I remember when Consol Energy had a coal to liquids program ready to go, but the pricepoint for viability was when diesel fuel reached $4.00 per gallon. Senator McCain even came to their R&D facility to present them with a nice grant for their revolutionary work, and to launch the program to meet consumer demand. This was in the vicinity of 2008.
That R&D facility no longer exists and their coal to liquids program has been relegated to the dustbin of bright ideas.
But it was viable right here in the US at the time due to our demand for fuel vs. the cost to produce it.
Point being, China is the worlds largest consumer of fossil fuels and they dont care who, what, or where gets annihilated in the process of keeping their gears turning. What they consider viable or acceptable is subject to entirely different criteria. They also feel that acid rain that literally burns your skin is acceptable.
So its kinda hard to compare what is considered viable or acceptable between the US and China. We’re playing by different rule books.
They wiped out entire regions for their Three Gorges hydroelectric damn.
Displaced millions of people and submerged millions of acres of land.
They will produce at any cost.
The bright side is that the US can send our windmill vanes to them for recycling. Their constraints on chemical processes and disposal are similar to their energy policies.
And our back yards and consciences will be squeeky clean and green.
This is the first thing that popped up that seemed almost like a real answer. They found out the CO2 emissions to build and maintain the windmills, but instead of giving that number they gave you some number of pollution divided by energy production so you could compare to coal fired plants. Like 6 carbons per KW hour vs 900+ carbons per kw hour
This says that the carbon footprint of wind energy is about 25% of the carbon footprint of solar energy
Interesting story. Slight irony. I don’t have an agenda if that’s what you’re alluding to. Just thought it would be fun to share. Maybe it should have gone in the supplements forum.
Riiiiight. I can tell you hate the environment… and minorities and women! Sorry. Tried my best to write up a substantive Progressive post without bringing up the racism and the sexism, but I couldn’t help it.
Are both usable/consumable at the same time? How many of each can we make from one 2 MW windmill blade? These are the important questions.
This is what I call “politically shady math” (not very catchy, needs a better name, maybe "Algorithmic Statistical Subterfuge" or ASS for short ). As I learned more math and became decently capable at it, I realized that with enough manipulation you can make numbers say anything you want. That’s why there are so many “universal” theories of physics and the nature of the cosmos.
I think this is only one factor when compared to a traditional building. Let’s say a corporate building only “produces” something 12 hours a day or 50% of the time. Even in the best places in the country, windmills are only producing power about 30-40% of the time. Some small areas of the Midwest and Texas get up to about 50% but those areas are Minute. So the 10% maintenance time factors more into the windmills overall cost.
I don’t know if there is an equation to accurately represent this kind of stuff.
or ASS for short