Making ethanol from corn is the least efficient use of farmland

[WiltonRanch]

China is certainly a big issue but they are leading the world in installing renewable electricity capacity.

China and the rest of the world have to step up. Saskatchewan and Canada are part of the rest of the world.

Canada's per capita emissions are almost 2.5 times those of China.


https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/5ae32253-7409-4f9a-a91d-1493ffb9777a/Renewables2021-Analysisandforecastto2026.pdf

Renewables
2021
Analysis and forecast to 2026

Additions of renewable power capacity are on track to set yet another annual
record in 2021, driven by solar PV. Almost 290 gigawatts (GW) of new
renewable power will be commissioned this year, which is 3% higher than 2020’s
already exceptional growth. Solar PV alone accounts for more than half of all
renewable power expansion in 2021, followed by wind and hydropower.
The growth of renewable capacity is forecast to accelerate in the next five
years, accounting for almost 95% of the increase in global power capacity
through 2026. We have revised up our forecast from a year earlier, as stronger
policy support and ambitious climate targets announced for COP26 outweigh the
current record commodity prices that have increased the costs of building new
wind and solar PV installations. Globally, renewable electricity capacity is forecast
to increase by over 60% between 2020 and 2026, reaching more than 4 800 GW.
This is equivalent to the current global power capacity of fossil fuels and nuclear
combined. Overall, China remains the leader over the next five years, accounting
for 43% of global renewable capacity growth, followed by Europe, the United
States and India. These four markets alone account for 80% of renewable capacity
expansion worldwide.

[ATTACH]10430[/ATTACH]

That is a lame ass copout and you bloody well know it. You’re comparing apples to oranges with per capita emissions stats. If it were relevant you should move to China or India and breath cleaner air and enjoy clean water. Right? Easy to hitch your horse to the co2 wagon and scream from the rooftops but what ultimately is killing man and beast here? Clean up the dirties coming out the exhaust pipes, strive to conserve resources by reducing waste, quit dumping poison into the air rivers and land.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

A good discussion about lead and ethanol and mtbe and aromatics over on new AG talk. The ethanol alternatives are some very nasty products.

https://talk.newagtalk.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=1054511&mid=9610350#M9610350

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Not about ethanol, but about how to deal with intermittent energy. Chuck likes models and reliable sources, so this should be approved.
To paraphrase, the best location for wind and solar, Texas, would require 4 months storage to deal with wind droughts, or 8 months for solar alone. Now imagine what the numbers are up here where we get winter? Turns out the 3 months figure I've been using, was far too conservative.

In a new modeling study in the journal Patterns, Lall and Columbia PhD student Yash Amonkar, show that solar and wind potential vary widely over days and weeks, not to mention months to years. They focused on Texas, which leads the country in generating electricity from wind power and is the fifth-largest solar producer. Texas also boasts a self-contained grid that's as big as many countries', said Lall, making it an ideal laboratory for charting the promise and peril of renewable energy systems.

Drawing on 70 years of historic wind and solar-power data, the researchers built an AI model to predict the probability of a network-scale "drought," when daily production of renewables fell below a target threshold. Under a threshold set at the 30th percentile, when roughly a third of all days are low-production days, the researchers found that Texas could face a daily energy drought for up to four months straight.

Batteries would be unable to compensate for a drought of this length, said Lall, and if the system relied on solar energy alone, the drought could be expected to last twice as long -- for eight months. "These findings suggest that energy planners will have to consider alternate ways of storing or generating electricity, or dramatically increasing the capacity of their renewable systems," he said.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/04/220412161551.htm

But let's keep converting farmland to solar, and block drilling for oil.

[blackpowder]

It's a shell game. Sucker born every minute.

[shtferbrains]

It's a shell game. Sucker born every minute.

Can't agree with that.
That would indicate they know the outcome.
Every time it becomes obvious that their goals have zero chance of being achieved the double down with the same game plan.
That revolves around killing oil and gas but no details on what replaces it in a totaly unrealistic time frame.

[chuckChuck]

Canada already has 80 % of its electricity coming from low emitting sources. Fossil fuels are a small part of our national electricity supply.

Alberta is leading the growth in renewables. They wont replace all fossil fuels for a long time. But the worlds energy supply is changing and electrification is well underway.

Its a long process so don't worry that you will freeze in the dark.

[furrowtickler]

Canada already has 80 % of its electricity coming from low emitting sources. Fossil fuels are a small part of our national electricity supply.

Alberta is leading the growth in renewables. They wont replace all fossil fuels for a long time. But the worlds energy supply is changing and electrification is well underway.

Its a long process so don't worry that you will freeze in the dark.

Until carbon tax goes to $170 and natural gas becomes unaffordable to a lot .
The world’s energy supply is changing , so why encourage more carbon tax for nothing ??
Why ? , because it simply a wealth transfer scheme .

[AlbertaFarmer5]

And what is a cheaper way to reduce carbon emmissions?

So far, where ever the solar and wind route has been attempted, CO2 emissions have not been reduced. Due to many of the factors shtfrbrains mentioned above. At tremendous cost. Trillions have been spent, and there is nothing to show for it. The cost per unit of reduced CO2 is astronomical, even infinite, if you want to measure it your way.

So, to answer your question, basically anything else would be a cheaper way to reduce CO2 emissions.
Nuclear, natural gas, keep using existing coal plants, incentivize industries to move to where the electricity is produced efficiently and cleaner, instead of punishing them so they are forced to move to where it is dirtier.

But, I thought it was a climate emergency, and now you think it is a time to be frugal about the solution? We only have a few years left to save the planet, and your worried about the cost?

One other possibility, is that you could save on the second M when you type emissions, that in itself would add up, considering how often you post about this.

[furrowtickler]

Clean green energy .....

https://youtu.be/Ucy-LT8zLds

the other side of green tech like batteries for EV's.

[cropgrower]

Clean green energy .....

https://youtu.be/Ucy-LT8zLds

the other side of green tech like batteries for EV's.

yes the climate hyprocrites clearly dont care what happens in china