Solar pv generation

[biffvernon]

Dr James Hansen was the lead scientist at NASA in determining the evolution of Venus's atmosphere. He then turned his attention to Earth's atmosphere. A lecture he gave in 2008 is pretty famous. Text and pictures are available here: http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/2008/AGUBjerknes_20081217.pdf This is really well worth reading through. Some of the diagrams may look daunting but the text is for a lay audience. There's a section about what he calls The Venus Syndrome on about page 24 where he describes the possibility of Earth turning out like Venus. That lecture was given 3 years ago. Since then Hansen's reputation in climate science circles has only grown as his findings have become confirmed by more and more observations.

For those interested in economics with reference to Peak Oil, Chris Martenson gave an excellent lecture last month to a group of people interested in investing in precious metals. It's about an hour long but will really fill you in about what might happen soon and why:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8WBiTnBwSWc&feature=player_embedded

 

[wobs]

A youtube regarding how we can consume less.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGab38pKscw&feature=share
This also ties in with the TV license thread, as it involves watching less adverts, but as we need to consume less, it would seem appropriate here.

 

[Flyfisher]

A Point of View: Climate change and craving a cause: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16215244


The lesson I draw from all this, in the context of the arguments for and against climate change and global warming, is addressed to the climate scientists. Perhaps it is time to acknowledge that international scientific near consensus is not enough to allay the fears of those who feel left out of the whole debate.

It is never a winning strategy to go on repeating dogmatically so-called "facts" that seem obvious to the already converted. To those who are fearful or simply unconvinced, this can sound like bullying. It can even be represented - and indeed has been by climate sceptics - as itself a conspiracy by a kind of "secret society", using selective, doctored evidence.

 

[biffvernon]

Yes, Umberto Eco has had a lot of wise things to say over a long time. We can accept the analysis in that article and we can adopt the various suggestion, indeed all of these suggestions have already been tried. We've been trying them all for the thirty years and more. What has been achieved is acceptance of the reality of the problem by just about every government on the planet except perhaps the USA. There is still an enormous gap between that acceptance and action that would deal effectively with the problem. The psychology of denial is not well understood and the waters are deliberately muddied by individuals and corporations who know the truth but act out of short term self-interest. This has led to a multi-million dollar funding stream for the denialists.

 

[FamilyWiggs]

The psychology of denial is not well understood and the waters are deliberately muddied by individuals and corporations who know the truth but act out of short term self-interest. This has led to a multi-million dollar funding stream for the denialists.

Oh no it hasn't!

8)

 

[Penners]

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[FamilyWiggs]

Was just pleased to have beaten you to that one, my dear fellow! :wink:

 

[Penners]

Only because you have youth on your side!

 

[biffvernon]

Oh yes it has.

(What is this, ruddy pantomime season again?)

 

[LadyArowana]

Oh yes it has.

(What is this, ruddy pantomime season again?)

Altogether now ....... where's the elephant?

 

[Feltwell]

It seems that a challenge to the legality of the government's decision to move the goalposts on the cutting of the feed-in tariff has been successful at the first stage. What's the odds though that the legal process takes far longer than 1st April to come to a definite decision on this!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16291768

 

[FamilyWiggs]

So in the meantime, are the previous tariffs back in play? Should I be saving my Christmas money for some?

 

[Feltwell]

No idea, but I was wondering exactly the same thing!

 

[biffvernon]

Here's this morning's article in the grauniad: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/dec/22/feed-in-tariffs-solar-subsidy

 

[Andrew Bodenham]

Biff wrote:

There's no harm not understanding science - so long as you leave the matter to those who do and accept their account, in the same way as you might trust a brain surgeon or airline pilot. You'd only use their services if they worked for a trusted organisation or could otherwise demonstrate their competence.

Biff, you seem to be arguing from a well-imformed position, and you imply a comprehensive scientific understanding of the issues involved. I'm sure the forum might be more ready to accept your account if you laid out your credentials, explained your competence in the field, and indicated which trusted organisations you work (or have worked) for. I like an expert opinion as much as the next chap, but I also like to know a bit about the expert.

 

[Feltwell]

Here's this morning's article in the grauniad: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/dec/22/feed-in-tariffs-solar-subsidy

Still doesn't say if the higher tariff is back on for the moment.

Plans to require homes to meet a C-rated energy efficiency standard before they can receive subsidies

Well, that's pretty much everyone who posts on here stuffed then!

 

[Flyfisher]

Plans to require homes to meet a C-rated energy efficiency standard before they can receive subsidies

Well, that's pretty much everyone who posts on here stuffed then!

Indeed. However, if one has a thermally inefficient house that 'wastes' energy, surely it's even more important for such homes to be heated with renewable energy sources? But I would guess that few people with solar pv systems are using the electricity thus generated for heating purposes so it all just goes into the national 'energy pot' - in which case, a period property roof seems as good as any other roof when it comes to mounting solar pv panels.

Perhaps the restriction is intended to prevent people spending their FIT income on fossils fuels for their cold houses? But does it really matter what they spend it on - it'll still result in increased energy consumption somewhere.

 

[skier-hughes]

As soon as the bits arrive back in to the country, our pv panels will automatically switch on the emersion heater in the buffer tank to top up the hot water for the heating system, ensuring we use all of our generated electricity in house

 

[Penners]

the emersion heater

Ooooh - you don't want one of those! It'll be a hell of a waste of money. The idea is that it heats the water by remaining immersed.

 

[biffvernon]

Biff, you seem to be arguing from a well-imformed position, and you imply a comprehensive scientific understanding of the issues involved. I'm sure the forum might be more ready to accept your account if you laid out your credentials, explained your competence in the field, and indicated which trusted organisations you work (or have worked) for. I like an expert opinion as much as the next chap, but I also like to know a bit about the expert.

It's almost a fair point. I'm not a climate scientist, though I have a geology degree and spent a long time in science teaching before changing to woodwork and buildings conservation. All my knowledge about climate science is second hand, which is why I have frequently referred readers of my posts to original sources. Far and away the best internet portal to the subject is http://www.realclimate.org/ from which you can find pretty much all climate related news and original research. I have a son who is a real climate scientist, currently researching the rate at which the Greenland Ice Sheet is melting. We talk a lot.