[HN Gopher] Brazil Hits 92% Renewable Energy Milestone
___________________________________________________________________
Brazil Hits 92% Renewable Energy Milestone
Author : thelastgallon
Score : 83 points
Date : 2024-02-12 20:05 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (old.reddit.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (old.reddit.com)
| Qem wrote:
| Most of it is hydropower. But most good hydropower sites are
| already tapped, so we shouldn't expect this source growth to keep
| pace in the future. So, to keep these numbers good, it's
| necessary to crank up the deployment of solar panels and wind
| turbines a lot.
|
| Also solve the deforestation problem for good, otherwise Brazil
| will shoot its own feet by causing deforestation-induced droughts
| to decrease available hydropower.
| soperj wrote:
| Not to mention some of it's hydropower is dirtier than coal in
| terms of methane & co2 produced.
|
| https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn7046-hydroelectric-po...
| krunck wrote:
| Uh, no. Nowhere in that article do they mention coal. Not do
| they do not do a comparison of hydro plant and fossil fuel
| plant emissions per megawatt-hour generated.
| timbit42 wrote:
| If scientists can't agree on the impact of methane, they
| probably can't say whether it is worse than coal or not.
| soperj wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balbina_Dam
|
| "As a result of the methane released from its vast
| reservoir, proportional to its output, the Balbina Dam
| emits ten times more greenhouse gases than a coal plant."
| cogman10 wrote:
| This is going to depend very heavily on where the dam is
| placed. Balbina is particularly bad because it sunk a ton
| of organic material with a bunch of acreage taken up.
|
| Almost a worst case for a dam really.
| feedforward wrote:
| Yes he is using as an example what is probably the most
| inefficient dam in the world.
| Retric wrote:
| That's extremely misleading to the point of being false.
| The dam is creating zero carbon and Methane breaks down
| to CO2 which is then counted as part of its global
| warming impact on some timescale.
|
| When you remove the dam the total global warming impact
| from all the methane produced over a ~100 year lifespan
| quickly goes to 0. That doesn't happen from a coal power
| plant.
| Qem wrote:
| ~100 years still too late. In 2050 we already risk
| catastrophic impacts if we keep business as usual.
| DavidKarlas wrote:
| Isn't this just cycling carbon in ecosystem? Same as planting
| tree on 100 year scale is pointless... I would imagine that
| hydro is ~neutral on 100 year scale, while coal is not, since
| we introduce carbon into ecosystem. What am I missing?
| soperj wrote:
| Produces methane, not CO2 because the plants decompose in
| an oxygen free environment. Because of the cycling of water
| throughout the year, during the dry seasons plants grow
| along the shoreline (which varies considerably because of
| the use of hydro), and then are covered up during the rainy
| season. This can be hundreds of kms every year.
| cogman10 wrote:
| Methane isn't great, but unlike CO2 is has a pretty short
| lifetime in the atmosphere (just 12 years). So the impact
| of the methane release from hydro is basically static
| rather than an ever increasing problem.
| TSiege wrote:
| This is not true! Methane is not only 84x more warming
| than CO2, it is at a record high at <1900ppb and rising,
| the current level is higher than the RCP 4.5 warming
| scenario by the IPCC (which is in the middle level of a
| warming scenario), and there is evidence that the
| atmospheric lifespan might be increasing
| feedforward wrote:
| It is not dirtier. In the first week of operation it is
| dirtier, but then at some point it crosses a threshold and
| becomes permanently less dirty. As that article you link to
| attests.
| bryanlarsen wrote:
| Brazil is sitting in a pretty optimal position, though. Solar &
| wind is currently by far the cheapest energy source, if you can
| deal with the intermittency. And with so much hydropower,
| Brazil can slow down hydro power when the sun is shining and
| speed it up when it isn't.
|
| You usually need to maintain flow in your rivers so you can't
| shut dams down completely and use hydro as pure storage, but
| the ratio of storage:generation on a dam can be adjusted.
| TSiege wrote:
| Given the projected savannization of much of the Amazon
| Rainforest, and the current drought being a preview of that,
| I don't think it's safe to assume the staying power of it's
| hydro. Damming of rivers also has drammatic impacts on
| riverine ecosystems which again coupled with the projected
| drier future gives me a lot of pause
| dheera wrote:
| While it's good for the power grid to be mostly renewable energy
| and it may be a great milestone, let's not forget that without
| conversion of vehicles to renewable energy Brazil is still
| running its total energy requirements _mostly_ on fossil fuels.
| gchamonlive wrote:
| That is untrue. 27% of gas is ethanol, and virtually all cars
| run on both gas and ethanol. Trucks use diesel, sure, but the
| amount of cars running on ethanol is not negligible. So while
| you would still need to renew the automotive fleet to electric
| vehicles to tap into that, Brazil is already using renewable
| fuel sources for cars.
|
| Not to mention that converting all cars to electricity will put
| more pressure on the electric distribution infrastructure which
| in itself will require more investments and will cause
| environmental impact invariably.
| adgjlsfhk1 wrote:
| ethanol produces more emissions than regular gas. the only
| thing ethanol is good for is as a farming subsidy.
| cma wrote:
| Corn ethanol end to end does, but does sugarcane ethanol in
| the tropics?
| kurthr wrote:
| Generally, that is true BUT...
|
| In Brazil there is a huge manufacture of sugar with excess
| baggasse that is used to power sugar extraction/drying and
| provide heat for alcohol distillation. There is a related
| industry of extracting leftover sugars, fermenting them,
| and making alcohol in rural agricultural regions, where the
| infrastructure for gasoline and diesel didn't exist 20-30
| years ago. As a result, there is a lot of infrastructure
| for distributing locally produced 95% alcohol for transport
| (and you need to have specific gravity measured at the
| pump!). Unlike fertilized corn/grain alcohol from the
| midwest, this is not subsidized and still less expensive
| that gasoline in many parts of rural Brazil.
| cassianoleal wrote:
| I don't know the numbers but I don't doubt diesel for trucks
| makes up a lot and perhaps most of the energy consumption in
| the country.
|
| Thankfully, the federal government seems to be taking notice
| and railways are a priority for the new PAC [0] (_Programa de
| Aceleracao do Crescimento_, or program for growth
| acceleration).
|
| It's not much but it's a start.
|
| [0] https://www.gov.br/transportes/pt-
| br/assuntos/noticias/2024/...
| alex201 wrote:
| Brazil is truly "samba"-rific, hitting a high note with 92.4% of
| its electricity by renewables. It seems they're not just good at
| producing great music and football talent. Obrigado, Brazil, for
| showing us how it's done!
| SV_BubbleTime wrote:
| The power went out every now and then while I was in Brazil last
| year. Costa Rica was quite a bit while I was living there.
|
| I'm not sure I can agree to be excited about an arbitrary
| milestone without equivalence to expectations.
| skohan wrote:
| This is no doubt a milestone we should celebrate. At the same
| time, the Brazilian beef industry is the driving force behind
| slash-and-burn expansion of agricultural land into the
| rainforest, so Brazil is still a massive contributor to climate
| change.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-02-12 23:01 UTC)