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

US can reach 100% clean power by 2035, DOE finds

utilitydive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 200 posts

Re: US can reach 100% clean power by 2035, DOE finds

#71

Post by ClumsyPilot »

roenxi wrote: post #41
gregwebs wrote: post #10

We can have 100% clean energy by 2035 if we assume the US is China and the state can build whatever it wants despite any local objections. And assume we increase battery supply by 40x (even though lithium price is going up dramatically now). And assume that clean power is actually 100% clean. It's good to have a vision for clean energy though that is shared with the country that we start working towards. I can see th…

You left out an important step - assuming that all the planning and modelling has been done correctly in and doesn't turn out to be politically motivated, have mistakes or miss unknown unknowns. Reconstituting all of society's energy consumption is a large project with a lot of technical uncertainties that will be discovered along the way. These sort of forecasts routinely turns out to be very wrong. Centrally planne…

> Reconstituting all of society's energy consumption is a large project with a lot of technical uncertainties that will be discovered along the way. These sort of forecasts routinely turns out to be very wrong

I frequently see this type of comment, and I like to imagine what if people with this attitude won the debate that was happening 300 yeara ago.

300 years ago, thousands of people in London were dying of cholera and the city was debating development of a sewage system.

They would argue that its not proven that shit in the streets causes disease, and a system of this size was never tested, and how much would it cost?

If they won the argument back then, we'd still be shitting in pots and throwing it out of the window.

Todays debate is literally the same problem, it's about cleaning up and about not tossing a different kind of waste out into the environment irresponsibly.

People with this attitude are never the ones i proving the human condition.

Re: US can reach 100% clean power by 2035, DOE finds

#72

Post by angrycontrarian »

epistasis wrote: post #44
gregwebs wrote: post #10

We can have 100% clean energy by 2035 if we assume the US is China and the state can build whatever it wants despite any local objections. And assume we increase battery supply by 40x (even though lithium price is going up dramatically now). And assume that clean power is actually 100% clean. It's good to have a vision for clean energy though that is shared with the country that we start working towards. I can see th…

A clean power grid means cheaper power. And the faster we push towards that future, the more money we save. Every day of delay, every bit of FUD about renewables, only serves to keep our energy costs higher, and make our future CO2 cleanup problem harder. The future for energy is cheap and clean, and the major roadblock are the people who profit from expensive and dirty electricity.

> A clean power grid means cheaper power.

That's a pretty wild assertion, given current events. Care to back it up with some evidence from a neutral source?

Re: US can reach 100% clean power by 2035, DOE finds

#73

Post by kjksf »

angrycontrarian wrote: post #72
epistasis wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A clean power grid means cheaper power. And the faster we push towards that future, the more money we save. Every day of delay, every bit of FUD about renewables, only serves to keep our energy costs higher, and make our future CO2 cleanup problem harder. The future for energy is cheap and clean, and the major roadblock are the people who profit from expensive and dirty electricity.

> A clean power grid means cheaper power. That's a pretty wild assertion, given current events. Care to back it up with some evidence from a neutral source?

https://tonyseba.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/RethinkingEn...

This research is solid and goes in depth about the costs etc.

Re: US can reach 100% clean power by 2035, DOE finds

#74

Post by ngmc »

epistasis wrote: post #45
roenxi wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You left out an important step - assuming that all the planning and modelling has been done correctly in and doesn't turn out to be politically motivated, have mistakes or miss unknown unknowns. Reconstituting all of society's energy consumption is a large project with a lot of technical uncertainties that will be discovered along the way. These sort of forecasts routinely turns out to be very wrong. Centrally planne…

There is clear political motivation in those who oppose the energy transition. Despite hundreds upon hundreds of papers on 100% clean energy electricity grids, they are produced by scientists that tend to follow the data rather than use data to justify their politics. There are a few counter examples (perhaps Marc Jacobs?) but there are so many other modelers coming to the same conclusion as DOE here, and nobody has…

Agreed except for the dig at Mark Jacobson. He was my undergrad and grad advisor, and I only knew him to be driven by data and a deep concern for the welfare of people and the planet. There are bad scientists out there but Mark isn't one of them. lol I recall him declining my request to put something about Al Gore in our common area because he didn't want to politicize the space.

Re: US can reach 100% clean power by 2035, DOE finds

#75

Post by ClumsyPilot »

kornhole wrote: post #52
gregwebs wrote: post #10

We can have 100% clean energy by 2035 if we assume the US is China and the state can build whatever it wants despite any local objections. And assume we increase battery supply by 40x (even though lithium price is going up dramatically now). And assume that clean power is actually 100% clean. It's good to have a vision for clean energy though that is shared with the country that we start working towards. I can see th…

And if Americans simplify their lives and stop using so much energy.

Indeed, noone talk about this. An average french person emits 3 or 4 times less CO2. Does an average american live 4 times better than an average frenchman?

French people live longer on average, have less obsesity and other health issues.

Insulated homes or apartments, smaller cars and less meat in diet could cut CO2 footprint 2x.

But also we must not fool ourselves, majority of energy emissions are industrial - as a consumer I have no control over 70% of emissions

Re: US can reach 100% clean power by 2035, DOE finds

#76

Post by davidw »

epistasis wrote: post #65
BitwiseFool wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our local library wanted to put in an automated drop-off bin that patrons could drive up to and return books into. It was bitterly contested because the adjacent home owners association was worried about the increased noise and traffic. Keep in mind they were already living next to this library and it already had a parking lot. The city paid to construct a high wall as a compromise. It wasn't terribly expensive, but…

Agreed 100%. You may like this article, that has academic research to back up your thoughts— Not Everyone Should Have a Say; To speed up permitting for energy projects, we’ll need to rethink community input: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/10/environmen... This sort of "participatory democracy," where the most motivated can dominate those with less time, can be traced back to the New Left, which was cr…

Jerusalem Demsas is a fantastic writer. One of the highlights of my year was getting to meet her and say "thank you" at the YIMBYTown conference in Portland.

Re: US can reach 100% clean power by 2035, DOE finds

#78

Post by xkcd-sucks »

davidw wrote: post #37
gregwebs wrote: post #10

We can have 100% clean energy by 2035 if we assume the US is China and the state can build whatever it wants despite any local objections. And assume we increase battery supply by 40x (even though lithium price is going up dramatically now). And assume that clean power is actually 100% clean. It's good to have a vision for clean energy though that is shared with the country that we start working towards. I can see th…

> local objections That's a big component of all this. NIMBYism in this country is becoming a big problem in a lot of ways. Want to build a dense, mixed use development that is less carbon-intensive than single family suburbia? NIMBYs oppose it. Build a transmission line from your green energy source? NIMBYs, again! Build a solar farm? NIMBYs will try and block it.

Want to start a backyard steel-smelting campaign? NIMBYs will block it.

Want to eradicate sparrows who seem to be eating crops? Environmental review will block it.

Want to set up a space launch facility near a village and jettison booster stages over agricultural fields? NIMBYs will block it.

Want to operate a pig farm in a residential neighborhood? NIMBYs will block it.

Re: US can reach 100% clean power by 2035, DOE finds

#79

Post by shapefrog »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #46
infamouscow wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The California Independent System Operator, which manages the state’s power grid, sent a Flex Alert asking all residents to voluntarily reduce their electricity use between 4 p.m. and 9 p.m. on Wednesday and Thursday and warned that more alerts were possible through the Labor Day weekend. > A spokeswoman for the governor, Erin Mellon, said that the request to avoid charging electrical vehicles has been misrepresent…

Air conditioners were the problem, not EV's.

The solution for air conditioners ... more solar power.

Re: US can reach 100% clean power by 2035, DOE finds

#80

Post by ClumsyPilot »

mionhe wrote: post #2

At the beginning of the article is says: "But it does not explain how adequate land to reach a 90% clean electricity penetration can be acquired or how reliability will be protected beyond that 90% penetration, stakeholders acknowledged." I'm confused that they can put a time frame on a problem they have no idea how to solve yet.

> I'm confused that they can put a time frame on a problem they have no idea how to solve yet.

You are writing on a developer forum, they work in Agile and ruotinely provide estimates or work to deadlines when business does not even know the requirements of their system, let alone how to build most of it.

Post reply on HN