Canada may exit Kyoto pact to save $$$$$

[Segnosaur]

my reply..."I" don't need nuke power. "I" live with solar power.

Well, by that standard, nobody needs nuclear because they can always generate all their power needs with coal, oil and gas. Just that those forms of electricity will be much more harmful to the environment.

i live with solar electricity, which i supplement with a small generator a few hours a week for a couple of months.
i burn about 5 litres of petrol a week to keep my batteries topped up, for two to three months a year..

Ok, first of all, you claim you "Live with Solar", but you have to burn at least some gas to "keep your batteries topped up". So right off the bat, you've already admitted you do not "live with solar". You live with a mixture of solar and fossil fuel.

Secondly, I notice you seem to be concentrating only on electricity (specifically your immediate use of electricity.) What about transportation? Do you have a car that uses an internal combustion engine? More importantly, what about the secondary impact you might have on the environment? That computer you're typing on might be powered in part by solar, but it was still produced in a factory that was probably powered by nuclear or fossil fuel. The (possibly) aluminum wires that carry your solar power throughout your home? Requires a huge amount of electricity. Any vehicle that you own (or that you have used, directly or indirectly, for example to transport material to your home) was produced in a factory which probably was powered by a combination of fossil fuels, hydro, and nuclear.

And even if you claim "Oh, that power is generated by hydro, etc.", its important to note that power generation is fungible. Every watt of hydro power used to create aluminum wire and computers, or every drop of gasoline used in your generators to top off batteries means that there's just a little less power available for other household uses.

So, at least indirectly, you do use nuclear power.

now since this thread is not about me.....carry on.

Actually, it is about you. Well, specifically its about people like you.

We have some pretty difficult decisions to make regarding our environment and our future power generation. We need to make the best possible decisions. When people jump in and start making misleading statements (like "Solar Power can do everything") then that mis-information must be corrected.

 

[D'rok]

Oh, and welcome back home, BTW.

Thanks!

I'm having fun saying to everybody (jokingly, of course), "well, in Toronto we...<insert comparator here>".

 

[Antiquehunter]

Without wanting to enter the fray...

I have a cousin who sells solar systems in rural Ontario. There seems to be some sort of provincial gov't sponsored plan to subsidize /support solar power production. If I understand it correctly, the gov't will sign a contract to buy all surplus solar-produced power supplied to 'the grid' for a set price, over a certain number of years. On the strength of this contract, a landowner can secure financing from a Canadian bank, to buy a solar panel install that will effectively pay for itself in about 5 years, and then be a revenue stream for the land owner.

My cousin in this business, is currently at the whim of the government's wavering on continuing the program. Also, he admits that the price of the components has already dropped significantly, and he expects it to continue to drop, such that in the next 5 years or so, this will no longer require such a massive up-front investment.

As the entry costs drop, I suppose that at least to supplement power production, solar COULD become more viable - assuming you already have a chunk of land upon which you are willing to erect a rather ugly set of panels.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

If your cousin hasn't seen this yet, then he should expect to see solar prices go way up very soon. The rare earth metals needed to make solar cells are almost completely controlled by China and they are putting the rest of the world on a limited allowance.

China's tight control of rare metals may hurt developing domestic solar industries, according to a research director at the National Renewable Energy Lab​.

The Chinese government's recent move to cut rare-metal exports by 35 percent and rapid growth of solar-panel manufacturing inside China also are chilling the climate for scientific cooperation. China produces 55 percent of the world's solar panels.

This is spurring development of rare earth deposits elsewhere in the world, but it will take years before new mines can be brought up to speed and ironically, you can bet large amounts of money and even portions of your own anatomy that any new mine will face stiff opposition from the environmental lobby.

 

[Antiquehunter]

I'll have to raise that issue with him. IIRC, his opinion that the prices would be dropping were a combination of improved efficiency in the technology (fewer square metres of panel required to produce x Mw of power) and more players producing panels / improved competition. But if component prices are shooting up (as most metals/minerals/rare earths currently are) then he may be off the mark.

As regards his market, he's completely at the whim of this provincial gov't scheme. His business isn't at all diversified. So while he's doing fine at the moment, he's watching to see where his bread will be buttered in the medium term.

 

[bikerdruid]

Thank you bikerdruid you confirmed what I thought : your lifestyl is probably both beyond the monetary power of the average person, and even if they had the money probably non generalizable to the population due the resource usage it would imply. In other word, you have your own turf , and more or less pontificate from a position of what I woudl call "wealth".

wealth?? hardly, i was a school teacher.
it would have cost $10,000 to run power lines to my home.
for 7000, i set myself up without a monthly bill.


as per the rest of the conversations here, so of t has a history of harrassment, of myself.
i make no pretense that i am the 'average albertan'.
i said that "I" did not need nukes.
that is true. period.

the rest of the province would be much better off if they supplemented their power usage with wind or solar.
there is noting 'out there' about that concept. it is just common sense.
every watt we can produce for ourselves, is keepinig money in their own pocket, instead of atco power, and in future, bruce power's pockets.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

i make no pretense that i am the 'average albertan'.
i said that "I" did not need nukes.
that is true. period.

The rest of us do need nukes.

period.

the rest of the province would be much better off if they supplemented their power usage with wind or solar.
there is noting 'out there' about that concept. it is just common sense.

A cubic metre of moving air can push a toy boat across a pond.

A cubic metre of oil can drive a truck from Edmonton to Calgary and back.

A cubic metre of uranium or thorium can light Edmonton or Calgary for a year.

There is no sense, common or otherwise, in denying physics.

every watt we can produce for ourselves, is keepinig money in their own pocket,

Canadians feeding a monopoly owned and run out of China isn't even remotely "keeping money in our own pockets".

Why would you even think such a thing?

instead of atco power, and in future, bruce power's pockets.

Canada has the worlds richest uranium deposits. Cameco, AECL, SNC-Lavalin, Bruce Power and even ATCO are all Canadian owned companies.

Keeping money in our pockets is common sense.

 

[Segnosaur]

wealth?? hardly, i was a school teacher.

Yet in your current situation you supposedly have a relatively large parcel of land that is capable of sustaining your lifestyle. It would be impracticle for all Albertans/Canadians to have such land at their disposal.

You might not be monetarily wealthy but you have real estate resources which the majority of the country does not (and could not) have.

as per the rest of the conversations here, so of t has a history of harrassment, of myself.

Ummmm... so?

You made some specific claims. I refuted your claims, with absolutely no reference to anything SoT said directly. Yet you chose to totally ignore my points.

If your method of "debate" here is to ignore any and all evidence that refutes your point and repeat the same statements over and over, perhaps you deserve little respect.

i said that "I" did not need nukes.

Yet you require the use of fossil fuels to "top up" your power requirements, which spews out carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

Yet you are using products (everything from aluminum house wiring, your computer, and any vehicles you have used) which have been produced by electricity generated in part from nuclear power.

that is true. period.

Proof by repetition is not proof.

the rest of the province would be much better off if they supplemented their power usage with wind or solar.

They would be best using whatever power system is:
A: Capable of generating the power required (that leaves out solar and wind energy)
B: Minimizes the environmental damages (limits fossil fuel usage)
C: Can do so at a practical cost

Solar and wind might serve as part of our generating capacity in the future, but at this point they cannot generate the information needed by today's society. The fact that you are concentrating only on your limited experience (and ignoring all of your secondary uses of energy at the same time!) means that you have very little useful to add to this discussion.

there is noting 'out there' about that concept. it is just common sense.

Yet your "common sense" ignores the fact that you need a generator on occasion to "top up" your solar cells.

Given a choice, I'd much rather you "top up" your batteries using energy obtained from a fuel source that does not add carbon unnecessarily to the environment.

Not to mention the fact that you are probably responsible for a huge amount of non-solar electricity use through the products you use, again something you seem to ignore.

 

[bikerdruid]

look, snarky dudes...
segnosaur...i burn 5 liters of petrol each week for 8 to 12 weeks a year to supplement my solar.
hell, many city dwellers burn more than that in their lawn mowers and leaf blowers (now there is a stupid invention).

s of t...rave away.

both: i am not alone in thinking that we need to begin to think and live differently.
the insane lust for more and more energy is detrimental to life on our planet.

feel free to blather with each other.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

i am not alone in thinking that we need to begin to think and live differently.

You're not technically alone, no. But your community is small, isolated from each other and politically impotent.

Consider the following:

United States sales figures

Wii – 30 million as of 10 August 2010
Xbox 360 – 18.6 million as of 31 December 2009
PlayStation 3 - nearly 12 million as of 14 April 2010
​

That is just a minor fragment of our high energy lifestyle. Those aren't sales figures... those are votes in favor of that lifestyle. If our country were to have a referendum on whether to live the way we do now, versus your lifestyle, how many people who have dropped ten bucks on gas, drove out to Best Buy and dropped hundreds or thousands of dollars on Playstations, 3D TVs, iPads, stereo systems and other power hogging toys would be willing to drop ten bucks on gas, drive out to a polling station and pull a lever for being able to keep all our stuff for free?

The votes are in. Your side lost.

the insane lust for more and more energy is detrimental to life on our planet

No it isn't. We can just switch to a nuclear economy.

 

[Furcifer]

You're not technically alone, no. But your community is small, isolated from each other and politically impotent.

Consider the following:

United States sales figures

Wii – 30 million as of 10 August 2010
Xbox 360 – 18.6 million as of 31 December 2009
PlayStation 3 - nearly 12 million as of 14 April 2010
​

That is just a minor fragment of our high energy lifestyle. Those aren't sales figures... those are votes in favor of that lifestyle. If our country were to have a referendum on whether to live the way we do now, versus your lifestyle, how many people who have dropped ten bucks on gas, drove out to Best Buy and dropped hundreds or thousands of dollars on Playstations, 3D TVs, iPads, stereo systems and other power hogging toys would be willing to drop ten bucks on gas, drive out to a polling station and pull a lever for being able to keep all our stuff for free?

The votes are in. Your side lost.



No it isn't. We can just switch to a nuclear economy.

This represents a small portion of "energy use". We can start crunching numbers but I'm fairly confident the energy to run a 40" LED and a PS3 for a month is less than the energy I use to heat my home for a day in the Winter. (a 40" LED uses about $30 per year @5 hours per day)

So yes, people have voted and they like their devices, but it's such a small percentage of the total energy use here in Canada. The bulk of our energy use here in Canada is keeping us warm, cooking our food and getting us to work where we process our pulp and minerals. A few hippies getting off the grid isn't going to have the slightest impact on CO2 emissions.

 

[Segnosaur]

look, snarky dudes...
segnosaur...i burn 5 liters of petrol each week for 8 to 12 weeks a year to supplement my solar.

Ummm..... so?

You claimed you "Lived with Solar power". You lied. You actually live with a mixture of solar and fossil fuel (one of which dumps carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, contributing to global warming and melting that glacier you were so attached to.)

Oh, and more importantly, i see you've totally ignored the fact that while you might be using solar for your electrical generation, you still use fossil fuel and/or nuclear power indirectly, for transportation and for the manufacture of items that you use. Why don't you address that point? Oh yeah I know.... because it would illustrate how faulty your arguments are.

hell, many city dwellers burn more than that in their lawn mowers and leaf blowers (now there is a stupid invention).

So? That doesn't mean your lifestyle doesn't result in unneccessary carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere. (Your argument is a little like a mugger claiming you shouldn't prosecute him because some people are bank robbers... crime is crime, and unnecessary carbon dioxide releases don't go away just because others might be polluting even more.

Heck, I can go even further and point out that its possible (and possibly even quite common0 for a city dweller to have even less of an environmental impact than you do. For years I lived in an apartment. No leaf blowers or lawn mowers. i also lived close enough to work to walk (close to shopping too) so no need for long distance transportation. The place was heated by electricity (which was largely generated by hydro and nuclear).

So, I was probably causing less carbon dioxide to be released than you currently do, given your use of gas to top up your batteries, and the distance material must be transported to your home.

So, how about you address the fact that despite your claim of 'living with solar', your life style still requires a significant amount of energy, both for transportation to and from your home, and for the manufacture of products you use.

 

[bikerdruid]

...blather on.

 

[Battman]

[QUOTE
as much as s of t loves to make me the topic of any thread he can, i am not.
i live with solar electricity, which i supplement with a small generator a few hours a week for a couple of months.
i burn about 5 litres of petrol a week to keep my batteries topped up, for two to three months a year..
[/QUOTE]

So what do you use to heat your house with? Just curious.

 

[bikerdruid]

[QUOTE
as much as s of t loves to make me the topic of any thread he can, i am not.
i live with solar electricity, which i supplement with a small generator a few hours a week for a couple of months.
i burn about 5 litres of petrol a week to keep my batteries topped up, for two to three months a year..

So what do you use to heat your house with? Just curious.[/QUOTE]

wood from the forest i live in.

 

[Furcifer]

...blather on.

You do understand the problem is much more than people leaving the porch light on or using an iPad? The problem doesn't have anything to do with residential electricity usage, it has to do with how Canadian society functions and how we use energy in a World economy.

It's great that you can limit your electricity use to a few hundred kilowatt hours a month, and it would be great if more people could, but that is just a very small tip of a very large iceberg that is your energy use as a Canadian citizen.

 

[Hallo Alfie]

wood from the forest i live in.

Um.... isn't that like burning stuff that emits carbon?

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

So what do you use to heat your house with? Just curious.

wood from the forest i live in.

And what is that going to do to Canadas forests if 30 million Canadians adopt your lifestyle as you suggest?

 

[Hallo Alfie]

And what is that going to do to Canadas forests if 30 million Canadians adopt your lifestyle as you suggest?

Is Smokey the bear Canadian? He would be very busy anyway.

 

[WildCat]

And what is that going to do to Canadas forests if 30 million Canadians adopt your lifestyle as you suggest?

Go look at some pics of the US Civil War, one thing that really stands out from that era is how denuded the countryside was, the hills in the background are bare, barely a tree in sight. Today those same hills are covered in trees.