Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
0 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   2014 was hotter than 1998. 2015 data in yet?
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 857 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 13 of 357 (775694)
01-04-2016 8:08 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by RAZD
01-03-2016 2:45 PM


Re: Here is some of Al Gore's interview pasted
Consumers are also worried about the ability of the utility companies to expand production, or even to maintain production, as electrical use increases and population increases, and having an alternate source for backup and to reduce peak demand makes sense.
Also utilities themselves are concerned about meeting increasing demand. Here in Michigan, a number of coal fired power plants (9 locations, I believe) are slated for decommissioning in the next 10 years, some of them do not have a really good alternative solution yet (such as one that serves the entire western upper peninsula). Utilities are scrambling to find ways to reduce demand and provide alternate sources of energy generation. Michigan is not a good candidate for extensive solar power (although there is some) but we do have potential for wind generators.
Anyway, our major electricity provider has a number of incentive programs right now aimed at reducing demand. We had them come in to our church and do an energy audit and they gave us, free of charge, 80+ LED bulbs to replace our old incandescent bulbs in our sanctuary - about $400 worth of bulbs. They also have incentives for replacing most of our other less efficient lighting sources which we will probably do next year since it will require some cash outlay on our part.
So the economics of it is that rather than investing $500 million to build a new generating plant they are investing that capital in reducing demand. In fact, I would think it is significantly cheaper to reduce demand by 1kW than it is to generate 1kW. Of course that only goes so far and they are investing significant amounts of money in new electricity generators - primarily wind and natural gas (I don't think they have plans to replace any coal fired plant with another coal fired plant - it is too costly).
Companies are already shifting away from coal because of cost. Companies are also investing in solar and wind farms to reduce production costs.
A big part of the cost associated with coal is transportation. For plants that are close to the source, I think it is still an economic choice - Wyoming and West Virginia for example. But in most places, natural gas is much less costly to produce and deliver. The other big cost is the technology needed to clean the smoke from coal. However, since many plants are implementing those scrubbing systems, there must still be economic incentive to do so.
However, I am not sure that the economics would favor alternative energy sources were it not for the pressure put on utilities to reduce emissions from coal fired plants, which is an example of how government does need to step in and set standards, not just wait for the market forces to drive corporate decisions.
HBD

Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by RAZD, posted 01-03-2016 2:45 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by RAZD, posted 01-04-2016 10:19 AM herebedragons has replied
 Message 16 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-04-2016 8:18 PM herebedragons has not replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 857 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


(2)
Message 15 of 357 (775734)
01-04-2016 2:32 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by RAZD
01-04-2016 10:19 AM


Re: Here is some of Al Gore's interview pasted
Rhode Island is pretty flat ... What do we do with these when the plant shuts down?
Mountain views... even better with an amusement park inside!!!
But seriously, getting rid of the remnants of our 20th century industrial roots is going to be a huge problem going forward. Here in Michigan, the 1000s of automotive suppliers that are no longer in business have left huge quantities of empty buildings and contaminated land behind. And then to make room for more development, we are clearing new land because it is too expensive and risky to reclaim old industrial lands. To me, its as big a problem as reducing future pollutions.
HBD

Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by RAZD, posted 01-04-2016 10:19 AM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024