How can we mitigate climate change 2?

  • Thread starter Thread starter lynnvinc
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
South Australia

“In South Australia, a solar feed-in tariff was introduced for households and an educational program that involved installing PVs on the roofs of major public buildings such as the Adelaide Airport, State Parliament, Museum, Art Gallery and several hundred public schools.[3] In 2008 Premier Mike Rann announced funding for $8 million worth of solar panels on the roof of the new Goyder Pavilion at the Royal Adelaide Showgrounds, the largest rooftop solar installation in Australia, qualifying it for official “power station” status.[4] South Australia has the highest per capita take up of household solar power in Australia.”

From the Clean Energy Council:

cleanenergycouncil.org.au/news/2017/February/shorten-renewable-50-pc.html

Ed

Shouldn’t we all be dead by now?
 
One of the more interesting recent developments is the turbine engine that uses pressurized CO2 instead of steam. Apparently it has a 100% carbon recapture. The carbon is then utilized in fracking, but can be used for other things as well. Can run on gas, but typically runs on coal.

gasturbineworld.com/gearing-up.html

Now, that development was not made to deal with any CO2 problem, but to deliver energy more efficiently.

If CO2 levels are a problem (and historically we’re a lot closer to the bottom than the top) it is irritating to me that the MMGW folks never want to talk about carbon sequestration through agricultural and forestry practices. If, for example, you properly manage grasslands, the plants can put roots down 20 feet or more. That’s a lot of carbon underground; much more than is above ground. No-tilling brassicas sequester a lot of carbon under the soil. “Weeding” woodlands can do so as well. Encouraging trees that are proper for the conditions can do so as well. Pasture rotation that causes carbon to be trampled to be reduced biologically is a lot better than leaving stubble above ground that is reduced chemically.

There are lots of things we could do. But the MMGW people only seem interested in making peoples’ heating bills “skyrocket” as Obama promised.
 
Ridgerunner said:
One of the more interesting recent developments is the turbine engine that uses pressurized CO2 instead of steam. Apparently it has a 100% carbon recapture. The carbon is then utilized in fracking, but can be used for other things as well. Can run on gas, but typically runs on coal.

gasturbineworld.com/gearing-up.html

Now, that development was not made to deal with any CO2 problem, but to deliver energy more efficiently.

If CO2 levels are a problem (and historically we’re a lot closer to the bottom than the top) it is irritating to me that the MMGW folks never want to talk about carbon sequestration through agricultural and forestry practices. If, for example, you properly manage grasslands, the plants can put roots down 20 feet or more. That’s a lot of carbon underground; much more than is above ground. No-tilling brassicas sequester a lot of carbon under the soil. “Weeding” woodlands can do so as well. Encouraging trees that are proper for the conditions can do so as well. Pasture rotation that causes carbon to be trampled to be reduced biologically is a lot better than leaving stubble above ground that is reduced chemically.

There are lots of things we could do. But the MMGW people only seem interested in making peoples’ heating bills “skyrocket” as Obama promised.
Click to expand...
Those all sound like good ideas, but most people live in cities and suburbs, so they really can’t do much about what to write, except to plant more trees and plants on their property – which we have been doing since 1990 when I started mitigating.

There is a tree we plant for food - moringa (can eat the leaves and drumsticks) - but it may also help re CC, since it grows really fast, is drought & flood resistant, grows in poor soil, grows straight up some 40 or more feet (uses very little space) and pops right back up within a year after killing freezes (if they do not last a long time, like more than a day). So they mainly grow in subtropical and mostly freeze-free climates. They also provide a lot of iron and calcium, and help cows and lactating mothers increase their milk.

There are lots of things we can do in addition to moving closer to work/school on our next move, hypermiling, taking our own shopping bags, etc.

Just the other night my husband complained he was feeling cold and wanted the heat turned on and thermostat increased. (We are at that crazy time of year when we often use the AC during the day, and occasionally have to turn on the heat at night.) Since he didn’t have any sheets or blankets on him, I said why don’t you cover up. Good idea!

There are just so many good ideas out there. 🙂
 
lynnvinc said:
Why do you say that?

I just read something about how all the energy from wind and solar could be stored in pumped hydro-storage facilities (to be used when it is not windy or sunny).
Click to expand...
South Australia is run on Solar Power. The state does tap into its neighbouring state, Victoria’s main grid, if needed.

1.7 million people live in SA, over a vast area. But 75% of them live in Adelaide, its capital.

But South Australia have recently had several severe storms, a bushfire or two, and a heat wave. During these times the entire state of South Australia lost power in the first storms. During the first severe storm, power poles were knocked down in a couple of places, leading to no power at all. And no backup.
Partial state blackouts were experienced in the following events, except for the bushfires. There was another total blackout briefly , from memory.

And in the heatwave, the power company itself turned off power supply at certain times of the day because of demand. So no one had air con in + 40 degree celcius heat.
The technology needs to be revisited.

Its been a point of political back and forthing since

Windpower is causing a lot of angst too. it has some major downsides.
 
Roseeurekacross said:
South Australia is run on Solar Power. The state does tap into its neighbouring state, Victoria’s main grid, if needed.

1.7 million people live in SA, over a vast area. But 75% of them live in Adelaide, its capital.

But South Australia have recently had several severe storms, a bushfire or two, and a heat wave. During these times the entire state of South Australia lost power in the first storms. During the first severe storm, power poles were knocked down in a couple of places, leading to no power at all. And no backup.
Partial state blackouts were experienced in the following events, except for the bushfires. And in the heatwave, the power company itself turned off power supply at certain tomes of the day because of demand. So no one had air con in + 40 degree celcius heat.
The technology needs to be revisited.

Its been a point of political back and forthing since

Windpower is causing a lot of angst too. it has some major downsides.
Click to expand...
It sounds like they could come up with some solutions. Maybe underground electric cables (tho those are expensive).

Maybe some gas-burning backup plants (which could be up and running almost right away after natural disasters or during peak demand times). Or people could have some back-up generators. I know people who live off-the-grid, using solar panels and small wind turbines, also tend to have gas or petroleum back-up generators. In India, due to frequent power cuts, many people have back-up batteries, from which they can at least run a few fans and lights. Telsa is developing such a household batteries that can run a house for one day - tesla.com/powerwall.

As for the heatwaves & high demand, they could put in more alt energy and use pumped hydro storage, which could then be used to create electricity during peak demand times.

I’ll bet the experts are working on that as we speak. 🙂
 
lynnvinc said:
Why do you say that?

I just read something about how all the energy from wind and solar could be stored in pumped hydro-storage facilities (to be used when it is not windy or sunny).
Click to expand...
lol, you just have to build large reservoirs everywhere that are are maybe 1000+ ft above the terrain. This solution only works is very limited locations that don’t happen to be near any planned wind farms.
The best move we could make in the US would be to reduce our obesity levels. Many benefits would come from everyone adopting a healthier diet. It would also greatly reduce our overspend on healthcare.
 
Theo520 said:
lol, you just have to build large reservoirs everywhere that are are maybe 1000+ ft above the terrain. This solution only works is very limited locations that don’t happen to be near any planned wind farms.
Click to expand...
That’s sort of what I thought & didn’t read the article to find out how they proposed doing that. I’ll see if I can find it. Though I don’t think the reservoir necessarily has to be 1000+ ft above or extremely large, depending on how much marginal peak energy is required during that peak demand time.
The best move we could make in the US would be to reduce our obesity levels. Many benefits would come from everyone adopting a healthier diet. It would also greatly reduce our overspend on healthcare.
Click to expand...
I actually have just done that over the past year or so – reducing about 30 lbs (with still some 15 more to go to be at my ideal weight for age, height, & gender). I always wanted to do that to reduce my eco-footprint, but it was a doctor who told me I should reduce for health reasons that gave me the impetus.

Here is an “ideal weight” calculator: calculator.net/ideal-weight-calculator.html
 
Roseeurekacross said:
There are a few issues with building hydro storage as reservoirs above 1000ft elevation in Australia, esp South Australia.

ga.gov.au/scientific-topics/national-location-information/landforms/elevations

And how do you fill these reservoirs?

And what about the flooded landscape it creates.

We do have one hydro electric scheme, built mid last century.

australia.gov.au/about-australia/australian-story/snowy-mountains-scheme
Click to expand...
As mentioned, I don’t think they have to be 1000 ft in elevation, unless a very high level of energy is needed (and can be generated from) alt energy.

see: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumped-storage_hydroelectricity

They have a section at the end:
Decentralised systems
Click to expand...
Small pumped-storage hydropower plants can be built on streams and within infrastructures, such as drinking water networks and artificial snow making infrastructures. Such plants provide distributed energy storage and distributed flexible electricity production and can contribute to the decentralized integration of intermittent renewable energy technologies, such as wind power and solar power. Reservoirs that can be used for small pumped-storage hydropower plants could include natural or artificial lakes, reservoirs within other structures such as irrigation, or unused portions of mines or underground military installations.
Click to expand...
 
lynnvinc said:
As mentioned, I don’t think they have to be 1000 ft in elevation, unless a very high level of energy is needed (and can be generated from) alt energy.

see: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumped-storage_hydroelectricity

They have a section at the end:
Click to expand...
The 1000 ft was directional, but it’s all about creating potential energy.
You can’t overcome inefficiencies with a low differential. Plus the lower the reservoir, the more water (and space) required.

This doesn’t require tech innovation, people would be doing more now if there were plentiful locations and it could meet peak demand requirements.

Water volumes such as this are prioritized for other purposes.
 
We dont even have the river systems. Our biggest is in its death throes.
Nor do we have the water.

I was in the USA and drove across a bridge spanning the Mississippi River. Compared to that, we have creeks, most are ephemeral.
Artificial snow is made on our few ski slopes. It melts pretty fast though .

Irrigation is an issue here with salinity, but thats another story.

mdba.gov.au/managing-water/salinity
 
Roseeurekacross said:
We dont even have the river systems. Our biggest is in its death throes.
Nor do we have the water.

I was in the USA and drove across a bridge spanning the Mississippi River. Compared to that, we have creeks, most are ephemeral.
Artificial snow is made on our few ski slopes. It melts pretty fast though .

Irrigation is an issue here with salinity, but thats another story.

mdba.gov.au/managing-water/salinity
Click to expand...
I think there are other ways to “store” intermittent energy. However, you already have that one, I think, and that is many people everywhere having solar and wind feeding into a common grid. But I think there are other possibilities for storage. Also, you could use salt water, if you are close to the sea.
 
There is more carbon in the soil than in the atmosphere and biological life combined. However, in the last two centuries, it has been significantly depleted, with much of it going into the atmosphere. The culprit is improper management of the soil combined with a poor understanding of the role soil sequestration and retention plays in carbon placement.

Various estimates, from 1/3 to 100% of fossil fuel emissions can be sequestered by proper grassland management alone, with forestry sequestering additional amounts.

e360.yale.edu/features/soil_as_carbon_storehouse_new_weapon_in_climate_fight

Before we go throwing money at uncertain technologies that might not have reached their proper time, we ought to be paying attention to the bigger threat of improper management and increased desertification, including in Australia, but in China, Africa and the U.S. as well.

Since we are currently much closer to the low end of historic CO2 levels than to the high end, and since increases since the Little Ice Age have been very small and quite expectable with increased biologic life, I’m not much of a believer in MMGW. But to those who are believers, it seems prudent to me that perhaps the alarm expressed about a lit candle on the table should be less than the fact that one whole wing of the house is in flames, but could be put out.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top