Nope. All heat, whether it comes from human activity, a volcano, a forest fire or the sun leaves the earth within days, most of it within hours.
There is a subtle change....: https://scitechdaily.com/earth…ts-due-to-climate-change/
Less reflection...
But inside the earth will not cool down as LENR will heat the core for one more billion years.
No, the core heats up due to cold nuclear fusion, the layers rub together from here electricity and plasma are obtained, which cannot rise more than 600 degrees. You have incorrect data, believe cold synthesis...
That 200 mile EV range would probably work fine in Europe but not here in the U.S.
Yes. As I said, "I think the average range is ~200 miles these days, which is a lot better [than 100 miles] but still not great." It depends on whether you use the car for long trips. If I only had an electric car, I would probably rent a gasoline model for trips over 400 miles.
f EVs of 500 Mile range are needed generally here and one should double the range if you live in a cold climate then I would need a 1000 mile range.
I do not think a 1000 mile range battery is likely to be invented anytime soon. That would be a big jump in capacity. More rapid recharge may be more likely, from what I have read. A 500 mile battery that recharges in 10 minutes would be almost as good as gasoline. I do not know if that is possible.
I know hydro power is not available everywhere, but even smack in the Atacama desert, and thanks to the height of the Andes mountain range, we have some shy rivers that we use mostly for irrigation (even if the water quality is very poor, brackish and naturally contaminated with boron and sulfur, thanks to the hight volcanic activity of the Andes). This is the dam that is currently being finished in the river that created the valley where we own some 20 hectares, is for irrigation purposes, but will also have a mini hydro power plant with measle 68KW output, but hey, its in the most arid desert in the world!
OPR, the fasted enabling green technology:: https://www.ft.com/content/bff…22-4d2e-9be0-383fb46e94c9
OPR, the fasted enabling green technology:: https://www.ft.com/content/bff…22-4d2e-9be0-383fb46e94c9
Clive Cookson (author of this piece) has visited my lab, and met Russ there, so while this piece has been a long tome coming, it isn't a surprise.
QuoteIn France, solar just got a huge boost from new legislation approved through the Senate this week that requires all parking lots with spaces for at least 80 vehicles – both existing and new – be covered by solar panels.
Solar panel parking lots are popular in U.S. places with extreme weather. That is, very hot summers like Arizona, or cold winters like Michigan, where the panels keep snow and ice off of parked cars.
In Atlanta, many people have "carports" which are roofs for cars with 4 posts, not full garages. I have not seen any with solar panels. Solar panels are rare in Atlanta.
From this map, it would suggest everywhere in the USA should be good for solar - if there was a will to use it.
Yes, the U.S. has a lot of potential solar energy. But in the middle of the continent, from Texas up to North Dakota, the U.S. and Canada have the best wind resources in the world. So wind is cheaper than solar in those places. That's how it was a few years ago, anyway. See the maps and tables here:
Where wind power is harnessed - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)
There is practically no wind in Georgia, so no one puts wind turbines here.
Here are average levelized costs for all sources of energy:
https://www.lazard.com/media/451905/lazards-levelized-cost-of-energy-version-150-vf.pdf
As you see, solar is now the cheapest, followed by wind. When the Georgia nuke comes on line it will be so expensive they will have to expand the chart. These numbers are averages for the whole U.S., and may not reflect local availability of solar or wind. In Las Vegas there are tremendous solar resources. North and South Dakota have enough potential wind to power the whole U.S.A. Unfortunately, there is no way to transmit it. Superconducting cables might work.
There is definitely the will to use solar. Because that's where the money is! Money beats all other motivations, hands down. See:
No way to ttransmit it? You mean high tension lines don't work anymore? So, how do they get all that wind generated power from Wyoming to California?
No way to ttransmit it? You mean high tension lines don't work anymore?
Too many losses between North Dakota and population centers on the coast or in Texas.
So, how do they get all that wind generated power from Wyoming to California?
They have not done that, yet, as far as I know. There are proposals for high tension DC power lines.
Superconducting lines would have fewer losses than DC lines. Another approach has been proposed. Use the electricity to make hydrogen and send the hydrogen by pipeline to California. Generate electricity with fuel cells. Losses are high, but you can use the gas on demand, 24 hours a day. You can get maximum power even when winds are low in Dakota. The hydrogen gas is a buffer.
The hydrogen gas proposal was made decades ago. I do not know where it stands, or whether there has been progress. Perhaps it resembles concentrated solar power? That is, an idea that might have worked, but the time for it has passed, because other technologies made faster progress. I put the Georgia fission nuke in that category.
Too many losses between North Dakota and population centers on the coast or in Texas.
It seems they still do not send electricity to California. Perhaps it is physically possible, but it cannot compete economically with sources closer to California population centers. See:
U.S. Energy Information Administration - EIA - Independent Statistics and Analysis
QUOTE:
Electricity
Coal-fired power plants accounted for 57% of North Dakota’s electricity generation in 2021, and the state’s four largest power plants by generating capacity and amount of electricity produced annually are coal-fired. The rest of the state’s electricity generation came primarily from renewable resources, including wind energy, which supplied about 34% of generation, and hydroelectric power, which provided about 5%. Natural gas fueled about 3% of the state’s electricity generation. The state does not have any nuclear power plants. Independent power producers account for about one-fifth of North Dakota’s electricity generation from utility-scale facilities (1 megawatt or larger capacity), and all of it is wind power.
North Dakota generates more electricity than it consumes, and almost half of the power generated in the state is sent to other states and Canada via the regional electric grid.86 Several high-voltage electric transmission lines connect North Dakota to Minnesota, Montana, South Dakota, and beyond. There are also three electric transmission line crossings at North Dakota’s border with Canada.
Quoting the EIA:
Coal-fired power plants accounted for 57% of North Dakota’s electricity generation in 2021, and the state’s four largest power plants by generating capacity and amount of electricity produced annually are coal-fired. The rest of the state’s electricity generation came primarily from renewable resources, including wind energy, which supplied about 34% of generation,
This is a dramatic change from 2001. In North Dakota, in 2001, coal was 95%, wind was less than 1%. In 2019, coal was 63%, wind 27%. See:
North Dakota:
U.S.:
So, how do they get all that wind generated power from Wyoming to California?
Wait, you said Wyoming, not North Dakota. Wyoming is 775 miles from California. N. Dakota is 1,197 miles. Considerably farther. Wyoming and California are part of WECC (Western Interconnection). North Dakota is in MRO. Maybe that is a reason?
Anyway, as far as I know, they do not transmit electricity from North Dakota to California. It is a shame there is so much wind in places where few people live.
Anyway, as far as I know, they do not transmit electricity from North Dakota to California. It is a shame there is so much wind in places where few people live.
So they have to convert it into hydrogen and natural gas...
@Jed
I counted 100 windmills that day. I was told the power went to California. When the wind comes off the Rockies at 50 Miles an hour all that power has to go somewhere. I think you're wrong. Wyoming certainly didn't need it.
I think you're wrong. Wyoming certainly didn't need it.
I thought you were talking about North Dakota. Wyoming does export electricity to the west coast. North Dakota apparently does not. Perhaps because they are in different Regional Entities? WECC and MRO. There does not seem to be major interconnects between them.
Here is WECC:
This week Benchmark Minerals visited the site of Green Lithium's proposed lithium hydroxide refinery in the UK. The company hopes to turn an empty container yard in north-east Teesside into a plant producing 50,000 tonnes of battery-grade lithium hydroxide a year, enough for around 1 million electric vehicles.
But with only a handful of potential mines and refineries in the UK and Britishvolt's gigafactory ambitions at risk, what needs to be done for the UK to build a battery supply chain? For starters, investment in the midstream or at least partnerships with up-and-coming European producers will be essential. Currently, the UK has no cathode or anode producers.
Elsewhere, the golden age for China's lithium companies could be coming to an end as geopolitical tensions increase. Our executive editor looks at how Canada's decision to force three Chinese companies to divest from three lithium producers will make it more difficult for China to secure lithium - increasing its reliance on Australia as a supplier.
Plans for the UK’s first lithium refinery were announced to guests on a blustery day at a port in north-east Teesside this week, in a step forward for the country’s battery supply chain.
Green Lithium said the £600 million refinery would produce around 50,000 tonnes of battery-grade lithium hydroxide starting in 2025, enough for around 1 million electric vehicles. The project is backed by commodity trader Trafigura, who will also help source feedstock for the plant.
It comes as the UK battery industry is struggling to expand production to meet the demand for electric vehicles, following reports last month that homegrown battery startup Britishvolt may enter administration unless it secures further funding. Britishvolt planned to build a battery gigafactory 60 miles away in Blyth, starting in 2023, but delays to its multi-billion pound plant mean it is now struggling for cash.
Yet even if Britishvolt and the new lithium refinery succeeds, the UK is missing a key component: the midstream cathode and anode production.
"Partnerships in Europe will be fundamental if we’re going to develop strong and resilient battery metal supply chains fit for the decades ahead"
Guy Hatcher, technical director and co-founder Green Lithium
