The environment thread

[ptatc]

While we're on the subject of funding, should I link to the multiple "skeptic" scientists who have all been found to be willing to produce a report that says whatever you want it to say as long as you meet their price?

I know lots of those on both sides of many topics. The same could be said for the "global warming is the fault of people" idea. This is why any credible publications will have a list of all funding. In the current environment (pun intended) what type of research do you think will garner more attention, grants and publications, everything is fine or the world is heating up so we need to spend more money to change it?

Edited January 23, 2016 by ptatc

[ptatc]

Who cares?

 

I agree with Matt. It was very warm no matter how you cut it. That is problematic.

 

How about we figure out how to do something to solve the problem rather than waste energy arguing about whether it was the worst or the second worst?

The discussion is frequently made that the earth goes through normal heating and cooling cycles. Some will still insist that there isn't a problem because it can occur naturally. I'm not saying I agree but much of the arguing revolves around is there truly a problem, regardless of the data.

[iamshack]

The discussion is frequently made that the earth goes through normal heating and cooling cycles. Some will still insist that there isn't a problem because it can occur naturally. I'm not saying I agree but much of the arguing revolves around is there truly a problem, regardless of the data.

Understood. There can't be global warming because look at all those snowstorms hitting the east coast right now!

[NorthSideSox72]

The discussion is frequently made that the earth goes through normal heating and cooling cycles. Some will still insist that there isn't a problem because it can occur naturally. I'm not saying I agree but much of the arguing revolves around is there truly a problem, regardless of the data.

And it does go through those cycles. Though this cycle doesn't profile like the others. But really, no matter your belief in how much of this is human caused, there are things we know can help mitigate the effects on the human population - both in terms of slowing the warming, and in reactions to the effects of it.

 

[Balta1701]

The discussion is frequently made that the earth goes through normal heating and cooling cycles. Some will still insist that there isn't a problem because it can occur naturally. I'm not saying I agree but much of the arguing revolves around is there truly a problem, regardless of the data.

There is an unusual amount of blood pouring out of this person's leg. Obviously that's just a natural cycle and we shouldn't ask why it's happening.

[ptatc]

There is an unusual amount of blood pouring out of this person's leg. Obviously that's just a natural cycle and we shouldn't ask why it's happening.

Ifyou readwhat I said, I dont necessarily agree with, but that is one reason why things aren't getting done. There is still that discussion.

 

However, if you want to use that example, there are times you let it bleed a little to clear out foreign substances to decrease the chance of infection.You don't close it up right away because there may be something else going on.

[ptatc]

And it does go through those cycles. Though this cycle doesn't profile like the others. But really, no matter your belief in how much of this is human caused, there are things we know can help mitigate the effects on the human population - both in terms of slowing the warming, and in reactions to the effects of it.

I agree. This is just some of the rhetoric that is slowing the process at the US government level.

[Balta1701]

Ifyou readwhat I said, I dont necessarily agree with, but that is one reason why things aren't getting done. There is still that discussion.

 

However, if you want to use that example, there are times you let it bleed a little to clear out foreign substances to decrease the chance of infection.You don't close it up right away because there may be something else going on.

Now I have time to spell this out.

 

I absolutely hate that "it could just be a natural cycle" line because anyone who says it should absolutely be embarrassed. It's a complete failure to learn the first thing about the scientific method.

 

The statement "the earth goes through warming and cooling cycles" you gave is fine. It's 100% true. But here's the problem, saying "The Earth goes through cycles" isn't some magical line that shuts down all debate. When we see some behavior is cyclic, we don't say "This unholy magic!!!! and run away. When we see a cyclic behavior, that's a classic "that's funny" moment, the thing that drives science.

 

When we see a cyclic process, we stop and ask "hey why is this cyclic?" It must have a negative feedback. When something goes up there must be a response that drives things the other way. This sets up as a process we can understand. CO2 going up leads to a warming climate which causes increased weathering rates to drive CO2 back down - a cyclic process. This is the basis of science. When you see a process happening, you make hypotheses about why it is happening and then test those hypotheses.

 

When we see a process that is repeating, we don't throw up our hands and say "this is natural and can't be understood". If you place your fingers on the wrist of another person and feel a pressure wave come through somewhere between 60 and 80 times per minute, you don't start yelling "THIS IS THE WORK OF A DEMON AND IF WE UNDERSTAND IT WE WILL ALL BE DOOMED". You investigate - it's associated with movement of a muscle in the body, it seems like it moves nutrients and oxygen, you formulate a series of hypotheses and test them and it turns out that cycle is the heartbeat.

 

 

The only other thing that saying "the earth goes through warming and cooling cycles" could mean, is that instead you're saying "I can't be bothered to look to see if anyone has done any research on this I'm just going to assume no one has". You can't be troubled with learning the basic physics behind how CO2 and H2O absorb light in the infrared so if you increase their abundance they must as a consequence absorb more infrared radiation. You can't be troubled to learn about the responses in the geologic record or how we reconstruct temperatures. The Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum, a rapid release of carbon that provoked an immediate temperature response - you can't be troubled to learn that exists. You can't be troubled to look into all the work done on the last ice ages and what moderates them. Ocean acidification sounds hilarious.

 

Take your pick. Either you're saying "science shouldn't be done it's cyclic and that's magic!" or you're saying "I can't be troubled with this so I'm going to assert it hasn't been done". Neither one of them deserves respect.

[Balta1701]

I know lots of those on both sides of many topics. The same could be said for the "global warming is the fault of people" idea. This is why any credible publications will have a list of all funding. In the current environment (pun intended) what type of research do you think will garner more attention, grants and publications, everything is fine or the world is heating up so we need to spend more money to change it?

And by the way, this is an absolute joke and you should turn away now.

 

"It's a darn shame that the fossil fuel industry doesn't have any money. After all, if they did they might actually do research to protect their product."

 

"I just spent 2 months writing a government grant that has a 15% chance of being funded. I'm going to go dump champagne on a stripper!!!"

 

"Every scientist in the world is willing to do bad science for that 12% chance of a grant being funded this year. If only the oil industry would step in and fund our good science to preserve their product! Oh if only that industry had money!"

 

Seriously, this is a pathetic and deliberate misunderstanding of the lives scientists live. A paper effectively challenging the status quo on some issue is one of the best things you can do for your career, as long as it's good science. The problem with the "climate change is a myth" folks is - it's terrible science!

[iamshack]

Nevada's Perplexing War on Solar

 

Really surprised this isn't getting more attention here. Some key battles around the future of distributed energy, solar in particular, playing out in the west.

 

The amount of disinformation in these articles drives me nuts, particularly, this notion that our current President, Barack Obama, doesn't know exactly what he is doing...no, I kid More seriously, this notion that the utilities want to pay distributed solar owners less than market rate for their electricity is simply not true. What the utilities want to pay distributed solar owners is closer to the wholesale rate for electricity, rather than the retail rate that customers want. Forcing utilities to pay retail for what they could get at a much cheaper wholesale rate elsewhere would simply raise everyone's rates and result in non-distributed generation owners subsidizing distributed generation owners even more than they currently do.

 

It will be interesting to see how this continues to play out in Nevada and California and what the resulting rate impacts will be. Additionally, how this impacts not only the solar industry, but other forms of potential distributed generation.

[Chisoxfn]

Nevada's Perplexing War on Solar

 

Really surprised this isn't getting more attention here. Some key battles around the future of distributed energy, solar in particular, playing out in the west.

 

The amount of disinformation in these articles drives me nuts, particularly, this notion that our current President, Barack Obama, doesn't know exactly what he is doing...no, I kid More seriously, this notion that the utilities want to pay distributed solar owners less than market rate for their electricity is simply not true. What the utilities want to pay distributed solar owners is closer to the wholesale rate for electricity, rather than the retail rate that customers want. Forcing utilities to pay retail for what they could get at a much cheaper wholesale rate elsewhere would simply raise everyone's rates and result in non-distributed generation owners subsidizing distributed generation owners even more than they currently do.

 

It will be interesting to see how this continues to play out in Nevada and California and what the resulting rate impacts will be. Additionally, how this impacts not only the solar industry, but other forms of potential distributed generation.

I've been following it (as I plan on getting solar when we move to our next place (which could be in 3 months or could be in 3 years...market is so s***ty right now outside of interest rates...prices just seem so absurd). California just delayed things for another few years but it is really interesting how Nevada was able to get its push and it will be interesting to see if other states eventually make that push. At one point it looked more likely CA was going to and I still think they will eventually, but to me there has to be a fine balance.

 

Of course when i say I follow this, it is more casually and I clearly am not understanding of all the inner details. Definitely seems your project was a successful one (when you view it from your perspective though). A real win for the utilities and probably the non-solar consumers (if those costs ultimately result in lower increases or even decreases in their costs).

[iamshack]

I've been following it (as I plan on getting solar when we move to our next place (which could be in 3 months or could be in 3 years...market is so s***ty right now outside of interest rates...prices just seem so absurd). California just delayed things for another few years but it is really interesting how Nevada was able to get its push and it will be interesting to see if other states eventually make that push. At one point it looked more likely CA was going to and I still think they will eventually, but to me there has to be a fine balance.

 

Of course when i say I follow this, it is more casually and I clearly am not understanding of all the inner details. Definitely seems your project was a successful one (when you view it from your perspective though). A real win for the utilities and probably the non-solar consumers (if those costs ultimately result in lower increases or even decreases in their costs).

Well, so here is the issue...some of the aggressive renewable portfolio standards, particularly in California, have brought a lot of wind and solar onto the western electric grid. Additionally, the production tax credits being extended through 2021 has finally provided developers with some sense of stability. So what happens is that certain states that are in proximity to states with high renewable portfolio standards, or in areas where wind or solar are particularly feasible to develop, have tremendous opportunities, if they have flexibility with their fossil fuel generating resources, to purchase solar and wind energy for tremendously low prices, sometimes even getting paid to take the energy, on the wholesale market.

 

Enter distributed generation customers who now wish for the utility to compensate them for their solar energy at a retail rate that is often 5-10 times the wholesale rate. Why would a utility want to be on the hook for that? It's basically the second coming of PURPA, which many utilities are finally unwinding now.

 

California, I must say, bless their hearts, are going to be paying many other states to take their solar and passing those expenses onto their rate payers. And then when they need other states' fossil fuel generation, they tax their ratepayers additionally for that dirty energy as well.

Edited February 8, 2016 by iamshack

[NorthSideSox72]

Well, so here is the issue...some of the aggressive renewable portfolio standards, particularly in California, have brought a lot of wind and solar onto the western electric grid. Additionally, the production tax credits being extended through 2021 has finally provided developers with some sense of stability. So what happens is that certain states that are in proximity to states with high renewable portfolio standards, or in areas where wind or solar are particularly feasible to develop, have tremendous opportunities, if they have flexibility with their fossil fuel generating resources, to purchase solar and wind energy for tremendously low prices, sometimes even getting paid to take the energy, on the wholesale market.

 

Enter distributed generation customers who now wish for the utility to compensate them for their solar energy at a retail rate that is often 5-10 times the wholesale rate. Why would a utility want to be on the hook for that? It's basically the second coming of PURPA, which many utilities are finally unwinding now.

 

California, I must say, bless their hearts, are going to be paying many other states to take their solar and passing those expenses onto their rate payers. And then when they need other states' fossil fuel generation, they tax their ratepayers additionally for that dirty energy as well.

 

I know ComEd allows for net billing in Illinois. The put-back rate is lower than the paid rate of course, but the spread isn't huge, like maybe 20%. Not many times over. It also depends on the supplier you connect with (you can elect a supplier other than ComEd here). People who have solar can, at times, push back more than they use to credit against when they actually use it.

 

[iamshack]

I know ComEd allows for net billing in Illinois. The put-back rate is lower than the paid rate of course, but the spread isn't huge, like maybe 20%. Not many times over. It also depends on the supplier you connect with (you can elect a supplier other than ComEd here). People who have solar can, at times, push back more than they use to credit against when they actually use it.

Yeah, I'm not sure how prevalent this is in the Chicago area yet. I know MidAmerican has a lot of wind development in Iowa, and I have seen many of the wind farms in the rural areas of Illinois. Is there still a lot of wind development happening in Illinois?

[Chisoxfn]

Well, so here is the issue...some of the aggressive renewable portfolio standards, particularly in California, have brought a lot of wind and solar onto the western electric grid. Additionally, the production tax credits being extended through 2021 has finally provided developers with some sense of stability. So what happens is that certain states that are in proximity to states with high renewable portfolio standards, or in areas where wind or solar are particularly feasible to develop, have tremendous opportunities, if they have flexibility with their fossil fuel generating resources, to purchase solar and wind energy for tremendously low prices, sometimes even getting paid to take the energy, on the wholesale market.

 

Enter distributed generation customers who now wish for the utility to compensate them for their solar energy at a retail rate that is often 5-10 times the wholesale rate. Why would a utility want to be on the hook for that? It's basically the second coming of PURPA, which many utilities are finally unwinding now.

 

California, I must say, bless their hearts, are going to be paying many other states to take their solar and passing those expenses onto their rate payers. And then when they need other states' fossil fuel generation, they tax their ratepayers additionally for that dirty energy as well.

I've long felt it was odd that the people with solar get paid a higher rate than the wholesale rate. It never made sense to me (other than essentially just using it as another subsidy / incentive to push solar). The other question in Nevada is what is going to come of solar in a state where theoretically, solar would make a ton of sense. I had read a few articles which indicated all the national carriers essentially left the state (no idea if that is true) but clearly the solar argument becomes much more null and void if the pay back period is significant. With all the incentives, you can justify solar pretty easily in CA (If I wasn't planning on moving to a bigger house, I'd have already put it on my current place). It all comes down to the fact that the solar industry still hasn't hit the fine line between reducing the incentives and the cost of solar coming down (to where you don't hit an eqilibrium point that significantly jumps the cost of installing solar back up).

 

Auto industry has some similar issues with how it rolled out electric and hybrids, etc.

[NorthSideSox72]

Yeah, I'm not sure how prevalent this is in the Chicago area yet. I know MidAmerican has a lot of wind development in Iowa, and I have seen many of the wind farms in the rural areas of Illinois. Is there still a lot of wind development happening in Illinois?

There are a number of wind farms now in IL, not sure how much power output. A few solar projects. But I was more getting at civilian-distributed, where a person puts panels on their home and does net billing with the utility.

 

[iamshack]

I've long felt it was odd that the people with solar get paid a higher rate than the wholesale rate. It never made sense to me (other than essentially just using it as another subsidy / incentive to push solar). The other question in Nevada is what is going to come of solar in a state where theoretically, solar would make a ton of sense. I had read a few articles which indicated all the national carriers essentially left the state (no idea if that is true) but clearly the solar argument becomes much more null and void if the pay back period is significant. With all the incentives, you can justify solar pretty easily in CA (If I wasn't planning on moving to a bigger house, I'd have already put it on my current place). It all comes down to the fact that the solar industry still hasn't hit the fine line between reducing the incentives and the cost of solar coming down (to where you don't hit an eqilibrium point that significantly jumps the cost of installing solar back up).

 

Auto industry has some similar issues with how it rolled out electric and hybrids, etc.

So many of the rooftop solar providers have laid off workers and claimed they are leaving the state. I'm sure they will be back.

 

The issue is whether it makes sense to utilize distributed generation, i.e., rooftop solar or storage or wind, if it requires subsidization by the non distributed generation ratepayers. Utility scale solar and wind are already being heavily subsidized by the federal government (American taxpayers), so why should we subsidize distributed generation, unless of course, it provides some other benefit? Utility solar, because of those federal subsidies, as well as the declining prices of solar panels and other technologies, can be had for much, much closer to the wholesale rate of electricity now than the retail rate. Additionally, state legislation in the aggressive states, like California, is causing an oversupply state which states like Nevada and Oregon and others can capitalize on.

 

Now, there are some studies that show that there may actually be something to using distributed generation instead of certain infrastructure improvements to the electric grid. If that is indeed the case, that changes the equation quite a bit.

[iamshack]

There are a number of wind farms now in IL, not sure how much power output. A few solar projects. But I was more getting at civilian-distributed, where a person puts panels on their home and does net billing with the utility.

Yeah, I was just sort of thinking out loud. Usually utilities are willing to pay a higher retail rate until a certain threshold is hit. That is what happened in Nevada. Then all the sudden the solar panel pricing came down enough to where all the solar companies came flooding in and the number of households with solar started increasing at a massive rate.

[StrangeSox]

Supreme Court issues a stay on the EPA's sweeping carbon emission regulations

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/10/us/polit...egulations.html

[iamshack]

Going Green: What it means to be powered by 100% renewable energy

 

A good blog about how many major corporations, particularly tech companies, are attempting to become 100% carbon neutral.

 

My employer is currently working with companies like Apple, Ebay and even municipalities to structure new deals like these for those that are interested.

[iamshack]

The Koch Brothers' Dirty War on Solar Power

[southsider2k5]

this is about the last thing I expected to see.

 

Reuters

1 hr ·

 

The undated, unsigned letter "to the American people," which U.S. intelligence officials attributed to bin Laden, calls on the American people to help President Barack Obama fight "catastrophic" climate change and "save humanity. "http://reut.rs/1Rkg1Z8

[farmteam]

this is about the last thing I expected to see.

 

Reuters

1 hr ·

 

The undated, unsigned letter "to the American people," which U.S. intelligence officials attributed to bin Laden, calls on the American people to help President Barack Obama fight "catastrophic" climate change and "save humanity. "http://reut.rs/1Rkg1Z8

What in the what what.

[StrangeSox]

The final $20B settlement with BP over the 2010 Deep Water Horizon oil spill was approved earlier this week.

 

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/05/us-judge-ap...-oil-spill.html

[iamshack]

Dreamers of the Golden Dream

 

Great article about how California has been working to solve global warming.