North Carolina Energy Partners

Forsyningssikkerheden for el i Danmark st?r og falder med udlandsforbindelserne. De ?ldste HVDC-forbindelser n?rmer sig udl?bet af deres levetid, og hvad s?? Energistyrelsens analyseforuds?tninger g?r ud fra konstante kapaciteter frem til 2050. De ved ingenting. B?de Norge og Sverige oplever med god grund deres markedspriser "smittet" med kontinentets h?je priser. Derfor overvejer man i Norge at lukke Skagerrak 1 og 2 ved aftalens udl?b, vistnok i 2026. Det vil koste 500 MW. I mods?tning hertil har Sverige i januar 2025 beskrevet en plan for fornyelse af Konti-Skan forbindelsen. Se https://lnkd.in/ddppUGnx. Men hvad siger Energinet i Danmark? Ingenting, s? vidt jeg kan se. Hvorfor? Er der en hensigt? Den mangelfulde information om energi?erne kunne tyde p? det.

Heating and cooling heavily relies on planet-warming fossil fuels. But some energy companies are looking to an unlimited thermal energy source below their feet as a clean alternative. https://cnn.it/42lNm5f

Why do so many homes feel too hot in summer and too cold in winter—despite all the technology we have? We pour money into ACs, heaters, and insulation, yet our homes still fight against the climate rather than working with it. The problem? We’ve forgotten how to design with nature. For centuries, people built homes that responded to their environment— thick adobe walls in deserts, elevated bamboo houses in the tropics, stone cottages in cold regions. But today, we apply the same glass-and-concrete formula everywhere. And then we wonder why our energy bills are so high. A truly comfortable home doesn’t rely on machines to regulate temperature. Instead, it’s designed to stay naturally cool in summer and warm in winter. To achieve this, we need to combine: → Scientific Climate Data (like the K?ppen Climate Classification) → Passive Solar & Material Science. (harnessing sun, shade, and thermal mass) → Traditional Knowledge (lessons from centuries of trial and error) What else do we need to keep in mind?

“But climate change is China’s fault” Is a huge lie. For 1 reason I always overlooked: Cumulative emissions is what matters. CO2 stays in the atmosphere for centuries. So emissions from the 19th century still contribute to warming today. That shows some shocking differences in responsibility: Since 1850, ? USA: 20.3% of cumulative emissions, associated with 0.2° of warming ? China: 11.4% of cumulative emissions. 0.1° of warming ? UK: 3%, just behind India (3.5%) of cumulative emissions. (68 million vs. 1.4bn population) Yes, China is the world’s largest emitter today. But ignoring each country’s total contribution misses a key point. Because over 86% of the 1.5°C carbon budget is already gone. I think that means countries whose growth was driven by fossil fuels: ? Have a larger responsibility to decarbonise ? Should fund + bring down the price of clean energy ? Need to help countries suffering the effects of climate change What do you think? Or is ‘responsibility’ for climate change the wrong question to ask? ???I post about turning your climate concern → action + optimism. Repost to inform your network and follow Rob Cooper for more. Video credit: Carbon Brief #climatechange #emissions #sustainability