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

Sea 'Boiling' with Methane Discovered in Siberia

newsweek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 118 posts

Re: Sea 'Boiling' with Methane Discovered in Siberia

#101

Post by Robotbeat »

klingonopera wrote: post #95
Robotbeat wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So... backed by about 24 to 48 hours of storage, and overbuilt by a factor of 2 to 3 (so you curtail most of your energy), wind and solar can produce reliable, baseload power. Particularly if you connect geographically separated regions and use wind/solar (and possibly geo/hydro) together. The cost is about the same as nuclear. We should do everything, though, including nuclear. i'm a big nuclear fan. All at once, ri…

If the cost is the same as nuclear, it should be preferred, as there is no nuclear waste. And that's probably even also considering that both the actual cost of nuclear[0][1][2][3], as well as the risk of failure[4][5] and the therein resulting costs[6] are often wildly underestimated. [0]: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4631737.stm [1]: https://www.pv-magazine.com/2019/01/31/debunking-the-low-cos... [2]:…

I'm including the wildly inflated costs, here. And it only works at lower latitudes. At high latitudes, it's not viable.

Re: Sea 'Boiling' with Methane Discovered in Siberia

#102

Post by seganddr »

daenz wrote: post #33
pdonis wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The simple answer is end fossil fuels. How do we do that? Build nuclear power plants. All the other things are fine, but if you really want to end fossil fuels, you need a non-fossil-fuel source of reliable base load power. Nuclear is the only one we have. Other sources are fine, but they can't produce reliable base load power. And, btw, I think we should end fossil fuels even if it turns out not to make much of a…

>Build nuclear power plants. And to all the people who say "they take too long there isn't enough time": the best time to start nuclear power plant construction was 10 years ago, the second best time is now.

Bill Gates wants to: https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/amp25728221/...

Re: Sea 'Boiling' with Methane Discovered in Siberia

#103

Post by ageofwant »

eloff wrote: post #50
milofeynman wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's been a difference in the last 15 years... Look at the ocean currents. Look at the hurricanes stalling. That didn't use to happen. Look at tornado alley moving west. Look at the mass migration out of Siberia.[0] If you haven't noticed anything you aren't paying attention, or you're a gas company shill spreading misinformation. [0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/national/climat...

I didn't say nothing is happening, I said it's not the end of the world. The effects so far are small compared to the direct damage caused by the air pollution itself, which kills over a million people a year. I don't expect that will change in my lifetime. The predictions are not so dire that it is likely to take a million lives a year. Over a period of several hundred years, it's a lot harder to say. At no point is…

This worldview is hyper human-centric. There are ~7735776725 people alive now. A million less is 7734776725. To keep this population alive billions of other lives are sacrificed. Yes humans and human civilization will be less affected in the short term, perhaps, or at least those that matter: i.e european northern hemisphere types. Short to medium term biosphere collapse will absolutely impact human civilization, but that is way to late for most other species.

Re: Sea 'Boiling' with Methane Discovered in Siberia

#104

Post by daenz »

zaroth wrote: post #80
daenz wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Build nuclear power plants. And to all the people who say "they take too long there isn't enough time": the best time to start nuclear power plant construction was 10 years ago, the second best time is now.

Except by the time the plant is done being built (10 years late and 10x over budget) renewables will have surpassed it in terms of cost for deployed GW, and grid-scale and consumer batteries will be at the point where we can store and demand shift enough power to use all the renewables we can bring online. Renewables has already surpassed nuclear in the US. I think the new reality is the best time to build a nuke pla…

Go into this with an open mind, but it shows a number of ways that nuclear is superior to renewables, coming from someone who was staunchly against nuclear:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ciStnd9Y2ak

Re: Sea 'Boiling' with Methane Discovered in Siberia

#105

Post by pdonis »

jbay808 wrote: post #75
pdonis wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Everything I’ve heard indicates a fairly dramatic change in the weather patterns as our global temperatures rise by even 1-2 degrees. These are not predictions based on data. They are predictions based on models--the same models that have been overpredicting warming for several decades now. The actual data says that extreme events have not been getting more frequent. Their consequences have been getting more severe…

Do you have a citation on the claim that mainstream models have been overpredicting warning? I'm not aware of it.

https://judithcurry.com/2015/12/17/climate-models-versus-cli...

https://judithcurry.com/2017/09/26/are-climate-models-overst...

Re: Sea 'Boiling' with Methane Discovered in Siberia

#106

Post by zaroth »

bch wrote: post #90
zaroth wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except by the time the plant is done being built (10 years late and 10x over budget) renewables will have surpassed it in terms of cost for deployed GW, and grid-scale and consumer batteries will be at the point where we can store and demand shift enough power to use all the renewables we can bring online. Renewables has already surpassed nuclear in the US. I think the new reality is the best time to build a nuke pla…

> renewables will have surpassed it in terms of cost Are you thinking in terms of dollars or including the price of future use/materials? In other words, can’t a nuclear plant effectively be swapped in for a (e.g.) coal-fired generator and Just Work, versus all the materials (grid-scale collectors, batteries, etc), which is just the next generation of junk in a treadmill that’s still a carbon problem? I ask because I…

Look at the other article on the front page about air pollution. We’ve actually made tremendous progress reducing sulfur dioxide emissions from coal in the last decade. To damages from air quality problems in the US are down 20% overall, which is a economic savings of $1.6 trillion per decade.

The waste stream from solar is a real question. The video posted in the other reply brings it up as well. We definitely need panels that are designed for extremely long service and recyclable end of life. I do think the battery tech is evolving extremely rapidly and dovetails with EVs so that will help keep renewables competitive even as total overall renewable supply share increases.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21200082

Re: Sea 'Boiling' with Methane Discovered in Siberia

#107

Post by zaroth »

daenz wrote: post #104
zaroth wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except by the time the plant is done being built (10 years late and 10x over budget) renewables will have surpassed it in terms of cost for deployed GW, and grid-scale and consumer batteries will be at the point where we can store and demand shift enough power to use all the renewables we can bring online. Renewables has already surpassed nuclear in the US. I think the new reality is the best time to build a nuke pla…

Go into this with an open mind, but it shows a number of ways that nuclear is superior to renewables, coming from someone who was staunchly against nuclear: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ciStnd9Y2ak

It’s a great video - thanks! I’m less worried about the safety, than the actual ability to just manage to build the damn things to spec and any kind of budget in the US regulatory environment.

Re: Sea 'Boiling' with Methane Discovered in Siberia

#108

Post by klingonopera »

pdonis wrote: post #105
jbay808 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a citation on the claim that mainstream models have been overpredicting warning? I'm not aware of it.

https://judithcurry.com/2015/12/17/climate-models-versus-cli... https://judithcurry.com/2017/09/26/are-climate-models-overst...

Cherry-picked input and model data to exaggerate their claims, Pat Michaels and Chip Knappenberger both work for the CATO institute, and Ross McKitrick is an economics professor and known climate change denier[0].

I do not have enough in-depth understanding of climate sciences in order to fully comprehend the articles you've attached, nor can I be bothered to (there's no attempt to make it accessible for the layman), but the comment section appears to be quite telling.

Does that sound rich to you? Well, I'm a simple programmer, not a climate change specialist, but Judith Curry OTOH is, and she has chosen to "not “bother with” peer-reviewed journals, in favor of publishing her own papers so that she could editorialize and write what she wanted “without worrying about the norms and agendas of the ‘establishment.’”"[1]. In other words, she's a lone scientist defying the consensus. Maybe she's our modern day plate-tectonist, but in all probability, not.

EDIT: To summarize, why even write (apparent) highly scientific articles if you're ignoring all the other scientists? To me, it just seems like someone wants to appear that way.

[0]: https://twitter.com/carbonbrief/status/913361157846597634

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Curry

Re: Sea 'Boiling' with Methane Discovered in Siberia

#109

Post by NeedMoreTea »

unsignedchar wrote: post #52
blhack wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What should we do?

Document our failures as a species for the next one that attempts to ‘civilize’?

Or for our next time around the cycle. At which point I think of Mote Prime[1]. Their "museums" were to document tech for rediscovery each time around the cycle, after their civilisation crashed.

[1] Mote in God's Eye, Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle

Post reply on HN