Jonathan Koomey Profile picture
Sep 27, 2020 7 tweets 2 min read Read on X
This is a key insight. Keeping gas plants around for emergencies but ONLY running them for emergencies allows us to run high renewables systems reliably NOW. No new tech breakthroughs needed, but we will need to change incentives and business models.
This is not a new insight, but some still fail to understand it. Keep some gas around, and incentivize it to ONLY run during emergencies. We'd need to pay enough for good maintenance and proof of availability, but we can do this with better institutional/incentive design.
Running a high renewables system with some gas plants around for emergencies means we can easily get to 90+% renewables generation in an average year in most places with little to no technical innovation. More innovation will of course make this even easier!

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Jonathan Koomey

Jonathan Koomey Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @jgkoomey

Sep 9, 2022
This thread is emblematic of a genre of thinking common among conservatives in the US. Government is bankrupt! Debt will keep growing! etc, etc.
What these people fail to understand is that there IS a popular way to raise taxes: Tax very wealthy people a lot more and enforce the laws so wealthy people don't get away with avoiding taxes they should be paying.
Also get rid of the carried interest deduction and jack up inheritance taxes for estates starting in the hundreds of millions. All this would be VERY popular. It would affect a relatively small number of very wealthy people and would raise hundreds of billions of $ every year.
Read 4 tweets
Sep 9, 2022
Critically important article summarized here.
Armstrong McKay, et al. 2022. "Exceeding 1.5 C global warming could trigger multiple climate tipping points." Science. vol. 377, no. 6611. September 9. pp. eabn7950. [science.org/doi/abs/10.112…]
The kicker:
Read 4 tweets
Oct 21, 2021
You weren't listening carefully enough to Kieren Mayer's presentation. Slide 14 shows total life cycle emissions including manufacturing of equipment and discs for three modes of gaming.
The key is that USE PHASE dominates in most cases, so your statement about "massive hardware emissions" doesn't track with reality, although in some use cases embedded emissions can be consequential.
My experience having collaborated with the Playstation folks for years in understanding environmental impacts is that they care very much about getting the numbers right. They show that by funding work that gets published in the peer reviewed literature, among other ways.
Read 10 tweets
May 21, 2021
Lead is terrible for humans, folks. Let's get rid of those pipes ASAP.
Also, many people don't know that lead is still allowed in aviation gasoline, because the FAA thinks "no safe alternative is currently available". faa.gov/news/fact_shee…
With the advent of electrified light planes, though, we now have a safe and superior alternative. cnn.com/travel/article…
Read 6 tweets
May 21, 2021
As one of the coauthors of a rebuttal to this nonsense article I can attest to the fact that this study by Mora et al. is widely cited even now.
Our rebuttal: Masanet, Eric, Arman Shehabi, Nuoa Lei, Harald Vranken, Jonathan Koomey, and Jens Malmodin. 2019. "Implausible projections overestimate near-term Bitcoin CO2 emissions." Nature Climate Change. vol. 9, no. 9. 2019/09/01. pp. 653-654. [doi.org/10.1038/s41558…]
We reproduced the authors' model almost exactly, so we know what they did. We showed that their conclusions made no sense in several ways, but the authors just denied the validity of our valid points in their riposte to our rebuttal.
Read 10 tweets
May 20, 2021
Setting a coal phase-out date (2030 or sooner for developed countries) is the most important single step most nations can take on climate. Of course it's not the only necessary step, but it's a big one.
This is another example of a critically important constraint on the supply side (it's not just about reducing demand).
Green, Fergus, and Richard Denniss. 2018. "Cutting with both arms of the scissors: the economic and political case for restrictive supply-side climate policies." Climatic Change. 2018/03/12. [doi.org/10.1007/s10584…]
Read 15 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(