Global hot air

[Pauly]

I love the way the different sides of the Climate Change debate have these indisputable figures showing contrary things. I personally think the truth is some place in the middle and both sides are exaggerating it all to try and show they have the biggest ego. I think we should be prepared for both a cooler and a hotter world. We also need to face the fact that we do not at this stage have any alternative to fossil fuels and should be finding ways to use them better and not all this alternative crap that usually turns out to be a disaster

:arrow-thru-heart:

[marshlander]

... and not all this alternative crap that usually turns out to be a disaster

... such as?

[Rychard the Lionheart]

'Global hot air' sound likes the results of a G8 summit.

Any reduction of the burning and use of fossil fuels is good for the planet and the human race.


We use too much electricity, street and motorway lighting could be reduced if the lights were fitted with motion detectors. Only switching on a person or vehicle is detected, many streets and rural roads are empty during the late hours. This would reduce the energy usage and costs in many countries.

More use of solar panels in industry and domestic properties would also bring another reduction in the use of fossil fuels.Bringing the costs of this solar panels down which is high at present, would encourage more people to install them.


My gripe with the electricity industry is that I would prefer to see our power lines underground and not strung across the countryside on high pylons which look ugly.

Also we are a nation surrounded by water, and yet we are told nearly each we have a water shortage. Why can't the water industry develop a system to take sea water and convert it into usable water for us, other countries have solved this problem. Alas, profits first and consumers last.

[fredv3b]

We use too much electricity, street and motorway lighting could be reduced if the lights were fitted with motion detectors. Only switching on a person or vehicle is detected, many streets and rural roads are empty during the late hours. This would reduce the energy usage and costs in many countries.

Unfortunately, street lighting is only a small proportion of total energy usage.

More use of solar panels in industry and domestic properties would also bring another reduction in the use of fossil fuels.Bringing the costs of this solar panels down which is high at present, would encourage more people to install them.

Photovoltaic cells in Britain are eco-bling. Solar water hearing panels are cheaper and more efficient.

My gripe with the electricity industry is that I would prefer to see our power lines underground and not strung across the countryside on high pylons which look ugly.

The industry prefers underground cables, they are more reliable and require less maintenance. The initial capital cost is massively more, no one wants to pay for it.

Also we are a nation surrounded by water, and yet we are told nearly each we have a water shortage. Why can't the water industry develop a system to take sea water and convert it into usable water for us, other countries have solved this problem. Alas, profits first and consumers last.

Other countries solved this problem by using the massive amounts of energy (fossil fuels) required for desalination plants.

[Rychard the Lionheart]

Unfortunately, street lighting is only a small proportion of total energy usage.

Lighting is responsible for one-fourth of all electricity consumption worldwide, and case studies have shown that several forms of over-illumination constitute energy wastage, including non-beneficial upward direction of night-time lighting. In 2007, Terna, the company responsible for managing electricity flow in Italy, reported a saving of 645.2 million kWh in electricity consumption during the daylight saving period from April to October. It attributes this saving to the delayed need for artificial lighting during the evenings.

Energy conservation advocates contend that light pollution must be addressed by changing the habits of society, so that lighting is used more efficiently, with less waste and less creation of unwanted or unneeded illumination. Several industry groups also recognize light pollution as an important issue. For example, the Institution of Lighting Engineers in the United Kingdom provides its members information about light pollution, the problems it causes, and how to reduce its impact.

Photovoltaic cells in Britain are eco-bling. Solar water hearing panels are cheaper and more efficient.

Growth in production is increasing as the demand grows. 15.9 GW (Gigawatt) of solar PV system installations were completed in 2010, with solar PV pricing survey and market research company PVinsights reporting growth of 117.8% in solar PV installation on a year-on-year basis. With over 100% year-on-year growth in PV system installation, PV module makers dramatically increased their shipments of solar panels in 2010. They actively expanded their capacity and turned themselves into gigawatt GW players. According to PVinsights, five of the top ten PV module companies in 2010 are GW players. Suntech, First Solar, Sharp, Yingli and Trina Solar are GW players now, and most of them doubled their shipments in 2010.

The industry prefers underground cables, they are more reliable and require less maintenance. The initial capital cost is massively more, no one wants to pay for it.

Overhead power lines are generally the lowest-cost method of transmission for large quantities of electric energy, but are still ugly and a can be damaged in severe weather leaving communities without electricity.

Other countries solved this problem by using the massive amounts of energy (fossil fuels) required for desalination plants.

I agree that increased water conservation and water use efficiency remain the most cost-effective of managing our water supply, but many other countries are investing and building desalination plants to supply water to their people

Some examples are Israel is now desalinating water at a cost of US$0.53 per cubic meter. Singapore is desalinating water for US$0.49 per cubic meter. Many large coastal cities in developed countries are considering the feasibility of seawater desalination, due to its cost effectiveness compared with other water supply.

The Perth (Australia) desalination plant is powered partially by renewable energy from the Emu Downs Wind Farm. A wind farm at Bungendore in NSW has been purpose-built to generate enough renewable energy to offset the energy use of the Sydney plant, mitigating concerns about harmful greenhouse gas emissions, a common argument used against seawater desalination due to the energy requirements of the technology. The purchase or production of renewable energy to power desalination plants naturally adds to the capital and/or operating costs of desalination. However, recent experience in Perth and Sydney indicates that the additional cost is acceptable to communities, as a city may then augment its water supply without doing environmental harm to the atmosphere. The Queensland state government also purchased renewable energy certificates on behalf of its Gold Coast plant which will see the plant offset its carbon emissions for the initial 18 to 20 months of operations, bringing its environmental footprint down, in line with the other major plants that will be operating around the same time, in Perth and Sydney.

Research and Development is going on to reduce the cost of desalinating water. On June 23, 2008, it was reported that Siemens Water Technologies had developed a new technology, based on applying electric field on seawater, that desalinates one cubic meter of water while using only 1.5 kWh of energy, which, according to the report, is one half the energy that other processes use. Fresh water can also be produced by freezing seawater, as happens naturally in the polar regions, and is known as freeze-thaw desalination.

[fredv3b]

Lighting is responsible for one-fourth of all electricity consumption worldwide

What proportion of that is street lighting?

[quote=Rychard the Lionheart]However, recent experience in Perth and Sydney indicates that the additional cost is acceptable to communities, as a city may then augment its water supply without doing environmental harm to the atmosphere.

The building of renewable electricity generation facilities alongside desalination facilities to avoid CO2 emissions is, in my opinion, nothing more than an accounting slight of hand. If a city uses fossil fuels, at least in part, for electricity production (I am unaware of any city that doesn't) then it should make use of any suitable sites for renewable electricity production regardless of any desalination facility. A desalination facility (or any other use of energy) represents fossil fuels that need not otherwise have been burnt.

Do you have a source for your figures on the cost of desalination in Israel and Singapore?

[Pauly]

I personally care very much about the environment and think its important that we care for our native animals birds etc and forests and we need to stop polluting but i do think that the Global warming hype has not helped in fact its turned a lot of people off and people think greens are nutters. Building horrid looking wind turbines that are energy inefficient all over pristine wild areas in my mind is a crime.

[Pauly]

Bio Fuel has been a disaster huge areas of Asian rain forest have been destroyed to plant bio fuel crops
Also to make the stuff uses huge amounts of energy. Some say electric cars are an answer but one car has 20 or 30 batteries that have to be replaced every 10 or so years. Solar panels are dirty to produce.
NO I DO NOT HAVE THE ANSWER