4 ms·

Before someone makes the inevitable joke, no this will not help offset climate change temperature gains and neutralize the risk of heat-waves. The summer tempe

Before someone makes the inevitable joke, no this will not help offset climate change temperature gains and neutralize the risk of heat-waves. The summer temperatures will continue to get hotter. It's the winter temperatures that will get colder. Both require energy use to keep housing liveable. Which, unless we dramatically transition our energy generation to renewables, will just continue exacerbating the climate problem. Ugh.

nodejs_rulez_1 5y ago
I did not know Gulf stream stops being a warm stream in summer, what an interesting phenomenon.
qweqwweqwe-90i 5y ago
It would have been nice if the environmentalists hadn't stopped nuclear energy in it's tracks.
- wittycardio 5y ago
  Would be nicer if you knew who to actually blame
  - yodelshady 5y ago
    No, the greens don't get away that easily. Fossil fuel companies are the prime cause, but the opposition were every bit as aware of the consequences of not shifting away and every bit as culpable for frustrating that shift. They chose to ignore the consequences because shouting "nein danke" at everything makes you look principled.
    - cableshaft 5y ago
      While I agree it shouldn't have been slowed down when it did, Nuclear Power Plants are not going to save us now. "Nuclear energy is being outcompeted by renewable energy sources and is an inefficient solution to carbon emissions, according to the annual World Nuclear Industry Status Report (WNISR) published on 24 September 2019." "The report estimates that the average construction time for reactors worldwide was ten years, significantly longer than the World Nuclear Association’s estimated construction time of between five and eight years. Nuclear reactors are also slow to start and a number have closed, with nine units closing over 2018 and a further five units expected to close over 2019." "The report also states that nuclear power is more expensive than renewables. Nuclear energy costs around $112-189 per megawatt hour (MWh) compared to $26-56MWh for onshore wind and $36-44MWh for solar power. Levelised cost estimates for solar and wind also dropped by 88% and 69% respectively, while they increased by 23% for nuclear power." https://www.power-technology.com/news/nuclear-energy-report-wnisr/ https://www.power-technology.com/news/nuclear-energy-report-...
      - asdff 5y ago
        For a major project averaging two years behind estimates is pretty good actually. Look at how long it takes to build a train in the U.S.
        cableshaft 5y ago
        Well the problem is we really need to cut emissions at least in half by 2030, so less than 10 years (and even that's probably not enough to stop some pretty awful shit). So if we suddenly start building 180+ nuclear plants this year (what the article says we need for the whole planet), they're unlikely to start providing any emission reduction at all until after 2030. That's part of the reason why they said in the article that they're too slow. That doesn't mean they can't be part of the solution, especially planning for 2040 and beyond, and Bill Gates mentioned in his book that he is investing some serious money into some next-gen nuclear power plants that is supposed to address some of their current issues, but they can't be the primary solution anymore (maybe they could have been 10-20 years ago if we built a lot more of them).
jakear 5y ago
Or, redesign houses to not need nearly as much energy for heating and cooling, preferring natural heating via the sun and cooling via breeze. https://www.codylundin.com/codys_house.html https://www.codylundin.com/codys_house.html
- nomel 5y ago
  > and cooling via breeze This makes many assumption that do not fit very large parts of the inhabited earth.
  - Overton-Window 5y ago
    Why should those living within 35° of the equator have to subsidise those living in the naturally uninhabitable reaches beyond?
    - effingwewt 5y ago
      Not everyone can choose where they live, or when/where to move. What's happened to sympathy/empathy these days?
    - beardedwizard 5y ago
      Another perspective: Because if you don't they will later be inclined to take it by force.
    - nomel 5y ago
      Well you're talking about a few billion people here, and a large chunk of the worlds population. And, since you can't warm "by breeze", you now have the worlds population squished into two very small bands around the earth. Here's a neat "population vs latitude" graph: https://engaging-data.com/population-latitude-longitude/ https://engaging-data.com/population-latitude-longitude/
- dogma1138 5y ago
  So you going to level down and rebuild entire cities? The building I live in in London was built in the mid 1800’s there are many others like it, Edwardian buildings aren’t much better not to mention the 50’s - 70’s council built blocks. Rebuilding buildings would also have a major carbon footprint not to mention cost.
8bitsrule 5y ago
I recall reading that temperatures 12 feet underground range between 55F and 65F (13-18C) year around. Found this chart [ https://www.builditsolar.com/Projects/Cooling/time-lag-vs-depth.gif https://www.builditsolar.com/Projects/Cooling/time-lag-vs-de... ] which suggests that's true with a ground-temp range of 42F to 82F (6-27C). And then there's Coober Pedy, which enjoys a 104F temp swing each year. If/when things get dire, there's always underground (moving into new digs). Those cities in Turkey are getting easier to understand.

nodejs_rulez_1 5y ago

I did not know Gulf stream stops being a warm stream in summer, what an interesting phenomenon.

qweqwweqwe-90i 5y ago

It would have been nice if the environmentalists hadn't stopped nuclear energy in it's tracks.

wittycardio 5y ago
Would be nicer if you knew who to actually blame
- yodelshady 5y ago
  No, the greens don't get away that easily. Fossil fuel companies are the prime cause, but the opposition were every bit as aware of the consequences of not shifting away and every bit as culpable for frustrating that shift. They chose to ignore the consequences because shouting "nein danke" at everything makes you look principled.
  - cableshaft 5y ago
    While I agree it shouldn't have been slowed down when it did, Nuclear Power Plants are not going to save us now. "Nuclear energy is being outcompeted by renewable energy sources and is an inefficient solution to carbon emissions, according to the annual World Nuclear Industry Status Report (WNISR) published on 24 September 2019." "The report estimates that the average construction time for reactors worldwide was ten years, significantly longer than the World Nuclear Association’s estimated construction time of between five and eight years. Nuclear reactors are also slow to start and a number have closed, with nine units closing over 2018 and a further five units expected to close over 2019." "The report also states that nuclear power is more expensive than renewables. Nuclear energy costs around $112-189 per megawatt hour (MWh) compared to $26-56MWh for onshore wind and $36-44MWh for solar power. Levelised cost estimates for solar and wind also dropped by 88% and 69% respectively, while they increased by 23% for nuclear power." https://www.power-technology.com/news/nuclear-energy-report-wnisr/ https://www.power-technology.com/news/nuclear-energy-report-...
    - asdff 5y ago
      For a major project averaging two years behind estimates is pretty good actually. Look at how long it takes to build a train in the U.S.
      - cableshaft 5y ago
        Well the problem is we really need to cut emissions at least in half by 2030, so less than 10 years (and even that's probably not enough to stop some pretty awful shit). So if we suddenly start building 180+ nuclear plants this year (what the article says we need for the whole planet), they're unlikely to start providing any emission reduction at all until after 2030. That's part of the reason why they said in the article that they're too slow. That doesn't mean they can't be part of the solution, especially planning for 2040 and beyond, and Bill Gates mentioned in his book that he is investing some serious money into some next-gen nuclear power plants that is supposed to address some of their current issues, but they can't be the primary solution anymore (maybe they could have been 10-20 years ago if we built a lot more of them).

jakear 5y ago

Or, redesign houses to not need nearly as much energy for heating and cooling, preferring natural heating via the sun and cooling via breeze. https://www.codylundin.com/codys_house.html https://www.codylundin.com/codys_house.html

nomel 5y ago
> and cooling via breeze This makes many assumption that do not fit very large parts of the inhabited earth.
- Overton-Window 5y ago
  Why should those living within 35° of the equator have to subsidise those living in the naturally uninhabitable reaches beyond?
  - effingwewt 5y ago
    Not everyone can choose where they live, or when/where to move. What's happened to sympathy/empathy these days?
  - beardedwizard 5y ago
    Another perspective: Because if you don't they will later be inclined to take it by force.
  - nomel 5y ago
    Well you're talking about a few billion people here, and a large chunk of the worlds population. And, since you can't warm "by breeze", you now have the worlds population squished into two very small bands around the earth. Here's a neat "population vs latitude" graph: https://engaging-data.com/population-latitude-longitude/ https://engaging-data.com/population-latitude-longitude/
dogma1138 5y ago
So you going to level down and rebuild entire cities? The building I live in in London was built in the mid 1800’s there are many others like it, Edwardian buildings aren’t much better not to mention the 50’s - 70’s council built blocks. Rebuilding buildings would also have a major carbon footprint not to mention cost.

8bitsrule 5y ago

I recall reading that temperatures 12 feet underground range between 55F and 65F (13-18C) year around. Found this chart [ https://www.builditsolar.com/Projects/Cooling/time-lag-vs-depth.gif https://www.builditsolar.com/Projects/Cooling/time-lag-vs-de... ] which suggests that's true with a ground-temp range of 42F to 82F (6-27C). And then there's Coober Pedy, which enjoys a 104F temp swing each year. If/when things get dire, there's always underground (moving into new digs). Those cities in Turkey are getting easier to understand.