SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Climate Central reports
The ravages of climate change could severely hurt the ability of utilities in the 11 Western states to generate power unless they "climate proof" their power grid using renewables and energy efficiency, something they are not prepared for, according to a new study[1] [by researchers at Arizona State University, published May 18 in the journal Nature Climate Change].
[...]Higher temperatures and low stream flow reduce coal-fired power plants' ability to use water for cooling, preventing them from operating at full capacity. The most vulnerable power plants could see a reduction in power generation capacity by up to 8.8 percent, the study says.
Renewables take a hit too, but are much less vulnerable to climate change.
[...]The Arizona State study recommends Western states invest in wind, solar, and other "resilient" renewable energy sources while upgrading the power grid and encouraging conservation as ways to overcome some of the challenges climate change poses to the region's power supply.
[1] Link in TFA redirects to the URL that I included.
(Score: 3, Informative) by frojack on Thursday May 21 2015, @06:45PM
You do realize the fusion, and fission both need cooling water don't you? (That's what this article is about.)
Also, your link was discussed a few days ago here on SN, the figure you quote is a world wide figure, and this SN discussion is US based.
Further, these "subsidies", in the US, are NOT WHAT YOU THINK THEY ARE. [mic.com]
Two federal programs that account for about 40% of federal oil "subsidies" are the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program.
Virtually all direct subsidies of the energy sector are actually in the form of tax credits for investments, and they are the same credits used by any big company, even solar and wind farms.
Oil and Gas depletion allowance is about the only direct tax credit that apply to the energy sector not available to other industries. (Which is odd, because US proven reserves are going UP, not down. Maybe the depletion allowance should take that into account).
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by canopic jug on Thursday May 21 2015, @06:55PM
There's a lot that is not covered in the figure either. It's hard to put a dollar value on the damage done by mountain topping [nationalgeographic.com], to name just one such travesty.
Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
(Score: 2, Disagree) by Kromagv0 on Thursday May 21 2015, @07:50PM
It should be pretty easy to put a dollar value on that. If you or any group doesn't want a coal company to basically level a mountain you could buy the damn mountain, the mineral rights, or what ever is needed to prevent it. Since no one seems to be doing this the cost is what ever the mining company paid for the privilege to leveling the mountain.
T-Shirts and bumper stickers [zazzle.com] to offend someone
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 22 2015, @06:08PM
Because normal people just happen to have billions of dollars lying around. The problem with money being the only power is that the game is automatically rigged against 99.9% of the people on earth.