Berkeley becomes first US city to ban natural gas in new buildings.

stevehorn

Member Who Talks (A Lot!)
Oct 29, 2008
27,025
18,184
0
New buildings must be 100% electric....but almost 50% of power generation in California is generated by....natural gas power plants. Carbon emissions are ok, just in someone else's atmosphere.
That's what I always think about with the desire for electrical everything to reduce emissions. It seems like people think the electricity comes out of nowhere. Since natural gas appliances in homes typically are more efficient (at least in my experience), I wonder if anyone does an overall analysis of the emissions impact of these type of laws including power generation.
 

sacatomato horn

Member Who Talks
Sep 15, 2016
362
747
0
That's what I always think about with the desire for electrical everything to reduce emissions. It seems like people think the electricity comes out of nowhere. Since natural gas appliances in homes typically are more efficient (at least in my experience), I wonder if anyone does an overall analysis of the emissions impact of these type of laws including power generation.
The theory is that we can become 100% clean energy by 2035 and shut down natural gas power plants. But the laws of physics say that wind and solar are approaching maximum efficiency boundaries. Green advocates counter that better battery storage of power generated from wind and solar farms is the answer, but it isn't. Here is an excerpt from Northwestern U Dept of Applied Physics. Fossil\hydro\nuclear may eventually be replaced, but not by solar\wind.

* Solar technologies have improved greatly and will continue to become cheaper and more efficient. But the era of 10-fold gains is over. The physics boundary for silicon photovoltaic (PV) cells, the Shockley-Queisser Limit, is a maximum conversion of 34% of photons into electrons; the best commercial PV technology today exceeds 26%.
* Wind power technology has also improved greatly, but here, too, no 10-fold gains are left. The physics boundary for a wind turbine, the Betz Limit, is a maximum capture of 60% of kinetic energy in moving air; commercial turbines today exceed 40%.
* The annual output of Tesla’s Gigafactory, the world’s largest battery factory, could store three minutes’ worth of annual U.S. electricity demand. It would require 1,000 years of production to make enough batteries for two days’ worth of U.S. electricity demand. Meanwhile, 50–100 pounds of materials are mined, moved, and processed for every pound of battery produced


https://www.manhattan-institute.org/green-energy-revolution-near-impossible
 

stevehorn

Member Who Talks (A Lot!)
Oct 29, 2008
27,025
18,184
0
The theory is that we can become 100% clean energy by 2035 and shut down natural gas power plants. But the laws of physics say that wind and solar are approaching maximum efficiency boundaries. Green advocates counter that better battery storage of power generated from wind and solar farms is the answer, but it isn't. Here is an excerpt from Northwestern U Dept of Applied Physics. Fossil\hydro\nuclear may eventually be replaced, but not by solar\wind.

* Solar technologies have improved greatly and will continue to become cheaper and more efficient. But the era of 10-fold gains is over. The physics boundary for silicon photovoltaic (PV) cells, the Shockley-Queisser Limit, is a maximum conversion of 34% of photons into electrons; the best commercial PV technology today exceeds 26%.
* Wind power technology has also improved greatly, but here, too, no 10-fold gains are left. The physics boundary for a wind turbine, the Betz Limit, is a maximum capture of 60% of kinetic energy in moving air; commercial turbines today exceed 40%.
* The annual output of Tesla’s Gigafactory, the world’s largest battery factory, could store three minutes’ worth of annual U.S. electricity demand. It would require 1,000 years of production to make enough batteries for two days’ worth of U.S. electricity demand. Meanwhile, 50–100 pounds of materials are mined, moved, and processed for every pound of battery produced


https://www.manhattan-institute.org/green-energy-revolution-near-impossible
The last sentence you noted is very important. Not only the energy required to produce the batteries, but the eventual disposal of those same batteries since I believe none last forever.

In the first couple of bullets, I suspect why commercial production is not at the maximum values is that the differential in cost between what is currently produced and the maximum is exponentially higher.
 

Duke Silver

Member Who Talks (A Lot!)
Oct 29, 2008
49,146
42,546
0
The theory is that we can become 100% clean energy by 2035 and shut down natural gas power plants. But the laws of physics say that wind and solar are approaching maximum efficiency boundaries. Green advocates counter that better battery storage of power generated from wind and solar farms is the answer, but it isn't. Here is an excerpt from Northwestern U Dept of Applied Physics. Fossil\hydro\nuclear may eventually be replaced, but not by solar\wind.

* Solar technologies have improved greatly and will continue to become cheaper and more efficient. But the era of 10-fold gains is over. The physics boundary for silicon photovoltaic (PV) cells, the Shockley-Queisser Limit, is a maximum conversion of 34% of photons into electrons; the best commercial PV technology today exceeds 26%.
* Wind power technology has also improved greatly, but here, too, no 10-fold gains are left. The physics boundary for a wind turbine, the Betz Limit, is a maximum capture of 60% of kinetic energy in moving air; commercial turbines today exceed 40%.
* The annual output of Tesla’s Gigafactory, the world’s largest battery factory, could store three minutes’ worth of annual U.S. electricity demand. It would require 1,000 years of production to make enough batteries for two days’ worth of U.S. electricity demand. Meanwhile, 50–100 pounds of materials are mined, moved, and processed for every pound of battery produced


https://www.manhattan-institute.org/green-energy-revolution-near-impossible
Better start building nuclear plants.
 

cctxfan

Member Who Talks (A Lot!)
Oct 29, 2008
21,247
3,486
0
Austin, TX
That's what I always think about with the desire for electrical everything to reduce emissions. It seems like people think the electricity comes out of nowhere. Since natural gas appliances in homes typically are more efficient (at least in my experience), I wonder if anyone does an overall analysis of the emissions impact of these type of laws including power generation.
This. And, yes, I agree that banning natural gas supply/appliances from new buildings is dumb.
 
  • Like
Reactions: padrehorn11

btown1110

Member Who Talks (A Lot!)
Jan 23, 2012
14,643
16,597
0
This is so dumb and so is not leaning into natural gas while we figure out safer fission and then fusion.

If Californians really cared about the environment, they would go ahead and send all of the extra money it'll cost to build solar/wind farms to India to replace their thousands of inefficient coal plants with very efficient and low emission combined cycle natural gas plants.
 

ttaghorn

Member Who Talks (A Lot!)
Oct 29, 2008
11,749
3,167
0
I think they should consider scooping up all that **** on the sidewalks in Frisco and burning it to generate electricity. Recycling at its truest form.

Also a good idea would be to cook and heat with Wood stoves. Been doing it for centuries, and it works. California always leads with novel ideas, sure glad I live in Texas.
 

calvin farquhar

Member Who Talks (A Lot!)
Dec 19, 2017
6,319
11,175
0
I think they should consider scooping up all that **** on the sidewalks in Frisco and burning it to generate electricity. Recycling at its truest form.

Also a good idea would be to cook and heat with Wood stoves. Been doing it for centuries, and it works. California always leads with novel ideas, sure glad I live in Texas.

Doesn't JG live in Frisco. :) What are you trying to say that hasn't been said already.
 

mcb0703!

Member Who Talks (A Lot!)
Feb 6, 2015
13,353
22,132
0

camp_4

Member Who Talks
Jun 22, 2017
416
1,244
0
The theory is that we can become 100% clean energy by 2035 and shut down natural gas power plants. But the laws of physics say that wind and solar are approaching maximum efficiency boundaries. Green advocates counter that better battery storage of power generated from wind and solar farms is the answer, but it isn't. Here is an excerpt from Northwestern U Dept of Applied Physics. Fossil\hydro\nuclear may eventually be replaced, but not by solar\wind.

* Solar technologies have improved greatly and will continue to become cheaper and more efficient. But the era of 10-fold gains is over. The physics boundary for silicon photovoltaic (PV) cells, the Shockley-Queisser Limit, is a maximum conversion of 34% of photons into electrons; the best commercial PV technology today exceeds 26%.
* Wind power technology has also improved greatly, but here, too, no 10-fold gains are left. The physics boundary for a wind turbine, the Betz Limit, is a maximum capture of 60% of kinetic energy in moving air; commercial turbines today exceed 40%.
* The annual output of Tesla’s Gigafactory, the world’s largest battery factory, could store three minutes’ worth of annual U.S. electricity demand. It would require 1,000 years of production to make enough batteries for two days’ worth of U.S. electricity demand. Meanwhile, 50–100 pounds of materials are mined, moved, and processed for every pound of battery produced


https://www.manhattan-institute.org/green-energy-revolution-near-impossible
I did diligence on a deal for auto parts company investing in electric batteries. I was shocked by how little power could be held at the expense and physical size of the battery required. And this company is on par with Tesla as an industry leader in terms of technology. When I hear some these ideas now I just laugh. Few people realize how far away from any sort of reality this is.
 

SAhornfan

Member Who Talks (A Lot!)
Oct 29, 2008
30,118
17,708
0
San Antonio, TX
I did diligence on a deal for auto parts company investing in electric batteries. I was shocked by how little power could be held at the expense and physical size of the battery required. And this company is on par with Tesla as an industry leader in terms of technology. When I hear some these ideas now I just laugh. Few people realize how far away from any sort of reality this is.
Given how far from reality people in Berkeley appear to be, I'm not surprised they're hitching to that wagon.
 

jamesrh

Member Who Talks (A Lot!)
Oct 29, 2008
3,474
2,532
0
I did diligence on a deal for auto parts company investing in electric batteries. I was shocked by how little power could be held at the expense and physical size of the battery required. And this company is on par with Tesla as an industry leader in terms of technology. When I hear some these ideas now I just laugh. Few people realize how far away from any sort of reality this is.
Most of the progress is being made in things like Pumped Hydroelectric Storage This uses excess electrical power to pump water in a reservoir at an elevation which can then be used to generate hydroelectric power when the solar array or windfarm is not generating adequate levels of power.
 

SAhornfan

Member Who Talks (A Lot!)
Oct 29, 2008
30,118
17,708
0
San Antonio, TX
Most of the progress is being made in things like Pumped Hydroelectric Storage This uses excess electrical power to pump water in a reservoir at an elevation which can then be used to generate hydroelectric power when the solar array or windfarm is not generating adequate levels of power.
This sounds efficient and certainly compact.