The Fringe | Conspiracy, News, Politics, and Fun Forum!

Full Version: California Wants All Its Electricity Carbon-Free. How’s That Possible?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
There’s a big debate over how much wind and solar an electric grid can handle.

If you want to get electricity generated by fossil fuels in California you’re soon going to be out of luck. A bill that just made it through the legislature requires the state’s electricity to come entirely from zero-carbon sources by 2045.

Environmentalists campaigned hard for the bill. Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club, called its passage, “a pivotal moment for California, for the country and the world.”

That’s assuming Governor Jerry Brown signs it into law. Brown reportedly said he won’t sign unless the legislature also passes a bill to expand the energy grid to cover several states.

There’s a key term of art in this clean-energy bill that’s easy to miss if you aren’t clued in. Activists and like-minded politicians often campaign for “100 percent renewable,” but this bill mandates 100 percent carbon-free sources of electricity. Catch that? It means California is likely to replace fossil fuels with more electricity from large hydroelectric dams (not considered renewable under California rules), nuclear reactors, and any new technologies, like fusion, that become viable in the next 30 years.

https://www.motherjones.com/environment/...-possible/
(09-06-2018, 12:18 AM)FringeDude Wrote: [ -> ]There’s a big debate over how much wind and solar an electric grid can handle.

If you want to get electricity generated by fossil fuels in California you’re soon going to be out of luck. A bill that just made it through the legislature requires the state’s electricity to come entirely from zero-carbon sources by 2045.

Environmentalists campaigned hard for the bill. Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club, called its passage, “a pivotal moment for California, for the country and the world.”

That’s assuming Governor Jerry Brown signs it into law. Brown reportedly said he won’t sign unless the legislature also passes a bill to expand the energy grid to cover several states.

There’s a key term of art in this clean-energy bill that’s easy to miss if you aren’t clued in. Activists and like-minded politicians often campaign for “100 percent renewable,” but this bill mandates 100 percent carbon-free sources of electricity. Catch that? It means California is likely to replace fossil fuels with more electricity from large hydroelectric dams (not considered renewable under California rules), nuclear reactors, and any new technologies, like fusion, that become viable in the next 30 years.

https://www.motherjones.com/environment/...-possible/

Nikola Tesla's ideas and technology should be public because those that own the wind turbines will think they own the air . Kinda like Nestle now wanting to own all the water .
Nuclear power is the only thing that would power a state such as Cali. If they intend to eliminate carbon emissions.
There was a study done in Australia on what it would cost to go for wind and solar 100%. It found the price of electricity would TRIPLE to 55 cents a Kilowatt.

[Image: cost-energy-aust-scenarios.gif]

California's current price is already 15 cents, up from the US average of 11 cents because of wind and solar.

http://joannenova.com.au/2018/09/enginee...australia/
a lot if times during hot months, the grid goes down leaving thousands without power for several hours to one day. rolling blackouts ensue...luckily we dont have that here

Guest

It's a lofty goal that sounds good to win political points, but right now the state is at 40% and a lot of folks think there's a practical limit south of 100%. maybe it's 75%, maybe it's 90%, but 100% becomes impractical.

Still, doubling from 40% to 80% would be something remarkable. If you want to make the ME as relevant as Nigeria, make crude a lot less valuable.

Guest

White power > nuclear power > coal power.

Guest

There is some sort of insanity in fracking the caldera of a supervolcano -

Non-double-couple microearthquakes at Long Valley Caldera, California, provide evidence for hydraulic fracturing

https://www.researchgate.net/publication...fracturing

Take a look at the Yellowstone hotspot, each time the new caldera clears the previous one there is a supereruption. The one time which is an exception to this I believe an impact from space fractured the land and triggered a supereruption. It seems that as a rule the fractures are greater on the rim of the old eruption allowing the magma to the surface and once the new hotspot hits that rim the volcano erupts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellowstone_hotspot
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellowston...te2013.JPG
They could force all the prisoners to use generator bikes.
(09-06-2018, 10:59 AM)Mulciber Wrote: [ -> ]They could force all the prisoners to use generator bikes.

Sounds a lot like that black mirror episode!
Hiding3
Pages: 1 2