Is Carbon Dioxide Just a Normal Part of the Atmosphere?

[Tuur]

Chevy: “Electric cars are great but where exactly does that electricity come from?”

I know a man who has solar panels on his roof. He has an electric car and charges the car from the electricity produced by his own solar panels. Just today I drove by another house with a car in the driveway obviously plugged in, recharging. They may be doing the same thing.

Most aren't. Let's look at charging a Telsa at Level 2. That's 240v and 48 amps. Watts = volts x amps = 48 x 240 = 11,520 Watts. One dimension I found for a 500W panel is 88.8 x 44.6 inches (2.25 m x 1.13m). Three 500w panels are going to be 88.8" tall by 133.8" long (2.25m x 3.39m). If the output is 120v and not 240v (and frankly, I don't know what the standard output for a panel in the US is), you'll have to double the size. Now we're talking 88.8" tall by 267.6" (2.25m x 6.80 m). With full sun we're looking at an 8 - 9 hour charge time.

Honestly, that's not too large. For us Americans, that's looking at nearly 7.5' x 22.5' or 15' x 11.25' depending on how you arrange them. When I started figuring, thought it would be much larger.

The problem, though, is you can only charge during the day. Charging at night is out. Even in the day, you need 8 - 9 hours of sunlight.

 

[eclipsenow]

That's fine. Mostly the electricity comes from coal fired power plants. It ain't environmentally free.

But it's a lot better. A good mix of wind and solar across the nation, in a national grid, will end up cheaper than the purchase price of coal - let alone counting for the health costs of coal - let alone climate change!

 

[chevyontheriver]

Most aren't. Let's look at charging a Telsa at Level 2. That's 240v and 48 amps. Watts = volts x amps = 48 x 240 = 11,520 Watts. One dimension I found for a 500W panel is 88.8 x 44.6 inches (2.25 m x 1.13m). Three 500w panels are going to be 88.8" tall by 133.8" long (2.25m x 3.39m). If the output is 120v and not 240v (and frankly, I don't know what the standard output for a panel in the US is), you'll have to double the size. Now we're talking 88.8" tall by 267.6" (2.25m x 6.80 m). With full sun we're looking at an 8 - 9 hour charge time.

Honestly, that's not too large. For us Americans, that's looking at nearly 7.5' x 22.5' or 15' x 11.25' depending on how you arrange them. When I started figuring, thought it would be much larger.

The problem, though, is you can only charge during the day. Charging at night is out. Even in the day, you need 8 - 9 hours of sunlight.

Which means solar panels for Tesla recharging only works if you only drive a few miles or work nights. Great idea but practically still using coal to charge most Teslas. For the most part cheaper than gasoline if you charge from home but you still end up with a smokestack in your life.

 

[chevyontheriver]

But it's a lot better. A good mix of wind and solar across the nation, in a national grid, will end up cheaper than the purchase price of coal - let alone counting for the health costs of coal - let alone climate change!

You are presuming future wind and solar production and not considering present coal burning. And also not considering the environmental and energy cost of Lithium mining. True cost has to consider the whole life cycle. The place where lifecycle is cheapest using Lithium is in the production of hybrids which have relatively tiny Lithium batteries that are leveraged mightily to increase (more or less double) MPG.

 

[prodromos]

Why are the wealthy elites still buying beach front properties if they truly believe sea levels are going to rise significantly?

 

[eclipsenow]

You are presuming future wind and solar production and not considering present coal burning. And also not considering the environmental and energy cost of Lithium mining. True cost has to consider the whole life cycle. The place where lifecycle is cheapest using Lithium is in the production of hybrids which have relatively tiny Lithium batteries that are leveraged mightily to increase (more or less double) MPG.

That's just temporary chicken and egg stuff. We can't wait around for a perfectly clean grid before also trying to Electrify Everything. Hybrids are too heavy and inefficient with their fuel, and maintain an interest in the oil industry. Better to go 100% EV, both to lower the national health bill and increase energy security and reduce how bad climate change is going to be.

What people don't get is the sheer speed of the Energy Transition.

EV’s are rising so fast the IEA predicts oil demand will peak 2029.

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/oil-demand-set-peak-by-2029-major-supply-glut-looms-iea-says-2024-06-12/

In a world still STARVING for new energy (let alone replacing old fossil fuel energy) - where only 17% of us live in ‘developed’ or ‘first world nations’ - I’m amazed that only 50 GW of new coal was built last year.

7 TIMES that was build in new solar! That’s 350 GW! A couple times the coal figure was built in wind. AND Solar used to double every 4 years - now it is every 3! “If this growth rate continues, there will be more solar installed in 2031 than all other electricity generation technologies put together.”

The fastest energy change in history still underway

Professor Andrew Blakers and Professor Ricardo Rüther (UFSC) have published an article in PV Magazine, detailing: 80% of new generation in 2023 was wind and solar, with solar installations reaching more than 350 GW Cumulative global solar installed capacity passed 1.4 TW, and cumulative...

re100.eng.anu.edu.au

It could be 2 to 3 times FASTER than the IPCC’s Paris goals by 2030! All I want for Christmas is one terawatt of solar deployed annually

RENEWABLES ARE ONLY HALF THE ENERGY TRANSITION STORY!

As we Electrify Everything - we’ll end up using less than half the energy we do today. How? Because burning stuff like cavemen wastes 60% of the energy as it wafts away as waste heat and noise and light.
DW (Deutsche Welle news) explains all this in 10 minutes - a good intro.

Then there’s Data Scientist Hannah Ritchie:- we’ll do 95% of the stuff we do today on 40% of the energy. Electrification is efficiency: The world will need less energy after the energy transition
(I’m still not convinced we’ll have cheap flights - but electric mining, industrial heat, transport etc are all possible - and now becoming easier and easier.)

The bottom line? If anyone tells you “We use blah blah Exa-jouls of fossil fuels a year” remind them gently that we only need 40% of that as we Electrify Everything.

 

[Tuur]

Most aren't. Let's look at charging a Telsa at Level 2. That's 240v and 48 amps. Watts = volts x amps = 48 x 240 = 11,520 Watts. One dimension I found for a 500W panel is 88.8 x 44.6 inches (2.25 m x 1.13m). Three 500w panels are going to be 88.8" tall by 133.8" long (2.25m x 3.39m). If the output is 120v and not 240v (and frankly, I don't know what the standard output for a panel in the US is), you'll have to double the size. Now we're talking 88.8" tall by 267.6" (2.25m x 6.80 m). With full sun we're looking at an 8 - 9 hour charge time.

Honestly, that's not too large. For us Americans, that's looking at nearly 7.5' x 22.5' or 15' x 11.25' depending on how you arrange them. When I started figuring, thought it would be much larger.

The problem, though, is you can only charge during the day. Charging at night is out. Even in the day, you need 8 - 9 hours of sunlight.

There is an error here that's on the order of a magnitude. A 500W panel is 0.5 KW, not 5 KW. Three 500W panels are 1.5 KW, not 15 KW. It would take 30 panels, not three, to recharge a Telsa in 8 - 9 hours. Three rows with ten panels per row. That's 22.2' x 37.2' (6.77m x 11.33m). That's some serious roof area.

My error didn't hit me until I picked up my calculator this morning. Maybe I should go ahead and retire.

 

[Tuur]

Which means solar panels for Tesla recharging only works if you only drive a few miles or work nights. Great idea but practically still using coal to charge most Teslas. For the most part cheaper than gasoline if you charge from home but you still end up with a smokestack in your life.

There's a mem of railroad cars loaded with coal and the caption "Oh look: Electric car fuel."

 

[chevyontheriver]

There's a mem of railroad cars loaded with coal and the caption "Oh look: Electric car fuel."

Granted that a modern coal fired power plant is fairly clean these days. The worst environmental part of an electric car is the spoilation caused by the mining of the components that go into the batteries. Which is why the hybrid approach is FAR better at the moment because it gets the most effect in reducing gasoline consumption if you are going to mess up the earth with that much Lithium.

 

[chevyontheriver]

That's just temporary chicken and egg stuff. We can't wait around for a perfectly clean grid before also trying to Electrify Everything. Hybrids are too heavy and inefficient with their fuel, and maintain an interest in the oil industry. Better to go 100% EV, both to lower the national health bill and increase energy security and reduce how bad climate change is going to be.

You aren't paying attention to the soft energy path. Massive subsidies are indicators here. The government should be tweaking at the margins. Only tweaking at the margins.

And energy security is an odd thing when EV owners have to be asked from time to time NOT to charge their cars because electrical production is topped out from so many EVs.

I can get 60 MPG in a hybrid as compared to a similar sized conventional engine car getting half of that. THAT is substantial change. If you can build 20 hybrids out of the same Lithium as goes into one Tesla you have saved a lot more gasoline than that one Tesla ever could.

What people don't get is the sheer speed of the Energy Transition.

Much of that is heavily subsidized. Which is another way of saying 'inefficient'.

EV’s are rising so fast the IEA predicts oil demand will peak 2029.

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/oil-demand-set-peak-by-2029-major-supply-glut-looms-iea-says-2024-06-12/

But then you had 50 GW of new coal plants.

In a world still STARVING for new energy (let alone replacing old fossil fuel energy) - where only 17% of us live in ‘developed’ or ‘first world nations’ - I’m amazed that only 50 GW of new coal was built last year.

7 TIMES that was build in new solar! That’s 350 GW! A couple times the coal figure was built in wind. AND Solar used to double every 4 years - now it is every 3! “If this growth rate continues, there will be more solar installed in 2031 than all other electricity generation technologies put together.”

The fastest energy change in history still underway

Professor Andrew Blakers and Professor Ricardo Rüther (UFSC) have published an article in PV Magazine, detailing: 80% of new generation in 2023 was wind and solar, with solar installations reaching more than 350 GW Cumulative global solar installed capacity passed 1.4 TW, and cumulative...

re100.eng.anu.edu.au

This is all fine as long as true economics are considered. Will these things pay for themselves WITHOUT subsidies? If so then fine. If they need subsidies to get them to 'pay for themselves' then they really are moving us collectively BACKWARDS.

The bottom line? If anyone tells you “We use blah blah Exa-jouls of fossil fuels a year” remind them gently that we only need 40% of that as we Electrify Everything.

Most of the solution to the energy future problem is in efficiency. That is end user lighting and heating and cooling and insulation and transportation. And pursuing efficiency is a relentless thing. This or that change makes economic sense AND energy sense. Subsidies mess with the economic calculus, and thereby mess with true efficiency. Most of us should still be insulating our attics and replacing old light bulbs now that LEDs are dirt cheap. Not going out to buy new Teslas. A Tesla is a fine car, but the Lithium environmental cost is extreme. Go figure out a better battery for it first. For now it is a false economy to see that as some sort of cure for all that ails us. You're still burning a lot of coal and the mining of Lithium and rare earth elements for these cars is not at all a trivial environmental problem.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Why are the wealthy elites still buying beach front properties if they truly believe sea levels are going to rise significantly?

Because THEY will get massive relief packages from the government buying back their overpriced land if it ever does go under.

 

[Dale]

I beg to disagree. The CO2 level is not 4%. It is 0.04% & at times has been higher. This is not the problem, albeit I like my open space & don't understand why municipal leaders have to constantly build. The density of buildings sutured together creates lots of entropy & absorb a lot of sunlight. They also block IR from getting out. There are only a handful of mitigation practices that take some of the misery off of cities, but it's not going to change the overall weather there.

Jacorian: “The CO2 level is not 4%. It is 0.04%”

You misunderstood my post. I did not say that we are at 4% CO2. What I said is that in an enclosed room, when the CO2 concentration reaches 4% it is fatal to humans. That is why OSHA has an exposure limit of 0.5%. I was hoping to lay to rest the notion that CO2 is just a harmless part of the atmosphere and can be ignored. I am well aware that the current CO2 level is about 420 PPM, which is far above levels in recent history.

 

[Dale]

I beg to disagree. The CO2 level is not 4%. It is 0.04% & at times has been higher. This is not the problem, albeit I like my open space & don't understand why municipal leaders have to constantly build. The density of buildings sutured together creates lots of entropy & absorb a lot of sunlight. They also block IR from getting out. There are only a handful of mitigation practices that take some of the misery off of cities, but it's not going to change the overall weather there.

What can we learn from the geologic past? Climate scientists tell us that the “warmest” or hottest time of the past 66 million years was the Early Eocene. In that period, volcanoes belched out CO2, the CO2 level reached 1000 PPM, and temperatures averaged 25 degrees Fahrenheit above what we see in the present day.

“The Early Eocene was a time of elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations and surface temperatures at least 14 degrees Celsius (25 degrees Fahrenheit) warmer, on average, than today.”

“Geological evidence suggests that atmospheric carbon dioxide levels reached 1,000 parts per million in the Early Eocene, more than twice the present-day level of 412 ppm. If nothing is done to limit carbon emissions from the burning of fossil fuels, CO2 levels could once again reach 1,000 ppm by the year 2100, according to climate scientists.”

Link
https://news.umich.edu/study-of-ancient-climate-suggests-future-warming-could-accelerate-as-carbon-dioxide-levels-rise/

 

[eclipsenow]

There is an error here that's on the order of a magnitude. A 500W panel is 0.5 KW, not 5 KW. Three 500W panels are 1.5 KW, not 15 KW. It would take 30 panels, not three, to recharge a Telsa in 8 - 9 hours. Three rows with ten panels per row. That's 22.2' x 37.2' (6.77m x 11.33m). That's some serious roof area.

My error didn't hit me until I picked up my calculator this morning. Maybe I should go ahead and retire.

It's a great big complicated world - and so this stuff happens! I respect someone willing to take another look at their working and do a public "Ooops!" (I have a social sciences background and yet am fascinated by this stuff - but mainly rely on other experts to do the technical stuff. If I do it - the next day I'm usually in the "Ooops" position myself! My interest is more in how it all fits together.)

The main advice in Australia? When buying solar - go BIG! Future proof. Buy as much as you can possibly fit on your roof. You may as well - it's cheap enough! Most homes in Australia have enough roof space to run their homes and charge at least 1 EV.

How much solar energy do I need to charge my EV?

Understanding how to use a solar system to charge your EV doesn’t need to be complicated. Here’s how to maximise energy efficiency when charging your EV.

www.racv.com.au

 

[eclipsenow]

What can we learn from the geologic past? Climate scientists tell us that the “warmest” or hottest time of the past 66 million years was the Early Eocene. In that period, volcanoes belched out CO2, the CO2 level reached 1000 PPM, and temperatures averaged 25 degrees Fahrenheit above what we see in the present day.

“The Early Eocene was a time of elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations and surface temperatures at least 14 degrees Celsius (25 degrees Fahrenheit) warmer, on average, than today.”

“Geological evidence suggests that atmospheric carbon dioxide levels reached 1,000 parts per million in the Early Eocene, more than twice the present-day level of 412 ppm. If nothing is done to limit carbon emissions from the burning of fossil fuels, CO2 levels could once again reach 1,000 ppm by the year 2100, according to climate scientists.”

Link
https://news.umich.edu/study-of-ancient-climate-suggests-future-warming-could-accelerate-as-carbon-dioxide-levels-rise/

14 degrees!

Aliens Game Over Man GIF – Aliens Game Over Man Burning – discover and share GIFs

Click to view the GIF

tenor.com

I wonder where this sits in the "hot models" controversy?
I take climate change very seriously - but we've got to be aware of "Climate Doomers".
I don't have time to compare the papers now - but wasn't there some controversy over some warming periods in the post-dinosaur era?

There’s a sinister and unexpected twist in the battle for a stable climate.

Climatologist Simon Clark explains that Big Oil are now sponsoring Climate Doomers - because just like climate Denial - it kills activism. Why would you bother doing the hard work of fighting to change anything if you believed there was already no point - one may as well just sit back with a beer and laugh cynically at everything.

Some climate Doomers cite the "hot models" - but Zeke explains why this is wrong. Revisiting the hot model problem


Michael Mann explains those who exaggerate climate sensitivity - and even had to debunk his highly respected colleague - indeed the grandfather of modern climate science - Dr James Hansen!
Hansen sadly fell in with a study from the "hot models" crowd. https://michaelmann.net/content/comments-new-article-james-hansen

 

[FireDragon76]

In two decades, the Hajj won't even be possible, heat waves in Mecca will be too frequent. There's going to be serious consquences if that happens. Ironically, the kingdom in which the Hajj takes places has been instrumental in facilitating the denial of Climate Change.

 

[eclipsenow]

I’ve lived through some nasty heatwaves in Sydney that are 47 degrees C. They probably killed an excessive number of elderly or unwell people without access to air that did not have air-conditioning. elderly and frail people without air conditioning than usual.

But there are super-heatwaves coming that are vastly more deadly - and at LOWER temperatures. Heatwaves that will kill *everyone* stuck outside. The difference? At only about 35 degrees C and 100% humidity, perspiration stops cooling the human body. We start to cook.

Too Hot to Handle: How Climate Change May Make Some Places Too Hot to Live - NASA Science

As Earth’s climate warms, incidences of extreme heat and humidity are rising, with significant consequences for human health. Climate scientists are tracking

climate.nasa.gov

Here’s PBS on it - 10 minutes. (May 2023).

There are 3 reasons electricity grids have blackouts when overheated:-
* thermal power plants like coal and nuclear PRODUCE less power. (Even solar panels are less efficient when hot.)
* power-lines CARRY less power.
* all right when we’re DEMANDING more power than ever before!

An El Niño looms over Australia’s stressed electricity system – and we must plan for the worst

The likely El Niño is bad timing for the electricity sector, and means Australians may face supply disruptions and volatile prices.

theconversation.com

Futurist Kim Stanley Robinson is famous for writing the Red Green Blue Mars trilogy. He wrote a climate scenario called “Ministry for the Future” - and the opening chapter is one of these “Wet Bulb” heatwaves settling over some very populated regions of India. It’s just plain awful. You can read the first chapter for free here.

Orbit – Welcome

Welcome Orbit publishes in the US and the UK. Orbit US Orbit UK

www.orbitbooks.net

 

[FireDragon76]

I’ve lived through some nasty heatwaves in Sydney that are 47 degrees C. They probably killed an excessive number of elderly or unwell people without access to air that did not have air-conditioning. elderly and frail people without air conditioning than usual.

But there are super-heatwaves coming that are vastly more deadly - and at LOWER temperatures. Heatwaves that will kill *everyone* stuck outside. The difference? At only about 35 degrees C and 100% humidity, perspiration stops cooling the human body. We start to cook.

Too Hot to Handle: How Climate Change May Make Some Places Too Hot to Live - NASA Science

As Earth’s climate warms, incidences of extreme heat and humidity are rising, with significant consequences for human health. Climate scientists are tracking

climate.nasa.gov

Here’s PBS on it - 10 minutes. (May 2023).

There are 3 reasons electricity grids have blackouts when overheated:-
* thermal power plants like coal and nuclear PRODUCE less power. (Even solar panels are less efficient when hot.)
* power-lines CARRY less power.
* all right when we’re DEMANDING more power than ever before!

An El Niño looms over Australia’s stressed electricity system – and we must plan for the worst

The likely El Niño is bad timing for the electricity sector, and means Australians may face supply disruptions and volatile prices.

theconversation.com

Futurist Kim Stanley Robinson is famous for writing the Red Green Blue Mars trilogy. He wrote a climate scenario called “Ministry for the Future” - and the opening chapter is one of these “Wet Bulb” heatwaves settling over some very populated regions of India. It’s just plain awful. You can read the first chapter for free here.

Orbit – Welcome

Welcome Orbit publishes in the US and the UK. Orbit US Orbit UK

www.orbitbooks.net

The sad thing is, the average Indian produces 9 times less CO2 than the average American, but they are going to be the most affected.

It's lead me to question alot of things about conventional morality. I think in such a scenario, it's impossible to be ethical within a system that perpetuates carbon ecocide. As Dietrich Bonhoeffer said, a pastor can't merely just console the widow killed by the maniac behind a wheel of a car, he should want to grab the steering wheel out of the hands of the maniac. And right now a great many people in the developed world have the ethics of maniacs in a very dangerous car.

 

[eclipsenow]

I hear you!
But while a system might be complicated - we at least get to vote. To write in forums like this. To buy our own EV's and solar panels (if we are in a position to do so.) To encourage others to see how much money they could save. But of course - the best EV is a Metro. IE: It's the one you don't have to buy because you're within a 5 minute walk of everything you need. Now - applying that to some parts of the world is going to take longer than the Energy Transition! Here are a few thoughts on Ecocities / New Urbanism - and there are a lot of social and economic and health reasons for a Christian to back a gradual move to this - let alone the environmental bonuses! (My blog is not theological in the target audience - which is why I comment here.)

 

[Job 33:6]

I wonder what role nuclear power may play in powering the grid, given its gradually increased attention and demand for electricity.