California Moves to Require 100% Clean Electricity by 2045 • Hacker News Board

Re: California Moves to Require 100% Clean Electricity by 2045

#181

Post by sixdimensional » Thu, Aug 30, 2018, 7:38 PM UTC

radicalbyte wrote: post #63

sixdimensional wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm with you. It's awesome that we're doing this and I think it will be good for future generations. Long term infrastructure investments take a long time, and it's weird to me to think that we might not even be around to enjoy the benefit, but needing to be done is needing to be done. I think this is exactly the kind of change in thinking we need, that we should take on such efforts, even if they take a long time, n…

It would be nice if there were say goals of over 90% by 2030; that gives you 12 years to build and decommission or convert existing fossil-fuel plants to sustainable alternatives. The hard problem is the storage and peak handling, hopefully with 90% you could cover that too. A real space-race goal - the kind that I would really have expected from America - would be to be carbon neutral within a decade. That would ini…

Agreed. Sadly, I believe the way things are going, geo-engineering will be required, not optional. At planerary scale, clearly it's a non-trivial problem, but we probably should be working on it much harder.

I like your inspiration for setting such goals as carbon neutral in America. That's the kind of thinking we need.

Re: California Moves to Require 100% Clean Electricity by 2045

#182

Post by ams6110 » Thu, Aug 30, 2018, 7:38 PM UTC

ancarda wrote: post #134

ams6110 wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way Europe deals with cars is they tax the bejezus out of them, and gasoline also. In some countries, half the price of a new car is tax. That is why people drive little toy cars there. Everyone would like a nice big comfortable car but they are unaffordable for most.

Oh yeah! It’s crazy expensive :( What I’m trying to grapple with is this desire of mine while trying to be aware of my environmental impact. If there’s no way to have my cake and eat it too, I won’t get one.

Well there's this.... https://workhorse.com/pickup/

But I think it's either still in the concept stage, or maybe in fleet trials. Don't think an ordinary consumer can get one.

Re: California Moves to Require 100% Clean Electricity by 2045

#183

Post by ousta » Thu, Aug 30, 2018, 7:41 PM UTC

They should find how to create electricity from poo as it is their first renewable material

Re: California Moves to Require 100% Clean Electricity by 2045

#184

Post by throwaway5752 » Thu, Aug 30, 2018, 7:42 PM UTC

ThomPete wrote: post #158

abtinf wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How will normal people be affected if you severely restrict the activities of those 100 companies?

That depends on how you do it. How were normal people affected by putting in carburetors in cars so they didn't spit out lead into the air? Edit: My bad I meant catalytic converter not carborators (katalysatorer in Danish)

1. I think this is a fantastic plan. I think that vertically integrated petroleum and coal companies should be forced to cease creating CO2 pollution. This should happen immediately. I am satisfied if nothing is done on the consumer side. \s

2. Carburetors aren't even on the exhaust side of an engine. Most cars don't have them any more (fuel injection), they mix air and fuel before it enters a cyclinder. You must be thinking of a catalytic converter, and that is still incorrect.

3. The only thing that stopped cars from spitting out lead was law and regulation in the US that banned tetraethyl lead additives.

Re: California Moves to Require 100% Clean Electricity by 2045

#185

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Aug 30, 2018, 7:43 PM UTC

ThomPete wrote: post #171

skookumchuck wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Carburetors have nothing to do with lead emissions. Lead emissions come from lead being added to gas to raise its octane, and hasn't been added for years.

I might be wrong but as far as i know they were added while there were still lead in the gazoline. Anyway it didn't hurt the normal person it helped them because techonology.

[deleted]

Re: California Moves to Require 100% Clean Electricity by 2045

#186

Post by borkt » Thu, Aug 30, 2018, 7:44 PM UTC

ThomPete wrote: post #158

abtinf wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How will normal people be affected if you severely restrict the activities of those 100 companies?

That depends on how you do it. How were normal people affected by putting in carburetors in cars so they didn't spit out lead into the air? Edit: My bad I meant catalytic converter not carborators (katalysatorer in Danish)

I think you mean catalytic converter? Which don't remove lead but do mitigate NOx/CO/Hydrocarbons and the like

Re: California Moves to Require 100% Clean Electricity by 2045

#187

Post by agumonkey » Thu, Aug 30, 2018, 7:45 PM UTC

abtinf wrote: post #153

ThomPete wrote: post #148

I am still baffled by the focus on private housholds and private consumption when it comes to the discussion of clean energy and emissions. The reality is that private households have very little to do with our problems and even less to do about them. Stop eating cow sound great but it's not going to do anything of any impact. Most emissions (70%) come from very few companies (around a 100 or some). Instead of making…

How will normal people be affected if you severely restrict the activities of those 100 companies?

We need to lay all these informations on a large map, so we don't have to speculate. That said, I'm sure most of the western world is in blind oppulence. So much shit is thrown out or spoiled for no reason it's crazy.

Re: California Moves to Require 100% Clean Electricity by 2045

#188

Post by jrockway » Thu, Aug 30, 2018, 7:46 PM UTC

jedberg wrote: post #178

merpnderp wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I have yet to see a side loading washing without the moldy ring on the side of the door. I'm unsure how this is in any way a net improvement, as whatever action people take to fix the mold problem is likely to more than make up for the energy saved processing the water.

We leave ours open when it's not in use. No mold for years.

Same. You have to let the thing dry out.

Re: California Moves to Require 100% Clean Electricity by 2045

#189

Post by oceanplexian » Thu, Aug 30, 2018, 7:51 PM UTC

jwr wrote: post #88

I think another great move would be to start dealing with excessive energy consumption. Compared to what I'm used to in Europe, California is wasting crazy amounts of energy. Poorly insulated homes, old and inefficient AC/heating units, vertical-drum washing machines (!!!), poorly designed gas stoves, oversized cars, monstrous gas-guzzling trucks, energy waste is all over the place. People behave just as if energy we…

I'm not against energy efficiency, however, conservation is fundamentally the wrong approach. What is the future going to look like?

- Earth will have another 10,20,30 Billion people living on it

- These people, if we don't screw up and start another war, will want a house, air conditioning, a car, air travel, lots of kids, and more

- Human will inhabit more parts of the Earth that are uninhabitable (Antarctica, Siberia, Canada, Australia), which will require an order of magnitude increase in energy for heating/cooling

- Industry and manufacturing will need to provide for the leisure spending of billions of additional humans (iPhones, Televisions, etc)

- New technologies will require orders of magnitude more energy, such as flying cars, space travel, etc.

The solution to these things isn't to crawl in a hole and try to shave a few % efficiencies out of a washing machine or a pickup truck. Energy isn't a limited resource. It's one of the most abundant things in the universe. With today's technology (Nuclear Fission and one day, Fusion) you could make energy more cheaply and abundantly than the air we breathe.

People should expect to behave as if energy is free. And energy should be free. The problem is that society at large (and NIMBYs and Anti-Nuclear activists) don't have any imagination and therefore set back our civilization and post-scarcity society 50-100 years.

Re: California Moves to Require 100% Clean Electricity by 2045

#190

Post by jrockway » Thu, Aug 30, 2018, 7:51 PM UTC

true_tuna wrote: post #5

We are going to need some more big batteries. Don’t we pay our neighbors to take our excess during peak times?

Big batteries are a solved problem. You use electricity to pump water uphill. When you want the electricity back, you let it run back downhill through a turbine.

This does not require mining lithium either, btw.