Recent comments in /f/Futurology

11-Eleven-11 t1_jd9odc8 wrote

Reply to comment by vm_linuz in Persuasive piece by Robert Wright. Worrying about the rapid advancement of AI no longer makes you a kook. by OpenlyFallible

I unironically have never seen something scale this fast before. I just watched an ai generated spongebob episode today where patrick and spongebob were considering having sex with each other after watching porn at the krusty krab before discussing 1984. Ai is accelerating very fast.

23

Fuzzers t1_jd9k2yf wrote

Reply to comment by altmorty in IPCC chart says Solar PV and Wind Turbines are best way to achieve Deep, Rapid, and Low Cost emission cuts before 2030. by DisasterousGiraffe

>You really do sound like a fossil fuel shill.

And you sound like you don't understand basic economics. What a shame. Let me know when they start replacing coal plants with solar/wind + battery storage instead of natural gas, and then we can relook at this discussion.

Also, FYI, those LCOE numbers were with tax credits applied.

0

Fuzzers t1_jd9jfab wrote

Reply to comment by DisasterousGiraffe in IPCC chart says Solar PV and Wind Turbines are best way to achieve Deep, Rapid, and Low Cost emission cuts before 2030. by DisasterousGiraffe

and that's a good thing! But as I said originally, base load electricity generation for renewables requires storage, of which in the EIA data is 17%. So 17% of all new possible base load generation is battery storage, and 14% is natural gas.

Right now, 39% of all electricity generation in the states is through natural gas, and I can guarantee they won't be replacing those plants with solar/wind+battery storage anytime soon, because its not economically feasible to do so.

Since 2011, 121 coal fired plants have converted to natural gas, because that's the most economical and logical thing to do. A replacement to solar/wind + battery storage would be more capitally intensive and have a longer payback period.

1

altmorty t1_jd9gg67 wrote

Reply to comment by Fuzzers in IPCC chart says Solar PV and Wind Turbines are best way to achieve Deep, Rapid, and Low Cost emission cuts before 2030. by DisasterousGiraffe

Are you kidding me? During a time of record high gas prices, you complain about the only alternative not becoming cheaper faster?

Storage will get cheaper and cheaper. LCOE are the unsubsidised costs. Governments can subsidise them for now, which will help them get cheaper still. The more we invest now, the faster this will happen. This is standard practise for all energy sources. No one complains when fossil fuels are heavily subsidised in so many different ways.

$1 billion invested in a storage system will lead to less gas for decades. $1 billion dumped into gas is temporary. Just look how none of those fracking investments saved us from record high gas prices!

You really do sound like a fossil fuel shill.

1

beezlebub33 t1_jd9ftuv wrote

Reply to Mobile Nanogrids Can Provide Electricity, Clean Water During a Disaster. A single Nanogrid from Sesame Solar can power up to six homes. by Sariel007

That sounds useful, maybe I should get one....

>A single unit costs anywhere from $100,000 to $375,000.

Oof, nevermind. It might make sense for a community or and emergency department, but not homeowners.

The open question is how this would compare with other sources of the same products (electricity and water) and how much those would cost. Assuming that this needs to be pulled behind a large truck, the question is whether it makes sense to have it pull this or have the truck pull a diesel generator and a large tank of water.

3

Fuzzers t1_jd9c0w7 wrote

Reply to comment by altmorty in IPCC chart says Solar PV and Wind Turbines are best way to achieve Deep, Rapid, and Low Cost emission cuts before 2030. by DisasterousGiraffe

Look I'm all in favor of getting rid of coal, but if you're going to replace it with anything due to cost increases, its going to be natural gas not solar/wind + storage.

The EIA LCOE 2022 report pins the LCOE of a combined cycle natural gas plant at $39.94, Wind at $40.23, Solar at $33.83, and battery storage at a whopping $128.55.

There is not a chance in hell a coal operator is going to look at those economics and convert to a solar/wind + battery storage setup vs. natural gas, especially with the ability to reuse the supercritical boiler for the steam turbine.

I mentioned nuclear as a base loads because moving forward, if the development of SMR's go well there is a possibility they could become economical for base load applications in the future. At the current time, best base solution is hydro if its available and if not natural gas.

3

Interesting_Mouse730 t1_jd9bprp wrote

Reply to comment by elehman839 in Persuasive piece by Robert Wright. Worrying about the rapid advancement of AI no longer makes you a kook. by OpenlyFallible

Agreed. The imminent direct danger of AI is bad actors, setting aside whatever chaos widespread adoption will cause the economy and labor market.

That said, I don't like how quick so much of the media and the tech industry is to dismiss the spookier sci-fi apocalypse scenarios. They may be a ways out, but we don't know what is or isn't possible. The most damaging consequences may come from something initially benign or seemingly harmless. We just don't know yet, but that doesn't mean we should stick our head in the sand.

2