Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“Carbon Bombs” – Mapping key fossil fuel projects

sciencedirect.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 77 posts

Re: “Carbon Bombs” – Mapping key fossil fuel projects

#11

Post by barney54 »

ben_w wrote: post #9
fny wrote: post #6

I hate to say it, but if energy prices keep rising this perspective is going to be disposed of rapidly. High energy prices mean rampant inflation and social unrest. With crude and natural gas prices skyrocketing, developing nations will again turn to coal as an energy source. Developed nations will return (see Germany) to coal as a heating source. Green energy will be thrown to the wayside for the sake of social stab…

Why would the world turn to a more expensive fuel source? Even in Germany, coal is more expensive than wind and mostly more expensive than PV: https://www.ise.fraunhofer.de/en/publications/studies/cost-o...

It is not valid to compare the levelized cost of non-dispatchable sources of generation like wind and solar and dispatachable sources of generation like coal and nuclear. It’s an apples to oranges comparison, unless you some storage costs to the wind and solar.

In that study you see there is overlap between coal and PV systems and batteries.

Re: “Carbon Bombs” – Mapping key fossil fuel projects

#12

Post by ben_w »

barney54 wrote: post #11
ben_w wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would the world turn to a more expensive fuel source? Even in Germany, coal is more expensive than wind and mostly more expensive than PV: https://www.ise.fraunhofer.de/en/publications/studies/cost-o...

It is not valid to compare the levelized cost of non-dispatchable sources of generation like wind and solar and dispatachable sources of generation like coal and nuclear. It’s an apples to oranges comparison, unless you some storage costs to the wind and solar. In that study you see there is overlap between coal and PV systems and batteries.

Only for rooftop batteries. The estimate for utility scale batteries is entirely lower than coal.

Re: “Carbon Bombs” – Mapping key fossil fuel projects

#13

Post by woodruffw »

fny wrote: post #6

I hate to say it, but if energy prices keep rising this perspective is going to be disposed of rapidly. High energy prices mean rampant inflation and social unrest. With crude and natural gas prices skyrocketing, developing nations will again turn to coal as an energy source. Developed nations will return (see Germany) to coal as a heating source. Green energy will be thrown to the wayside for the sake of social stab…

This might have been true 20 years ago, but the economic envelope has changed: solar and wind power are both consistently cheaper than fossil fuels. This holds true even in developing nations[1], which means that countries that are still building out their initial power generation and distribution systems stand to benefit from skipping a costly transition entirely (not to mention eliminating a geopolitical lever.)

[1]: https://www.irena.org/newsroom/pressreleases/2021/Jun/Majori...

Re: “Carbon Bombs” – Mapping key fossil fuel projects

#14

Post by downsidesabound »

matthewdgreen wrote: post #8
fny wrote: post #6

I hate to say it, but if energy prices keep rising this perspective is going to be disposed of rapidly. High energy prices mean rampant inflation and social unrest. With crude and natural gas prices skyrocketing, developing nations will again turn to coal as an energy source. Developed nations will return (see Germany) to coal as a heating source. Green energy will be thrown to the wayside for the sake of social stab…

You know what else causes social unrest? Starvation induced by crop failure. We’re already seeing the first signs with recent extreme weather and the megadrought. Wait just a short few years until it really gets moving.

That too will cause social unrest, indeed. But we won’t suffer social unrest today just to make tomorrow easier, however wise that might be. We’ll kick the can.

Re: “Carbon Bombs” – Mapping key fossil fuel projects

#15

Post by matthewdgreen »

downsidesabound wrote: post #14
matthewdgreen wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know what else causes social unrest? Starvation induced by crop failure. We’re already seeing the first signs with recent extreme weather and the megadrought. Wait just a short few years until it really gets moving.

That too will cause social unrest, indeed. But we won’t suffer social unrest today just to make tomorrow easier, however wise that might be. We’ll kick the can.

It's already happening. https://archive.ph/pDvLA

Re: “Carbon Bombs” – Mapping key fossil fuel projects

#16

Post by hedora »

fny wrote: post #6

I hate to say it, but if energy prices keep rising this perspective is going to be disposed of rapidly. High energy prices mean rampant inflation and social unrest. With crude and natural gas prices skyrocketing, developing nations will again turn to coal as an energy source. Developed nations will return (see Germany) to coal as a heating source. Green energy will be thrown to the wayside for the sake of social stab…

Three of four home states for my extended family are under continuous threat of burnining down, and air quality has been unacceptably low (due to fires) for years. Also, at least one is running out of water, to the point that is has been causing food shortages elsewhere for years.

I honestly think the US will end up in a civil war if it ends up being necessary to force action on climate change.

As an aside, I own a pickup. I honestly don't give a shit if gas goes to $20. We already drive it as little as possible.

However, there's no reason that would have to happen. It would cost about a dollar per gallon of gasoline-equivalent for existing prototype atmospheric carbon capture technologies to start drawing down CO2.

That's much cheaper than societal collapse. Heck, it is less than Putin's war is costing US consumers.

The excuses need to end, and action needs to start ramping up.

Re: “Carbon Bombs” – Mapping key fossil fuel projects

#18

Post by guerrilla »

woodruffw wrote: post #13
fny wrote: post #6

I hate to say it, but if energy prices keep rising this perspective is going to be disposed of rapidly. High energy prices mean rampant inflation and social unrest. With crude and natural gas prices skyrocketing, developing nations will again turn to coal as an energy source. Developed nations will return (see Germany) to coal as a heating source. Green energy will be thrown to the wayside for the sake of social stab…

This might have been true 20 years ago, but the economic envelope has changed: solar and wind power are both consistently cheaper than fossil fuels. This holds true even in developing nations[1], which means that countries that are still building out their initial power generation and distribution systems stand to benefit from skipping a costly transition entirely (not to mention eliminating a geopolitical lever.) [1…

I think you missed the fact that what OP said is already happening and even the most highly invested in green (Scandinavia) isn't remotely close to keeping up with this.

Re: “Carbon Bombs” – Mapping key fossil fuel projects

#19

Post by woodruffw »

guerrilla wrote: post #18
woodruffw wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This might have been true 20 years ago, but the economic envelope has changed: solar and wind power are both consistently cheaper than fossil fuels. This holds true even in developing nations[1], which means that countries that are still building out their initial power generation and distribution systems stand to benefit from skipping a costly transition entirely (not to mention eliminating a geopolitical lever.) [1…

I think you missed the fact that what OP said is already happening and even the most highly invested in green (Scandinavia) isn't remotely close to keeping up with this.

What do you mean by "keeping up with this"? Macro trends are what matter. For example, the US (a very not green country) has cut its coal use by over 50% in the last 20 years[1]. A lot of that is being replaced with natural gas generation, but that's partially because the coal-to-natgas transition is much quicker and cheaper due to the US's established power plants. That wouldn't apply to a developing nation, especially not ones where coal is historically imported (e.g. Pakistan).

[1]: https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/electricity/electricity-...

Re: “Carbon Bombs” – Mapping key fossil fuel projects

#20

Post by guerrilla »

woodruffw wrote: post #19
guerrilla wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you missed the fact that what OP said is already happening and even the most highly invested in green (Scandinavia) isn't remotely close to keeping up with this.

What do you mean by "keeping up with this"? Macro trends are what matter. For example, the US (a very not green country) has cut its coal use by over 50% in the last 20 years[1]. A lot of that is being replaced with natural gas generation, but that's partially because the coal-to-natgas transition is much quicker and cheaper due to the US's established power plants. That wouldn't apply to a developing nation, especia…

This crisis.

> Macro trends are what matter.

No, it's not all that matters to everyone that can't afford to pay these skyrocketing prices because there's no way to keep up with demand other than reverting to coal. The OP is about social unrest and burning coal now not long-term trends. There is no long term if everything collapses before that. Germany is already burning more coal right now because alternatives cannot in fact keep up. Your head seems stuck in the US, apparently ignorant of news from Europe (take a look at electricity prices here and what's coming online.) There's literally not enough physical natural gas, and we'll outbid everyone else into starvation for what there is and fill the gaps with coal. Green cannot compete in this environment, even where it's most heavily invested in. No way does it have a chance elsewhere.

Post reply on HN