Why is the climate change issue divided along party lines?

[Chicks]

Renewables produce 17.5% more electricity than coal in Q1 2020

https://www.solarpowerworldonline.co...al-in-q1-2020/

Coal is a loser's game in this country, thankfully, despite Donny's bad intentions. It's a dying source of energy. The sooner it's gone, the better off we'll all be. Just the health benefits of cleaner air alone are worth killing off coal. Sadly, it's still widely used in other countries.

Here in progressive CA, I notice more and more of the parking lot solar panel covers. Dual purpose, generate electricity while providing shade for cars. The Kaiser outpost I go to just put up eight long rows of these. Not sure if they're providing energy for Kaiser, or for the grid. Thankfully, my metro area has its own, community-owned, not-for-profit electric service, so we don't have to deal with PG&E, which lost its way via Wall Street a long time ago.

The electric service also has hundreds of acres of solar panels on underused former farmland throughout the area. We have some 300 days/year of sunlight, so solar is absolutely viable, especially now that it's become more cost effective than many other sources of power.

[Not Insane]

Originally Posted by Chicks

Renewables produce 17.5% more electricity than coal in Q1 2020

https://www.solarpowerworldonline.co...al-in-q1-2020/

Coal is a loser's game in this country, thankfully, despite Donny's bad intentions. It's a dying source of energy. The sooner it's gone, the better off we'll all be. Just the health benefits of cleaner air alone are worth killing off coal. Sadly, it's still widely used in other countries.

Here in progressive CA, I notice more and more of the parking lot solar panel covers. Dual purpose, generate electricity while providing shade for cars. The Kaiser outpost I go to just put up eight long rows of these. Not sure if they're providing energy for Kaiser, or for the grid. Thankfully, my metro area has its own, community-owned, not-for-profit electric service, so we don't have to deal with PG&E, which lost its way via Wall Street a long time ago.

The electric service also has hundreds of acres of solar panels on underused former farmland throughout the area. We have some 300 days/year of sunlight, so solar is absolutely viable, especially now that it's become more cost effective than many other sources of power.

I'm in the power industry. You are correct that Coal is diminishing in use in the US (though new plants are being built in other countries). We use a lot of coal and natural gas here in kentucky. Most of the infrastructure in a coal plant is not there to produce power. It is there to clean up the emissions and ash. And it is incredibly effective.

The use of Coal in the US will naturally shrink over time as other methods of producing power become more cost effective. Government need not force it. The future, based on the technology we have today, is clearly in Nuclear though. Wind and Solar are basically publicity stunts for the most part until the tech improves substantially. Rooftop solar is nice, and it does impact the grid, but not as much as people think. And that whole nighttime thing really does matter. Without an ability to store all that wasted electricity during the day the efficiency is drastically reduced.

I used to be a huge fan of solar and may become one again as cells become more efficient (a lot more) and batteries become more environmentally friendly and efficient/cheap. But until that happens, Electric power is at the same place electric cars were in the 60's: a novelty that is actually useful and functional for a tiny fraction of the population.

FWIW, if I lived in an urban area where I had a ten or less mile commute, one of my cars would be electric. They have crossed that line for me. But I would still need my gas powered car for stuff other than commuting and short trips to the grocery store.

Also, to get an idea where I'm coming from on the environment, I bicycle commuted for almost 20 years in the seattle area. I stopped when cell phone use made it too dangerous. My average round trip commute was 38 miles. I loved it.

[Pio1980]

CNN isnt my Go-to, but it can generally pass a fact check search and doesn't feature opinion and commentary over actual news.
Generally, I use AP, NPR, and NBC as morning go-to, trying Smartnews as an aggregator, which gets into the weeds on both sides. I tend to avoid sites with a known bias like Breitbart as credible news sources.

[Chicks]

Happy to live in CA, which leads the country in renewable energy (and most everything else of any significance).

https://www.eia.gov/state/analysis.php?sid=CA

Some facts from this government site:

Per capita residential energy use in California is lower than that of any other state except Hawaii.

Renewable resources, including hydropower and small-scale (less than 1-megawatt), customer-sited solar photovoltaics (PV), supplied almost half of California's in-state electricity generation in 2018. (No doubt more than half in 2020).

California is the top producer of electricity from solar, geothermal, and biomass energy in the nation.

The Geysers in northern California is the largest complex of geothermal power plants in the world.

California does not have any coal reserves or production and has phased out almost all use of coal for electricity generation. In 2018, coal fueled less than 0.2% of the in-state utility-scale net generation, and all of that power was generated at industrial facilities

[Pio1980]

Back to the OP topic, I find the advantages of nuke power interesting, if the disadvantages of initial and subsequent costs and hazards can be mitigated.

[mpholland]

I don't understand why more people don't go solar irregardless of beliefs in climate change. My 9.4kW solar system will be installed next week. It will conservatively cover over 100% of my electricity usage. The cost after credits, incentives and rebates went from 25,600 down to 15,800. That should pay for itself in about 8 years plus add about 18,000 to my home value. Sounds like a win-win to me. I am financing the whole shebang and my loan payment is less than my electric bill.

[Not Insane]

Originally Posted by mpholland

I don't understand why more people don't go solar irregardless of beliefs in climate change. My 9.4kW solar system will be installed next week. It will conservatively cover over 100% of my electricity usage. The cost after credits, incentives and rebates went from 25,600 down to 15,800. That should pay for itself in about 8 years plus add about 18,000 to my home value. Sounds like a win-win to me. I am financing the whole shebang and my loan payment is less than my electric bill.

My old guitar player installs solar for a living. He has 40 panels on his roof and got them when China was dumping them. That being said, he believes that solar is more expensive than power from the grid (at least, where we live) when you take into account the cost of the hardware and its useful life span coupled with the sunlight we get. The reason he's a fan is that he is a bit of a survivalist.

That is, when the grid goes, he still has power.

My company is experimenting with solar farms right now to determine the economic feasibility of those farms. But the results won't be in for decades. The main reason for going solar with current tech is to make a political/cultural statement.

i.e. part of the solution is to convert one's life to one of using more energy efficient stuff like LED lighting.

I'm thinking of using automotive alternators coupled with a homemade windmill to produce power for stuff around my property. LED lighting can be 12 volt based so I could, theoretically, have 12 volt generators connected to 12 volt batteries and infrastructure that uses 12 volt power, bypassing the need for very expensive inverters. Frankly, just as many homes used to be wired with cat-5, one could wire their home with a 12 volt system that was pure solar/wind connected, separate from their normal 120 volt wiring. All of your lighting could be 12 volt, thanks to LED's.

BTW, when LED lighting hit big, my power company noticed a drop in power consumption all over the grid.

[Chicks]

Vanguard names names and backs some calls for climate steps

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-c...-idUSKBN23P1T1

Glad to see that Vanguard is voting responsibly. Half my sizable holdings are in Vanguard funds.

[Oerets]

Originally Posted by Chicks

Vanguard names names and backs some calls for climate steps

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-c...-idUSKBN23P1T1

Glad to see that Vanguard is voting responsibly. Half my sizable holdings are in Vanguard funds.

We locked in some of our into a Indexed Annuity with a guarantee of 15% in February. For only 12 months.
We will see!

[mpholland]

Originally Posted by Not Insane

My old guitar player installs solar for a living. He has 40 panels on his roof and got them when China was dumping them. That being said, he believes that solar is more expensive than power from the grid (at least, where we live) when you take into account the cost of the hardware and its useful life span coupled with the sunlight we get. The reason he's a fan is that he is a bit of a survivalist.

That is, when the grid goes, he still has power.

My company is experimenting with solar farms right now to determine the economic feasibility of those farms. But the results won't be in for decades. The main reason for going solar with current tech is to make a political/cultural statement.

I am far from being a green extremist, though I do recycle and compost. Compost makes our garden soil rich, recycling is free at the dump and my trash costs me about 12 dollars every other month or so to dump. Spending 16K on my system to save 40K over the next 15 years makes sense to me. As a fiscal conservative all of this is done for financial reasons. None of it is political or cultural. I see no reason to retire with any bills that aren't necessary.

i.e. part of the solution is to convert one's life to one of using more energy efficient stuff like LED lighting.

My whole house and most of my automotive lighting as well is all LED. Again, all financial and safety decisions, not cultural or political.

I'm thinking of using automotive alternators coupled with a homemade windmill to produce power for stuff around my property. LED lighting can be 12 volt based so I could, theoretically, have 12 volt generators connected to 12 volt batteries and infrastructure that uses 12 volt power, bypassing the need for very expensive inverters. Frankly, just as many homes used to be wired with cat-5, one could wire their home with a 12 volt system that was pure solar/wind connected, separate from their normal 120 volt wiring. All of your lighting could be 12 volt, thanks to LED's.

Tried that already when I was much younger. Getting an alternator to spin at a proper rpm from wind will be quite a chore, and the amount of alternators and batteries you would need to power an average house would be quite a large number.

BTW, when LED lighting hit big, my power company noticed a drop in power consumption all over the grid.

Originally Posted by Chicks

Vanguard names names and backs some calls for climate steps

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-c...-idUSKBN23P1T1

Glad to see that Vanguard is voting responsibly. Half my sizable holdings are in Vanguard funds.

I too have quite a sizeable quantity in Vanguard holdings, but they are also fairly diverse.

Originally Posted by Oerets

We locked in some of our into a Indexed Annuity with a guarantee of 15% in February. For only 12 months.
We will see!

I would have to look and see exactly where my portfolios were in February, but they have gone up over 25% since March. Of course that was when we had the Covid crash.