Prediction: Coal has fallen. Nuclear is next then Oil.

[Raffy.Roma]

Sorry but I disagree as ideology is ALWAYS part of the issue. We as humans have many problems confronting us. We have several significant wars, poverty, unwanted immigration, large deficit spending, high inflation, hunger/starvation, climate change,.......... So what is the priority? Which problem(s) do we tackle first? How much should we spend on each issue? Those answers fall into ideology.

Of course I agree with you David, but you are raising a more general matter.
I only meant when it comes to the Climate Change issue let's find solutions matching with the Science, not with the ideology or politics.

To this concern I wish to point out that also former Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry invited to face the Climate Change issue as a purely scientific problem.

 

[Oil4AsphaultOnly]

Of course I agree with you David, but you are raising a more general matter.
I only meant when it comes to the Climate Change issue let's find solutions matching with the Science, not with the ideology or politics.

To this concern I wish to point out that also former Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry invited to face the Climate Change issue as a purely scientific problem.

No. You can't do that. Al Gore was a proponent of addressing climate change, and his problem was that no one would listen to him. Same problem here. You have to factor in human psychology or you'll end up with a solution that works perfectly in theory (because it's facts based), but fails in practice.

Edit: This is why Tesla succeeded with the Roadster and Model S, while GM failed with the EV1 and gen1 Bolt.

 

[Raffy.Roma]

No. You can't do that. Al Gore was a proponent of addressing climate change, and his problem was that no one would listen to him. Same problem here. You have to factor in human psychology or you'll end up with a solution that works perfectly in theory (because it's facts based), but fails in practice.

Edit: This is why Tesla succeeded with the Roadster and Model S, while GM failed with the EV1 and gen1 Bolt.

Sorry but I don't manage to understand your point. Of course I say what I think and how things should be according to me. The purpose is to keep the Global Temperature Deviation under the threshold of 1.5°C set by the Agreement of Paris. Hope that at least you will appreciate my Good Faith.

Then we can have different views. Main thing is that we all make efforts to work out the Climate Change issue.

 

[Oil4AsphaultOnly]

Sorry but I don't manage to understand your point. Of course I say what I think and how things should be according to me. The purpose is to keep the Global Temperature Deviation under the threshold of 1.5°C set by the Agreement of Paris. Hope that at least you will appreciate my Good Faith.

Then we can have different views. Main thing is that we all make efforts to work out the Climate Change issue.

The data calls for an end to burning fossil fuels "yesterday", since CO2 emissions take time to ramp down. Obviously that isn't going to happen. Not today, nor tomorrow, nor this year. So when you wrote, "when it comes to the Climate Change issue let's find solutions matching with the Science, not with the ideology or politics.", my point was to show that we're way past the point of finding solutions matching "the science". We're now at the point where we actually need to ALSO have negative carbon solutions, which are currently non-viable.

And this is where my past posts about ideology come into play. In english, "science" is a methodology, with specific "sciences" being specific fields of study applying that methodology. No one has objective discussions based on "the science". We can only discuss the facts and data, which are the products of science. So when you advocate for finding "solutions matching with the Science", it really sounds like someone who doesn't understand how to interpret data and is just repeating what others say. And when all you do is parrot, you're practicing ideology.

As an engineer, I get really annoyed when someone tells me what "science says" without any understanding of how to analyze data and facts. So please STOP writing that "we need to find solutions based on science"!! As I've written before, please tell everyone else that we need to solve climate change, because it's those people who need to hear this, NOT THIS FORUM (I'm convinced that teslamotorsclub.com has the highest concentration of engineers, scientists, doctors, and other professionals than any other forums).

 

[eevee-fan]

I think we are going to get transportation pollution under control in the next decade or two, but the rise of electricity hungry data centers might throw a monkey wrench into plans to make our grids greener. I also think geothermal may be the dark horse to save the day. Not sure if everyone knows what is meant by a dark horse, but it means something that is so far away from the lead that nobody notices them until they put on a burst of speed and win the race to everyone's surprise.

 

[eevee-fan]

 

[Raffy.Roma]

The data calls for an end to burning fossil fuels "yesterday", since CO2 emissions take time to ramp down. Obviously that isn't going to happen. Not today, nor tomorrow, nor this year. So when you wrote, "when it comes to the Climate Change issue let's find solutions matching with the Science, not with the ideology or politics.", my point was to show that we're way past the point of finding solutions matching "the science". We're now at the point where we actually need to ALSO have negative carbon solutions, which are currently non-viable.

And this is where my past posts about ideology come into play. In english, "science" is a methodology, with specific "sciences" being specific fields of study applying that methodology. No one has objective discussions based on "the science". We can only discuss the facts and data, which are the products of science. So when you advocate for finding "solutions matching with the Science", it really sounds like someone who doesn't understand how to interpret data and is just repeating what others say. And when all you do is parrot, you're practicing ideology.

As an engineer, I get really annoyed when someone tells me what "science says" without any understanding of how to analyze data and facts. So please STOP writing that "we need to find solutions based on science"!! As I've written before, please tell everyone else that we need to solve climate change, because it's those people who need to hear this, NOT THIS FORUM (I'm convinced that teslamotorsclub.com has the highest concentration of engineers, scientists, doctors, and other professionals than any other forums).

Don't like your philosophical arguments about the Science. But of course you are free to write whatever you want in this Forum.
FYI I also am free to write whatever I want in this Forum and only the moderators have the right to say if I have to stop writing something. Not you.

 

[David_Cary]

Last I looked, geothermal was great in a few parts of the world. It doesn't seem scalable. But - certainly if you dig deep enough it may be. I have no idea if that would be safe or technologically and financially feasible.
Do you know something about this that you could share?

Agreed that I simplified Ideology vs science - they aren't opposites. And they influence each other. But ideology is not something we can all agree on....

The idea of negative carbon solutions is arguably a violation of thermodynamics. I mean algae is using photosynthesis to overcome it so that doesn't violate thermodynamics. And massive energy from non-carbon sources could do it but that would seem to be something we might apply once we stop adding to carbon (at least in the 90% range).

 

[mspohr]

I hesitate to join this debate but I think idealogy is too nebulous a term.
The science has been clear for many years. Our corrupt political and economic systems are the problem.

 

[Raffy.Roma]

Agreed that I simplified Ideology vs science - they aren't opposites. And they influence each other. But ideology is not something we can all agree on....

WELL SAID AGAIN!

And we need to work out the Climate Change issue soon. If in August--September, when La Niña (cool flip-side of El Niño) will kick in, the 0.2°C Anomaly of the Global Temperature Deviation will not stabilize, we will be, as Dr. Gavin Schmidt Director of NASA GISS said, IN UNCHARTED TERRITORY with the Climate Change issue OUT OF CONTROL.

Then what will we say to our sons and grandsons who will experience a new Ice Age as a result of the AMOC collapse?

That we didn't manage to find a compromise among the various ideologies existing worldwide?

I tell you. Our sons and grandsons don't really give a damn about our ideologies. They want only that we leave them the Earth in good conditions so that they can thrive.

So, since the Climate Change issue is crystal clear a matter of Global Security, all the power to the UN Security Council to work out the Climate Change issue as a purely Scientific problem IMO.

 

[tmoz]

Sadly, or thankfully, clean electricity is happening because it is now the cheaper source.

 

[Raffy.Roma]

Sadly, or thankfully, clean electricity is happening because it is now the cheaper source.

I would say "thankfully".

 

[Dave EV]

I think we are going to get transportation pollution under control in the next decade or two, but the rise of electricity hungry data centers might throw a monkey wrench into plans to make our grids greener.

Done right, electricity hungry data centers could help improve the adoption of renewable energy as they could be set up as flexible loads.

How long before electricity cost starts factoring into compute pricing in a time of use manner? I suspect that it may already happen with spot instance pricing, for example.

At the end of the day, though, for data centers it's a business that they are trying to maximize profits for.

Which is why we desperately need a carbon tax - it's the best, most efficient way in our capitalistic society to discourage behaviors with harmful externalities.

 

[Raffy.Roma]

WELL SAID AGAIN!

And we need to work out the Climate Change issue soon. If in August--September, when La Niña (cool flip-side of El Niño) will kick in, the 0.2°C Anomaly of the Global Temperature Deviation will not stabilize, we will be, as Dr. Gavin Schmidt Director of NASA GISS said, IN UNCHARTED TERRITORY with the Climate Change issue OUT OF CONTROL.

Then what will we say to our sons and grandsons who will experience a new Ice Age as a result of the AMOC collapse?

That we didn't manage to find a compromise among the various ideologies existing worldwide?

I tell you. Our sons and grandsons don't really give a damn about our ideologies. They want only that we leave them the Earth in good conditions so that they can thrive.

So, since the Climate Change issue is crystal clear a matter of Global Security, all the power to the UN Security Council to work out the Climate Change issue as a purely Scientific problem IMO.

Greta Thunberg: I have not come to offer any prepared remarks at this hearing.
I am instead attacching my testimony.
It is the IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°Celsius.
The SR1.5 which was released on 8 October 2018.
I am submitting this report as my testimony because I DON'T WANT YOU TO LISTEN TO ME I WANT YOU TO LISTEN TO THE SCIENTISTS AND I WANT YOU TO UNITE BEHIND THE SCIENCE and I want you to take real action.

Chairman: Could you expand on why it is SO IMPORTANT TO LISTEN TO THE SCIENCE?

Greta Thunberg: Just such a thing that we should be taking for granted that we listen to the CURRENT BEST AVAILABLE UNITED SCIENCE. IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT EVERYONE SHOULD DO. THIS IS NOT POLITICAL OPINIONS POLITICAL VIEWS OR MY OPINIONS THIS IS THE SCIENCE!

 

[Raffy.Roma]

Greta Thunberg: I have not come to offer any prepared remarks at this hearing.
I am instead attacching my testimony.
It is the IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°Celsius.
The SR1.5 which was released on 8 October 2018.
I am submitting this report as my testimony because I DON'T WANT YOU TO LISTEN TO ME I WANT YOU TO LISTEN TO THE SCIENTISTS AND I WANT YOU TO UNITE BEHIND THE SCIENCE and I want you to take real action.

Chairman: Could you expand on why it is SO IMPORTANT TO LISTEN TO THE SCIENCE?

Greta Thunberg: Just such a thing that we should be taking for granted that we listen to the CURRENT BEST AVAILABLE UNITED SCIENCE. IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT EVERYONE SHOULD DO. THIS IS NOT POLITICAL OPINIONS POLITICAL VIEWS OR MY OPINIONS THIS IS THE SCIENCE!

I invite all TMC Members to watch the reported interview to Greta Thunberg

 

[Oil4AsphaultOnly]

Done right, electricity hungry data centers could help improve the adoption of renewable energy as they could be set up as flexible loads.

How long before electricity cost starts factoring into compute pricing in a time of use manner? I suspect that it may already happen with spot instance pricing, for example.

At the end of the day, though, for data centers it's a business that they are trying to maximize profits for.

Which is why we desperately need a carbon tax - it's the best, most efficient way in our capitalistic society to discourage behaviors with harmful externalities.

Data centers are the WORST candidates for renewable energy, because their power consumption (driven mostly be cooling needs) are pretty much static. AWS and other cloud computing centers are priced towards maximizing resource utilization, which means keeping them operating as close to a full constant load as possible. Throw in crypto-currency and you can pretty much consider Tech and Finance as the banes of climate change solutions.

 

[eevee-fan]

Data centers are the WORST candidates for renewable energy, because their power consumption (driven mostly be cooling needs) are pretty much static. AWS and other cloud computing centers are priced towards maximizing resource utilization, which means keeping them operating as close to a full constant load as possible. Throw in crypto-currency and you can pretty much consider Tech and Finance as the banes of climate change solutions.

I guess you do not know the energy usage patterns of data centers. My old neighbor has a AWS server that he cranks down during the night, cranks up in the morning as people are logging in, the goes on normal use during the day. Data centers have peak periods, so you could always add a battery system to charge when energy is cheap and run off the battery when energy is expensive.

You would also think a Bitcoin farm would not be a good fit for renewables, yet there's a farm in TX that adjusts its operation based on the power produced at that attached wind farm.

 

[Raffy.Roma]

Greta Thunberg: I have not come to offer any prepared remarks at this hearing.
I am instead attacching my testimony.
It is the IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°Celsius.
The SR1.5 which was released on 8 October 2018.
I am submitting this report as my testimony because I DON'T WANT YOU TO LISTEN TO ME I WANT YOU TO LISTEN TO THE SCIENTISTS AND I WANT YOU TO UNITE BEHIND THE SCIENCE and I want you to take real action.

Chairman: Could you expand on why it is SO IMPORTANT TO LISTEN TO THE SCIENCE?

Greta Thunberg: Just such a thing that we should be taking for granted that we listen to the CURRENT BEST AVAILABLE UNITED SCIENCE. IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT EVERYONE SHOULD DO. THIS IS NOT POLITICAL OPINIONS POLITICAL VIEWS OR MY OPINIONS THIS IS THE SCIENCE!

Greta Thunberg is a young giri 21 years old. She could be your daughter.

As you can see GRETA IS NOT INTERESTED IN IDEOLOGY OR POLITICS, SHE ONLY WANTS THAT WE STICK TO THE SCIENCE AND WORK OUT THE CLIMATE CHANGE ISSUE AS A PURELY SCIENTIFIC PROBLEM, BECAUSE SHE WANTS A BETTER WORLD WHERE SHE AND HER FELLOWS CAN THRIVE!

 

[Oil4AsphaultOnly]

I guess you do not know the energy usage patterns of data centers. My old neighbor has a AWS server that he cranks down during the night, cranks up in the morning as people are logging in, the goes on normal use during the day. Data centers have peak periods, so you could always add a battery system to charge when energy is cheap and run off the battery when energy is expensive.

You would also think a Bitcoin farm would not be a good fit for renewables, yet there's a farm in TX that adjusts its operation based on the power produced at that attached wind farm.

I stand corrected.

Having worked in server farms for over 2 decades, I was going to make a point about how minimum consumption is within 60% of peak consumption isn't very "peaky", because a server's energy consumption does NOT scale with its load: https://www.researchgate.net/figure...hape-in-2007-Summer-and-Winter_fig2_255215593. "Cranking" that AWS EC2 instance isn't going to do squat for your friend's energy consumption.

But then I realized that the periods of high load are during the daytime when AC loads are highest, which as you pointed out, are also when renewable energy is most abundant (thus cheapest) and batteries can buffer that. This type of usage cycle is terrible for a grid, but not as bad for a datacenter/solar+wind+geothermal+hydro-farm site.

As for the Bitcoin farm in TX, that only works because they're part of a mining pool, where other miners come online as the the TX ones shut down. Miners are needed to process transactions at ALL hours of the day, NOT only when electricity is cheapest for them.

 

[David_Cary]

Data centers would also tend to need more cooling in the summer when solar is best performing. That is the bigger issue since batteries have a really hard time fixing the annual problem. The reality though is that more energy is more energy and renewables don't come from nowhere.
If you need 10X energy, the energy consumed in making the 10X renewables makes goals really hard to meet.

The question really is do you buy some land up north or do you buy small bits in various places since who knows what will be the most habitable? And what gets hit hardest and the quickest? In the US - is it Gulf states or wildfires more in the West? The AMOC decline would seem to be the biggest variable.