A place for discussion.
0
0
votes
Article Rating
Open Thread
A place for discussion.
24 Comments
February 8, 2026 2:12 am
China switches on world’s first 20MW wind turbine to feed power into the grid
For not using wind power according to some, they seem quite dedicated building it.
Australia’s grid now relies on renewable energy as much as coal. Those who doubted it look foolish
A significant part of the change is due to the astonishing rise of solar power, and the extent to which it is squashing coal generation. The grid is now operating in a way that many people considered unimaginable, and maybe impossible, not that long ago.
(Truly a SUNday :P)
Bonus oil:
The recent threat by US Energy Secretary Chris Wright to defund the International Energy Agency (IEA) has achieved its goal: the return of the pro fossil-fuel “Current Policies Scenario” (CPS) to the agency’s flagship reports. (WEO, Nov 12)
For critics of peak demand and the energy transition, this is seen as a victory for data over ideology. In reality, it is the reverse – it is a triumph of political gesture over foresight.
Sorry, first link again:
https://interestingengineering.com/energy/wind-turbine-powers-china-grid
A Danish energy giant has revived plans for a massive North Sea wind farm after Ed Miliband promised billions more in subsidies.
Ørsted, the world’s largest wind farm operator,said it would resubmit plans for the Hornsea 4 wind farm off the east of England next year after Mr Miliband offered a much higher subsidy for the power generated.
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2026/02/06/here-have-another-1-9-billion-orsted/
Another £1.9 billion and that won’t be the end of it.
If you narrow the calculation to consider just when the sun is out, the numbers are even more striking. Solar met 59% of electricity demand between 9am and 6pm. More than half of this – 37.6% of the total – was from small-scale systems spread across about 4m roofs. The rest was from large-scale solar farms.
Dylan McConnell, a senior research associate at the University of New South Wales, says between 12pm and 1pm solar output peaked at 67% of consumption. It was more than 70% in New South Wales and South Australia.
Coal-fired power, the historic backbone of the grid that once supplied nearly 90% of power, could not compete. Solar energy is incredibly cheap. It costs much more to burn coal. It meant the country’s ageing coal fleet was reduced to filling in gaps, kicking in barely a quarter of the electricity used over lunchtime.
That changed as the sun set, when the grid leant much more heavily on coal, with notable support from wind, hydro and batteries and gas.
And no useful numbers. No explanation of how much this all cost, why its better than just running on gas. Not in the post, not in the Guardian piece linked to. Pretending that intermittency doesn’t exist or doesn*t matter.
between 12pm and 1pm solar output peaked at 67% of consumption. It was more than 70% in New South Wales and South Australia.
This is the problem. And after 7pm? And its being treated as something to celebrate and an indication that the future is solar! No organized thinking about energy supply for a modern industrial economy whatever.
Trolling.
February 8, 2026 2:16 am
I have a traditional open fire place which is used when temperatures drop. Having heard the alarmism around [closed] wood burners I checked the particulates in ppm with a roaring fire.
The range was 53 to 67 or 0.0053% to 0.0067%. That seems pretty good to me.
Children living in homes with wood burners could be exposed to over three times more pollution than those in non-wood-burning homes.
…
Cooking added to the measured air pollution
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/feb/06/children-living-homes-wood-burners-exposed-pollution
Wood burners are closed and must have a flue. But then the attack on cooking is a bit of a giveaway.
February 8, 2026 2:17 am
I’m posting today about an interesting finding in the ERA5 “vertical integral of energy conversion” values I often write about. Here are the computed means of all the hourly values for 2022 at each of the following latitude rings for all longitudes:
-259.4 W/m^2 at 10N
-40.9 W/m^2 at 10S
159.6 W/m^2 at 23.5N
137.8 W/m^2 at 23.5S
35.0 W/m^2 at 45N
38.4 W/m^2 at 45S
-37.2 W/m^2 at 66.5N
-178.8 W/m^2 at 66.5S
These values are also given on each of the plots in the histogram folder within this Google Drive folder here.
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1PDJP3F3rteoP99lR53YKp2fzuaza7Niz?usp=drive_link
Negative values indicate [internal energy + potential energy] -> [kinetic energy]
Positive values indicate [kinetic energy] -> [internal energy + potential energy]
Discussion:
Energy conversion is NOT a zero-sum variation at each latitude. The global patterns of the formation, lifetimes, and dissipation of high pressure (descending air) and low pressure (rising air) weather systems no doubt have a lot to do with this.
So what? Even the one-year mean values of energy conversion at different latitudes in both positive and negative directions are very large compared to the computed static incremental IR absorbing power of the atmosphere from rising concentrations of CO2, CH4, N2O (e.g. ~4 W/m^2 for 2XCO2).
This is related to, but not the same thing, as advection of absorbed energy from the tropics toward the poles.
Thank you for reading. Your on-topic comments are welcome.
P.S. I know there must be substantial uncertainty in the stated values, and the precision to the nearest tenth is only numerical.
P.P.S. When dynamic energy conversion within the general circulation is properly considered, there is no good physical basis remaining to expect incremental CO2, CH4, N2O to drive ANY portion of ANY trend of climate variables. It cannot reasonably be supposed otherwise, and the modelers know this.
February 8, 2026 2:33 am
I tackled a problem posed by J.Burgois. I would be very interested in hearing your comments on the solution that I offered for his dilemma.
https://breadonthewater.co.za/2026/02/01/the-sword-of-damocles-behind-the-curtain-of-earths-global-warming-a-review/
February 8, 2026 3:56 am
Facts Flee as the EU Prepares to Clamp Down on Climate Dissent
Launched at the COP30 meeting in Brazil last year, the Declaration on Information Integrity on Climate Change (DIICC) was, as reported here, a manifesto for censorship wrapped in venal doublespeak.
https://dailysceptic.org/2026/02/08/facts-flee-as-the-eu-prepares-to-clamp-down-on-climate-dissent/
February 8, 2026 4:49 am
February 8, 2026 4:56 am
For those willing to deal with the science, it is easy to see how it is wrong..
A Falsification – the incredibly stupid case of water vapor feedback
February 8, 2026 5:54 am
STORY TIP
An article in Vermont’s The Central Square, as reported by Andrew Stuttaford at National Review Online, describes cold weather failure of EV bus fleet. Must be 41 deg f. to charge bus battery, but cannot charge indoors due to fire risk!
Includes bonus, the article perfectly describes how local selection of new bus purchase determined solely by federal grant process. The locals can’t buy a bus without a fed grant.
