Renewables made up 92% of new generating capacity in the U.S. in the first half of 2021

[abu afak]

If it was "created by the Chinese" how come we had all those "wrong" warming predictions in the 80s?

`

 

[abu afak]

South Australia Smashes Renewable Record Using 100% Solar And Wind For Full Week​

By - Andy Corbley
Jan 28, 2022

South Australia Smashes Renewable Record Using 100% Solar And Wind For Full Week

For 6.5 days the denizens of South Australia enjoyed 101% of their electricity needs coming from solar and wind power.

www.goodnewsnetwork.org

`

 

[abu afak]

How're those renewables working out in Europe?

Europe’s Power Crunch Shuts Down Factories as Prices Hit Record

(Bloomberg) -- European power climbed to a fresh record as France faces a winter supply crunch, with heavy industries forced to curb production across the region. Most Read from BloombergOmicron May Double Risk of Getting Infected on Planes, IATA SaysOmicron Has 80% Lower Risk of Hospitalization...

finance.yahoo.com

`

ENERGY
13 October 2020 8:37

Solar is now ‘cheapest electricity in history’, confirms IEA​

Solar is now ‘cheapest electricity in history’, confirms IEA

The world’s best solar power schemes now offer the “cheapest…electricity in history” with the technology cheaper than coal and gas in most major countries.

www.carbonbrief.org

`

 

[ding]

ENERGY
13 October 2020 8:37

Solar is now ‘cheapest electricity in history’, confirms IEA​

Solar is now ‘cheapest electricity in history’, confirms IEA

The world’s best solar power schemes now offer the “cheapest…electricity in history” with the technology cheaper than coal and gas in most major countries.

www.carbonbrief.org

`

I can't think of a better way to usher in the next glacial cycle other than the widespread use of solar.

 

[abu afak]

I can't think of a better way to usher in the next glacial cycle other than the widespread use of solar.

View attachment 596519

Youtube is not debate.

 

[ding]

Youtube is not debate.

So you don't believe that when the northern hemisphere is in winter that significant portions of the lands in the northern hemisphere are snow covered?

You do realize the planet has been in an ice age for the past 3 million years, right?

Solar variability and orbital forcings coupled with albedo of the northern hemisphere have driven all climate fluctuations and environmental uncertainty over the last 3 million years because the planet is uniquely configured for bipolar glaciation and the planet's temperature is at the threshhold for extensive northern hemisphere glaciation.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Solar is now ‘cheapest electricity in history’, confirms IEA

Obviously. That must be why Germany just shut down half their nuclear plants.
That must be why they pay triple what we do.
Will they be paying quadruple, after they shut down the other half.....with all their cheap solar?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I can't think of a better way to usher in the next glacial cycle other than the widespread use of solar.

View attachment 596519

Decreasing the Earth's albedo is gonna cool us down good, eh?

 

[ding]

Decreasing the Earth's albedo is gonna cool us down good, eh?

It has every time there's been a glacial cycle. But with widespread use of solar it's not exactly albedo as it's not reflecting solar radiation as much as it is capturing solar radiation by converting it into electricity.

 

[abu afak]

It has every time there's been a glacial cycle. But with widespread use of solar it's not exactly albedo as it's not reflecting solar radiation as much as it is capturing solar radiation by converting it into electricity.

That's a Ridiculous opinion/REPEAT and Refuted by 97% of Climate scientists, and 100% of International Science orgs.
And the opposite of My Linked and sourced OP.

Opposing (The AGW Consensus)

Since 2007, when the American Association of Petroleum Geologists released a revised statement,[29] NO national or international scientific body any longer rejects the findings of human-induced effects on climate change.".."[28][30]..

`

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

It has every time there's been a glacial cycle. But with widespread use of solar it's not exactly albedo as it's not reflecting solar radiation as much as it is capturing solar radiation by converting it into electricity.

It has every time there's been a glacial cycle.

Glacial cycles happen with decreasing albedo?

But with widespread use of solar it's not exactly albedo as it's not reflecting solar radiation as much as it is capturing solar radiation by converting it into electricity.

Panels are darker than what they cover. Sounds like more captured heat to me.
And that electricity ends up as heat as well. You know that, right?

 

[ding]

That's a Ridiculous opinion/REPEAT and Refuted by 97% of Climate scientists, and 100% of International Science orgs.
And the opposite of My Linked and sourced OP.

Opposing (The AGW Consensus)

Since 2007, when the American Association of Petroleum Geologists released a revised statement,[29] NO national or international scientific body any longer rejects the findings of human-induced effects on climate change.".."[28][30]..

`

So then you don't believe that solar variability and orbital forcings coupled with albedo of the northern hemisphere have driven all climate fluctuations and environmental uncertainty over the last 3 million years because the planet is uniquely configured for bipolar glaciation and the planet's temperature is at the threshhold for extensive northern hemisphere glaciation.

How do you explain all of the climate fluctuations of the past 3 million years?

 

[ding]

It has every time there's been a glacial cycle.

Glacial cycles happen with decreasing albedo?

But with widespread use of solar it's not exactly albedo as it's not reflecting solar radiation as much as it is capturing solar radiation by converting it into electricity.

Panels are darker than what they cover. Sounds like more captured heat to me.
And that electricity ends up as heat as well. You know that, right?

Increasing albedo.

Yes, panels are darker which is how they are able to capture solar radiation and convert it into electricity. Are you assuming that that conversion does not reduce the solar radiation heating the surface of the earth?

Yes, it does end up as heat but not at the same frequency. But since that heat is in both cases (fossil fuels vs solar) it cancels out and the only incremental effect is the reduction is solar radiation heating the surface of the planet.

 

[abu afak]

So then you don't believe that solar variability and orbital forcings coupled with albedo of the northern hemisphere have driven all climate fluctuations and environmental uncertainty over the last 3 million years because the planet is uniquely configured for bipolar glaciation and the planet's temperature is at the threshhold for extensive northern hemisphere glaciation.

How do you explain all of the climate fluctuations of the past 3 million years?

Opposing (The AGW Consensus)

Since 2007, when the American Association of Petroleum Geologists released a revised statement,[29] NO national or international scientific body any longer rejects the findings of human-induced effects on climate change.".."[28][30]..

`

 

[ding]

Opposing (The AGW Consensus)

Since 2007, when the American Association of Petroleum Geologists released a revised statement,[29] NO national or international scientific body any longer rejects the findings of human-induced effects on climate change.".."[28][30]..

`

There have been many reviews and articles published that reached the conclusion that much of the global warming since the mid-20th century and earlier could be explained in terms of solar variability.

For example:
Soon et al. (1996); Hoyt & Schatten (1997); Svensmark & Friis-Christensen (1997); Soon et al. (2000b,a); Bond et al. (2001); Willson & Mordvinov (2003); Maasch et al. (2005); Soon (2005); Scafetta & West (2006a,b); Scafetta & West (2008a,b); Svensmark (2007); Courtillot et al. (2007, 2008); Singer & Avery (2008); Shaviv (2008); Scafetta (2009, 2011); Le Mouel et al. ¨ (2008, 2010); Kossobokov et al. (2010); Le Mouel et al. ¨ (2011); Humlum et al. (2011); Ziskin & Shaviv (2012); Solheim et al. (2012); Courtillot et al. (2013); Solheim (2013); Scafetta & Willson (2014); Harde (2014); Luning & Vahrenholt ¨ (2015, 2016); Soon et al. (2015); Svensmark et al. (2016, 2017); Harde (2017); Scafetta et al. (2019); Le Mouel¨ et al. (2019a, 2020a); Morner et al. ¨ (2020); Ludecke et al. ¨ (2020)).

 

[abu afak]

There have been many reviews and articles published that reached the conclusion that much of the global warming since the mid-20th century and earlier could be explained in terms of solar variability.

For example:
Soon et al. (1996); Hoyt & Schatten (1997); Svensmark & Friis-Christensen (1997); Soon et al. (2000b,a); Bond et al. (2001); Willson & Mordvinov (2003); Maasch et al. (2005); Soon (2005); Scafetta & West (2006a,b); Scafetta & West (2008a,b); Svensmark (2007); Courtillot et al. (2007, 2008); Singer & Avery (2008); Shaviv (2008); Scafetta (2009, 2011); Le Mouel et al. ¨ (2008, 2010); Kossobokov et al. (2010); Le Mouel et al. ¨ (2011); Humlum et al. (2011); Ziskin & Shaviv (2012); Solheim et al. (2012); Courtillot et al. (2013); Solheim (2013); Scafetta & Willson (2014); Harde (2014); Luning & Vahrenholt ¨ (2015, 2016); Soon et al. (2015); Svensmark et al. (2016, 2017); Harde (2017); Scafetta et al. (2019); Le Mouel¨ et al. (2019a, 2020a); Morner et al. ¨ (2020); Ludecke et al. ¨ (2020)).

No, and all you have is ONE Oil Paid study (Soon et al) to evidence it while the VAST MAJORITY of the Science community and 100% of Intl Science orgs and say the warming is AGW.

`

 

[ding]

No, and all you have is ONE Oil Paid study (Soon et al) to evidence it while the VAST MAJORITY of the Science community and 100% of Intl Science orgs and say the warming is AGW.

`

You must be ignoring all the other studies I posted, right?

Labitzke & van Loon (1988); van Loon & Labitzke (2000); Labitzke (2005); Beer et al. (2000); Reid (2000); Carslaw et al. (2002); Ruzmaikin & Feynman (2002); Ruzmaikin et al. (2004, 2006); Feynman & Ruzmaikin (2011); Ruzmaikin & Feynman (2015); Salby & Callaghan (2000, 2004, 2006); Kirkby (2007); de Jager et al. (2010); Tinsley & Heelis(1993); Tinsley (2012); Lam & Tinsley (2016); Zhou et al. (2016); Zhang et al. (2020b); Dobrica et al. (2009); Dobrica et al. (2010); Demetrescu & Dobrica (2014); Dobrica et al. (2018); Blanter et al. (2012); van Loon & Shea (1999); van Loon & Meehl (2011); van Loon et al. (2012); Roy & Haigh (2012); Roy (2014, 2018); Roy & Kripalani (2019); Lopes et al. (2017); Pan et al. (2020). Soon et al. (1996); Hoyt & Schatten (1997); Svensmark & Friis-Christensen (1997); Soon et al. (2000b,a); Bond et al. (2001); Willson & Mordvinov (2003); Maasch et al. (2005); Soon (2005); Scafetta & West (2006a,b); Scafetta & West (2008a,b); Svensmark (2007); Courtillot et al. (2007, 2008); Singer & Avery (2008); Shaviv (2008); Scafetta (2009, 2011); Le Mouel et al. ¨ (2008, 2010); Kossobokov et al. (2010); Le Mouel et al. ¨ (2011); Humlum et al. (2011); Ziskin & Shaviv (2012); Solheim et al. (2012); Courtillot et al. (2013); Solheim (2013); Scafetta & Willson (2014); Harde (2014); Luning & Vahrenholt ¨ (2015, 2016); Soon et al. (2015); Svensmark et al. (2016, 2017); Harde (2017); Scafetta et al. (2019); Le Mouel¨ et al. (2019a, 2020a); Morner et al. ¨ (2020); Ludecke et al. ¨ (2020)).

 

[ding]

It seems there isn't a consensus after all.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Increasing albedo.

Yes, panels are darker which is how they are able to capture solar radiation and convert it into electricity. Are you assuming that that conversion does not reduce the solar radiation heating the surface of the earth?

Yes, it does end up as heat but not at the same frequency. But since that heat is in both cases (fossil fuels vs solar) it cancels out and the only incremental effect is the reduction is solar radiation heating the surface of the planet.

Increasing albedo.

Less reflection from darker panels is decreasing albedo, silly.

Are you assuming that that conversion does not reduce the solar radiation heating the surface of the earth?

Do you feel the electricity doesn't eventually end up as heat?
What does it end up as? Does that energy disappear?

Yes, it does end up as heat but not at the same frequency.

What frequency of heat is it?

But since that heat is in both cases (fossil fuels vs solar) it cancels out

Except for the darker panels.

 

[ding]

Increasing albedo.

Less reflection from darker panels is decreasing albedo, silly.

Are you assuming that that conversion does not reduce the solar radiation heating the surface of the earth?

Do you feel the electricity doesn't eventually end up as heat?
What does it end up as? Does that energy disappear?

Yes, it does end up as heat but not at the same frequency.

What frequency of heat is it?

But since that heat is in both cases (fossil fuels vs solar) it cancels out

Except for the darker panels.

You were asking about glaciation, silly. It's increasing albedo which is a result of increased glaciation/snow cover which is a result of temperatures at the threshold of extensive continental glaciation.

As for the solar panels, the only effect you need to know is that any solar radiation that is converted into electricity is solar radiation that does not warm the surface of the planet. The discussion of albedo does not apply to solar panels. It's about the reduction of solar radiation warming the surface of the planet.

I already explained the heat from electricity to you earlier. All you need to know is that in the case of fossil fuels generating electricity, fossil fuels do not reduce the solar radiation heating the surface of the planet whereas solar power does. Electrical usage is the same in both cases so whatever heat you think is heating the planet by using electricity is in both cases.