See below at 2:40.
Trump voter would not believe Russiagate story if “Jesus came down off the cross” to tell him.

New MIT study backs up and underlines what Dan Kammen told me a year ago.

MIT:

The dramatic rise in production of electric vehicles, coupled with expected growth in the use of grid-connected battery systems for storing electricity from renewable sources, raises a crucial question: Are there enough raw materials to enable significantly increased production of lithium-ion batteries, which are the dominant type of rechargeable batteries on the market?

A new analysis by researchers at MIT and elsewhere indicates that for the near future, there will be no absolute limitations on battery manufacturing due to shortages of the critical metals they require. But, without proper planning, there could be short-term bottlenecks in the supplies of some metals, particularly lithium and cobalt, that could cause temporary slowdowns in production.

The analysis, by professor Elsa Olivetti and doctoral student Xinkai Fu in MIT’s Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Gerbrand Ceder at the University of California at Berkeley, and Gabrielle Gaustad at the Rochester Institute of Technology, appears today in the journal Joule.

Olivetti, who is the Atlantic Richfield Assistant Professor of Energy Studies, says the new journal’s editors asked her to look at possible resource limitations as battery production escalates globally. To do that, Olivetti and her co-authors concentrated on five of the most essential ingredients needed to produce today’s lithium-ion batteries: lithium, cobalt, manganese, nickel, and carbon in the form of graphite. Other key ingredients, such as copper, aluminum, and some polymers used as membranes, are considered abundant enough that they are not likely to be a limiting factor.

Among those five materials, it was quickly clear that nickel and manganese are used much more widely in other industries; battery production, even if significantly increased, is “not a significant part of the pie,” Olivetti says, so nickel and manganese supplies are not likely to be impacted. Ultimately, the most significant materials whose supply chains could become limited are lithium and cobalt, she says.

Read the rest of this entry »

Treasure from Climate State. Stephen Schneider in 1990, presentation in Aspen – the climate debate and greenhouse science is well developed, and much like what we still discuss today.

First 5 minutes or so is intro.

Extremely interesting discussion of pre-economic explosion China, false balance in media, forest fires, methane and agriculture, science consensus, drought and hydrological change, greenhouse amplification, “loading the dice”,  economic and social projections, and climate model projections for the future. (which means now)
Yeah, Schneider pretty much nailed it, 27 years ago.

He may have overestimated the ability of deniers to change in response to data.

Climate State has been doing an absolutely amazing job of providing a useful historical archive of important experts warning on climate issues through past decades.

 

muskausbatsmall

Mashable:

Elon Musk made a bet to build the world’s biggest battery in 100 days or he’d pay for it.

And he’s done.

Tesla has completed installing its colossal lithium ion battery in South Australia, a Powerpack system with 100 megawatts of capacity. But now comes the test.

Regulatory testing will begin in the next few days to ensure the battery is optimised and meets AEMO and South Australian Government requirements, before operation commences on Dec. 1.

Representatives from Tesla, French renewable energy company Neoen and Adelaide engineering firm Consolidated Power Projects will join South Australian Premier Jay Weatherill next week to officially launch the battery.

Connected to Neoen’s Hornsdale Wind Farm near Jamestown, three hours’ drive from Adelaide, the Powerpack system is an attempt to alleviate some of the state’s severe energy issues.

Musk’s involvement came from a now famous bet derived from light Tesla bragging and Twitter banter in March. Musk said that if he didn’t get it done in 100 days, he’d foot the bill, which could have been up to US$50 million (A$65 million).

Read the rest of this entry »

DW:

The global shift to renewable energy is well underway, including large-scale deployment of offshore wind farms. There are already about 3,600 turbines operating along European coasts, with 14 more wind farms under development.

Even more wind energy is needed to meet the goals of the Paris climate agreement — but the push to boost European offshore wind power 40-fold by 2030 will change regional ocean ecosystems in profound and unexpected ways, according to researchers studying how the turbines affect the environment.

Most of the research stems from northern Europe, where offshore turbines have been operating since 1991. Scientists say this research can help shape plans for deploying offshore wind turbines in other parts of the world.

A recent study on the Mediterranean identified wind energy and wildlife hotspots, based partly on lessons learned in northern Europe. The science is also useful in places like Japan and the United States, where a boom in the development of offshore wind energy appears imminent.

Offshore wind developers along the US East Coast, for instance, are able to better protect endangered whales because research in the North Sea shows that construction noise temporarily displaces some fish and marine mammals; so they’re now timing building to avoid affecting those species when they are in the area, said Greer Ryan, a sustainability researcher with the Arizona-based Center for Biological Diversity.

Off the Scandinavian coast, scientist have watched some of the underwater turbine foundations gradually transform into artificial reefs, attracting mollusks and small fish that feed on plankton. This magnet effect goes right up the food chain to larger fish, seals and dolphins.

Some scientists have described these zones as de facto marine sanctuaries because fishing is often limited directly around the turbines.

Seafloor ecosystems may even be recovering in areas where fishermen have “pulverized” the seabed by dragging heavy nets along the seafloor for 100 years, said Jason Hall-Spencer, a marine biologist at the University of Plymouth.

Read the rest of this entry »

Hacking, distorting, and weaponizing emails.
Hmmmm.

Rings a bell.

Apologies to Katherine Hayhoe, one of my favorite people, but some folks are genuinely arrogant about their own ignorance.  Observe.

We’ve all done stupid things, occasionally we’ve all been hypocritical, and we’re all ignorant about something.
But people like Joe Barton, whose recently released, uhm…, let’s say, nude self portrait has become famous – has made a career of stupidity, ignorance, and hypocrisy.
Nice work if you can get it, I guess, but for the rest of us, there is science, fact, data, and hard won truth.

Mike Mann, the Climate scientist who has most famously been a target of Rep. Barton, has richly earned the right to be feeling a little bit of schadenfreude at this moment.

It was Joe Barton who was behind a shoddy attack on the National Academy of Science’s 2006 report affirming global warming – an attack that fell apart after being exposes as a third rate, plagiarized hash of nonsense and fakery.

Below, more great moments in Greed and Stupidity, including Barton’s infamous apology to British Petroleum, after the Federal Government penalized the the Oil Giant following the catastrophic 2010 Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill, and a stunning revelation from the Bible.

Read the rest of this entry »

“Climate Scientists are all in it for the money”.

Katharine Hayhoe breaks it down.

I’ve met scientists who left Wall Street Hedge fund jobs, because they found searching for truth more meaningful. And the reality that working for an Oil company is vastly more profitable than toiling on a glacier is obvious – yet still the myth persists.

ICYMI

November 22, 2017