Demand for gas down 7% as wind energy increases::undefined
You must log in or register to comment.
In 1976, Jimmy Carter put solar panels on the White House.
First thing Reagan did was have them torn down.
Reagan, the gift that keeps on giving!
The article is about Ireland so what do Carter or Reagan have to do with this?
what does Reagan have to do with the article?
It’s environmental geopolitics 🤷 seeing widespread adoption of a policy that the US (Reagan) ignored get traction in Ireland helps highlight how shortsighted that view was. Considering the US has had a small hand in building the world’s energy supply, it seems at least tangential to remind people why such policies have existed.
Demand for sails 20% up
Based on last night’s dinner though, it appears gas production is way up. Wind seems to be breaking.
It only works when you drive the same direction as the wind is going though.
Coal is the real enemy, gas is already relatively “green” (albeit still non-renewable).
All fossil fuels are the real enemy, 7% down on any of them is a good thing regardless of how they compare to each other. But also with a claim calling gas relatively green you should add a source or link to some studies because that doesn’t sound accurate
I’d recommend reading the EU’s reasoning for allowing both natural gas and nuclear energy projects to receive “green” funding - https://www.dw.com/en/european-commission-declares-nuclear-and-gas-to-be-green/a-60614990
But basically it burns much, much cleaner than coal, and is easy to fire up, so works great whilst transitioning the baseload to nuclear and renewable power.
Oh score, nobody ever actually follows up thank you. Article touches on arguments both for and against the inclusion of fossil gas. Good read
I highly recommend reading Sustainable Energy without the hot air by the late David Mackay.
The issues are difficult, and it’s often about choosing the least bad option.
This is false. Methane is a more potent greenhouse gas than CO2 in the short term, and “natural gas” is just methane. When it leaks, it’s very bad, and could be worse than coal. https://newrepublic.com/article/176605/natural-gas-way-worse-coal
I am not an expert, but I try to be pragmatic. Here’s what socalgas.com says about the topic.
You’re right that natural gas is methane and that leaks are bad. However I think a nuanced view is important here for a few reasons.
-
Many developed countries have the infrastructure and workforce in place to not just safely deliver methane to buildings as an energy source but also to correct leaks.
-
Methane can be produced via a variety of sources both at a large and small scale. I’ve toyed with the idea of making a black soldier fly larvae farm and methane would be a by product
-
Gas tanks to hold methane have maximum a lifespan of 10 years. However many other methods of storing potential energy have a much shorter maximum lifespan, making methane a decent backup energy source in cases of emergency.
I don’t know how good the energy conversion rate of burning methane is but I would be surprised if it is low.
Personally I think we should leverage every option, especially the lower hanging fruit before dismissing these options as being not ideal when the alternative is continuing to do worse.
-
But the methane gets burned to CO2. Sure leaks are worse as a greenhouse gas, but then you’d need to count air pollution, radiation, water pollution, etc. from coal mining and burning too.
Well it’s good that EU coal consumption is falling too
https://www.statista.com/statistics/265504/coal-consumption-in-europe-and-eurasia-in-oil-equivalent/
