Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

wtmusic

(39,166 posts)
Thu Jan 31, 2013, 11:56 PM Jan 2013

Jon Stewart rocks.

In this interview with Al Gore from last night, Jon pulls no punches regarding Al's recent pocketing of $70M for selling his network to al-Jazeera, a mouthpiece for the emir of Qatar and OPEC.

Stewart asks, "Can mogul Al Gore co-exist with activist Al Gore?", after which Al ties his tongue in knots trying to explain how oil is sustainable:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-january-30-2013/exclusive---al-gore-extended-interview-pt--1

5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Jon Stewart rocks. (Original Post) wtmusic Jan 2013 OP
"ties his tongue in knots trying to explain how oil is sustainable" Nihil Feb 2013 #1
Still peddling that nuclear lover's myth? kristopher Feb 2013 #2
Still peddling unicorn poo in the disguise of reality? Nihil Feb 2013 #3
Painful to watch. joshcryer Feb 2013 #4
I just realized. This is the "offset mentality." joshcryer Feb 2013 #5
 

Nihil

(13,508 posts)
1. "ties his tongue in knots trying to explain how oil is sustainable"
Fri Feb 1, 2013, 06:57 AM
Feb 2013

Goes nicely with people around here celebrating the increase in consumption of dirty coal
"as a stepping stone to more renewables" (not to mention the support for the dirty gas that
is a vital keystone of increased wind energy, irreplaceable in the timescale in which the
CO2 levels go through the roof).


kristopher

(29,798 posts)
2. Still peddling that nuclear lover's myth?
Fri Feb 1, 2013, 07:41 AM
Feb 2013

It isn't true. Full paper available at link:


Cost-minimized combinations of wind power, solar power and electrochemical storage, powering the grid up to 99.9% of the time

Abstract
We model many combinations of renewable electricity sources (inland wind, offshore wind, and photovoltaics) with electrochemical storage (batteries and fuel cells), incorporated into a large grid system (72 GW).

The purpose is twofold:
1) although a single renewable generator at one site produces intermittent power, we seek combinations of diverse renewables at diverse sites, with storage, that are not intermittent and satisfy need a given fraction of hours. And
2) we seek minimal cost, calculating true cost of electricity without subsidies and with inclusion of external costs.

Our model evaluated over 28 billion combinations of renewables and storage, each tested over 35,040 h (four years) of load and weather data. We find that the least cost solutions yield seemingly-excessive generation capacity—at times, almost three times the electricity needed to meet electrical load. This is because diverse renewable generation and the excess capacity together meet electric load with less storage, lowering total system cost. At 2030 technology costs and with excess electricity displacing natural gas, we find that the electric system can be powered 90%–99.9% of hours entirely on renewable electricity, at costs comparable to today's—but only if we optimize the mix of generation and storage technologies.


http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378775312014759
 

Nihil

(13,508 posts)
3. Still peddling unicorn poo in the disguise of reality?
Fri Feb 1, 2013, 08:32 AM
Feb 2013

As I said,
>> ... support for the dirty gas that is a vital keystone of increased wind
>> energy, irreplaceable in the timescale in which the CO2 levels go
>> through the roof.

Note the total absence of any "this will NEVER work" comment and a clear
pointer that things that have a "only this happens somehow" clause in
their claims are (literally) blowing smoke.

joshcryer

(62,276 posts)
5. I just realized. This is the "offset mentality."
Fri Feb 1, 2013, 09:28 AM
Feb 2013

Well, we might have done it better ourselves, but it's better to just let someone else do it better since they have bigger pockets. It's partially market-oriented nonsense. "The sustainability of capitalism." I'll have to read this book.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Jon Stewart rocks.