Comments on: Greenhouse: The Problem Grows, But So Do The Solutions http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/ Blogging politics, culture, sociology and life from Brisvegas Wed, 07 Jan 2009 20:01:38 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: Rob http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56836 Rob Thu, 09 Mar 2006 01:04:23 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56836 Robert - I can't monitor overall usage with my set up, just amps in and amps out, but I'd guess it would be around 4-5 kWh daily. But we no doubt would consume less electricity than most, because we've always got one eye on the amps out part of the system, so we turn lights off, switch off major appliances with LED displays, and use gas for hot water and cooking. Robert - I can’t monitor overall usage with my set up, just amps in and amps out, but I’d guess it would be around 4-5 kWh daily. But we no doubt would consume less electricity than most, because we’ve always got one eye on the amps out part of the system, so we turn lights off, switch off major appliances with LED displays, and use gas for hot water and cooking.

]]> By: Robert Merkel http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56664 Robert Merkel Wed, 08 Mar 2006 08:33:49 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56664 If I do my sums right, the cost is closer to $600 per quarter. By comparison, if you buy 100% green energy from your retailer (my choice, on the basis that it's the only option other than installing a solar system available to me), the surcharge is about 20%, so your bill would be about $500 per quarter. Secondly, I suspect Rob is using a lot less power than Pottsy is. Rob, do you measure how much power you actually use? If I do my sums right, the cost is closer to $600 per quarter.

By comparison, if you buy 100% green energy from your retailer (my choice, on the basis that it’s the only option other than installing a solar system available to me), the surcharge is about 20%, so your bill would be about $500 per quarter.

Secondly, I suspect Rob is using a lot less power than Pottsy is. Rob, do you measure how much power you actually use?

]]> By: Nabakov http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56662 Nabakov Wed, 08 Mar 2006 08:31:11 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56662 Interestingly enough Bush seems to be right into renewable energy and environmental technologies personally, both at <a href="http://www.solartoday.org/2003/may_june03/solar_wh.htm" rel="nofollow"> The White House</a> and <a href="http://hootsystems.com/environmental/presbushranch.html" rel="nofollow">down on the range. I hope it's not because he knows something about the future of oil that we don't.</a> Interestingly enough Bush seems to be right into renewable energy and environmental technologies personally, both at The White House and down on the range.

I hope it’s not because he knows something about the future of oil that we don’t.

]]> By: Rob http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56645 Rob Wed, 08 Mar 2006 06:20:26 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56645 Pottsy - non, je ne regret rien. Other than the technical fact that its not cheaper in dollar terms, under current arrangements of subsidies for energy, I am a big fan of it - and the economics will change as the technology evolves - though as Rob Merkel pointed out the real challenge is the storage rather than the generation. Pottsy - non, je ne regret rien. Other than the technical fact that its not cheaper in dollar terms, under current arrangements of subsidies for energy, I am a big fan of it - and the economics will change as the technology evolves - though as Rob Merkel pointed out the real challenge is the storage rather than the generation.

]]> By: Pottsy http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56598 Pottsy Wed, 08 Mar 2006 03:56:51 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56598 Rob, at my guesstimate, over 26 years including another battery replacement at 4K, insurance and your pa diesel cost (all this not including inflation of course) it will cost you about $521 per quarter. My current bill is $400 p/q. I still think that you are better off as you create much less of a mess than my mains consumption currently does. Rob, at my guesstimate, over 26 years including another battery replacement at 4K, insurance and your pa diesel cost (all this not including inflation of course) it will cost you about $521 per quarter. My current bill is $400 p/q.
I still think that you are better off as you create much less of a mess than my mains consumption currently does.

]]> By: Rob http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56500 Rob Wed, 08 Mar 2006 00:26:07 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56500 Steve Munn writes that "People who are able to afford the upfront cost of solar for their homes DO save money over the longer term." I wish. I put in a solar system ten years back - total cost has been around $25K, of which I got $10K back from subsidies. The batteries cost $4K and have a lifetime of around 10-15 years - so that's an annual cost of $270-400, plus all solar systems need a back up for cloudy days. On the increasingly misnamed Sunshine Coast we haven't seen much sun since Christmas, and overall I probably spend over $500 per year on petrol for the generator. You also need insurance, because a lightning strike once blew out my $3K inverter. Mind you, its a good system, almost mains equivalent, and I never get black or brown outs. Steve Munn writes that “People who are able to afford the upfront cost of solar for their homes DO save money over the longer term.” I wish. I put in a solar system ten years back - total cost has been around $25K, of which I got $10K back from subsidies. The batteries cost $4K and have a lifetime of around 10-15 years - so that’s an annual cost of $270-400, plus all solar systems need a back up for cloudy days. On the increasingly misnamed Sunshine Coast we haven’t seen much sun since Christmas, and overall I probably spend over $500 per year on petrol for the generator. You also need insurance, because a lightning strike once blew out my $3K inverter. Mind you, its a good system, almost mains equivalent, and I never get black or brown outs.

]]> By: David http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56473 David Tue, 07 Mar 2006 22:40:57 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56473 Beazley's blueprint seemed to me like a comprehensive, sensible and probably effective mix of policies. Solar panels on every school seems a bit gimmicky and unlikely to make much sense if you're looking at it only from the perspective of cost-effective solutions, but I like it. It would make school kids feel like part of the solution, have educational value, give the industry a boost financially and morale-wise (it gives solar some more cred as a mainstream response). The more important part of the schools policy was actually to earmark part of capital works funding for energy efficiency measures. That's likely to have a bigger impact and probably save schools a big whack of money on power bills as my impression is that most school buildings are pretty energy inefficient. Beazley’s blueprint seemed to me like a comprehensive, sensible and probably effective mix of policies. Solar panels on every school seems a bit gimmicky and unlikely to make much sense if you’re looking at it only from the perspective of cost-effective solutions, but I like it. It would make school kids feel like part of the solution, have educational value, give the industry a boost financially and morale-wise (it gives solar some more cred as a mainstream response).

The more important part of the schools policy was actually to earmark part of capital works funding for energy efficiency measures. That’s likely to have a bigger impact and probably save schools a big whack of money on power bills as my impression is that most school buildings are pretty energy inefficient.

]]> By: Robert Merkel http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56417 Robert Merkel Tue, 07 Mar 2006 15:41:29 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56417 Steve, solar is not competitive without enormous subsidies. That's why there's a lot more wind power installed than solar; it's cheaper. This may change in the future, but it's not true now. The only think that can make it so is research and development. Throw money at that, instead. My objection to solar and wind is that they're not going to solve the problem without a breakthrough in energy storage. Ultimately, other technologies are going to be necessary, of which the only one ready right now is nuclear and the only other one likely to be ready quickly enough is sequestration of coal emissions. Conservation might buy us time, but the gains stand every chance of being eaten up by economic growth, along the lines of "woohoo - I saved $500 on my electricity bill, let's fly to Sydney to celebrate!" So why bother fart-assing around with non-solutions like solar and wind? Incidentally, if you want a non-polluting energy source that's actually worth a damn, check out these guys attempting to extract <a HREF="http://www.geodynamics.com.au" rel="nofollow">geothermal power</a> from hot rocks buried deep under South Australia. I liked it so much I bought the company (or at least some shares...). Steve, solar is not competitive without enormous subsidies. That’s why there’s a lot more wind power installed than solar; it’s cheaper.

This may change in the future, but it’s not true now. The only think that can make it so is research and development. Throw money at that, instead.

My objection to solar and wind is that they’re not going to solve the problem without a breakthrough in energy storage. Ultimately, other technologies are going to be necessary, of which the only one ready right now is nuclear and the only other one likely to be ready quickly enough is sequestration of coal emissions. Conservation might buy us time, but the gains stand every chance of being eaten up by economic growth, along the lines of “woohoo - I saved $500 on my electricity bill, let’s fly to Sydney to celebrate!” So why bother fart-assing around with non-solutions like solar and wind?

Incidentally, if you want a non-polluting energy source that’s actually worth a damn, check out these guys attempting to extract geothermal power from hot rocks buried deep under South Australia. I liked it so much I bought the company (or at least some shares…).

]]> By: Steve Munn http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56382 Steve Munn Tue, 07 Mar 2006 13:57:29 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56382 Rog has an irritating habit of interjecting with a boring one liner that has no basis in fact nor a shred of evidence behind it. Solar has made tremendous gains and continues to do so, as per Nabakov's link. People who are able to afford the upfront cost of solar for their homes DO save money over the longer term. This is a simple and demonstrable fact. What is at least as important as renewable sources of power is better design that saves electricity. The Rocky Mountains Institute in the USA deserves to be more widely known. That have done plenty of work in this area and have had oustanding sucess. See http://www.rmi.org/ Rog has an irritating habit of interjecting with a boring one liner that has no basis in fact nor a shred of evidence behind it.

Solar has made tremendous gains and continues to do so, as per Nabakov’s link. People who are able to afford the upfront cost of solar for their homes DO save money over the longer term. This is a simple and demonstrable fact.

What is at least as important as renewable sources of power is better design that saves electricity. The Rocky Mountains Institute in the USA deserves to be more widely known. That have done plenty of work in this area and have had oustanding sucess.

See http://www.rmi.org/

]]> By: Nabakov http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56322 Nabakov Tue, 07 Mar 2006 12:01:30 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56322 That's the spirit rog. Who needs invention, progress, entreprenuership, etc (or <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power" rel="nofollow">even</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power#Deployment_of_solar_power" rel="nofollow">reality</a>) if it only gets in the way of scoring a petty ideological point? You couldn't have proved my point better if you had set out to do so on purpose. Do you really think the world needs more knockers and whingers when it comes to pushing technologies further? That’s the spirit rog. Who needs invention, progress, entreprenuership, etc (or even reality) if it only gets in the way of scoring a petty ideological point?

You couldn’t have proved my point better if you had set out to do so on purpose. Do you really think the world needs more knockers and whingers when it comes to pushing technologies further?

]]> By: rog http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56306 rog Tue, 07 Mar 2006 10:52:34 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56306 Solar and wind power have had 30 years of science poured into them and <i>still</i> have not progressed past the farting horseless 4mph carriage stage. But dont let me stand in your way... Solar and wind power have had 30 years of science poured into them and still have not progressed past the farting horseless 4mph carriage stage.

But dont let me stand in your way…

]]> By: Nabakov http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56294 Nabakov Tue, 07 Mar 2006 09:47:54 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56294 Iwonder what the same people dissing solar and wind power now would have said about Mr Benz's snorting farting horseless 4mph carriage or Mr Bell's crackly experiments in transmitting music for the deaf. Iwonder what the same people dissing solar and wind power now would have said about Mr Benz’s snorting farting horseless 4mph carriage or Mr Bell’s crackly experiments in transmitting music for the deaf.

]]> By: Pottsy http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56288 Pottsy Tue, 07 Mar 2006 09:33:06 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56288 Absolutely agree with you Robert on the research side, while you're at it, add to that research into more efficient PV cells and the development of new renewable energy technology. Every bit helps. Absolutely agree with you Robert on the research side, while you’re at it, add to that research into more efficient PV cells and the development of new renewable energy technology.
Every bit helps.

]]> By: observa http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56271 observa Tue, 07 Mar 2006 08:32:53 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56271 That settles it then on GW. According to the Beazer, Alcoa has spoken! We'll all look forward to Labor's absolute reliance on the wisdom of big biz in future now shall we? That settles it then on GW. According to the Beazer, Alcoa has spoken! We’ll all look forward to Labor’s absolute reliance on the wisdom of big biz in future now shall we?

]]> By: Robert Merkel http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56256 Robert Merkel Tue, 07 Mar 2006 06:36:22 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56256 It's an investment that doesn't pay off, Pottsy. That's the point. If you want to cut greenhouse emissions there are innumerable cheaper and better ways to do it. Use the money for research into grid energy storage, without which solar and wind can never replace more than a small portion of the electricity grid. It’s an investment that doesn’t pay off, Pottsy. That’s the point. If you want to cut greenhouse emissions there are innumerable cheaper and better ways to do it. Use the money for research into grid energy storage, without which solar and wind can never replace more than a small portion of the electricity grid.

]]> By: Pottsy http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56253 Pottsy Tue, 07 Mar 2006 06:22:49 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56253 I think that bomber beazley has a great idea with the solar schools concept. As you say Robert the initial cost is high, yet it is a one of investment. Once paid for the panels will not only replace a proportion of energy used at schools, it will also lower energy costs and reduce the amount of greenhouse gas released. They could also be used as teaching aids in technical schools. I think that's a pretty good start. I think that bomber beazley has a great idea with the solar schools concept.
As you say Robert the initial cost is high, yet it is a one of investment.
Once paid for the panels will not only replace a proportion of energy used at schools, it will also lower energy costs and reduce the amount of greenhouse gas released. They could also be used as teaching aids in technical schools.
I think that’s a pretty good start.

]]> By: Robert Merkel http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56248 Robert Merkel Tue, 07 Mar 2006 06:13:19 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56248 Groan... He's saying nuclear is too dear and he's advocating <em>solar power</em>? <a HREF="http://www.solaronline.com.au/page/solar_system_pricing.html" rel="nofollow">Have a look here</a>, straight from the horse's mouth. It's not economic. Yes, smart metering and other things will help, but the price of solar cells will have to come down a long, long way - not to mention the price of energy storage. Groan…

He’s saying nuclear is too dear and he’s advocating solar power? Have a look here, straight from the horse’s mouth. It’s not economic. Yes, smart metering and other things will help, but the price of solar cells will have to come down a long, long way - not to mention the price of energy storage.

]]> By: Cristy http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56246 Cristy Tue, 07 Mar 2006 05:52:13 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/03/07/greenhouse-the-problem-grows-but-so-do-the-solutions-2/#comment-56246 I am glad that technical solution are growing to climate change, which frankly terrifies me, but I hope that this will not just reinforce the ridiculous attitude of some that 'technology will save us' and allow us to continue to behave as we have always done - in terms of consumption of resources etc. Clearly more than just new technology is going to be needed in order to prevent an environmental distaster, let alone turn things around. I am glad that technical solution are growing to climate change, which frankly terrifies me, but I hope that this will not just reinforce the ridiculous attitude of some that ‘technology will save us’ and allow us to continue to behave as we have always done - in terms of consumption of resources etc. Clearly more than just new technology is going to be needed in order to prevent an environmental distaster, let alone turn things around.

]]>