OT: Solar farm with batteries, to power LA

[Bill Sloman]

On Monday, September 16, 2019 at 9:37:44 AM UTC+10, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Sun, 15 Sep 2019 22:57:19 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 15/09/19 18:18, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 15 Sep 2019 07:32:49 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 14/09/19 23:38, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2019 23:18:07 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 14/09/19 21:25, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2019 12:52:42 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:


More precip but also more evaporation. More rainfall does no good if the
water evaporates before it gets where you want it.

OK, more rainfall makes the soil dryer. Logic!

Do read what he wrote (cf speedread your preconception of what he wrote)

Do respond to what he wrote (cf make poor strawman arguments)

https://www.dropbox.com/s/jf8rjfh93e13rre/Corn_Yield.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/qsrtk88vrvtu03w/indicator3_2013_ProductionGrain.PNG?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/0tm8wyli83nt1v4/human-progress.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/mebwcus72nmr16p/Leaf_Area_NASA.jpg?raw=1


But that doesn't matter since we'll all be dead in 10 years.

I'm sure all of those graphs are real.

I'm sure *none* of them have any relevance whatsoever to
the simple point I made. I really don't see why you posted
them.

The standard retail financial disclaimer "past performance is
not a guide to future performance" also applies in other
areas!


I've been hearing how we'll all be dead in 10 or so years, for about
50 years now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Population_Bomb

It sells books and wins elections, I suppose.

10 years from today seems to be the standard for doomsday. Like Free
Beer Tomorrow.

Just like 2 years before a product takes off.

But none of your subsequent points have anything to do
with the temperature dependence of precipitation vs
evaporation.

It has to do with the general case of doomsday predictions; whatever
happens must be bad. That appeals to some people, goodness knows why.

I'm struggling to deal with the promised California Perpetual Drought.
Our big reservoir is at its lowest point of the year... 93% full. It
might rain tomorrow, about a month early. Snow season starts soon.
There wasn't going to be any more snow, either. I need new ski boots.

Why can't people look at the facts: things keep getting better.

Not always.

The fact that the curves are currently looking better and better doesn't say anything about whether the improvements are sustainable. Lemming populations regularly go through population explosions followed by crashes - you may be looking the run-up to a human population crash. They have happened.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collapse:_How_Societies_Choose_to_Fail_or_Succeed

One of the points that Jahred Diamond makes is that the people at the top of the tree in societies that are facing collapse seem to concentrate on staying at the top of the tree, rather than worrying about long term prospects for the tree they happen to be at the top of.

The Koch brothers enthusiasm for funding climate change denial propaganda is a fairly obvious modern example.

> Electronics, too. GaN rocks.

Sadly, you can't eat electronics.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 16/09/19 00:37, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Sun, 15 Sep 2019 22:57:19 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 15/09/19 18:18, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 15 Sep 2019 07:32:49 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 14/09/19 23:38, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2019 23:18:07 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 14/09/19 21:25, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2019 12:52:42 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:


More precip but also more evaporation. More rainfall does no good if the
water evaporates before it gets where you want it.

OK, more rainfall makes the soil dryer. Logic!

Do read what he wrote (cf speedread your preconception of what he wrote)

Do respond to what he wrote (cf make poor strawman arguments)

https://www.dropbox.com/s/jf8rjfh93e13rre/Corn_Yield.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/qsrtk88vrvtu03w/indicator3_2013_ProductionGrain.PNG?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/0tm8wyli83nt1v4/human-progress.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/mebwcus72nmr16p/Leaf_Area_NASA.jpg?raw=1


But that doesn't matter since we'll all be dead in 10 years.

I'm sure all of those graphs are real.

I'm sure *none* of them have any relevance whatsoever to
the simple point I made. I really don't see why you posted
them.

The standard retail financial disclaimer "past performance is
not a guide to future performance" also applies in other
areas!


I've been hearing how we'll all be dead in 10 or so years, for about
50 years now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Population_Bomb

It sells books and wins elections, I suppose.

10 years from today seems to be the standard for doomsday. Like Free
Beer Tomorrow.

Just like 2 years before a product takes off.

But none of your subsequent points have anything to do
with the temperature dependence of precipitation vs
evaporation.

It has to do with the general case of doomsday predictions; whatever
happens must be bad. That appeals to some people, goodness knows why.

Irrelevant, of course!

I'm struggling to deal with the promised California Perpetual Drought.
Our big reservoir is at its lowest point of the year... 93% full. It
might rain tomorrow, about a month early. Snow season starts soon.
There wasn't going to be any more snow, either. I need new ski boot

California != the world, something Rick C also has difficulty
grasping.

Weather vs climate; surely you can understand the difference.

Global warming will cause the /global/ /average/ temperature
to rise.

Some places will become /much/ colder, e.g. Europe when the
gulf stream moves southwards.

Principal cause: the lack of /cold/ water from Greenland and
the arctic. There are already ambiguous signs that is happening.


> Why can't people look at the facts: things keep getting better.

Until they get worse.

For example, relentless optimism and excessive risk taking
caused Deepwater Horizon.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Monday, September 16, 2019 at 11:56:53 PM UTC+10, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Mon, 16 Sep 2019 08:14:51 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
On 16/09/19 00:37, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 15 Sep 2019 22:57:19 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
On 15/09/19 18:18, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 15 Sep 2019 07:32:49 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
On 14/09/19 23:38, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2019 23:18:07 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
On 14/09/19 21:25, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2019 12:52:42 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

It has to do with the general case of doomsday predictions; whatever
happens must be bad. That appeals to some people, goodness knows why.

Irrelevant, of course!

No, it shows a strong systematic bias, which even Top Scientists are
not immune to.

They may not be immune to it, but science is all about detecting and cancelling out any systematic biases.

John Larkin doesn't know much about science, so he is unaware of these mechanisms, and doesn't understand them when they are pointed out to him.

I'm struggling to deal with the promised California Perpetual Drought.
Our big reservoir is at its lowest point of the year... 93% full. It
might rain tomorrow, about a month early. Snow season starts soon.
There wasn't going to be any more snow, either. I need new ski boot
California != the world, something Rick C also has difficulty
grasping.

One interesting thing about mid-California is how erratic and
unpredictable the weather is, compared to the rest of the USA.

"California’s precipitation is the most variable, year-on-year, of any state in the nation.

Not only does the Golden State get almost all of its rain and snow between November and March, but the majority also tends to fall in a few heavy storms, occurring over just five to ten days. So if just a couple of major storms drift north or south, it makes a huge difference."

> It's raining pretty good now. It's not supposed to rain in September.

You aren't supposed to make generalisations about California's weather ..

Weather vs climate; surely you can understand the difference.

Global warming will cause the /global/ /average/ temperature
to rise.

Some places will become /much/ colder, e.g. Europe when the
gulf stream moves southwards.

Principal cause: the lack of /cold/ water from Greenland and
the arctic. There are already ambiguous signs that is happening.

Why can't people look at the facts: things keep getting better.

Until they get worse.

For example, relentless optimism and excessive risk taking
caused Deepwater Horizon.

Which fed a lot of voracious critters in the Gulf. From what I've
read, you have to dig down into the beaches to find solidified bits of
oil. A couple weeks of end-of-the-Gulf headlines, and nothing much
resulted. Beasts (and people) down there will eat most anything.

Again, doomsday is popular.

Doomsday is attention-getting.

Anthropogenic global warming isn't actually a doomsday subject, though the trivial media that John Larkin seems to pay attention like to claim that it is.

The reality is that the real increase in the CO2 level in that atmosphere is producing a real increase in global temperature, which makes droughts and floods more likely, and more extreme. Tropical cyclones are a special case - Dorian was record breaking.

Acknowledging this isn't any kind of doomsday alarmism. Some places have always been vulnerable to bad weather, and anthropogenic global warming is adding new target areas, but it isn't going to wipe out the human race.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

On Mon, 16 Sep 2019 08:14:51 +0100, Tom Gardner
<spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 16/09/19 00:37, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 15 Sep 2019 22:57:19 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 15/09/19 18:18, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 15 Sep 2019 07:32:49 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 14/09/19 23:38, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2019 23:18:07 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 14/09/19 21:25, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2019 12:52:42 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:


More precip but also more evaporation. More rainfall does no good if the
water evaporates before it gets where you want it.

OK, more rainfall makes the soil dryer. Logic!

Do read what he wrote (cf speedread your preconception of what he wrote)

Do respond to what he wrote (cf make poor strawman arguments)

https://www.dropbox.com/s/jf8rjfh93e13rre/Corn_Yield.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/qsrtk88vrvtu03w/indicator3_2013_ProductionGrain.PNG?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/0tm8wyli83nt1v4/human-progress.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/mebwcus72nmr16p/Leaf_Area_NASA.jpg?raw=1


But that doesn't matter since we'll all be dead in 10 years.

I'm sure all of those graphs are real.

I'm sure *none* of them have any relevance whatsoever to
the simple point I made. I really don't see why you posted
them.

The standard retail financial disclaimer "past performance is
not a guide to future performance" also applies in other
areas!


I've been hearing how we'll all be dead in 10 or so years, for about
50 years now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Population_Bomb

It sells books and wins elections, I suppose.

10 years from today seems to be the standard for doomsday. Like Free
Beer Tomorrow.

Just like 2 years before a product takes off.

But none of your subsequent points have anything to do
with the temperature dependence of precipitation vs
evaporation.

It has to do with the general case of doomsday predictions; whatever
happens must be bad. That appeals to some people, goodness knows why.

Irrelevant, of course!

No, it shows a strong systematic bias, which even Top Scientists are
not immune to.

I'm struggling to deal with the promised California Perpetual Drought.
Our big reservoir is at its lowest point of the year... 93% full. It
might rain tomorrow, about a month early. Snow season starts soon.
There wasn't going to be any more snow, either. I need new ski boot
California != the world, something Rick C also has difficulty
grasping.

One interesting thing about mid-California is how erratic and
unpredictable the weather is, compared to the rest of the USA.

It's raining pretty good now. It's not supposed to rain in September.

Weather vs climate; surely you can understand the difference.

Global warming will cause the /global/ /average/ temperature
to rise.

Some places will become /much/ colder, e.g. Europe when the
gulf stream moves southwards.

Principal cause: the lack of /cold/ water from Greenland and
the arctic. There are already ambiguous signs that is happening.


Why can't people look at the facts: things keep getting better.

Until they get worse.

For example, relentless optimism and excessive risk taking
caused Deepwater Horizon.

Which fed a lot of voracious critters in the Gulf. From what I've
read, you have to dig down into the beaches to find solidified bits of
oil. A couple weeks of end-of-the-Gulf headlines, and nothing much
resulted. Beasts (and people) down there will eat most anything.

Again, doomsday is popular.

 

[rangerssuck]

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 12:17:00 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 11:37:22 AM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2019 02:03:48 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 9/13/19 1:46 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On 13 Sep 2019 09:34:25 -0700, Winfield Hill <winfieldhill@yahoo.com
wrote:

jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote...

That battery is 1/4 the power of the array, and will
deliver that for two hours. Why bother?

They call it four hours, probably because the demand
goes down in the evening. The huge benefit of this
type of solar farm is providing power during the hot
days, when everyone in LA is running AC full blast.
The extra 130MW saves on DC-AC conversion costs and
provides off-peak power. They also discuss holding
off on using the battery until the next morning, to
reduce early AM peaks and avoid ramping up generators.

If CO2 reduction is the goal, China is building enough coal plants
every week to crush the savings of that thing many times over.

There might be a lithium issue too:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium#Reserves




Besides China's pollution issues which they're going to be forced to
confront very seriously eventually, they have 30% of the world's
population but only 6% of its arable land.

Long term at least we have China by the balls.

I think so. They are at some fundamental disadvantages in a
trade/tariff war. And in a culture war.

WWII was partially decided by food and fuel resources. Britain,
Germany, and Japan were all constrained, but the US wasn't.

So you think we would be fighting WWII again with China? lol

A shooting war with China would be over in a matter of hours. Neither side would win.

This isn't about a shooting war. China won't have any trouble getting their food supplies from the world market, just as they are doing now with many food supplies which we have essentially cut them off from. At the same time we are increasing our debt by subsidizing our farmers. I wonder who is buying that debt and what the impact will be if they stop buying US debt?

Another point, the Chinese population growth is down to 0.6%, only half again the rate in the US and much lower than many areas of the world. So there is no reason to believe they will be starving in the future either.

Like I said before, world dominance isn't about making war today, it's about financial dominance. Khrushchev wasn't talking about bombs when he said, "We will bury you!" He just couldn't pull it off.

--

Rick C.

--+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

Where there IS going to be a problem is when the snow melt from the Himalayas can no longer supply drinking water to the large part of China it currently serves. The snow is disappearing, and well, just wait to see what happens when a billion or so people find themselves thirsty with no Perrier in sight.

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 16/09/19 18:39, rangerssuck wrote:

Where there IS going to be a problem is when the snow melt from the Himalayas
can no longer supply drinking water to the large part of China it currently
serves. The snow is disappearing, and well, just wait to see what happens
when a billion or so people find themselves thirsty with no Perrier in
sight.

Agriculture takes a lot of water.

They could reduce the problem by buying up farms
in other parts of the world with sufficient water,
and transport the food back to China.

 

[whit3rd]

On Monday, September 16, 2019 at 6:56:53 AM UTC-7, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Mon, 16 Sep 2019 08:14:51 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 16/09/19 00:37, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

It has to do with the general case of doomsday predictions; whatever
happens must be bad. That appeals to some people, goodness knows why.

Irrelevant, of course!

No, it shows a strong systematic bias, which even Top Scientists are
not immune to.

It says nothing, however, about reality. There's no reference to any facts about
climate, nor any guidance on how to proceed. So, it's irrelevant to rational beings.

It's an example of spin, which can be applied in any direction, to any topic, for
a modest fee (50 cents a word). Real research and credible models cost more,
but they're worth it. Those are not aimed, by PR folk, in incredible directions.

 

[Jasen Betts]

On 2019-09-16, Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 16/09/19 18:39, rangerssuck wrote:

Where there IS going to be a problem is when the snow melt from the Himalayas
can no longer supply drinking water to the large part of China it currently
serves. The snow is disappearing, and well, just wait to see what happens
when a billion or so people find themselves thirsty with no Perrier in
sight.

Agriculture takes a lot of water.

They could reduce the problem by buying up farms
in other parts of the world with sufficient water,
and transport the food back to China.

they are doing that already.

--
When I tried casting out nines I made a hash of it.

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 17/09/19 04:54, Jasen Betts wrote:

On 2019-09-16, Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
On 16/09/19 18:39, rangerssuck wrote:

Where there IS going to be a problem is when the snow melt from the Himalayas
can no longer supply drinking water to the large part of China it currently
serves. The snow is disappearing, and well, just wait to see what happens
when a billion or so people find themselves thirsty with no Perrier in
sight.

Agriculture takes a lot of water.

They could reduce the problem by buying up farms
in other parts of the world with sufficient water,
and transport the food back to China.

they are doing that already.

ISTR hearing something to that effect