4 ms·

There is no night time renewable supply at California scale without nuclear power. For nuclear power to be available 10-20 years from now, those proposed plant

There is no night time renewable supply at California scale without nuclear power. For nuclear power to be available 10-20 years from now, those proposed plants would need to be going through approvals now. None are. California will be burning gas 10 to 20 years from now.

therealdrag0 6y ago
Wind can blow at night. Also batteries can be developed (in the broad sense including dams,flywheels, gravity rocks, etc)
- testfoobar 6y ago
  Winds die down at night. No battery tech today can store the energy needs of millions and millions of home during the night. We do not have dam capacity to build water batteries at the scale needed. Without nuclear or dramatic battery innovations, we will always burn natural gas for night time energy.
  - therealdrag0 6y ago
    > winds die at night How sure of that are you? I’m not so sure but quick google says maybe not as true as you imply: https://slate.com/business/2015/09/texas-electricity-goes-negative-wind-power-was-so-plentiful-one-night-that-producers-paid-the-state-to-take-it.html https://slate.com/business/2015/09/texas-electricity-goes-ne.... Maybe région dépendant? Is that a deal breaker given power can be transported between regions? > Battery tech I see part of the point of this legislation is to drive innovation. We’ll never get change if we just say “it’s impossible so we have to burn fossils.” I don’t dispute any of your points really except if the policy is gradual enough it will force us to adapt and that is a good thing IMO.
    - testfoobar 6y ago
      This legislation won't drive innovation. It'll just move the burning of fossil fuels out to the electric power plant instead of at the consumer level. Burning natural gas to produce electricity to power electric heaters at home is actually worse from a CO2 perspective than burning natural gas directly for home heating.
      - therealdrag0 6y ago
        It’ll move SOME burning. Some burning will be replaced by other fuels sources, and as more alternatives are ramped up less and less of that moved gas will be burned. Whereas if it’s a stove, you’re committing to 20+ years of 100% gas burning on that stove. If you think ÇA can’t make a dent in gas consumption in 20 years then we just disagree about that.

therealdrag0 6y ago

Wind can blow at night. Also batteries can be developed (in the broad sense including dams,flywheels, gravity rocks, etc)

testfoobar 6y ago
Winds die down at night. No battery tech today can store the energy needs of millions and millions of home during the night. We do not have dam capacity to build water batteries at the scale needed. Without nuclear or dramatic battery innovations, we will always burn natural gas for night time energy.
- therealdrag0 6y ago
  > winds die at night How sure of that are you? I’m not so sure but quick google says maybe not as true as you imply: https://slate.com/business/2015/09/texas-electricity-goes-negative-wind-power-was-so-plentiful-one-night-that-producers-paid-the-state-to-take-it.html https://slate.com/business/2015/09/texas-electricity-goes-ne.... Maybe région dépendant? Is that a deal breaker given power can be transported between regions? > Battery tech I see part of the point of this legislation is to drive innovation. We’ll never get change if we just say “it’s impossible so we have to burn fossils.” I don’t dispute any of your points really except if the policy is gradual enough it will force us to adapt and that is a good thing IMO.
  - testfoobar 6y ago
    This legislation won't drive innovation. It'll just move the burning of fossil fuels out to the electric power plant instead of at the consumer level. Burning natural gas to produce electricity to power electric heaters at home is actually worse from a CO2 perspective than burning natural gas directly for home heating.
    - therealdrag0 6y ago
      It’ll move SOME burning. Some burning will be replaced by other fuels sources, and as more alternatives are ramped up less and less of that moved gas will be burned. Whereas if it’s a stove, you’re committing to 20+ years of 100% gas burning on that stove. If you think ÇA can’t make a dent in gas consumption in 20 years then we just disagree about that.