Those were solar thermal panels, for heating water. Those just haven't caught on, unfortunately, as solar PV gets all the attention; solar thermal is way simpler, much easier to make, and can be effective in the right climates.
On the Aus 3 hour free electricity - don’t get me wrong i believe in the need to mitigate climate change - but as an Australian with both solar panels and a battery (both purchased with government subsidies) it wont help me. Because by that time of day my battery is full and we are one of the ones feeding electricity to the grid. My issue comes at night as the sun goes down my battery soon runs out of charge and i start drawing from the grid. I need to increase my battery capacity but it is not cheap. It will mainly help those who have not yet invested in panels and batteries. That includes people who rent their houses (good of course). There is no incentive here (yet at least) for landlords to go solar and battery.
One advantage for people with solar is there’s no longer an excuse for energy suppliers to charge them for exporting to the grid, something that’s been mooted to minimise oversupply during peak production hours. Instead excess energy is utilised, given to those without solar, many of whom are renters, living in apartments or economically disadvantaged. I say that’s a brilliant way to smooth not only renewable energy but socio economic inequality. This broader community approach delivers real and political benefits, it’s an important step in redesigning our systems to maximise renewables for us all.
I realised - I don’t know - my guess would be not much impact because they may not be on the grid. I did read an article that the iconic wind driven stock feeds were moving to solar
Oh, yes, that’s way out in the boonies. I’m rural but am on the grid. My electric rates are high. Many people here have solar and Tesla walls that the grid can draw on when needed. I don’t have that kind of money.
What about rural Australians who rely on well water? It’s expensive to run a 1.5 HP well pump. If I had three hours of free power, I’d be filling my water tanks at that time (I live in a rural part of the US).
Gemini estimates that is about 250,000 households many being urban dwellers with bores for garden water. I would guess that the impact will not be massive.
Thinking about your mention of Exxon/Mobil Indivisible is trying to figure out a group of boycott campaign targets. I wonder if Exxon would make sense because of their past history of leading climate denial, and present role continuing to foster it. I know that not every Exxon/Mobil station pumps Exxon gas, but given that their stations are everywhere, it seems like they'd be an awfully target to pull multiple issues together.
I'm still stuck on the forced continuation of the Campbell Power Plant here in West Michigan - just a half hour south of my home. It was scheduled to be shut down in July but at the 11th hour Trump's energy dept. said it had to stay open because gollee-gee, we'll need all that coal-fired energy to keep those data centers open!
Michigan residents are paying $615,000 per day for this outrageous stupidity and corruption. No wonder the T-rumpers are forced to try every dirty trick in the book to keep themselves in power - they sure as hell won't be winning election on economics.
There's a new campaign brewing under the header Make Polluters Pay, where Sierra Club and 350 team up with others. Curious to see where it goes because it makes a lot of sense. Everybody here pays for garbage disposal and waste water - why not the industries that pollute the most?
Mr Mckibben, Like you I'm the author of a book on climate change. I would like to get your email address so I can send you a description and financial analysis of a potential new solar program I call "remote-solar". Put simply its like rooftop solar but the panels aren't on your roof and its far less expensive. (Its not community solar) I formally submitted it to the CPUC under Docket A22-05-022 asking them to carefully study it, then tariff it if they find no fatal flaws. Would like to make you aware of the idea and get your feedback. --Rich Harkness, BSEE, PhD, retired in Santa Rosa.
In Randy Newman's classic song, " Political 🔭 Science", he satirized United States Presidents who wish to plunder the world 🌍 like modern pirates. But he sings, " We will save Australia 🦘, don't want to hurt 🤕 no kangaroos ‼️🦘🦘" George Harrison sang, " Here comes the SUN ☀️🔆, it's alright ‼️💪😎" 🦘🦘🦘☀️☀️
Bill, I understand why you focus on decarbonization of the global economy (even though 100% electrification of all utility systems and heavy industry will have a long tail of diminishing returns and a residual of impossible conversions), but the promise of free electricity seems to be merely a “marketing scheme” to hasten the capitalistic residential sector transition.
Bottom line: no matter how rapid or begrudgingly slow electrification and decarbonization happen, it does nothing in an environment (atmospheric, terrestrial and oceanic) that is increasingly less able to naturally absorb what emissions we produce during the ramping down to Net Zero.
Only when we turn the corner and begin Net Negative will the trillions of tons of legacy CO2 begin to stabilize and begin to head back down to a survivable Holocene level <350ppm (preferably trailing off near 280ppm ultimately). But the cooling won’t happen this century.
This is the elephant in the room. Where is the urgency of moving the goalpost for Net Negative from 2050 CLOSER TO NOW?
On our current trajectory, in the few decades leading up to 2050-2060 when some 2 billion desperate folks will become refugees fleeing deadly 2.7°C projected in a wide swath from Australia and Indonesia through India, Middle East and Northern Africa over to South America.
Serious extraordinary measures to assist Mother Nature in removing CO2 at a scale that She is incapable of doing in the couple decades before 2050-2060 must be openly and transparently deliberated, planned, implemented and fully operational if our Global North civilization hopes to survive the mass exodus from the Global South.
And the two paragraphs (below ⬇️)—that none of the commenters noticed—accelerate a need to cool the Arctic by all means necessary lest everything we do to reduce CO2 emissions will be for naught—because CH4 released from thawing tundra (terrestrial and subsea) has 80–120 times greater GWP (global warming potential) and is far more difficult to remove from the atmosphere in the very short 20 year time frame that we have to act.
Commenters, reread and take heed:
<< Roads and buildings on and around the permafrost that were built to last for centuries are already being “dramatically” affected, according to Rick Thoman, a climate analyst at the International Arctic Research Center at the University of Alaska Fairbanks.
<< “When somebody at the end of the 21st century in Alaska tallies up the cost of climate change, permafrost thaw will be the single most expensive thing because it is impacting stuff that is so expensive,” he said. The “most globally profound risk,” though, is the injection of more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. >>
The value of keeping CH4 frozen in the tundra and seabed: PRICELESS (human survival)
But, Bill,I actually think that the price of energy must go up for most purposes. I understand the 3 hours free is meant to show that like water, affordable minimal energy should be available to all. But at heart I'm a pragmatist. Whatever experiments will be performed everywhere in dealing with the Ecological Overshoot Unraveling that is accelerating, I wish great success to the younger generations that will have to bootstrap themselves into a new, workable society.
I'm going to start using the hashtags #RoadKill and #Poopjet for any social media post referencing those two from now on. This newsletter is an excellent guide to how things could be better so easily. I live in France, which is credited with starting the mandatory covering of car parks with solar panels and I know so many people who look at the US with pity rather than admiration right now
What Australia is doing with the free hours, is so amazing, and it is common sense, as well,
In fact, I wrote to a climate journalist awhile back, Sammy Roth, before he started his substack, Climate Colored Goggles, when I suddenly got an article in my inbox about how CA was considering selling excess energy to other states, and I said that I thought it would be great if instead there were a few free hours a day as a rate plan option, and that if there was, that I would buy another battery (I got the cheaper 1 kilowatt ones but I am running out of a sunny space in my yard due to mature trees). My non-permanent solar setup means I need no permit, I checked with my city, so I stack them and put a canvas patio chair cover over them at night to keep the critters out.
If people got a few free hours, even apartment dwellers could get batteries and save and do their part, as well, I thought, even people with no sunny space for panels could do this. I'm so glad batteries keep getting cheaper. Nothing gets people's attention like the word "free." That is motivation right there and the press would get giddy and make a big hoopla about it.
I had no idea this was something Australia was considering,but if it makes sense someone will realize it and get it done (well when there is a will and a way that is).
it is known power could cost less but when profits rule...! How can making energy more affordable benefit power companies so they would condider something like Australia?
I keep thinking about how Carter placed solar panels on the White House and if only we could have built on that progress starting then...Thank you!
Those were solar thermal panels, for heating water. Those just haven't caught on, unfortunately, as solar PV gets all the attention; solar thermal is way simpler, much easier to make, and can be effective in the right climates.
On the Aus 3 hour free electricity - don’t get me wrong i believe in the need to mitigate climate change - but as an Australian with both solar panels and a battery (both purchased with government subsidies) it wont help me. Because by that time of day my battery is full and we are one of the ones feeding electricity to the grid. My issue comes at night as the sun goes down my battery soon runs out of charge and i start drawing from the grid. I need to increase my battery capacity but it is not cheap. It will mainly help those who have not yet invested in panels and batteries. That includes people who rent their houses (good of course). There is no incentive here (yet at least) for landlords to go solar and battery.
One advantage for people with solar is there’s no longer an excuse for energy suppliers to charge them for exporting to the grid, something that’s been mooted to minimise oversupply during peak production hours. Instead excess energy is utilised, given to those without solar, many of whom are renters, living in apartments or economically disadvantaged. I say that’s a brilliant way to smooth not only renewable energy but socio economic inequality. This broader community approach delivers real and political benefits, it’s an important step in redesigning our systems to maximise renewables for us all.
Not talking about garden water, but water for the home. Also livestock. Water as part of essential life support, not for your zinnias.
I realised - I don’t know - my guess would be not much impact because they may not be on the grid. I did read an article that the iconic wind driven stock feeds were moving to solar
Oh, yes, that’s way out in the boonies. I’m rural but am on the grid. My electric rates are high. Many people here have solar and Tesla walls that the grid can draw on when needed. I don’t have that kind of money.
What about rural Australians who rely on well water? It’s expensive to run a 1.5 HP well pump. If I had three hours of free power, I’d be filling my water tanks at that time (I live in a rural part of the US).
Gemini estimates that is about 250,000 households many being urban dwellers with bores for garden water. I would guess that the impact will not be massive.
So there's an incentive for you to get more batteries?
I plan on waiting until prices fall further
Fair dos.
Small correction: It's called the Epstein Ballroom.
Thinking about your mention of Exxon/Mobil Indivisible is trying to figure out a group of boycott campaign targets. I wonder if Exxon would make sense because of their past history of leading climate denial, and present role continuing to foster it. I know that not every Exxon/Mobil station pumps Exxon gas, but given that their stations are everywhere, it seems like they'd be an awfully target to pull multiple issues together.
This post is all over the map. Literally and figuratively. And I’m here for it.
I'm still stuck on the forced continuation of the Campbell Power Plant here in West Michigan - just a half hour south of my home. It was scheduled to be shut down in July but at the 11th hour Trump's energy dept. said it had to stay open because gollee-gee, we'll need all that coal-fired energy to keep those data centers open!
Michigan residents are paying $615,000 per day for this outrageous stupidity and corruption. No wonder the T-rumpers are forced to try every dirty trick in the book to keep themselves in power - they sure as hell won't be winning election on economics.
There's a new campaign brewing under the header Make Polluters Pay, where Sierra Club and 350 team up with others. Curious to see where it goes because it makes a lot of sense. Everybody here pays for garbage disposal and waste water - why not the industries that pollute the most?
Why not the people who pollute the most? Do you pay for your pollution?
So much great information to unpack. Thank you!!!
Mr Mckibben, Like you I'm the author of a book on climate change. I would like to get your email address so I can send you a description and financial analysis of a potential new solar program I call "remote-solar". Put simply its like rooftop solar but the panels aren't on your roof and its far less expensive. (Its not community solar) I formally submitted it to the CPUC under Docket A22-05-022 asking them to carefully study it, then tariff it if they find no fatal flaws. Would like to make you aware of the idea and get your feedback. --Rich Harkness, BSEE, PhD, retired in Santa Rosa.
You nailed it this is the kind of mindset we need.
Well, Just dropped a new reflection on trust and technology real, human, and quietly deep.
If you enjoy thought-provoking reads, check it out and hit like + subscribe 💭✨
🔗 https://substack.com/@jacobw25/note/p-178131550?r=6fzwhx
In Randy Newman's classic song, " Political 🔭 Science", he satirized United States Presidents who wish to plunder the world 🌍 like modern pirates. But he sings, " We will save Australia 🦘, don't want to hurt 🤕 no kangaroos ‼️🦘🦘" George Harrison sang, " Here comes the SUN ☀️🔆, it's alright ‼️💪😎" 🦘🦘🦘☀️☀️
Bill, I understand why you focus on decarbonization of the global economy (even though 100% electrification of all utility systems and heavy industry will have a long tail of diminishing returns and a residual of impossible conversions), but the promise of free electricity seems to be merely a “marketing scheme” to hasten the capitalistic residential sector transition.
Bottom line: no matter how rapid or begrudgingly slow electrification and decarbonization happen, it does nothing in an environment (atmospheric, terrestrial and oceanic) that is increasingly less able to naturally absorb what emissions we produce during the ramping down to Net Zero.
Only when we turn the corner and begin Net Negative will the trillions of tons of legacy CO2 begin to stabilize and begin to head back down to a survivable Holocene level <350ppm (preferably trailing off near 280ppm ultimately). But the cooling won’t happen this century.
Visual aids at Bit.ly/PRAGfundamentals
This is the elephant in the room. Where is the urgency of moving the goalpost for Net Negative from 2050 CLOSER TO NOW?
On our current trajectory, in the few decades leading up to 2050-2060 when some 2 billion desperate folks will become refugees fleeing deadly 2.7°C projected in a wide swath from Australia and Indonesia through India, Middle East and Northern Africa over to South America.
Serious extraordinary measures to assist Mother Nature in removing CO2 at a scale that She is incapable of doing in the couple decades before 2050-2060 must be openly and transparently deliberated, planned, implemented and fully operational if our Global North civilization hopes to survive the mass exodus from the Global South.
And the two paragraphs (below ⬇️)—that none of the commenters noticed—accelerate a need to cool the Arctic by all means necessary lest everything we do to reduce CO2 emissions will be for naught—because CH4 released from thawing tundra (terrestrial and subsea) has 80–120 times greater GWP (global warming potential) and is far more difficult to remove from the atmosphere in the very short 20 year time frame that we have to act.
Commenters, reread and take heed:
<< Roads and buildings on and around the permafrost that were built to last for centuries are already being “dramatically” affected, according to Rick Thoman, a climate analyst at the International Arctic Research Center at the University of Alaska Fairbanks.
<< “When somebody at the end of the 21st century in Alaska tallies up the cost of climate change, permafrost thaw will be the single most expensive thing because it is impacting stuff that is so expensive,” he said. The “most globally profound risk,” though, is the injection of more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. >>
The value of keeping CH4 frozen in the tundra and seabed: PRICELESS (human survival)
But, Bill,I actually think that the price of energy must go up for most purposes. I understand the 3 hours free is meant to show that like water, affordable minimal energy should be available to all. But at heart I'm a pragmatist. Whatever experiments will be performed everywhere in dealing with the Ecological Overshoot Unraveling that is accelerating, I wish great success to the younger generations that will have to bootstrap themselves into a new, workable society.
I'm going to start using the hashtags #RoadKill and #Poopjet for any social media post referencing those two from now on. This newsletter is an excellent guide to how things could be better so easily. I live in France, which is credited with starting the mandatory covering of car parks with solar panels and I know so many people who look at the US with pity rather than admiration right now
What Australia is doing with the free hours, is so amazing, and it is common sense, as well,
In fact, I wrote to a climate journalist awhile back, Sammy Roth, before he started his substack, Climate Colored Goggles, when I suddenly got an article in my inbox about how CA was considering selling excess energy to other states, and I said that I thought it would be great if instead there were a few free hours a day as a rate plan option, and that if there was, that I would buy another battery (I got the cheaper 1 kilowatt ones but I am running out of a sunny space in my yard due to mature trees). My non-permanent solar setup means I need no permit, I checked with my city, so I stack them and put a canvas patio chair cover over them at night to keep the critters out.
If people got a few free hours, even apartment dwellers could get batteries and save and do their part, as well, I thought, even people with no sunny space for panels could do this. I'm so glad batteries keep getting cheaper. Nothing gets people's attention like the word "free." That is motivation right there and the press would get giddy and make a big hoopla about it.
I had no idea this was something Australia was considering,but if it makes sense someone will realize it and get it done (well when there is a will and a way that is).
it is known power could cost less but when profits rule...! How can making energy more affordable benefit power companies so they would condider something like Australia?