I’m a numbers type of guy - I work with them everyday, do cost estimates, and ‘pencil out’ whether or not a project is viable.
So frankly, it offends me that do-gooders gloss through that step, when they’re using my money.
I hope you understand that. I don’t ‘hate’ solar. But I have great disdain for the solar pushers. And you just pulled the same old rabbit trick with the 200k deaths claim.
Every. Single. Modern. Device. Has. A. Cost. Since the advent of the automobile, 3.5 million people have died in car deaths. Using your logic, we are complete fools...we should give up our cars and start walking. Obviously we don’t though.
Same with coal power.
Lets pare down the numbers. The EPA says is 13k deaths a year in the US, so again it seems some exaggerated numbers are being used...and you are probably conflating worldwide particulate deaths due to indoor cooking fires with coal. But its 13k, according to the EPA (less than half of the auto deaths btw).
Now in order to accept even the EPA’s claim, I have to ignore the fact that states that have had stricter particulate rules (North Carolina) for a decade showed no reduction in deaths. Also, I have to pretend that no energy is used to manufacture a solar panel (all the while knowing that massive amounts of fossil fuel derived heat is used). Then I have to accept the premise of your argument - that its a two horse race between solar and coal....all the while knowing that coal use is in decline and natural gas use is increasing...and that the real, viable, successor to coal is natural gas.
And then I have to overlook the extreme damage our do-gooders have done to the third world...where they use the World Bank to enforce some of the most expensive power on the planet (solar) on the poorest people in the world - people who would benefit greatly from having a reliable source of power, to the point of extending their lifespans.
And I need to back up some more - your argument is based on a libertarian notion that solar will get you ‘off the grid’. It won’t. It can’t. It is not a constant, reliable source of power. So you always need grid backup - wind and solar both suffer from this, to the point that they offset practically zero fossil fuel generating capacity. I hope you can understand that - every time a power company builds a windmill, it is 100% extra cost, above and beyond their normal costs. There is no offset or reduction on their plant size, no matter how many windmills they have. Its terribly ineffective. There are some exceptions btw. In Portugal they lift water with wind energy and release it later through turbines - a giant non-chemical battery to help make their wind more continuous. A nuke plant in Michigan does the same with water - a genius way to store wasted excess energy created throughout the night. You see - I’ve got an open mind, and I’m fascinated by solutions that really work.
You know what doesn’t work: Government using my money to foist solar projects on an organization whose mission is allegedly to provide medical care to veterans. No mind melt or leap of logic can turn a boondoggle like that into a conservative cause celebre. It is exactly what t appears to be - crony capitalism, Obama style.
One more thing that bugs me about green energy - all the rules are thrown out the window. I mentioned in my initial comment that the fence around this solar field is a zoning violation. It just flat is, no argument can be made that it isn’t. And as a person who has handled dozens of zoning cases, and even been denied a variance for a fence before...it offends me. The panels are ‘for the children’ I suppose, so the rules get tossed out. Remember the Bundy ranch standoff? The entire reason the feds are reducing the number of cattle he can graze is in the name of the environment - a turtle in particular is threatened. It has been for years - I remember a huge portion of FT Irwin was off limits to training, back in the 1990’s, because of this turtle. So for a quarter century at least, decisions have been made in the name of protecting this turtle. And the turtle’s plight must be getting worse - this is why more territory is declared restricted, and it affects Bundy, etc. There is one major exception though. One instance in which the turtle’s needs are trumped. One facility built right in the middle of the turtle’s territory, in which several miles of desert have been completely cleared. Ivanpah.
Animal Farm comes to mind.
I could go on for dozens of pages...this is just a small sample of why solar pushers get it wrong.
“Every. Single. Modern. Device. Has. A. Cost. Since the advent of the automobile, 3.5 million people have died in car deaths. Using your logic, we are complete fools...we should give up our cars and start walking. Obviously we don’t though.”
Not valid logic. With a vehicle I can GREATLY affect my own safety by cautious defensive driving. What pray tell am I similarly going to do about global mercury poisoning?
24k, 13k, 7k, 600k, 1 in 8 deaths, 30k IT all depends on exactly what area, what year, and the exact cause. One thing that is very clear is that the global use of solar power vs. coal would save an enormous number of lives.
http://www.treehugger.com/fossil-fuels/coal-death-toll-china-suffers-670000-smog-related-deaths-each-year.html
http://www.catf.us/fossil/problems/power_plants//
http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/25/health/who-air-pollution-deaths/index.html
http://www.ecomall.com/greenshopping/cleanair.htm
“Now in order to accept even the EPA’s claim, I have to ignore the fact that states that have had stricter particulate rules (North Carolina) for a decade showed no reduction in deaths.”
That is entirely false as I saw in at least one of the links I just looked at and I think I added it above.
” Also, I have to pretend that no energy is used to manufacture a solar panel”
More BS. unless you also want to start including the energy to mine the coal and create the power plant, lay utility lines, maintain them etc.
“Then I have to accept the premise of your argument - that its a two horse race between solar and coal.”
In no way shape or form do I believe or support that premise.
“the real, viable, successor to coal is natural gas.”
I certainly believe there is a place for natural gas. It certainly has less emissions like mercury but still has sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides. Although I think nuclear is superior.
“And then I have to overlook the extreme damage our do-gooders have done to the third world...where they use the World Bank to enforce some of the most expensive power on the planet (solar) on the poorest people in the world”
That is delusional. In many of these place the cost in connecting a village to the grid is more than ten times the cost of solar. http://www.villageprojects.org/
“And I need to back up some more - your argument is based on a libertarian notion that solar will get you ‘off the grid’. It won’t. It can’t. It is not a constant, reliable source of power. “
Another complete delusion. It is called energy storage. In fact we even have panels now that work on deep infrared and get energy from the re-reflected energy at night. 100% solar with complete energy storage may not be ideal or practical given other alternatives, but there are plenty of off grid home and communities. You are living in a dream world Neo.
“I hope you can understand that - every time a power company builds a windmill, it is 100% extra cost, above and beyond their normal costs. There is no offset or reduction on their plant size, no matter how many windmills they have.”
I can’t even imagine what you are thinking here? Of course you do not chop off a part of an existing power plant because you put up a wind turbine. Power use in this country keep growing. More power is constantly needed. More wind and solar means less new power plants.
“You know what doesn’t work: Government using my money to foist solar projects on an organization whose mission is allegedly to provide medical care to veterans.”
Govt is already using your money to foist death causing coal and has been for decades. But since coal is sooo much safer I am sure that was ok. SMH
“There are some exceptions btw. In Portugal they lift water with wind energy and release it later through turbines “
Yeah, like pumped hydro is the only effective energy storage mechanism
http://energystorage.org/energy-storage/energy-storage-technologies
” I mentioned in my initial comment that the fence around this solar field is a zoning violation. “
Zoning variances are done all the time for a variety of causes and if you don’t like how the leaders in your community handle them, then I suggest you try to get them removed form office rather than blame solar for it.
“But I have great disdain for the solar pushers.”
Exactly my point. After a long rant you made not one single valid point. You just hate people promoting clean, independent, distributed energy. Too bad for you.
Power Blackout = clean air
http://www.nature.com/news/2004/040726/full/news040726-1.html
BTW there is one more inescapable fact, unless you are one of the deluded few who believes the earth manufactures new oil and coal deposits at a rate as fast as we use them and are projected to use them, then ultimately fossil fuels still have one unavoidable problem. THEY ARE NOT SUSTAINABLE.