2014 was hotter than 1998. 2015 data in yet?

No.Because I am also asleep.I don't have to be awake while the machine's washing - but I do have to be awake to put the clothes in it, and then move them to the drier/hang them.And all this has to be completed well before I go to work, since I don't so much care to wear wet underwear.But really: the fact that you're railing on me because I don't wake up at 2:00 am to do my laundry really shows how pathetic your position is. And when everyone else does it, then what?

Sure he has. Not really. Again, not really.If you want to talk about something other than 100% replacement, go for it.But LNA started this thread to harp about global warming and then started pissing on about the miracle of solar power. I'm just going with the flow.Let's talk about partial replacement. We can start with you getting some figures showing where it's decreased GHG.

But that's what you want them to do. When they run at max capacity, they run the most efficiently (unless by 'max' you mean at the point where they're about to blow).Look at your car. Idling is the least efficient thing you can do with your engine - it runs and burns gas yet propels you nowhere. Going very slow is only a step above idling and your car is still burning up more fuel just in keeping the engine running than what actually goes toward moving you forward. As you increase speed, though, you increase the ratio of fuel being used to move the car to fuel being used just to keep the pulleys spinning - you get more efficiency. Peaks and valleys are never 'benefits'. Yes. They are predictable and steady. The power ramps up and ramps down smoothly. Unlike renewables which generate one second and go dead the next. I agree. But the storage technology isn't there; not at a cost that makes it feasible for the majority of people anyway. Yes. Remember? I pointed out how ridiculously expensive it is and how little power storage you get with it: Message 279.

Okay, so you do understand the concept I'm trying to get across. Thank you.

That's it? I've always agreed that running on pure renewables would be the ideal as far as reducing electricity-related GHG emissions.And I've always agreed that the big hurdle to overcome is the storage.I personally do not see chemical batteries as being the answer to the storage problem. I'd be interested in Dogmafood going further into depth on his concrete-lifting battery idea.

Armchair proclamations are often best left unexamined.The storage capacity of a 1000 tonnes is not dense enough at reasonable heights to be very useful. You might store enough for 3 or 4 homes and it would take up 400 m3. On the other hand it would probably last a long time. The Ludington Pumped Storage power plant stores enough power for 1.65 million homes by using off peak power from a nuclear plant. It covers about 3 sq miles.

quote:

---

This process was designed to level the load of nearby nuclear power plants on the grid. It also replaces the need to build natural gas peak power plants used only during high demand.

---

Edit Flywheels would probably be a better idea.Edited by ProtoTypical, : No reason given.

2015 data is in and so is January 2016 data.
2015 was the hottest year on record and 2016 is starting out even worse. Bad AstronomyDr. Plait does link to a refutation of a deniers argument in this article. I suggest any deniers at least take a look at it before you post some denial hog wash. Here I will make it easy for you. Denier claimsEdited by Theodoric, : No reason given.

If it's true we can effect drastic changes in the climate system, then I suppose a few questions need to be answered:

• What do we want the climate system to look like? What is optimal for our survival and how do we make that happen?
• If we have to change the climate as part of improving our lives, what level of change is acceptable in return for what level of improvement?

I don't honestly believe any discussion about what we should/can do about anthropogenic climate change can really begin until these questions are answered.This thread's probably not the place for that discussion... so I started a new one: The Optimal Climate & Optimal Human Development

You wish. Your claims get more and more ridiculous and blind to reality. My personal use is far from subsistence -- it is doing so well that I am looking at expanding my use of electricity so I can cut down on other energy.The systems being installed in India and Kenya are lifting people OUT of subsistence living.Nor do I envisage removal of the grid wiring, but converting it to a web network with billions of generation locations distribute in a way that the energy is shared as needed.I produced more energy than I used in December, when days were short and sunshine limited. That surplus is out there on the web for others to use. So I expect to be producing more than I need for some time.For little cost ($3,000.00-$5,000) you can buy off the shelf power backup that would allow you to power your peak-load time usage and replenish during low load times. This market is just beginning ... because solar power panels are creating a demand for it. The price will come down as the technology is developed -- and there is a LOT of activity in developing energy storage systems.Solar and wind and tidal energy generation are developing more and more, and efficiencies are increasing while costs are dropping.Remaining glued to fossil fuels is unrealistic.One of the last "frontiers" is powering vehicles with renewable systems, and there are several approaches that are undergoing further development.For example compressed air car technology is being developed into a practical system. This would be amazing for public transportation -- where the vehicles recharge at stations (and use air compression for brakes) -- no high voltage subway rails or trolley\trolly-bus overhead wires.Of course you need compressors, but they can be powered by any energy. This is a common element of all new powering systems -- hydrogen, fuel cells, etc -- but I think compressed air is (a) the easiest for infrastructure (most garages have compressors ...) (b) the safest as there is nothing there to cause fires in a crash. One of my new projects is to work with my town so that it can go fossil fuel free by 2020 (the "2020 vision project") by installing solar panels on town properties ... with co-op funding: people "buy" panels to be installed, the town gets the electricity and the panel "owners" get credit against their property taxes. This is working with the existing way solar power is structured with the utility company. Co-op members could buy and sell shares (panels). The town gets cheaper electricity without having to fund the panels, the members get cheaper taxes -- both because they get a rebate but because town costs are lowered - win-win.There is no reason that you couldn't have a company provide solar power and you could sign up to use their power -- you can already choose different utility companies to provide your electricity over the existing grid system.Now I live -- intentionally -- in a small town in RI, and it is very very feasible to provide all the electricity that the town needs by this system.I don't need to focus on your unrealistic extreme scenario cases (NY city may take a while but that doesn't mean the small town can't get started on it).There is also more interest each year.Enjoy

The furnace is only needed for part of the year. Without it hot water becomes 18/58=31% of usage. I have heard other sources say it is 40% of energy use.I use hot water radiant floor heat, and water heaters are hot enough, so this summer I will be installing a large electric water heater for hot water and heat. It will be powered by the excess power I have been generating. This will double my savings from my panels.In addition I will be adding solar hot water to "precondition" the water entering the water heater, reducing the energy demand. And I can take my house system and place it anywhere in rural America and not be reduced to a "Kenyan economy ... constrained by the availability of reliable energy." There is absolutely no reason everyone else cannot do this -- even if you have to "rent" panels half-way across the continent and access it through the energy web.Every existing generation plant can be replaced with solar power and you would not even notice it.It is your misconception that is your problem.EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : lost some of that

Put your dishwasher and clothes washer on timers. And the best place to store energy is as local as possible -- thus the Tesla Wall for homes and small businesses. This technology is just beginning to be practical, and it is one of the growing endeavors: competition will lower costs, technology improvements will improve efficiency. Which is a cultural thing, and this can change. Personally I think Americans wash too much (and are unhealthy as a result).Enjoy

And 2015 was higher than previous records for each month of the year.But that is only part of the story: Scientists are floored by what’s happening in the Arctic right now

quote:

---

​

New data from NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration suggest that January of 2016 was, for the globe, a truly extraordinary month. Coming off the hottest year ever recorded (2015), January saw the greatest departure from average of any month on record, according to data provided by NASA.

​

But as you can see in the NASA figure above, the record breaking heat wasn’t uniformly distributed it was particularly pronounced at the top of the world, showing temperature anomalies above 4 degrees Celsius (7.2 degrees Fahrenheit) higher than the 1951 to 1980 average in this region.

​

Indeed, NASA provides a zonal mean version of the temperature map above, which shows how the temperature departures from average change based on one’s latitude location on the Earth. As you can see, things get especially warm, relative to what the Earth is used to, as you enter the very high latitudes:

​

​

Global warming has long been known to be particularly intense in the Arctic a phenomenon known as Arctic amplification but even so, lately the phenomenon has been extremely pronounced.

​

This unusual Arctic heat has been accompanied by a new record low level for Arctic sea ice extent during the normally ice-packed month of January, according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center over 400,000 square miles below average for the month. And of course, that is closely tied to warm Arctic air temperatures.

​

​

More ...

---

If there is a tipping point to sudden extreme change we could be approaching that.

I really don't understand this.The dishwasher, sure.But clothes washer? What happens to the clothes when they're done washing? And suddenly you're a laissez-faire capitalist.

Prove. It.Edited by Jon, : No reason given.

The technology exists. Now. Off the shelf.All it takes is implementation, not any new science or engineering of systems.Also see Here's how to get solar power if you don't own a roof - VoxCommunity based systems sharing installation costs.Enjoy