• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

The Climate Change Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

boyo

Mark Ella (57)
Perhaps you need to look to your anatomy.


Farts usually involve Hydrogen Sulphide, which accounts for the smell (mostly).

Farts which contain a large amount of methane and hydrogen can be flammable.

Sheep, deer, cattle, and other livestock can belch methane when they eat, and regurgitate, grass.
 

BPC

Phil Hardcastle (33)
Dick and fart jokes are the most sublime level of humour. We can't ban farts when the world needs laughter now more than ever!
 

Ruggo

Mark Ella (57)
Farts usually involve Hydrogen Sulphide, which accounts for the smell (mostly).

Farts which contain a large amount of methane and hydrogen can be flammable.

Sheep, deer, cattle, and other livestock can belch methane when they eat, and regurgitate, grass.


You know your shit Boyo. :)
 

Runner

Nev Cottrell (35)
Models can’t hide true RET cost

25 Aug 2014


Studies relied on by the renewable energy lobby to justify the continuation of the Renewable Energy Target make a lot of noise about the RET’s effect on the wholesale price of energy. But as shown in this newspaper today, force feeding up to 30 per cent renewables such as wind- and sun-generated electricity into the power grid may put downward pressure on wholesale prices amid weak demand by artificially boosting supply. But the effect of forcing more power into the system will then show up in other ways: by increasing retail prices through the cost of renewable energy certificates. Those increased prices will reduce gross domestic product, by depressing productivity and by pushing up prices and costs elsewhere in the economy. That is, it is a highly expensive way to reduce emissions.
As previously discussed in this newspaper, an ongoing review of the RET led by Dick Warburton to make recommendations about winding back or even ending the scheme has resulted in considerable argument over the scheme’s effect on the electricity markets. These arguments include contradictory findings by computer modelling groups, with the RET lobby relying on studies pointing to the effect of dumping a lot of additional capacity into the wholesale market at a time of stagnating demand. However, as the coverage in today’s Financial Review notes, retailers still have to buy the Renewable Energy Certificates required to meet their obligations under the RET from the renewable generators, and that is expected to cost $37 billion between now and 2030, or as much as the electricity itself. That is $37 billion that must be reflected in higher prices elsewhere.
The arguments over the Renewable Energy Target show just how deftly skilled lobbyists can distort the debate, but we should not lose sight of the fact that the RET in any form will cost many billions of dollars in return for an hypothetical social benefit of the carbon emissions being offset.
The Australian Financial Review
 

Mr Doug

Dick Tooth (41)
You keep making that sort of comment.

Where we're seeing the huge impact from solar is in small scale PV systems on a house by house basis. This is already having a significant impact on peak demand because almost always, peak demand is matched with lots of sunshine.

As battery systems improve, it will become possible for these households to store electricity and use it when they need it. We may see small scale suburban storage systems where power can be saved and shared on a neighbourhood basis.

I agree that large scale solar plants are unlikely to become the norm anytime soon.

Gas fired plants could start replacing coal fired power stations quite soon though for baseload generation.


Braveheart81, I assume you would be aware of the fact that PV cell performance will max out at around 25c. "The hotter it gets, the better the performance" is false.
On a very hot day, production from the PV cells on your roof can drop by as much as 20%! We should all stick to the facts.
 

Scoey

Tony Shaw (54)
Braveheart81, I assume you would be aware of the fact that PV cell performance will max out at around 25c. "The hotter it gets, the better the performance" is false.
On a very hot day, production from the PV cells on your roof can drop by as much as 20%! We should all stick to the facts.

I haven't noticed an appreciable difference with mine Mr Doug. I have a ~3kw system on my roof and in a clear day in winter the max generation is much the same as it gets in the middle of summer.
I'll have a closer look this coming summer though as you've got me curious now.
Can I ask what your basing that on? Experience? Research? Or both?
 

Sully

Tim Horan (67)
Staff member
The lower efficency is more than compensated by longer days and in most cases a better alignment of the panel to the sun in summer.

Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using Tapatalk
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
Braveheart81, I assume you would be aware of the fact that PV cell performance will max out at around 25c. "The hotter it gets, the better the performance" is false.
On a very hot day, production from the PV cells on your roof can drop by as much as 20%! We should all stick to the facts.

Did I say anything like that Mr Doug?

I just said that in general, hot days where demand spikes are also very sunny days.

It's not like there are many 40 degree days where it is overcast and gloomy.

Unsurprisingly, solar panel uptake is strongest in states where peak demand aligns with hot weather rather than cold weather. The coldest state, Tasmania is largely powered by renewables in the form of hydro-electric.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top