Slashdot Mirror
Carbon Emissions Reached Record High In 2010
iONiUM writes "Last year, greenhouse gas emissions rose to a record amount of 30.6 gigatons, according to estimates from the International Energy Agency. From an article at the Guardian: 'Professor Lord Stern of the London School of Economics, the author of the influential Stern Report into the economics of climate change for the Treasury in 2006, warned that if the pattern continued, the results would be dire. "These figures indicate that [emissions] are now close to being back on a 'business as usual' path. According to the [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's] projections, such a path... would mean around a 50% chance of a rise in global average temperature of more than 4C by 2100," he said.'"
jamie points out a recent report that the cost of solar cells has dropped about 21 percent this year, leading to predictions that solar power may become cheaper than nuclear and fossil power within five years.
You've got to ask yourself one question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?
What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
But rising by 3.9C is almost as bad. It's not 50% chance temps rise 4C or 50% chance it doesn't rise at all.
Even if we immediately stop burning any fossil fuels, it should still get warmer. It takes hundreds of years for the carbon cycle to take the excess out of the atmosphere. We're committed to continued warming right now. The only thing we can do is commit to less warming or more warming.
What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
Sea level rise wiping out coastal cities, droughts, flooding due to excessive rainfall, to name the most important problems with warmer temperatures.
What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
Actually most of the people who question the need to do something about global warming have logic that works like this:
1.) Person A says that we must give the government greater powers in order to prevent disaster from global warming.
2.) Person A lives an extravagant lifestyle that results in more CO2 emissions in a week than the average person generates in a year.
3.) Conclusion, person A does not really believe in global warming, they just want to increase government power (and perhaps make some money off of it).
If the people who are preaching about the need to reduce CO2 emissions are not doing anything to reduce their carbon emissions, why should I?
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
I thought conservatives were all about personal responsibility? Funny how that only lasts up until the point where they are asked to take personal responsibility.
Let's see, the early IPCC reports warned us of 50 million climate refugees from flooded coastlines but 2010. I set up a couple of cots in my basement to help out but no one's come knocking at my door yet. In fact, as far as I've seen, no one's really displaced yet. There's a country in the south Pacific that leased a big chunk of Australia for just such and emergency but I haven't heard that they've moved there yet.
There's been a big problem with weather (i know, in know, weather and climate aren't supposed to be mentioned in the same article but you did already.) but that seem to the connected to a short period cooling and warming of the Pacific ocean called La Nina and El Nino.
Not sure what your definition of a "major boom" is, but PV production has been doubling every two years for the last decade.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Step one would be to make some concrete, testable predictions.
Pascal's wager isn't science.
If you really think that reactor belonged to the people, then you're a sucker of the worst kind.
Ah, so Chernobyl was an EVIL CAPITALIST reactor. Now it all makes sense.
Demand has increased at 20 to 40% a year as the cost has gone down. (Demand curve, efficiencies of volume production, etc... basic economics).
You don't need a crystal ball. Fortunately, there is no "silicon cartel" to restrict the supply of raw materials so people who are expert at manufacturing (such as GE) can predict their costs accurately.
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
I have two sets of solar panels - one 10 year old set that's wired up conventionally to a single inverter, and another 8-month-old set that uses per-panel microinverters.
According to the very nice graphical display of power generation the microinverters provide via a built in web monitoring thingie, I average about four hours each day operating between 90% and peak generation.
Installation of the original set of panels was a major PITA because UL delisted the inverter after it was installed. Getting a massive piece of equipment down off the wall is easy, getting the replacement back up, not so much. But once that one startup issue was dealt with, the system has been 100% reliable and has required no repairs. As for the microinverters, it's early days yet, but they've been completely reliable so far.
As for washing the panels, yes, doing that more often increases output, but in my experience, not by that much. Around here the windows need to be washed twice a year so the panels get done as part of that. No big deal.
And as for all this "resetting after a power failure" - it appears your experience with grid-tie systems is seriously out of date. My 10 year old inverter handles power failures automatically. Aside from monitoring, I haven't had to touch the thing once the replacement inverter was installed. Ditto for the microinverters.
Finally, you appear to be conflating grid-tie and off-grid setups. I agree that a fully off-grid setup isn't easy. I have battery backup as part of my original system, but since the batteries are only used when there's a grid failure they haven't needed to be replaced. (And most grid-tie systems don't need them at all.) An off-grid setup that charges and discharges the batteries every day is going to require a lot more maintenance. And when solar is the only energy source the system has to be overbuilt in the fashion you describe (just not as much as you claim). And you probably care more about keeping the panels clean when they are your only power source.
But the vast majority of solar systems are grid-tied, not off-grid. So most of your issues simply don't apply.
Now, perhaps you'll say my experience is unusual. Yes, it's only anecdotal, but I know three people with similar solar setups in the area, and their systems have all worked flawlessly since they were installed.