Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Iain

Pages: 1 [2] 3
51
Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: January 20, 2020, 11:50:33 PM »
Is there a thread for subsea turbines?

Had a search, but only "cable" hits for Subsea and lots of hits for turbines.

Cormat looks promising:

No net torque
Easy to fabricate
Size limited only by water depth
Easy to tow into place and ballast down
PTime of peak flow varies along coastline
Subsea cables up estuaries to substations

http://www.emec.org.uk/about-us/our-tidal-clients/nautricity/

52
Policy and solutions / Re: Nuclear Power
« on: January 20, 2020, 11:44:31 PM »
Ref. for actual generation by source, lots of blue shading for wind:

https://gridwatch.co.uk/demand/percent

53
Policy and solutions / Re: Nuclear Power
« on: January 20, 2020, 11:41:03 PM »
NeilT: "Producing massive amounts of wind power with no viable storage of that energy leads to it being wasted"

Not wasted when the average commuter has a car with a range several times their daily commute (for the occasional weekend trip and to prolong battery life by reducing cycling.)

25 Million (one per UK household) Nissan Leafs at 56 kWh, that’s 14 Terawatt Hours stored, while the average daily UK production in 2018 was just 0.91 TWh.

It's far windier in the winter than summer, when electricity demand is highest

Nuclear's main problem is it must run 24/7/365 to pay back the enormous capital cost (and carbon footprint from the 1st pour of concrete to commissioning)
So massive inter-seasonal, 1 cycle per year storage would be required to follow demand.

Unfeasably expensive, I don't see a place for nuclear at all with wind/solar/EVs

54
Policy and solutions / Re: Electric cars
« on: January 19, 2020, 02:37:49 PM »
There are alternatives if Lithium, Cobalt, etc. become harder to obtain.

Sodium Ion looks promising.

https://www.power-technology.com/features/sodium-ion-batteries-worth-salt/

55
Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: January 15, 2020, 03:56:08 PM »
Neil, All

"What I challenge is that anyone has a workable plan which does not use all CO2 neutral sources."

Did you mean

"What I challenge is that anyone has a workable plan which uses only CO2 neutral sources."


I believe the rapid transition to renewables it is do-able - see my post #4499, last one on P90

I didn't get any criticism of it, happy to hear any, you won't hurt my feelings : )

Is there a flaw in that thinking which makes you so pessimistic?

56
Policy and solutions / Re: Electric cars
« on: January 14, 2020, 10:40:58 AM »
Griff, Thanks for the graphs

Neil makes an important point

"the smallest Tesla batteries are often more than twice the size of standard range for older models"

So will cycle fewer times per 100 miles

Looks like the trend is toward bigger batteries anyway, myself I was thinking of a used Outlander Plug in hybrid, but with the smaller battery it may be cycled to death by the previous owner

I have asked and got the battery management data from a couple of dealers, so it is possible to find out how many cycles it has had.


57
Policy and solutions / Re: Electric cars
« on: January 13, 2020, 11:26:59 PM »
Battery life

I searched the forum on "degradation", but got no hits

Has anyone come across real world data on battery degradation?
I remember seeing a google group where owners on Outlanders were posting the retention figure vs age and mileage. Can't find it again.

Main factors are number of cycles and depth of discharge, so large battery capacity EVs on daily 10% depth of discharge will last for 10,000 cycles +

Smaller batteries, e.g. the Mitsu Outlander may have to be discharged to c. 50% (or the max discharge allowed by Mitsu) then recharged 2x per day.

Really keen to see how they are holding up after 5+ years

58
Policy and solutions / Re: Electric cars
« on: January 13, 2020, 11:11:17 PM »
Apologies to Neil and Nanning, this is a cross post, but I think EVs have an important role in the transition to renewables not already discussed:

Free Energy Storage (UK case)

Replacing cars with batteries and Lorries with hydrogen (or forklifting in a charged battery bank)would require c. 3x present electricity production

25 Million (one per household) Nissan Leafs at 56 kWh, that’s 14 x10^12

Each does 1/10th max range per daily commute.

14 Terawatt Hours stored, Average daily UK production in 2018 was 0.91 TWh

So that’s 1/3 Gimmie it NOW demand as is the present case; 1/3 anytime this week is fine demand and 1/3 sometime between the two, as the trucks keep rolling 24/7

That makes managing intermittency so much easier, up renewables x6 (c. 50% electricity is renewable at present) the cars / hydrogen electrolysers absorb any additional over and above the GimmieitNOW demand, so the grid side storage only has to cover the rare periods of shortfall on the GimmieitNOW demand side.

NB this is not car to grid, just cars absorb the surplus for now.

The grid can’t take all this from big centralised stations, so a more dispersed arrangement would suit better. Local – Factory / Office roof solar to static cars in carpark over 8 hrs of daylight. Solar runs aircon and cars in the summer, just the cars in the winter. The Wind turbine in the carpark (industrial areas) produces more in winter than summer.


Encouragements:

Tax office / factory roofs (E, W, S) which have no solar, tax business electricity, tax office parking spaces which have no charging point, tax ICE cars and trucks
Give tax breaks on their opposite numbers.

Nuclear is limited to summer valley baseload, the high capital cost and low running cost means it must run 24/7/365, so it would be v. expensive to try to cover winter peak with stations which would be idle in Spring, Summer and Autumn. It also does not suit storage, if the stations were sufficient for Spring / Autumn, the summer surplus would have to be stored for 3 months of Winter. That’s one battery cycle per year – prohibitively high capital cost.

Tidal turbines anyone? – peak every 12h, peak occurs at different times N to S on the coast. Cables run up rivers and estuaries to the local substations.

No need to go back to the stone / iron / pre-industrial age

59
Policy and solutions / Re: Electric cars
« on: January 13, 2020, 11:06:39 PM »
"Most charging should be at home/office/streetside at low rates. If your charging is gonna be solely in fast charger stations at such high rates, better skip buying an EV for now"

Or workplace solar roof to carpark, cheap electricity and no grid or DNO charges, nor profit to supplier.

60
Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: January 13, 2020, 11:01:41 PM »
Ken,

In the UK, offshore wind is down to 3.965 to 4.1611 p/kWh on a "contract for difference" - developers bid for a floor price, though they can sell for more if they can strike a commercial deal.

It's largely because the turbines are getting bigger, so less capital required for the capacity.

Nuclear, by comparison is 9.25p / kWh on a similar cfd and cannot increase output in winter as wind can, so massive inter-seasonal storage would be required.

61
Policy and solutions / Re: The Most Ambitious Plan of the Human Race
« on: January 13, 2020, 10:50:59 PM »
Neil,

I don't see the same problems you do.

If the same amount of money is being spent, albeit on different things, then the same amount of wages are being earned, albeit for different work. The Germans are producing EVs too.

If all energy were renewable, we could consume (almost, the sources still have an energy cost, though it's paid back in months) as much as we liked without emissions. In the meantime, saving and not spending is good.

In my model, electricity production and storage is widely distributed, so infrastructure - grid and local network reinforcement is minimal.

I don't see the cards collapsing - can you give an example?


62
Policy and solutions / Re: The Most Ambitious Plan of the Human Race
« on: January 13, 2020, 09:10:52 PM »
The Radical I’m thinking of is a rapid transition to renewable energy

I don’t see any tech issues with that, just more of the same already developed solar, wind, tidal. Car batteries help by absorbing the surplus.
I do see behavioral issues. E.g. despite informed concern, I don’t see a rapid transition to red meat or air travel abstinence.

People like their cars (the kids don’t have a choice, would like a car too I bet)
The transition will happen sooner if it is made easy - ICE to Battery/electric motor for a similar car.

Re. wealth – all purchases have a carbon cost in 2 parts – primary energy and …
“induced energy” – when you pay for all the work which went into making the item, you “induce” the workers in the supply chain to be consumers themselves.

Buying less stuff is good.

63
Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: January 13, 2020, 08:11:14 PM »
@rboyd

What is the price of electricity per kWh where you are, and will there be upward pressure if demand increases for EVs

In the UK it's 16p/kWh, 12.3 cents, so worthwhile fitting solar as a DIY project without the feed in tarriff. All self use. A diverter with a current clamp PWMs the surplus to the Hot water cylinder, or any resistive load.

I think it would be easier to fund solar-roof-to-employee-carpark than more centralised generation, also a tax free perk to aid recruitment and retention of staff.

64
Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: January 13, 2020, 08:03:48 PM »
The end of the Intermittency Problem… Cross posted from “The Most Ambitious Plan of the Human Race”

Free Storage (UK case)

Replacing cars with batteries and Lorries with hydrogen would require c. 3x present electricity production

25 Million (one per household) Nissan Leafs at 56 kWh, that’s 14 x10^12

Each does 1/10th max range per daily commute.

14 Terawatt Hours stored, Average daily UK production in 2018 was 0.91 TWh

So that’s 1/3 Gimmie it NOW demand as is the present case; 1/3 anytime this week is fine demand and 1/3 sometime between the two, as the trucks keep rolling 24/7

That makes managing intermittency so much easier, up renewables x6 (c. 50% electricity is renewable at present) the cars / hydrogen electrolysers absorb any additional over and above the GimmieitNOW demand, so the grid side storage only has to cover the rare periods of shortfall on the GimmieitNOW demand side.

NB this is not car to grid, just cars absorb the surplus for now.

The grid can’t take all this from big centralised stations, so a more dispersed arrangement would suit better. Local – Factory / Office roof solar to static cars in carpark over 8 hrs of daylight. Solar runs aircon and cars in the summer, just the cars in the winter. The Wind turbine in the carpark (industrial areas) produces more in winter than summer.


Encouragements:

Tax office / factory roofs (E, W, S) which have no solar, tax business electricity, tax office parking spaces which have no charging point, tax ICE cars and trucks
Give tax breaks on their opposite numbers.

Nuclear is limited to summer valley baseload, the high capital cost and low running cost means it must run 24/7/365, so it would be v. expensive to try to cover winter peak with stations which would be idle in Spring, Summer and Autumn. It also does not suit storage, if the stations were sufficient for Spring / Autumn, the summer surplus would have to be stored for 3 months of Winter. That’s one battery cycle per year – prohibitively high capital cost.

Tidal turbines anyone? – peak every 12h, peak occurs at different times N to S on the coast. Cables run up rivers and estuaries to the local substations.

No need to go back to the stone / iron / pre-industrial age

65
Policy and solutions / Re: The Most Ambitious Plan of the Human Race
« on: January 13, 2020, 07:26:34 PM »
I note Nanning's point re. the efficiency of buses, but it would take a lot to get people out of their cars. The main issue is a finite number of routes, but the car can go anywhere.

I Also note Neil's issue with lack of services in a sparsely populated area

Public transport suits densely populated areas with many connections per node better, also walking, cycling, as what you want is usually closer. When congested, it suits cars less.
(Nanning - We'll tax cars more and use the money to free issue anyone who wants one an electric bike, helmet, lights, wet weather gear, a big stick to ward off cars...: )

Let the car's big batteries be part of the solution, allowing a much greater penetration of intermittent renewables.

66
Policy and solutions / Re: The Most Ambitious Plan of the Human Race
« on: January 13, 2020, 05:16:00 PM »
Agreed, Hydrogen is not ideal.

Alt. Change out battery packs by forklift at each pickup or delivery point.

67
Policy and solutions / Re: The Most Ambitious Plan of the Human Race
« on: January 13, 2020, 01:54:57 PM »
Free Storage (UK case)

Replacing cars with batteries and Lorries with hydrogen would require c. 3x present electricity production

25 Million (one per household) Nissan Leafs at 56 kWh, that’s 14 x10^12

Each does 1/10th max range per daily commute.

14 Terawatt Hours stored, Average daily UK production in 2018 was 0.91 TWh

So that’s 1/3 Gimmie it NOW demand as is the present case; 1/3 anytime this week is fine demand and 1/3 sometime between the two, as the trucks keep rolling 24/7

That makes managing intermittency so much easier, up renewables x6 (c. 50% electricity is renewable at present) the cars / hydrogen electrolysers absorb any additional over and above the GimmieitNOW demand, so the grid side storage only has to cover the rare periods of shortfall on the GimmieitNOW demand side.

NB this is not car to grid, just cars absorb the surplus for now.

The grid can’t take all this from big centralised stations, so a more dispersed arrangement would suit better. Local – Factory / Office roof solar to static cars in carpark over 8 hrs of daylight. Solar runs aircon and cars in the summer, just the cars in the winter. The Wind turbine in the carpark (industrial areas) produces more in winter than summer.


Encouragements:

Tax office / factory roofs (E, W, S) which have no solar, tax business electricity, tax office parking spaces which have no charging point, tax ICE cars and trucks
Give tax breaks on their opposite numbers.

Nuclear is limited to summer valley baseload, the high capital cost and low running cost means it must run 24/7/365, so it would be v. expensive to try to cover winter peak with stations which would be idle in Spring, Summer and Autumn. It also does not suit storage, if the stations were sufficient for Spring / Autumn, the summer surplus would have to be stored for 3 months of Winter. That’s one battery cycle per year – prohibitively high capital cost.

Tidal turbines anyone? – peak every 12h, peak occurs at different times N to S on the coast. Cables run up rivers and estuaries to the local substations.

No need to go back to the stone / iron / pre-industrial age

68
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019/2020 freezing season
« on: December 02, 2019, 06:05:30 AM »
@charles_oil

LoL, yes, it is set at a level Joe Public would be able to follow.

The BBC charter includes a commitment to  " ...inform, educate..."

E.G the recent nature programmes highlighting plastic waste in the seas being ingested by marine life .

Significantly, many more of the public now realise their small action has a consequence.

< I'm drifting OT, last post on this >


69
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019/2020 freezing season
« on: December 01, 2019, 08:42:58 AM »
Ah, Now I get it.

A brief explainer on what a SSW is and possible effects:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/feeds/20992173

70
Arctic sea ice / Re: Latest PIOMAS update (November 2019)
« on: November 11, 2019, 01:28:14 PM »
Also worth noting the linear trend of September minimums predicts BOEs will be common in 16 years from now.

Scary.

An excursion below the trend line such as seen in 2010, 11 or 12 reduces that to 4 or 5 years from now.

Very scary.

71
Arctic sea ice / Re: Latest PIOMAS update (November 2019)
« on: November 11, 2019, 01:24:12 PM »
Piomas now has the Oct data.

2019 is within a whisker of 2012 and 2016 for time of year.

72
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019/2020 freezing season
« on: October 23, 2019, 06:09:21 AM »
“How soon before BOE is a possibility?”

About 14 years, if the linear trend continues
That’s a seriously scary number and worth mentioning in conversation, where appropriate.
http://psc.apl.uw.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/schweiger/ice_volume/BPIOMASIceVolumeAprSepCurrent.png

With the spiky nature of the data, more likely to be sooner than that than not.
Also have to consider the many competing +ve and –ve feedbacks, but the timescale is so short, less than half of the Piomas record, I think their effect is unlikely to deflect the trend.

73
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019/2020 freezing season
« on: October 09, 2019, 03:17:26 PM »
Oh, and I would like to make clear I have made many thousands of informative posts on this forum, it's just that my post count has been stuck at 62 since 1975.






 ;)

74
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019/2020 freezing season
« on: October 09, 2019, 03:15:27 PM »
Charctic puts 2019 in second lowest extent for day of year - 4.879 against 4.882 for 2007.

75
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019/2020 freezing season
« on: October 08, 2019, 03:46:39 PM »
...Like I said, it's a tease this year, 2019 extent graph almost intersecting 2007....

76
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: September 19, 2019, 03:20:20 PM »
Chartic puts 2019 at 4.153 Million km^2, 2nd place in the satellite record.


https://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/charctic-interactive-sea-ice-graph/

77
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: September 18, 2019, 03:13:10 PM »
2019 on 4.220 Million km2

Next nearest minima are: 2016 4.165; 2007 4.163. 4.155

"Here's the throw, here's the play at the plate, Holy cow....."
[/quote

STOP RIGHT THERE!!! ........]

"Let me sleep on it...."

At 4.170 today

78
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: September 16, 2019, 04:35:15 PM »
@ Ossifrage. Good concise summary. Thanks

I believe the CAA will become a significant export route for the CAB in the years to come.

79
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: September 16, 2019, 03:07:23 PM »
2019 on 4.220 Million km2

Next nearest minima are: 2016 4.165; 2007 4.163.

"Here's the throw, here's the play at the plate, Holy cow....."

80
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: September 12, 2019, 03:21:40 PM »
The extent graphs are a tease this year

81
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: September 03, 2019, 03:52:18 PM »
...Also my post count is stuck again,  at 54 this time. I'll never get past being a crystal....
: )


82
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: September 03, 2019, 03:49:53 PM »
2019 extent is back in 3rd place.

83
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: September 03, 2019, 09:26:29 AM »
Cloud free image of the CAA from Worldview, I think I'll frame it and put it on the wall.

More importantly there has been no Southward movement of ice from the CAB into the clear blue water in the last couple of days, despite a Northerly wind.

Wind is forecast to continue to from the North and strengthen for the next couple of days, also the Ice can stay mobile into early October, so there is still time for the CAB to populate the channels with floes.

However, if not, there will only be salty 1st year ice there, ready for an early breakup next year.

84
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: August 21, 2019, 01:03:24 PM »
West end of the CAA: New cracking along the East coast of Victoria I and the adjacent bay. The storm coming on Fri/Sat  will shake things up.

85
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: August 19, 2019, 01:16:16 PM »
Southward movement has restarted in Nares and between some of the Islands of the CAA: Borden, Ellef Ringes, Meighen and Ellesmere, also the South end of Parry Channel
Map here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_Archipelago

Wind has been light over the last few days (Gif is for 15th to 18th Aug) so this is this is mostly ocean current driven.

South of the floes is clear blue ocean, so the potential for export over the next 6 weeks (2 w past the expected minimum date) is high.

86
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: August 05, 2019, 12:47:47 AM »

My naive reaction is that those anomalies around the CAA suggest that a complete melt out is possible there.
[/quote]

The thickness in most of the CAA is already very low according to PIOMAS, so I agree.
[/quote]

The tidal flow is generally from North to South through the CAA, so the CAA gets filled with floes from the CAB. Recently the wind has been from the South, preventing the usual South going export, but it looks like that has restarted.

The breakup of the first channel from CAB to Parry Chanel occurred at the end of July, the earliest on a tie with 2012. The export flow has continued into October in the past.

87
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: July 29, 2019, 04:48:22 AM »
CAA - There is cracking in the landfast ice all the way to the CAB. That's early, but not unprecedented. As near as I can, visibility permitting, the same event happend on these dates in the recent past:

2018 Aug 15
2017 Aug 22
2016 Between July 30 and Aug 04 (thick cloud)
2015 Jul 31
2014 Sept 12
2013 between Aug 11 and Aug 22 (thick cloud)
2012 July 28

88
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2019 sea ice area and extent data
« on: June 17, 2019, 05:31:41 PM »
Dispersal showing up as a left swerve on Chartic.

89
Greenland and Arctic Circle / Re: The 'Very Big Chunk' poll
« on: May 12, 2019, 09:01:09 PM »
Confirmed on Worldview. Shattered. I'm not optimistic Nares will block until winter.

90
Greenland and Arctic Circle / Re: The 'Very Big Chunk' poll
« on: May 06, 2019, 11:09:57 PM »
From what I've seen so far, very unlikely that the remaining FBCs (Fairly big.....: ) will block the channel.


91
Greenland and Arctic Circle / Re: The Nares Strait thread
« on: May 06, 2019, 10:56:56 PM »
VBC has broken further with the rest of the FBCs (Fairly big....) separating from the arch. The grey infill looks like cloud, not refreeze - there is clear blue water in the strait

92
Greenland and Arctic Circle / Re: The Nares Strait thread
« on: May 05, 2019, 10:18:31 AM »
VBC has split in half.

94
Greenland and Arctic Circle / Re: The Nares Strait thread
« on: April 05, 2019, 11:11:39 AM »
Fracture of a slab of landfast ice at the narrow near Inglefield Land

95
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019 melting season
« on: March 11, 2019, 09:11:32 PM »
Not a serious objection, but shouldn't the extent uptick be discussed in the freezing thread rather than the melting thread?

More freez-ing happening than melt-ing (extent wise) is the reason for the uptick.



96
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2018/2019 freezing season
« on: March 11, 2019, 04:00:12 PM »
Here's the throw,
Here's the play at the plate,
Holy cow.....

97
Greenland and Arctic Circle / Re: Old ice moving through Nares Strait
« on: March 10, 2019, 09:58:14 AM »
And there is still movement along the full length.

Potentially significant because:

The date has passed when it blocked last year
The sun is coming up
Though narrow, there is a fast current carrying the ice southwards. Only a strong South wind would halt or reverse the floes
There is an accumulation of thick ice nearby, against the N coast of Greenland and the CAA.
Much of that is fragmented

One to watch

98
Greenland and Arctic Circle / Re: Old ice moving through Nares Strait
« on: March 10, 2019, 09:47:11 AM »
Better view on Polar View

99
Greenland and Arctic Circle / Re: Old ice moving through Nares Strait
« on: March 10, 2019, 09:43:25 AM »
Look like new ice is entering from the North.

100
Greenland and Arctic Circle / Re: Old ice moving through Nares Strait
« on: March 04, 2019, 11:14:51 PM »
I think it would depend largely on Sea Surface Temperature, as Nares is the first left turn exit for the Atlantic drift,  but my goto source for day to day graphics has a snapshot archive for 2017 but not '18:

https://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/arc_list_arcticsst.html

Ignore the warning, advanced > allow exception

So I can't decide.

Pages: 1 [2] 3