used for farming etc. When driving through Kansas and Colorado last summer on I70 I witnessed first hand the fact that the farmers rent out a little plot for the windmill and then farm around it. I also got to see a crop duster winding its way between the windmills to dust the crops.



Jim

[Teallaura]

Alright, alright, I'll grant that the impound doesn't extend to the horizon. Now, will you grant that one million tons are less than four hundred million tons?

I never disputed it. But I don't think this helps you in the long term case.

You posted a pic of how much of the Sahara would be used to supply the world with solar electricity - but it's really horribly misleading. Europe isn't buying up Saharan land - and I doubt any to the North African nations would be anything less than eager to oblige - because logistically, getting power from there to all of Europe would be extremely costly - if it were even doable. And then the power goes out at nightfall - batteries aren't up to taking over full grid load from what I've read.

It's literally not an option for the US - but even using the Mohave has massive logistical and environmental issues (Libya might not care about the environmental damage of such a huge array - but the EPA definitely would!).

So the reality, is these arrays have to be built closer to home - and since most of the places where people live are not really good for solar, the land use volume goes up considerably - and with it, the number and volume of photovoltaics. Would the material equal coal ash? Dubious - but coal ash is a danged site easier to recycle and far more economically feasible to do so.

Start recycling it. It's silicon and metal with plastic. It can be recycled, it's just not economically feasible at the moment. The question is rather whether there is an urgent need for it. Since its a tiny fraction of the output of the coal power plants, it could take decades or centuries before the landfills become significant, if even then.

*emphasis mine

Who pays for it? I don't pay income tax any longer (disability) but I do pay sales and VAT (what few we have) taxes - on a limited income. I'm supposed to help pay for recycling a system I can't even use?

The heavy metals can be leached and recycled and it been done. Currently landfilling is just cheaper. With advocation for stricter controls, this could change. But there is nothing impossible about recycling them.

Except the economic feasibility part...

I think of all the concerns this is the most significant one. And it's a fair concern.

[Mountain Man]

what about lithium battery disposal (and production?) I hear it is bad on the environment mining the stuff and then having to dispose of it later too. really bad. And once we have billions of electric cars on the road...

And those batteries have to be replaced every 5- to 10-years...

[Teallaura]

And those batteries have to be replaced every 5- to 10-years...

And they ain't cheap, says the former owner of a second generation Prius...

[Mountain Man]

Most of the lithium batteries for cars will be in service for many decades.

I suppose it depends on what you mean by "in service for many decades". If you're talking "many decades at a significantly reduced charge capacity" then you would be correct.

To give you an idea, Tesla warranties their batteries for 8-years but stipulates that reduced charge capacity as a result of normal use is not covered. As far as they're concerned, up to 30% reduced capacity is acceptable within the warranty period.

[Tassman]

You mean like conservative Texas that has the largest wind farms in the US? No, the costs of wind and solar are going down making them more competitive.

Well the conservative Texans would do well to convince Trump of their value, so as to coordinate the national effort with the Paris Agreement. Because Trump says that "wind turbines undermined property values, killed birds and even caused cancer." "The president, who doesn't acknowledge climate change and has staunchly opposed wind-generated power, often outlandishly criticizes renewable technology as he lauds coal and other traditional fossil fuels. Scientists call Trump's opposition to renewable energy "malicious ignorance."

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trum...-birds-1384338

And remember your country is not even on track to meet the Paris accords.

Nevertheless Australia, unlike Trump, recognizes the importance of the Paris Agreement goals. And, in fact, Australia is on track to meet the Paris Agreement targets five years earlier than expected, research finds.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-...years/10789810

[seer]

Well the conservative Texans would do well to convince Trump of their value, so as to coordinate the national effort with the Paris Agreement. Because Trump says that "wind turbines undermined property values, killed birds and even caused cancer." "The president, who doesn't acknowledge climate change and has staunchly opposed wind-generated power, often outlandishly criticizes renewable technology as he lauds coal and other traditional fossil fuels. Scientists call Trump's opposition to renewable energy "malicious ignorance."

What Trump says is meaningless, we are building renewables at a very rapid rate.

Nevertheless Australia, unlike Trump, recognizes the importance of the Paris Agreement goals. And, in fact, Australia is on track to meet the Paris Agreement targets five years earlier than expected, research finds.

Australia is not a person, it doesn't have an opinion. And the fact is the free market is working.

Plunging Prices Mean Building New Renewable Energy Is Cheaper Than Running Existing Coal

https://www.forbes.com/sites/energyi.../#299e990e31f3

[oxmixmudd]

I suppose it depends on what you mean by "in service for many decades". If you're talking "many decades at a significantly reduced charge capacity" then you would be correct.

To give you an idea, Tesla warranties their batteries for 8-years but stipulates that reduced charge capacity as a result of normal use is not covered. As far as they're concerned, up to 30% reduced capacity is acceptable within the warranty period.

The latest technologies for Tesla batteries show significantly increased lifespan.

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/04/16...-500000-miles/

And as the technology improves, it will only get better.

https://electrek.co/2019/04/23/tesla...les-elon-musk/

If supercapacitors can rise to the challange then there is an even better outlook as they charge nearly instantly and have little to no degradation in charge capacity over time. Though Telsa's advances in charging technology and battery technology may make that difference unimportant as well.

https://techcrunch.com/2019/07/18/te...ehicles-a-day/

https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/6/18...specs-location

Think about it - with batteries that last 500,000 to 1,000,000 miles and that can charge 3 hours of drive time in the typical gasoline fill-up time frame, the electric car can easily become far more economical over a person's life time than a gasoline car. Given the lack of deterioration of electric motors and cars in general, and the fact the batteries cost significantly less than a new car, People could expect to 'refurbish' their cars after 10 to 15 years at 1/3 to 1/2 the price of a similar new car and keep them virtually forever.

Electric cars are cleaner, faster, more efficient, cheaper to 'fuel', more convenient for daily activities (most of the time you charge them at home) more technologically savvy (smarter).

Already.

And that is because of the vision of one man over a decade. Think what the situation will be a decade from now after the Honda's and the Ford's of the world add their expertise and $$$ to the problem.

Jim

[Mountain Man]

The latest technologies for Tesla batteries show significantly increased lifespan.

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/04/16...-500000-miles/

And as the technology improves, it will only get better.

https://electrek.co/2019/04/23/tesla...les-elon-musk/

If supercapacitors can rise to the challange then there is an even better outlook as they charge nearly instantly and have little to no degradation in charge capacity over time. Though Telsa's advances in charging technology and battery technology may make that difference unimportant as well.

https://techcrunch.com/2019/07/18/te...ehicles-a-day/

https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/6/18...specs-location

Think about it - with batteries that last 500,000 to 1,000,000 miles and that can charge 3 hours of drive time in the typical gasoline fill-up time frame, the electric car can easily become far more economical over a person's life time than a gasoline car. Given the lack of deterioration of electric motors and cars in general, and the fact the batteries cost significantly less than a new car, People could expect to 'refurbish' their cars after 10 to 15 years at 1/3 to 1/2 the price of a similar new car and keep them virtually forever.

Electric cars are cleaner, faster, more efficient, cheaper to 'fuel', more convenient for daily activities (most of the time you charge them at home) more technologically savvy (smarter).

Already.

And that is because of the vision of one man over a decade. Think what the situation will be a decade from now after the Honda's and the Ford's of the world add their expertise and $$$ to the problem.

Jim

Of course technology will continue to improve, and I think the possibilities are very exciting, but my point is simply that we're still many years away from electric vehicles becoming a viable replacement for good old fashioned combustion engine technology.

There's also the matter of where the energy is going to come from to power all those electric vehicles in the future, and where the raw materials are going to come from to manufacture the batteries, and how are we going to dispose of millions upon millions of electric car batteries. Which is to say that electric vehicles are not necessarily the panacea they're being promoted as.

[oxmixmudd]

Of course technology will continue to improve, and I think the possibilities are very exciting, but my point is simply that we're still many years away from electric vehicles becoming a viable replacement for good old fashioned combustion engine technology.

Your facts were way off, and I think it's more like 3 years at this point. My daughter and son-on-law own 2 model 3's, one long range, the other the normal range. Their logic: Anything more than 6 to 9 hours drive time they are going to fly anyway. And there are plenty of superchargers on the day trip routes they'd normally drive. With the latest superchargers, they can put almost 3 hours drive time on in 15 minutes. And it's only going to get better.

There's also the matter of where the energy is going to come from to power all those electric vehicles in the future, and where the raw materials are going to come from to manufacture the batteries, and how are we going to dispose of millions upon millions of electric car batteries. Which is to say that electric vehicles are not necessarily the panacea they're being promoted as.

The latest supercharger in vegas has solar panels and provides a good bit of its own power.

For the most part, there are not any real long term problems with electric vehicles. Only some growing pains. And there really aren't very many good reasons not to head towards renewable alternatives. Global warming or not, oil is a limited resource, and we need to significantly reduce the rate at which we are using it up even if the massive amounts of CO2 we are adding to the atmosphere is less of a problem than the science would indicate it is.

Jim

[Mountain Man]

Your facts were way off...

Nah. We've still got a long way to go technologically and culturally. I mean, 15-minutes to get only 3-hours of drive time? Big deal... I can fill up my Toyota Echo in 5-minutes and drive for 20-hours before I need to refuel.

Electric vehicles will get there eventually, but give it another decade... and watch out for the many unanticipated unintended consequences.