Chronicles in Pacific Socialism - Hawaii Bans Fossil Fuels to Make Electricity.

[Nice Squirrel]

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/08/28/3696207/hawaii-isnt-big-on-gas/

Hawaiian Gov. David Ige said this week he opposes plans to use liquefied natural gas as a “transitional fuel” for the island state as it moves to 100 percent renewable electricity. Ige said investment in infrastructure for LNG — or any fossil fuel — was misplaced, and he expressed doubt that there would be any monetary benefits to LNG proposals.

What more freedoms will they destroy in the name of unworkable energy sustainability? What's next floating gulags?

 

[Derec]

They will likely get away with it due to their geographical position which leads to high cost of shipping fossil fuels and good availability of solar, wind and wave/tidal energy.

I am more concerned about the movement to prevent the building of the Thirty Meter Telescope honestly.

 

[dismal]

They will likely get away with it due to their geographical position which leads to high cost of shipping fossil fuels and good availability of solar, wind and wave/tidal energy.

No one says you can't have 100% renewable energy if you are willing to tolerate the expense and unreliability of it.

Those sound like intermittent and/or impractical sources of energy.

How much wave/tidal energy generation actually exists in the world?

BTW I looked up current generation stats for HI and in 2013 it was 70% oil, 14% coal, 5% wind, 0.2% solar, 2.7% geothermal, 0.8% hydro, 3.2% biomass and no tidal specifically identified though there is a little bit of "other".

http://www.eia.gov/electricity/state/hawaii/index.cfm

 

[arkirk]

They will likely get away with it due to their geographical position which leads to high cost of shipping fossil fuels and good availability of solar, wind and wave/tidal energy.

No one says you can't have 100% renewable energy if you are willing to tolerate the expense and unreliability of it.

Those sound like intermittent and/or impractical sources of energy.

How much wave/tidal energy generation actually exists in the world?

BTW I looked up current generation stats for HI and in 2013 it was 70% oil, 14% coal, 5% wind, 0.2% solar, 2.7% geothermal, 0.8% hydro, 3.2% biomass and no tidal specifically identified though there is a little bit of "other".

http://www.eia.gov/electricity/state/hawaii/index.cfm

You appear to have very little imagination or inventiveness. Everything needs to be obvious or you just can't seem to get it. Hawaii has to import all its fossil fuel. It does have abundant alternative energy sources and they can be worked into a system that meets their needs.

 

[dismal]

No one says you can't have 100% renewable energy if you are willing to tolerate the expense and unreliability of it.

Those sound like intermittent and/or impractical sources of energy.

How much wave/tidal energy generation actually exists in the world?

BTW I looked up current generation stats for HI and in 2013 it was 70% oil, 14% coal, 5% wind, 0.2% solar, 2.7% geothermal, 0.8% hydro, 3.2% biomass and no tidal specifically identified though there is a little bit of "other".

http://www.eia.gov/electricity/state/hawaii/index.cfm

You appear to have very little imagination or inventiveness. Everything needs to be obvious or you just can't seem to get it. Hawaii has to import all its fossil fuel. It does have abundant alternative energy sources and they can be worked into a system that meets their needs.

This thread is not about me.

And , if it were, you would be exactly wrong that I do not understand what Hawaii does to meet its electricity needs as I literally posted it in the post you quoted.

 

[arkirk]

You appear to have very little imagination or inventiveness. Everything needs to be obvious or you just can't seem to get it. Hawaii has to import all its fossil fuel. It does have abundant alternative energy sources and they can be worked into a system that meets their needs.

This thread is not about me.

And , if it were, you would be exactly wrong that I do not understand what Hawaii does to meet its electricity needs as I literally posted it in the post you quoted.

All any new provider has to do is to beat 33 cents per KWH. That looks pretty easy to me...even with outrageously expensive equipment. If they switched to natural gas, they would have to build infrastructure to support storing it and also have a continuing transportation bill. Their choice looks like it makes sense to me.

 

[dismal]

This thread is not about me.

And , if it were, you would be exactly wrong that I do not understand what Hawaii does to meet its electricity needs as I literally posted it in the post you quoted.

All any new provider has to do is to beat 33 cents per KWH. That looks pretty easy to me...even with outrageously expensive equipment. If they switched to natural gas, they would have to build infrastructure to support storing it and also have a continuing transportation bill. Their choice looks like it makes sense to me.

Yet they use 0.2% solar and 85% fossil fuels.

Perhaps its not as easy as you think.

 

[arkirk]

All any new provider has to do is to beat 33 cents per KWH. That looks pretty easy to me...even with outrageously expensive equipment. If they switched to natural gas, they would have to build infrastructure to support storing it and also have a continuing transportation bill. Their choice looks like it makes sense to me.

Yet they use 0.2% solar and 85% fossil fuels.

Perhaps its not as easy as you think.

YOU GOTTA START SOMEWHERE. New infrastructure will replace 33cent generating equipment. Why build LNG infrastructure that still will be more expensive and still pollute?

 

[dismal]

Yet they use 0.2% solar and 85% fossil fuels.

Perhaps its not as easy as you think.

YOU GOTTA START SOMEWHERE. New infrastructure will replace 33cent generating equipment. Why build LNG infrastructure that still will be more expensive and still pollute?

Yeah, ya gotta start by convincing the public to pay more for less reliable energy.

And the answer to "why build LNG" is that it will pollute less than the oil and coal you are burning today and will still be burning decades from now.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

I agree with dismal, history shows that electricity was 100% reliable throughout history. Even in the beginning.

 

[Bronzeage]

They will likely get away with it due to their geographical position which leads to high cost of shipping fossil fuels and good availability of solar, wind and wave/tidal energy.

No one says you can't have 100% renewable energy if you are willing to tolerate the expense and unreliability of it.

Those sound like intermittent and/or impractical sources of energy.

How much wave/tidal energy generation actually exists in the world?

BTW I looked up current generation stats for HI and in 2013 it was 70% oil, 14% coal, 5% wind, 0.2% solar, 2.7% geothermal, 0.8% hydro, 3.2% biomass and no tidal specifically identified though there is a little bit of "other".

http://www.eia.gov/electricity/state/hawaii/index.cfm

No one says you can't continue to produce 84% of your power with fossil fuels, as long as you can afford it.

Hawaii finds itself in a strange position. Everything comes in or leaves on a boat or a plane.

Since Hawaii has no oil, gas, or coal of it's own, that 84% is paid for by stuff they ship out. It's a losing proposition, no matter how low the price of oil falls.

Hawaii has wind, tides, and they're sitting on a volcanic vent in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. None of those is likely to go away anytime soon.

 

[dismal]

I agree with dismal, history shows that electricity was 100% reliable throughout history. Even in the beginning.

Is s this the first time you've encountered the idea that wind power doesn't make electricity when the wind is not blowing and solar power does not make electricity when the sun is not shining?

I didn't realize this point was controversial.

Is this to be another area of willfully ignorant denial for the left?

 

[dismal]

Since Hawaii has no oil, gas, or coal of it's own, that 84% is paid for by stuff they ship out. It's a losing proposition, no matter how low the price of oil falls.

Hawaii has wind, tides, and they're sitting on a volcanic vent in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. None of those is likely to go away anytime soon.

Can you show me the math that say importing oil/coal is a losing proposition compared to spending enough money to generate the entire island's supply of power with tidal power?

Because that sure sounds like ass-talking to me.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

I agree with dismal, history shows that electricity was 100% reliable throughout history. Even in the beginning.

Is s this the first time you've encountered the idea that wind power doesn't make electricity when the wind is not blowing and solar power does not make electricity when the sun is not shining?

Amazing. If only there was a way to store energy for later? Welp there isn't, so let's give up.

Is this to be another area of willfully ignorant denial for the left?

It's in our basic text:


Actually it should be "Selbstversorgung"

 

[dismal]

Is s this the first time you've encountered the idea that wind power doesn't make electricity when the wind is not blowing and solar power does not make electricity when the sun is not shining?

Amazing. If only there was a way to store energy for later? Welp there isn't

Well, it turns out you can say something that is reasonably accurate.

 

[Bronzeage]

Since Hawaii has no oil, gas, or coal of it's own, that 84% is paid for by stuff they ship out. It's a losing proposition, no matter how low the price of oil falls.

Hawaii has wind, tides, and they're sitting on a volcanic vent in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. None of those is likely to go away anytime soon.

Can you show me the math that say importing oil/coal is a losing proposition compared to spending enough money to generate the entire island's supply of power with tidal power?

Because that sure sounds like ass-talking to me.

No one said they were going to supply it all with tidal power. Solar, geothermal, and tidal are all renewable sources of energy production.

I don't have any numbers at my disposal and correcting your misconceptions is not on my to-do list at the moment. Most people would concede that an oil tanker is a fairly expensive ship to build and maintain, regardless of the cost of the oil it transports across the Pacific Ocean. If I were looking for numbers, I would want to see how many hours a week the average Hawaiian works to pay for the energy he/she consumes. I live in an oil rich state and we like solar energy because it leaves us with more oil to ship to places that don't any of their own. See how that works?

Whether it is expensive to extract energy from the sun, the sea, or the earth, is not really the question. The question is whether to continue to give your money to people who live far away, or to your neighbors. Japan was faced with the same problem and they decided to build nuclear power plants on the beach. We all know how that turned out.

It really doesn't make any sense to pitch an energy policy based on today's oil market. That would be some real ass-talking.

 

[Horatio Parker]

According to the article, as of 2014, 21% of their energy comes from renewables.

 

[Bronzeage]

According to the article, as of 2014, 21% of their energy comes from renewables.

We must always give credit for small improvements.

 

[dismal]

Can you show me the math that say importing oil/coal is a losing proposition compared to spending enough money to generate the entire island's supply of power with tidal power?

Because that sure sounds like ass-talking to me.

No one said they were going to supply it all with tidal power. Solar, geothermal, and tidal are all renewable sources of energy production.

I don't have any numbers at my disposal and correcting your misconceptions is not on my to-do list at the moment. Most people would concede that an oil tanker is a fairly expensive ship to build and maintain, regardless of the cost of the oil it transports across the Pacific Ocean. If I were looking for numbers, I would want to see how many hours a week the average Hawaiian works to pay for the energy he/she consumes. I live in an oil rich state and we like solar energy because it leaves us with more oil to ship to places that don't any of their own. See how that works?

Whether it is expensive to extract energy from the sun, the sea, or the earth, is not really the question. The question is whether to continue to give your money to people who live far away, or to your neighbors. Japan was faced with the same problem and they decided to build nuclear power plants on the beach. We all know how that turned out.

It really doesn't make any sense to pitch an energy policy based on today's oil market. That would be some real ass-talking.

What did Japan do when it stopped operating those nuclear plants by the beach?

Lots of tidal power? Geothermal?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Hawaii is probably the best place for such a thing but it's not going to work even there.

LNG plants are peaking plants already, thus they can freely add unreliable power to the grid without driving it into the base load that's a problem in most of the world. You still need the LNG plants to back up anything unreliable, though.


There's also the technical problem that they have to pretty much replace their substations in order to support more rooftop solar. Current substations worldwide are designed to step power down from the high voltage lines to the neighborhood and won't work the other way around--the safety systems assume the power is coming from upstream and the cooling systems are engineered for this, also. You'll burn out the transformers if you push too much power the other way.