Gå tilbage leveret af  Boliga logo    
Boligdebatten.dk   Boligdebatten.dk > Politik og Økonomi > Politik
Opret bruger OSS Søgning Dagens indlæg Marker alt som læst


Svar
 
Emne værktøjer Visningsmåde
  #1 (permalink)  
Gammel 14th July 2019, 09:34 AM
Senior Member
 
Registreringsdato: Nov 2008
Indlæg: 8,722
Standard Klima og energipolitik

Hårde tal på bordet som viser at vind og sol ikke kommer til at batte meget. Der er vil kun atomkraft som en reel løsning her og nu. 41 punkter opsummerer problemerne.


Inconvenient Energy Realities


Citer:
A week doesn’t pass without a mayor, governor, policymaker or pundit joining the rush to demand, or predict, an energy future that is entirely based on wind/solar and batteries, freed from the “burden” of the hydrocarbons that have fueled societies for centuries. Regardless of one’s opinion about whether, or why, an energy “transformation” is called for, the physics and economics of energy combined with scale realities make it clear that there is no possibility of anything resembling a radically “new energy economy” in the foreseeable future. Bill Gates has said that when it comes to understanding energy realities “we need to bring math to the problem.”

FEKS:
3. When the world’s four billion poor people increase energy use to just one-third of Europe’s per capita level, global demand rises by an amount equal to twice America’s total consumption.

5. Renewable energy would have to expand 90-fold to replace global hydrocarbons in two decades. It took a half-century for global petroleum production to expand “only” 10-fold.

19. It costs less than $0.50 to store a barrel of oil, or its equivalent in natural gas, but it costs $200 to store the equivalent energy of a barrel of oil in batteries.

40. China dominates global battery production with its grid 70% coal-fueled: EVs using Chinese batteries will create more carbon-dioxide than saved by replacing oil-burning engines.
Besvar med citat
  #2 (permalink)  
Gammel 24th July 2019, 04:19 AM
Senior Member
 
Registreringsdato: Nov 2008
Indlæg: 8,722
Standard

Videnskabsfolk kritiserer brugen af deadlines i klimapolitk.

Why setting a climate deadline is dangerous: Nature

Citer:

...A more fundamental problem with deadline-ism is that it might incite cynical, cry-wolf responses and undermine the credibility of climate science when an anticipated disaster does not happen. The imagery of deadlines and countdown clocks offers an illusory cliff-edge after which the world heads inevitably to its imminent demise. It promulgates the imaginary of extinction and the collapse of civilization. The impacts of climate change are more likely to be intermittent, slow and gradual. Of course, this does not mean that climate change is not a serious challenge. ...



...The political responsibility of science.
This rise of climate deadline-ism raises a central question about the role of science in politics. Despite good intentions, the rhetoric of a 2030 deadline is the political (mis)use of science for setting an artificial deadline23. Although the rhetoric is usually seen by scientists as a misleading interpretation of the IPCC findings24, the IPCC and most climate scientists have so far kept silent, thereby implicitly seeming to endorse it.

However, given that the IPCC’s SR15 report helped to create the condition for this rhetoric, as the institutional authority for climate science the IPCC should take responsibility for more actively engaging in political conversations around it.
After accepting an invitation from the UNFCCC to prepare a special report on 1.5 °C, the IPCC increasingly finds itself in a catch-22 position: operating under a singular regime of consensual policy neutrality, yet trying to meet the different expectations of governmental policymakers and a new generation of civic activists25.

Now the IPCC faces a challenge to its historical stance of policy neutrality. To remain silent about the 2030 deadline rhetoric is perhaps a safe option for the IPCC. It can retreat into a comfort zone that appears to preserve its integrity as a policy-neutral advisor.But because of the dangers of climate deadline-ism that we have outlined, this would be irresponsible...

Sidst redigeret af Vymer : 24th July 2019 kl. 04:30 AM.
Besvar med citat
  #3 (permalink)  
Gammel 14th September 2019, 05:27 PM
Senior Member
 
Registreringsdato: Nov 2008
Indlæg: 8,722
Standard

Vindmøller er åbenbart ikke helt så grønne som de udstilles som.

Climate change: Electrical industry's 'dirty secret' boosts warming: BBC
Besvar med citat
Svar


Emne værktøjer
Visningsmåde

Regler for indlæg
Du kan ikke starte nye emner
Du kan ikke svare på indlæg
Du kan ikke vedhæfte filer
Du kan ikke rette dine indlæg

vB code er aktiv
Smilies er aktiv
[IMG] kode er aktiv
HTML kode er ikke aktiv
Trackbacks are aktiv
Pingbacks are aktiv
Refbacks are ikke aktiv

Lignende emner
Emne Startet af Forum Svar Nyeste indlæg
Landbrug, økonomi og klima Vymer Økonomi 0 29th September 2017 08:03 AM
Til dem med et agnostisk verdenssyn på klima Vymer Off-topic 39 18th February 2010 01:55 PM
Klima: hvor lidt vi ved om det. Vymer Off-topic 79 16th January 2010 09:29 PM
Bagom klima.skandalen Goldenboy Off-topic 0 11th October 2009 10:00 PM
Hvordan ser det politiske klima ud p.t. ? Thomas Generelt 0 31st March 2008 09:36 AM



Al tidssætning er GMT +1. Klokken er nu 01:04 AM.



Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.