Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Finishline42

(1,156 posts)
13. No argument with your stance on nat gas
Mon Jan 27, 2020, 09:53 PM
Jan 2020

It's still burning dead dino meat.

The problem is that people will not just go COLD turkey.

But you can nudge them in the direction we need to go.

You and I both know that there's a good chance we are beyond the tipping point. There are plenty of negative feedback loops that will require major changes (that aren't going to happen IMO) to reverse.

But there are places that are moving in the right direction. Little things like energy standards for appliances and getting rid of incandescent bulbs have reduced the demand growth of electricity. Utilities have dropped plans to add new peaker plants and they can't even justify COMPLETING nuclear plants - wind and solar are already cheaper. Batteries are filling in roles that spare power plants use to stand ready just in case. When they stand ready, the boiler is up to temp so they are burning fuel just to be ready state.

The A#1 thing we need are transmission lines to move power long distances from where the wind is blowing and the sun is shining to where it's needed. Texas has done this, but they are a self contained market. They are at 20% from wind, starting to build out solar and have yet to tap off shore. It can be done, but will it?

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Germany Rejected Nuclear ...»Reply #13