Climate Change / Global Warming Discussion

[mspohr]

'Content from American Petroleum Institute' is a pretty good clue.

It is not reasonable, or advisable, to ask the WP to exclude adverts based on political leanings. The advert content is up to the advertiser, so all the WP can and should do is be quite clear that what follows is an advert.

I did not waste my time reading the advert, which probably explains why I don't care about it. As for the WP -- I hope they charged a lot of money.

It is reasonable to ask the WP to not print ads which can be confused with their news content.

 

[SageBrush]

It is reasonable to ask the WP to not print ads which can be confused with their news content.

I disagree. That is a slippery slope I expect from Repukes or Faux News.

 

[ohmman]

No, it is not obvious.
The "advertisement" is made to look just like the normal "news" content of the WP. Yes, if you look carefully, you can see that it is a paid advertisement but many people won't take the time and effort to see that disclaimer and won't know the difference.

This is a practice I do not condone, and I think should have some regulations put upon it. I've seen it plenty in magazines like Scientific American as well. There should be a watermark behind the entire copy that says "Advertisement" or something of the sort. It should be impossible to miss.

 

[mspohr]

I disagree. That is a slippery slope I expect from Repukes or Faux News.

I'm confused. Are you saying that it's OK for WP to confuse readers with advertisements that look like news stories just like Fox news constantly editorializes in their "news" coverage? Fox news has gone down that slippery slope. Are you saying that it's OK for WP to go down that same slippery slope?

 

[SageBrush]

I'm confused. Are you saying that it's OK for WP to confuse readers with advertisements that look like news stories just like Fox news constantly editorializes in their "news" coverage? Fox news has gone down that slippery slope. Are you saying that it's OK for WP to go down that same slippery slope?

No, I am saying that your demand that adverts meet an impossible threshold -- that they cannot be mixed up with news content -- is wide open to abuse.

 

[mspohr]

No, I am saying that your demand that adverts meet an impossible threshold -- that they cannot be mixed up with news content -- is wide open to abuse.

My demand is that advertisements don't mimic news content. This is easy to do. Most of the ads in the paper don't have any problem looking like ads and not looking like news content. Only a very few ads are designed to deceive readers disguised as news.

 

[jerry33]

My demand is that advertisements don't mimic news content. This is easy to do. Most of the ads in the paper don't have any problem looking like ads and not looking like news content. Only a very few ads are designed to deceive readers disguised as news.

I guess the question is: How does the broadcast news today differ from advertising? Back in the day, news was a public service. Now it's a profit centre.

 

[WannabeOwner]

Only a very few ads are designed to deceive readers disguised as news.

Over here any advertisement in print that looks like Content has "Advertisement" printed at the top ... not over your side of the pond?

Requirements / Legislation for Online stuff probably not caught up ... yet ...

 

[mspohr]

Norway has completed divestment from oil and gas and has expanded authority to invest in renewables.
‘Historic breakthrough’: Norway’s giant oil fund dives into renewables
‘Historic breakthrough’: Norway’s giant oil fund dives into renewables

 

[SageBrush]

Norway has completed divestment from oil and gas and has expanded authority to invest in renewables.
‘Historic breakthrough’: Norway’s giant oil fund dives into renewables
‘Historic breakthrough’: Norway’s giant oil fund dives into renewables

<<shrug>>
If you view the sovereign fund as part of Norway's treasure chest -- with its fossil reserves being another very big fraction -- then this is best viewed as a diversification strategy.

 

[mspohr]

Renewable Energy Now Accounts for One-Third of Global Power Capacity, Says New Report
The decade-long trend of strong growth in renewable energy capacity continued in 2018 with global additions of 171 gigawatts, according to new data released by the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) earlier this week.

The annual increase of 7.9%t was bolstered by new additions from solar and wind energy, which accounted for 84% of the growth.

Full report
Capacity Statistics 2019

 

[rays427]

Renewable Energy Now Accounts for One-Third of Global Power Capacity, Says New Report
The decade-long trend of strong growth in renewable energy capacity continued in 2018 with global additions of 171 gigawatts, according to new data released by the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) earlier this week.

The annual increase of 7.9%t was bolstered by new additions from solar and wind energy, which accounted for 84% of the growth.

Full report
Capacity Statistics 2019

Sounds good but the problem is that the capacity factors reduce the actual amount of generation for wind and solar. The capacity factors in the us last year per month ranged from 25%-45% for wind, 15% to 35% for solar photovoltaic and 7% to 42% for thermal solar. This is on a monthly basis and the amount of change is much more on a weekly or daily basis.

 

[SmartElectric]

the capacity factors reduce the actual amount of generation for wind and solar. The capacity factors in the us last year per month ranged from 25%-45% for wind, 15% to 35% for solar photovoltaic

The capacity factor of gas generation in Ontario is lower than what you quote. 7GW deployed to backup Nuclear power.

We pay an adjustment fee on top of our rates to cover the costs of keeping the gas plants idle.

 

[SageBrush]

The capacity factor of gas generation in Ontario is lower than what you quote. 7GW deployed to backup Nuclear power.

We pay an adjustment fee on top of our rates to cover the costs of keeping the gas plants idle.

Peaker NG plants are around 5% on average in the USA. That is not doubt part of the reason why they are being replaced by battery

 

[ReddyLeaf]

Sounds good but the problem is that the capacity factors reduce the actual amount of generation for wind and solar. The capacity factors in the us last year per month ranged from 25%-45% for wind, 15% to 35% for solar photovoltaic and 7% to 42% for thermal solar. This is on a monthly basis and the amount of change is much more on a weekly or daily basis.

Even worse, is when RE is curtailed. According to CAISO, 125,000 MWh was curtailed in the CAISO area just last month. If I did my math right, that’s 500,000,000 miles of electric driving at 4 mi/KWh. We really need to advocate for MORE charging stations at all workplaces.

 

[SageBrush]

Even worse, is when RE is curtailed. According to CAISO, 125,000 MWh was curtailed in the CAISO area just last month. If I did my math right, that’s 500,000,000 miles of electric driving at 4 mi/KWh. We really need to advocate for MORE charging stations at all workplaces.

Also, advocate for RE to take precedence over fossil sources.

 

[rays427]

The capacity factor of gas generation in Ontario is lower than what you quote. 7GW deployed to backup Nuclear power.

We pay an adjustment fee on top of our rates to cover the costs of keeping the gas plants idle.

That's because gas is used as backup and is available as needed. This is not the case of wind and solar. As we add more wind and solar we will need more backup for when the sun doesn't shine or the wind doesn't blow. One way is to way overbuild solar and wind in combination with batteries or you can use something like gas generation as a backup.

 

[mspohr]

Looks like Amazon.com has dialed back it's commitment to renewables as it pursues oil and gas money for its data services.

https://gizmodo.com/amazon-is-aggressively-pursuing-big-oil-as-it-stalls-ou-1833875828

I guess we should just accept that they are another greed driven corporation.

 

[ggies07]

Looks like Amazon.com has dialed back it's commitment to renewables as it pursues oil and gas money for its data services.

https://gizmodo.com/amazon-is-aggressively-pursuing-big-oil-as-it-stalls-ou-1833875828

I guess we should just accept that they are another greed driven corporation.

Damn. Reminds me of this book by Naomi Klein: This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. The Climate

So not only does Amazon push society to consume to the max with programs like Prime, which allows the continuous flow of products like plastics and such that have oil in them, but is doing so knowingly on dirty energy WHILE at the same time helping the fossil fuel industry.

 

[SageBrush]

Damn. Reminds me of this book by Naomi Klein: This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. The Climate

So not only does Amazon push society to consume to the max with programs like Prime, which allows the continuous flow of products like plastics and such that have oil in them, but is doing so knowingly on dirty energy WHILE at the same time helping the fossil fuel industry.

That is more than a little over the top. Selling data services to fossil industries should not be grouped in the same pail as using fossils for energy, anymore than I would view a Tesla taxi negatively that ferries fossil fuel workers to their jobs. I do agree that Amazon should be pushed/encouraged to reach 100% renewables for its operations but it is hard for me to criticize too harshly a company that is at 50% -- which is easily a decade ahead of every corporation I can think of except Google.