Now is the time to act, we can all do something good!

[Nomad Willy]

If there wern’t so many people we wouldn’t be having this discussion.

 

[O C Diver]

I am just speaking as to South Florida and specifically three counties-Miami Dade, Broward and Palm Beach. Very different climate than northern Florida although the impediments may be much the same. Following are the key factors.

1. Electricity costs in South Florida are less than many would think if you have an energy efficient home or building. We don't have the extremes of heat. For instance nothing like Texas with all their 100 degree days. Our average highs in August are 90 degrees. Areas like Dallas are 96 and 97. This August, we only had one day above 90 and it was 92. Dallas was between 95 and 101 most of the month. They had 16 days of 98 or higher. Then, obviously, we use very little heat during the winter.

2. Solar installation isn't cheap at all and requires detailed planning with approval by FPL.
3. Solar must be connected to the power grid. Now you do benefit from the ability to bill FPL for power generated and used by them, but you also get basic electric charges too.

4. Whereas our roof is rated for 150 mph winds. Now there are codes for solar panels, but they really just mean that they must have enough tie downs and the tie downs not come off, the attachment points survive, but doesn't mean the panels won't have damage. We have tiled roofs and the panels would then be attached to sit a few inches above the tiles. A lot of unanswered questions as to what would happen.

5. We've gotten estimates and calculations. We've also done the same including Powerwalls. The best payback we've gotten so far was 14 years and that was uncertain. I believe the solar industry will continue to improve and better systems will be available. However, even there, the advantage seems to be for the power company to invest in Solar Centers vs homeowners doing so. FPL added 3.5 million panels in the last two years and now uses more solar to produce energy than coal and oil combined. So, I think the way to go has been forced into the power company going to solar, not the homeowner.

6. For our businesses in FL, the payback would be slightly better but we don't own the buildings.

B, while I agree with most of what you wrote, there are a few areas I feel need some clarification for those who may not be familiar with FPL home solar. I also have looked at home solar in Fort Myers with FPL.

1. Not sure how temperature has a significant impact on producing and utilizing solar. While I only average about 750 kilowatts per month. A moderate size system without storage would cover my use.

2. While solar installation isn't cheap, 30 percent of the total cost is refunded by the federal government (provided you pay income tax) in the form of tax credits. While FPL does require detailed planning, most of it has become standardized by approved installers. No different than building a house to hurricane standards, detailed but done regularly by professionals.


3. The power your property consumes is offset by the power your solar generates, kilowatt for kilowatt. You can bank surplus kilowatts you generate for a calendar year. So, if you generate more during the winter, you can utilize it during the summer. At the end of the year, FPL will pay you if you end with a surplus. Since they pay you far less per kilowatt than what you pay them for a killowatt, the goal is to have the amount of solar you will likely use or less.

5. While I like FPL investing in solar, when there final 2 nuclear power plants come off line, there will be a sizable hole that residential solar should fill.

Ted

 

[78puget-trawler]

If there wern’t so many people we wouldn’t be having this discussion.

OK Eric, I'll bite... whats your offer??

 

[Seevee]

I am just speaking as to South Florida and specifically three counties-Miami Dade, Broward and Palm Beach. Very different climate than northern Florida although the impediments may be much the same. Following are the key factors.

1. Electricity costs in South Florida are less than many would think if you have an energy efficient home or building. We don't have the extremes of heat. For instance nothing like Texas with all their 100 degree days. Our average highs in August are 90 degrees. Areas like Dallas are 96 and 97. This August, we only had one day above 90 and it was 92. Dallas was between 95 and 101 most of the month. They had 16 days of 98 or higher. Then, obviously, we use very little heat during the winter.

2. Solar installation isn't cheap at all and requires detailed planning with approval by FPL.

3. Solar must be connected to the power grid. Now you do benefit from the ability to bill FPL for power generated and used by them, but you also get basic electric charges too.

4. Whereas our roof is rated for 150 mph winds. Now there are codes for solar panels, but they really just mean that they must have enough tie downs and the tie downs not come off, the attachment points survive, but doesn't mean the panels won't have damage. We have tiled roofs and the panels would then be attached to sit a few inches above the tiles. A lot of unanswered questions as to what would happen.

5. We've gotten estimates and calculations. We've also done the same including Powerwalls. The best payback we've gotten so far was 14 years and that was uncertain. I believe the solar industry will continue to improve and better systems will be available. However, even there, the advantage seems to be for the power company to invest in Solar Centers vs homeowners doing so. FPL added 3.5 million panels in the last two years and now uses more solar to produce energy than coal and oil combined. So, I think the way to go has been forced into the power company going to solar, not the homeowner.

6. For our businesses in FL, the payback would be slightly better but we don't own the buildings.

BandB,

Where does it say you MUST connect to the power grid if you install solar? Im under the impression that you can disconnect from the grid and operate totally independently in FL.

 

[Group9]

Following "The Malthus Gloomy Theory",that population is ultimately managed by flood pestilence and war, thereby equating the population to the available food supply.
I wonder if Malthus holds good. We`ve done so much to avoid its operation, which in many ways is a good thing, but it affects the natural operation envisaged by Malthus.
For example, medical science sees those born afflicted who otherwise would not, survive, in some cases requiring enormous support to maintain vitality. We`ve found ways to tap the planet harder, to produce goods, services,and food, to maintain and increase population. Much of our economic system depends on ever increasing "economic growth" which has become the economists "holy grail",and is easily achieved by simply increasing demand by increasing the population, in a kind of vicious circle.

Contrary to nature, and natural selection as well, is our democratic notion of letting the weaker half of the herd, who were only saved from their bad decisions and lack of survival ability by the stronger half, to have an equal say in the direction and decisions of the entire herd.

Kind of like a group of hikers coming up on a lost group, and then letting the lost hikers get an equal vote on which direction the new combined group goes.

The built in poison pill for democracies, I guess.

 

[Flybull]

China produces as much Co2 emmissions in one half of a second as the entire Trawler population backing off .5K cruise.

 

[Shrew]

The best payback we've gotten so far was 14 years and that was uncertain. I believe the solar industry will continue to improve and better systems will be available. However, even there, the advantage seems to be for the power company to invest in Solar Centers vs homeowners doing so. FPL added 3.5 million panels in the last two years and now uses more solar to produce energy than coal and oil combined. So, I think the way to go has been forced into the power company going to solar, not the homeowner.

ROI will always be the driving factor in success with alternative energy. From the introduction of hybrid vehicles, i've tried to calculate the complete cost of ownership. I haven't done so recently, however for a long time the additional cost of the vehicle would exceed the fuel savings over the time of ownership (as compared to a gas vehicle in the same class).

The same goes for solar. In Northern New England, we figure almost 20 year ROI to go Solar. And this is 'front-end' loaded. Expensive upfront investment with a long period before you even break even. Solar wouldn't even make sense for me. I only plan to be in this house for another 10-12 years.

Green energy is a wonderful idea, but nobody really wants to pay for it.

 

[janice142]

Each generation laments Progress. The monks and scribes who wrote the books were no doubt singing the song of Doom and Gloom when Gutenberg created his printing press. Automated knitting machines negated much of the need for hand knit sweaters. Kindle books have curtailed a lot of the printed books, yet opened new opportunities.

For the Record, I love love love my Kindle!

The Paperwhite Kindle is simply a treasure.

My website could not exist were it not for the Internet. How many single women over sixty have an audience? I am Honored that a couple thousand folks stop by a day to see what's happening in my world.

The post office lamented the internet because we would stop sending letters. Instead we send parcels to virtual friends, and occasionally meet IRL (in real life) Online orders for goods have skyrocketed too.

The world changes and I am in favor of progress. That doesn't mean I'm going to adapt each new Thing. I'll simply live my life as I see fit. As long as I am not harming you, you have no say in my choices. Just as I have no say in yours!

This world is wonderful... I'm grateful for the online community. Y'all have no idea how much your support has meant to me. Trawler Forum made my life a better place. Thank you all!

My world is amazing:

What you do or do not do with your money and resources is entirely YOUR choice. If y'all want to knock off a half a knot, go for it. Most Trawlers have a "sweet spot" and that's the speed we go all the time anyway.

As for a "Sweet Spot" (using the least amount of fuel) the easiest Cheater Method is this. Stand directly above the engine and adjust your RPM's up by 100 at a time. At a certain point you'll feel the least amount of vibration. That's your "Sweet Spot"

Of course there are other more precise ways to do this, measuring fuel consumption, etc. but if you want to know where your Best fuel economy is, try the vibration test. It's easy and falls (for me) entirely in the Good Enough category.

So if you want to do something for the planet, and save yourself some $$, find your boat's sweet spot.

 

[bayview]

IMO the predicted payback period of individual solar and roof systems about equal their life time.

 

[Bill R.]

I suppose if that makes you feel better do it.
However, as China is building coal fired generating stations as fast as they can and Germany is building one also to slow down 1/2 knot makes no difference.

And as for reducing our carbon footprint solar and wind WILL NEVER be enough!
If you want to significantly reduce emissions we need more nukes to generate power.
And for those driving Elon Musks cars remember 70% of your charge comes from fossil fueled plants.

Bill

 

[AusCan]

I guess it feels better to blame it all on China. Just remember they still produce less than half the CO2 emissions per capita than USA or Australia.

 

[Giggitoni]

Each generation laments Progress. The monks and scribes who wrote the books were no doubt singing the song of Doom and Gloom when Gutenberg created his printing press. Automated knitting machines negated much of the need for hand knit sweaters. Kindle books have curtailed a lot of the printed books, yet opened new opportunities.

For the Record, I love love love my Kindle!

The Paperwhite Kindle is simply a treasure.

My website could not exist were it not for the Internet. How many single women over sixty have an audience? I am Honored that a couple thousand folks stop by a day to see what's happening in my world.

The post office lamented the internet because we would stop sending letters. Instead we send parcels to virtual friends, and occasionally meet IRL (in real life) Online orders for goods have skyrocketed too.

The world changes and I am in favor of progress. That doesn't mean I'm going to adapt each new Thing. I'll simply live my life as I see fit. As long as I am not harming you, you have no say in my choices. Just as I have no say in yours!

This world is wonderful... I'm grateful for the online community. Y'all have no idea how much your support has meant to me. Trawler Forum made my life a better place. Thank you all!

My world is amazing:

What you do or do not do with your money and resources is entirely YOUR choice. If y'all want to knock off a half a knot, go for it. Most Trawlers have a "sweet spot" and that's the speed we go all the time anyway.

As for a "Sweet Spot" (using the least amount of fuel) the easiest Cheater Method is this. Stand directly above the engine and adjust your RPM's up by 100 at a time. At a certain point you'll feel the least amount of vibration. That's your "Sweet Spot"

Of course there are other more precise ways to do this, measuring fuel consumption, etc. but if you want to know where your Best fuel economy is, try the vibration test. It's easy and falls (for me) entirely in the Good Enough category.

So if you want to do something for the planet, and save yourself some $$, find your boat's sweet spot.

This^ ?

 

[BaltimoreLurker]

I guess it feels better to blame it all on China. Just remember they still produce less than half the CO2 emissions per capita than USA or Australia.

Do we know what their CO2 emissions are with respect to productivity, GDP, or some other measure of efficiency? Asking not as a political question/accusation, just that I dig numbers/stats.

I'm all for building modern nukes. Do that and be done with this divisive issue.

 

[boatruptcy]

I guess it feels better to blame it all on China. Just remember they still produce less than half the CO2 emissions per capita than USA or Australia.

Ha, what's per capita have to do with it? There is only one planet and if you really think it's an issue you would focus on the fact that China emits more than the USA and EU combined. Just look at their output over the past twenty years. Don't be an apologist for their behavior.


Of course it's probably not an issue anyway since as noted on page 1, we humans only contribute about 4% of all emissions annually.

 

[AusCan]

Do we know what their CO2 emissions are with respect to productivity, GDP, or some other measure of efficiency? Asking not as a political question/accusation, just that I dig numbers/stats.

I'm all for building modern nukes. Do that and be done with this divisive issue.

Good point BL. I does make a lot of sense to look at CO2 emissions per GDP as a measure of efficiency. I found those numbers here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_ratio_of_GDP_to_carbon_dioxide_emissions

China does poorly. Surprisingly, Chad leads the world in this statistic due to their very low CO2 production and high oil production.
The Scandinavian countries do very well also. USA is listed at #80 and Australia #90. Middle of the road.

 

[BaltimoreLurker]

Good point BL. I does make a lot of sense to look at CO2 emissions per GDP as a measure of efficiency. I found those numbers here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_ratio_of_GDP_to_carbon_dioxide_emissions

China does poorly. Surprisingly, Chad leads the world in this statistic due to their very low CO2 production and high oil production.
The Scandinavian countries do very well also. USA is listed at #80 and Australia #90. Middle of the road.

Thanks for digging that up. Those are some interesting numbers.

 

[AusCan]

Ha, what's per capita have to do with it? There is only one planet and if you really think it's an issue you would focus on the fact that China emits more than the USA and EU combined. Just look at their output over the past twenty years. Don't be an apologist for their behavior.


Of course it's probably not an issue anyway since as noted on page 1, we humans only contribute about 4% of all emissions annually.

I try to look at it from an unbiased viewpoint. Per Capita statistics are important to look at. Just looking at total numbers means the largest countries are doing the worst polluting, just because they have big borders with lots of people. Efficiency is important to look at as well.

I'm not apologizing for China's behaviour. I am saying - stop blaming and start acting.

Yes, we only produce 4% of CO2 emission. Until we started doing this, the CO2 cycle was balanced within a very small margin. Now we are 4% out of balance.


If you want to learn a bit about it, here is a good scientific article which looks at factual data.
https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-other-greenhouse-gas-emissions

 

[boatruptcy]

I try to look at it from an unbiased viewpoint. Per Capita statistics are important to look at. Just looking at total numbers means the largest countries are doing the worst polluting, just because they have big borders with lots of people. Efficiency is important to look at as well.

I'm not apologizing for China's behaviour. I am saying, stop blaming and start acting.

Yes, we only produce 4% of CO2 emission. Until we started doing this, the CO2 cycle was balanced within a very small margin. Now we are 4% out of balance.

Per capita is irrelevant in this regard as previously stated, the only thing that matters is the total amount emitted each year.



How in the world can you claim that 4% is out of balance? What's the balance point, 1%, half percent? What's your baseline? How do you know what the margin is for in or out of balance? It's this kind of nonsense and conjecture that is not supported by science that is worrisome to me.

 

[AusCan]

Per capita is irrelevant in this regard as previously stated, the only thing that matters is the total amount emitted each year.



How in the world can you claim that 4% is out of balance? What's the balance point, 1%, half percent? What's your baseline? How do you know what the margin is for in or out of balance? It's this kind of nonsense and conjecture that is not supported by science that is worrisome to me.

In regard to the balance point of CO2, it has always slowly gone up and down. For the past 10,000 years it has very slowly increased,. Now the increase in atmospheric CO2 is skyrocketing. This has scientifically proven by measuring air trapped in ice cores drilled in Antartica. The problem is not the level of CO2 or the temperature, so much as the rate of change.

The timing of the sudden rise in atmospheric matches exactly with the increase in man's additional output of CO2. Coincidence perhaps? There is a very slight chance. No one has yet been able to come up with another reason for the very sudden rise in atmospheric CO2.

So - do we just ignore it and hope it goes away?

 

[sunchaser]

I guess it feels better to blame it all on China. Just remember they still produce less than half the CO2 emissions per capita than USA or Australia.

A trip to various parts of China dispels this notion, provided one equates visible smoke, smog and ultra high PM10s with air pollution.

 

[AusCan]

A trip to various parts of China dispels this notion, provided one equates visible smoke, smog and ultra high PM10s with air pollution.

Yes - I've also made numerous visits to China, and without a doubt there is plenty of visible smoke & smog which cause local health issues.

In most cases high levels of PM10's do not have an effect on global climate change except in very dramatic circumstances such as a massive volcanic eruption. In that case it tends to cause cooling. It is the invisible gases such as CO2 and methane that are causing the global damage.

 

[BruceK]

Had a 2 day stopover in Guangzhou going to Europe(on Air France/KLM,the China Southern leg was the only good part). Pollution was visible and unpleasant,seen nothing like it before.

 

[Yambabill]

It's actually the temperature change that drives the release of Co2, not the other way around. Point is, take care of what's been given to us, but I certainly don't need another religion forcing itself on my way of life through carbon taxes and caps.

Mr Boatruptcy - couldn’t agree more. Here Here.

 

[78puget-trawler]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapie...es-in-reducing-carbon-emissions/#494f18b73535


Interesting. China leads the way in CO2 emissions, about twice the US, India follows... I was quite tickled when you-know-who pulled out of the useless Paris Climate Accord. It was a joke that allowed as usual, the biggest culprits (China) a pass while trying to nibble at the fringes. There were no requirements for any country to do anything other than talk. Another product of the do-something disease that is so much a part of "modern, enlightened" thinking. Bah!

 

[Lou_tribal]

It is funny how people like to point failure of others to justify their own passive inactivity. Why to bother doing something when my neighbor is doing nothing.
Why to move when everybody stay still.
This is exactly why we are where we are and why we are just destroying our own playground. People are just looking at each other waiting for the other to do something. What great leaders we all are !

L

 

[78puget-trawler]

Did you read the article? The US has been doing something.

 

[MRRiley]

I think we sometimes forget from whence we came to focus on how much more there is to do. I remember sailing out of Long Beach in the early-mid 80s. Leaving port ending up 100 miles plus off shore for weeks or months.

On return there was always an orange haze that could be seen before the coast was even visible. In 2010, that haze simply doesn't exist and hasn't for more than a decade. Sure there's smoke from fires, Santa Ana's blowing dust etc but the air is much, much cleaner.

I think we, the collective we, are at a point where the returns are diminishing quite rapidly compared to the cost. Might technology overcome this at some point? Sure. I'm sure some remember conversations in the 80's about SDI, can't happen, ridiculous, too expensive. Well, its here, it works, and it's being improved on. So I'm hopeful re: pollution. My 2 cents.

 

[South of Heaven]

After I read the first post then I knew that reading the rest of the thread was futile.

 

[BruceK]

Did you read the article? The US has been doing something.

Yep.Great Again.
(Just to illustrate South Of Heaven`s post above. Little chance of anyone changing views,mostly ventilation. Apologies for the political,but so irresistible.)

 

[AusCan]

Did you read the article? The US has been doing something.

The US has definitely been doing something, and should be commended. Hopefully they will continue to do something, even without bipartisan support.

To put global CO2 production perspective, the US has emitted more CO2 than any other country in total. They also had the biggest reductions in annual output recently.
China is now the biggest annual producer of CO2 and may catch up to the US's cumulative CO2 output sometime in the future if they don't reduce their current output.

The big question is always - How should countries be limited. By their cumulative production, by their annual production, or by their production per capita.
So far it seems to be somewhat of a combination of the 3.