Green Energy

A study shows that claims about renewable energy's high cost are demonstrably false.

The Wall Street Journal and Fraser Institute published the articles about solar and wind power Jan. 1, and Steve Hanley of CleanTechnica debunked the arguments with the help of Mark Jacobson, director of Stanford University's Atmosphere/Energy Program.

Jacobson was the lead author of a paper that shows clean energy does not produce expensive and unstable electricity, as the articles claimed.

Because this community is about green, and mentions 'energy production', i'd like to bring to attention this new tech. It can be retrofitted to combustion engines and reduces emissions drastically. Output has seen to achieve 0% CO2 and 20% O2. (if another community would be better suited, i'm happy to place it there)

From the video: Dec 14, 2023 Global reduction of CO2 emissions is critical for the survival of our planet. This video demonstrates the MSAART Plasmoid Power Thunderstorm Generator which provides the solution.

• https://www.strikefoundation.earth/ - patent holder
• https://www.alpha-prospects.com/ - commercial partner

An analysis published today in the journal Science found that, contrary to a widely held assumption, the high assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU) now being produced with federal subsidies to fuel the next generation of small nuclear power reactors can be used directly to make nuclear weapons, and thus presents greater terrorism and nuclear proliferation threats than publicly acknowledged by the federal government and industry.

"Norway is the world leader when it comes to the take up of electric cars, which last year accounted for nine out of 10 new vehicles sold in the country."

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/24611584

Archived copies of the article:

• archive.today
• ghostarchive.org

Community solar is gaining momentum nationwide, but uptake is low among those who could benefit most. This grassroots NYC project aims to change that.

Workers are pushing for improved training and safety standards to help avoid falls, electrocution and equipment failure.

archivierte kopie des artikels

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/51457651

To achieve its climate goals, the city helped finance the largest solar farm east of the Mississippi River.

My goal is to keep central heating turned off as much as possible. I bundle up indoors, which works for the most part but I will struggle when temps drop low enough. And hands in cold air on a keyboard are still a problem regardless.

What about using an infrared heat lamp, which traditionally has these use cases:

• keeping pet reptiles warm
• farms: livestock and incubators
• physical therapy for humans (the claims: pain relief, skin healing/repair, blood circulation, anti-aging skin, …)
• (atypical) specifically to warm hands on keyboards (but the emitted light is white when red would be better so as to not disturb natural night vision)

The last bullet inspires some enthusiasm. But I am interested in a DiY project on-the-cheap, buying locally not online.

This array of IR LEDs will be hard to buy locally. But the question is, are LEDs even the way to go? That article has a complaint about the LEDs (ironically) having a short life. And a complaint that they do not produce heat anyway. Is that a failure of just that brand and model, or generally a gimick?

The temptation is to go cheap on the bulbs, but this ad for a heat lamp for lambs is convincing to the contrary. They sell bulbs for $21 that last ~4320 hours. These bulbs are claimed to last 6000 hours.

What about carbon heating lamps? They look like the basis of space heaters, which are notoriously ineffecient. Though I wonder if the problem is just that people use space heaters to heat a whole room.. when perhaps it’s more sensible to have a quite low setting to just keep hands or feet warm.

If a typical red filiment bulb is used, is it fair to say a simple dimmer would be useful, such as that of this fixture?

cross-posted from: https://feddit.uk/post/22128148

Experts from a “nudge unit” have been hired to help ministers fight misinformation about heat pumps to try to encourage take-up of the devices.

The appliances run on electricity instead of gas and are regarded as a way of decarbonising homes at scale. A target of installing 600,000 a year by 2028 is part of a drive to achieve Britain’s commitment to reach net zero by 2050.

However, misinformation shared in the media and by “other stakeholders” is impeding uptake, according to a £100,000 government contract awarded to the Behavioural Insights Team (BIT), which specialises in ideas to “nudge” the public into taking different actions.

The contract awarded to BIT contains details of a previously unpublished research by the Department for Energy.

It found that individuals who self-reported that they knew a fair amount or a lot about heat pumps were less likely to want one. However, people who correctly answered a simple knowledge question about heat pumps were more likely to want one.

BIT is finalising a large survey of householders’ views and coverage in the media that will be used in planning how the government will push back against misinformation.

“Information about heat pumps is being shared by the media and stakeholders, which may be skewed to negative, incorrect or exaggerated stories of heat pump adoption,” says the contract, which cites examples including claims that the pumps are noisy, cost too much to install and are not reliable and don’t work in older homes.

Articles about heat pumps in the Daily Mail and the Daily Telegraph were cited in the document, which states that some of these stories “are generally well-founded, such as believing that heat pumps are expensive” but adds that some include incorrect misconceptions, such as believing they might not work well in the cold.

“Online information which is imbalanced or skewed towards incorrect and exaggerated claims could be considered an environment where misinformation is a problem,” it reads.