Warming Predictions

[davesl708]

So, is it possible that there was even a stronger El Nino in the 30's than now???

I suspect there were more than one stronger El Nino before we started keeping record. Probably an El Nino that ended the last ice age. :shocked:

 

[MinnesotaEric]

I suspect there were more than one stronger El Nino before we started keeping record. Probably an El Nino that ended the last ice age. :shocked:

FWIW, the latest thinking is that El Ninos seem to be generated by underwater volcano-driven geological heat flow rather than from anthropomorphic causes. Plate Climatology Theory is explained in a PDF I'm linking to.

http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/images/PDFs/Plate_Climatology_Jan_7_2015.pdf

 

[KennyG]

From a recent article in the Wall Street Journal, I don't think we are going to be seeing any increase in power plants any time soon. The gist of the article was that the Sierra Club (and some other environmental org) thinks they have banned coal plants completely with the Clean Power regulations. Basically they are mandating controls so expensive that all coal plants will have to close over time. The prediction was that there will be power shortages as the plants go off-line.

We can put up natural gas plants in about 2 years so any potential power shortage will be quickly addressed. I'm not much of a conspiracy fan but the "unintended consequences" of our push for renewable energy has primarily been a huge increase in natural gas use and windfall (pun intended) profits for wind farm developers. Reduction in CO2? Not so much.

The US has built a huge amount of wind generation but because of the poor capacity factor and the loss of hydro capacity, the % of US electricity from renewable sources is essentially the same as it was 20 years ago (US Energy Information Administration, if you are interested). Because of the nature of subsidized wind power, it hits high capital cost, low fuel cost sources hardest. This is nuclear and elimination of that low CO2 source is considered a good thing by environmentalists. Next, the EPA rules go after coal to essentially outlaw them based on CO2 while keeping the ban limited enough to allow natural gas plants.

In the magic unicorn future, renewables and massive, yet to be invented, batteries supply essentially all our electricity. In a more practical future, subsidized renewables struggle to get up to 20% or 30% of supply before their intermittent performance destabilizes the grid, nuclear hangs on to keep contributing 10% or so, and we end up getting 60 to 70% of our electricity from gas. When gas supplies tighten back up, electricity prices double and gas producers only have to worry about being nationalized by President "Hugo" Sanders.

Like my story?

 

[oldpilgrim]

FWIW, the latest thinking is that El Ninos seem to be generated by underwater volcano-driven geological heat flow rather than from anthropomorphic causes. Plate Climatology Theory is explained in a PDF I'm linking to.

http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/images/PDFs/Plate_Climatology_Jan_7_2015.pdf

yup, I've thought for quite a while that any ocean warming has been due to underwater volcanoes. There are massive underwater eruptions going on all around the earth with the faults spewing massive amounts of heat and lava. These are by no means constant and could easily account for the heating and subsequent cooling cycles of the oceans.

 

[95XL883]

We can put up natural gas plants in about 2 years so any potential power shortage will be quickly addressed. I'm not much of a conspiracy fan but the "unintended consequences" of our push for renewable energy has primarily been a huge increase in natural gas use and windfall (pun intended) profits for wind farm developers. Reduction in CO2? Not so much.

The US has built a huge amount of wind generation but because of the poor capacity factor and the loss of hydro capacity, the % of US electricity from renewable sources is essentially the same as it was 20 years ago (US Energy Information Administration, if you are interested). Because of the nature of subsidized wind power, it hits high capital cost, low fuel cost sources hardest. This is nuclear and elimination of that low CO2 source is considered a good thing by environmentalists. Next, the EPA rules go after coal to essentially outlaw them based on CO2 while keeping the ban limited enough to allow natural gas plants.

In the magic unicorn future, renewables and massive, yet to be invented, batteries supply essentially all our electricity. In a more practical future, subsidized renewables struggle to get up to 20% or 30% of supply before their intermittent performance destabilizes the grid, nuclear hangs on to keep contributing 10% or so, and we end up getting 60 to 70% of our electricity from gas. When gas supplies tighten back up, electricity prices double and gas producers only have to worry about being nationalized by President "Hugo" Sanders.

Like my story?

I guess you make me feel a little better that gas plants can be constructed so quickly. I hope you are right but I am afraid the "environmentalists" will target gas just as soon as they really obliterate coal. Now President "Hugo" Sanders is a really scary concept. Of course, if he does become president, well there will be all sorts of problems everywhere. Either way I guess I should still consider adding a small solar array so we can have some power, some time on some days.

You know it just occurred to me that if we do get to the magic unicorn/uniform future with a President "Hugo" Sanders, he should just give me some of those magic pixie dust batteries because by golly I am entitled. (ROTFLMAO!)

 

[houstonscott]

From a recent article in the Wall Street Journal, I don't think we are going to be seeing any increase in power plants any time soon. The gist of the article was that the Sierra Club (and some other environmental org) thinks they have banned coal plants completely with the Clean Power regulations. Basically they are mandating controls so expensive that all coal plants will have to close over time. The prediction was that there will be power shortages as the plants go off-line. For right now we might be okay as the Supreme Court has put a stay on the rules but if they are eventually allowed to go into effect, it sounds like there won't be enough electricity generated for our current usage let alone increased usage. I'm not trying to offend anybody but the realistic view appears to be that the "environmentalists" are setting us up for a drastic change in lifestyles. In fact, that is the reason I am seriously considering some solar generation at home but I have a serious problem in that my house is orientated wrong for solar.

Suppose the next President said he had no intention of enforcing environmental regulations or laws that apply to power production. Suppose the next president said those laws and regulations governing power plant construction were deferred until 2021. We have eight years of precedence now...HS

 

[95XL883]

Suppose the next President said he had no intention of enforcing environmental regulations or laws that apply to power production. Suppose the next president said those laws and regulations governing power plant construction were deferred until 2021. We have eight years of precedence now...HS

I'm sorry. I don't understand your point. My understanding of the Clean Power regs is the WH is hoping to force compliance before the legality of the regs can be settled. Their goal is to force compliance even if the regs are eventually ruled illegal. Basically the cost of going back to pre-Clean Power regs would be so great that it wouldn't happen. Thus, a future president/Congress/EPA couldn't effectively or easily undo the effect. And all this gamesmanship just because some want to use a claimed man-made, supposedly catastrophic supposed global warming to force their idea of utopia on others without regard to the reality of their claims, the cost to comply, the upset to people's lives and the economy or whether or not any of it will make any difference anyway.

 

[turnkey4099]

I do not know what the remedial action would be but it may be similar to what happens to a conventional vehicle which has stopped running while being driven on the road.

As an aside do regular vehicles ever run out of fuel while on the road??

I did once and came very close once out in the boonies of Montana once.

 

[turnkey4099]

We can put up natural gas plants in about 2 years so any potential power shortage will be quickly addressed. I'm not much of a conspiracy fan but the "unintended consequences" of our push for renewable energy has primarily been a huge increase in natural gas use and windfall (pun intended) profits for wind farm developers. Reduction in CO2? Not so much.

The US has built a huge amount of wind generation but because of the poor capacity factor and the loss of hydro capacity, the % of US electricity from renewable sources is essentially the same as it was 20 years ago (US Energy Information Administration, if you are interested). Because of the nature of subsidized wind power, it hits high capital cost, low fuel cost sources hardest. This is nuclear and elimination of that low CO2 source is considered a good thing by environmentalists. Next, the EPA rules go after coal to essentially outlaw them based on CO2 while keeping the ban limited enough to allow natural gas plants.

In the magic unicorn future, renewables and massive, yet to be invented, batteries supply essentially all our electricity. In a more practical future, subsidized renewables struggle to get up to 20% or 30% of supply before their intermittent performance destabilizes the grid, nuclear hangs on to keep contributing 10% or so, and we end up getting 60 to 70% of our electricity from gas. When gas supplies tighten back up, electricity prices double and gas producers only have to worry about being nationalized by President "Hugo" Sanders.

Like my story?

In about 2 years they would have barelyi begun clearing all the permitting paperwork. The antis can throw up so much interference that a project is almost impossible to get off the ground.

 

[davesl708]

In about 2 years they would have barelyi begun clearing all the permitting paperwork. The antis can throw up so much interference that a project is almost impossible to get off the ground.

True. You have to prove you won't bother a cockroach during the construction.