Dan Schroeder
LightNews LightNews
banner
dvschroeder.bsky.social
Dan Schroeder
@dvschroeder.bsky.social
820 followers 200 following 2.3K posts
Physicist, educator, number-cruncher. Cartoon by the great Cal Grondahl. physics.weber.edu/schroeder
Posts Replies Media Videos
dvschroeder.bsky.social
If offshore wind farms pose a security threat, China is a sitting duck.
Screen capture from the Global Energy Monitor Global Wind Power Tracker map (https://globalenergymonitor.org/projects/global-wind-power-tracker/tracker-map/) showing a map of eastern China, Korea, and Taiwan, with a green dot for each operating offshore wind farm. There are well over a hundred of these dots strewn along China's east coast, from the Bohai Sea and Korea Bay in the north to Hainan in the south. There are also a few dots near the west coasts of Taiwan and South Korea.
December 23, 2025 at 3:31 PM
dvschroeder.bsky.social
The first sentence here isn't true but the real dispute is about what role a meaningful but arbitrary "target" set by scientists should play in an effective political strategy. I think well-meaning people can disagree about that and I wish they wouldn't get so angry at each other for disagreeing.
Paragraph from Sammy Roth (www.climatecoloredgoggles.com/p/matthew-yglesias-climate): "Even worse, Yglesias subtly implies there's no real-world difference between reducing emissions slowly and reducing them quickly. He slams climate advocates for opposing fossil fuel projects that would keep the world from reaching net zero climate pollution by 2050, saying the perfect shouldn't be the enemy of the good — as if net zero were a purity test invented by activists, rather than a target set by leading scientists to ensure we maintain a reasonably safe planet."
December 22, 2025 at 5:08 PM
dvschroeder.bsky.social
This kind of rhetoric seems unconstructive. Yes, of course, solar+batteries are "limiting" the amount of gas burned in CA and TX, but both states still burn enormous amounts of gas. Both @sammyroth.bsky.social and @mattyglesias.bsky.social know all this so what exactly is the disagreement here?
Excerpt from essay by Sammy Roth (https://www.climatecoloredgoggles.com/p/matthew-yglesias-climate), responding to Matt Yglesias (https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/18/opinion/democrats-liberals-oil-gas-industry.html?unlocked_article_code=1.9k8.OPOh.i7NfuOm7AOLP&smid=url-share): "Energy-wise, the piece sounds like it was written a decade ago, when solar power was far more expensive and batteries didn't exist at scale. To hear Yglesias tell it, keeping the lights on affordably is possible only with gas. He should really spend more time in California, or even Texas, where cheap solar-plus-battery plants are limiting the need for costlier gas plants."
December 22, 2025 at 4:45 PM
dvschroeder.bsky.social
December 22, 2025 at 3:54 PM
dvschroeder.bsky.social
And when I say "veteran", I mean it!
Image of the top of the front page of the Salt Lake Tribune, March 24, 1989, reporting on the University of Utah announcement of what came to be known as "cold fusion". The main headline reads "U. Fusion Finding Energizes Scientists". The article under the headline features a photo of Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann at their press conference, and its byline reads "By Tim Fitzpatrick And Anne Wilson". The article includes a quote from physicist Edward Teller, with a photo. A second article by Fitzpatrick has the headline "Nuke Fusion Offers Particle of Hope For a Better World".
December 18, 2025 at 2:00 AM
dvschroeder.bsky.social
And here's the predicted inversion!
Photo looking southwest from the Wasatch Mountains across South Ogden, Hill Air Force Base, and northwestern Davis County toward Great Salt Lake, Antelope Island, and the Stansbury Mountains. The valleys are filled with a thick haze layer, bright with reflected sunlight, with contrasting dark mountain peaks poking above it.
December 16, 2025 at 2:15 AM
dvschroeder.bsky.social
Visibility has been exceptional lately. Here's a photo from above Ogden, yesterday afternoon.
Photo of islands in Great Salt Lake and mountains beyond, with urban development in the foreground and gray clouds above. The sky near the horizon is bright and tinted orange, and this light from the sky is reflecting from much of the lake, contrasting with the dark shaded islands.
December 8, 2025 at 4:42 PM
dvschroeder.bsky.social
Here's a chart of IPP coal generation over the last 30 days. I'm not sure why it was bouncing between such apparently hard limits of ~310 and ~640 MW during most of November. Each of the 2 coal units has a nameplate capacity of 820 MW. The plant ran at an average capacity factor of 40% in 2024.
Screen capture from the EIA Hourly Electric Grid Monitor (https://www.eia.gov/electricity/gridmonitor/dashboard/electric_overview/balancing_authority/LDWP) showing a chart of hourly generation from coal within the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power balancing authority, from November 7 through December 6, 2025. The generation level bounced between about 310 MW and 640 MW until Nov 23, then settled at about 350 MW early on Nov 25, then abruptly dropped to zero on the morning of Nov 26. It has remained at zero since then.
December 6, 2025 at 6:50 PM
dvschroeder.bsky.social
I'm marking my calendar for 2028.
Screen capture from https://deepfission.com/technology/ of section titled "Development Timeline", saying "Deep Fission plans to be commercially operational in Q3 2028" with a "150 MWe commercial plant".
December 6, 2025 at 5:21 PM
dvschroeder.bsky.social
Something to be thankful for!

Utah's largest coal-fired power plant—the Intermountain Power Project, located in the west desert near Delta and serving southern California—stopped burning coal at mid-day on Wednesday, just in time for Thanksgiving. 🔌💡
Screen capture from the EIA Hourly Electric Grid Monitor (https://www.eia.gov/electricity/gridmonitor/dashboard/electric_overview/balancing_authority/LDWP) showing a chart of hourly generation by energy source within the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power balancing authority, from November 21-27. The data indicate that natural gas is almost always the largest source, with significant contributions from solar, wind, and coal. The curve for coal fluctuates in the approximate range of 350 to 630 megawatts up to mid-day on Wednesday, November 26, when it abruptly drops to zero. It remains at zero through all of November 27, Thanksgiving Day.
November 28, 2025 at 2:29 PM
dvschroeder.bsky.social
There are a whole lotta states that have disappointingly low solar adoption. I think AZ and NM are coming along, though. They're well ahead of TX, percentage-wise.

emp.lbl.gov/capacity-and...
Screen capture from linked site (https://emp.lbl.gov/capacity-and-generation-state, "State %" tab) showing a map of solar PV generation in 2024 as a percentage of electricity consumption by state, for the 48 contiguous US states (with data for AK, HI, and DC in a side box). The highest percentages are in NV (34%), CA (29%), HI (22%), ME, AZ, UT (17% each), NM, RI (16% each), CO, MA (12% each), NC (10%), FL, TX (9% each). The US as a whole is at 7.5%, many states have very low values, with ND, KY, AK, KS, NE, OK, and WV all below 1%.
November 26, 2025 at 12:14 AM
dvschroeder.bsky.social
And here's a version in which I've also changed the treatment of "unspecified imports", assuming they're entirely from fossil fuel instead of just leaving them out of the calculations. This steepens the curve because the amount that's unspecified has decreased a lot in recent years.
Chart of California's annual low-carbon (non-fossil) electricity percentage, from 2009 through 2024, including estimates for imported electricity and rooftop solar. Based on data from the California Energy Commission, https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2024-total-system-electric-generation, except for in-state solar generation data is from Ember, https://ember-energy.org/data/us-electricity-data-explorer/. The numbers generally trend upward, with considerable fluctuations and changes in rate: 2009 34% 2010 38% 2011 42% 2012 33% 2013 35% 2014 35% 2015 38% 2016 46% 2017 54% 2018 53% 2019 58% 2020 57% 2021 56% 2022 58% 2023 62% 2024 66%
November 23, 2025 at 3:49 PM
dvschroeder.bsky.social
OK, here's a version in which I've swapped in Ember's numbers, which include rooftop, for California's in-state solar generation. This reproduces Bloomberg's value of 67% for 2024, but worsens the discrepancy with their 40% value for 2019.
Chart of California's annual low-carbon (non-fossil) electricity percentage, from 2009 through 2024, including estimates for imported electricity and rooftop solar. Based on data from the California Energy Commission, https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2024-total-system-electric-generation, except for in-state solar generation data is from Ember, https://ember-energy.org/data/us-electricity-data-explorer/. The numbers generally trend upward, with considerable fluctuations and changes in rate: 2009 41% 2010 44% 2011 49% 2012 39% 2013 40% 2014 41% 2015 44% 2016 54% 2017 60% 2018 59% 2019 62% 2020 61% 2021 59% 2022 62% 2023 64% 2024 67%
November 23, 2025 at 3:42 PM
dvschroeder.bsky.social
Thanks! That adds more detail, and a data point for 2024. Still, doesn't corroborate the more sudden, recent jump suggested by the Bloomberg chart.
Chart of California's annual low-carbon (non-fossil) electricity percentage, from 2009 through 2024, including estimates for imported electricity. Based on data from the California Energy Commission, https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2024-total-system-electric-generation. The numbers generally trend upward, with considerable fluctuations and changes in rate: 2009 41% 2010 44% 2011 49% 2012 39% 2013 40% 2014 40% 2015 42% 2016 52% 2017 58% 2018 57% 2019 60% 2020 58% 2021 56% 2022 58% 2023 60% 2024 63%
November 22, 2025 at 5:52 PM
dvschroeder.bsky.social
I'm suspicious of the vaguely sourced chart. Doesn't seem to agree with what I'm seeing at the California Energy Commission or EIA via Ember. The progress is very real but I don't think it's been that fast.
Chart from the California Energy Commission (https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/clean-energy-serving-california/estimated-annual-clean-energy) showing the estimated annual percentage of electricity used in California that comes from "clean" (low-carbon) sources, from 2013 through 2023. For each year the total is broken down in to "renewables", nuclear, and large hydro. The totals by year are: 2013 41% 2014 39% 2015 42% 2016 52% 2017 61% 2018 58% 2019 64% 2020 59% 2021 59% 2022 61% 2023 67% My understanding is that these numbers include electricity generated outside California that is sold to California users. Chart from Ember (https://ember-energy.org/data/us-electricity-data-explorer/) showing annual percentage share of "clean" (low-carbon) electricity generated in California. My understanding is that these numbers come from the US Energy Information Administration, and include only electricity generated within the state. The numbers in the chart (rounded to the nearest whole percent) are: 2001 41% 2002 49% 2003 50% 2004 46% 2005 50% 2006 49% 2007 42% 2008 40% 2009 42% 2010 45% 2011 53% 2012 38% 2013 39% 2014 40% 2015 42% 2016 52% 2017 58% 2018 56% 2019 59% 2020 55% 2021 54% 2022 57% 2023 61% 2024 65%
November 22, 2025 at 4:48 PM
dvschroeder.bsky.social
Utah's Intermountain Power Plant coal unit(s) still chugging along at ~500 MW, 2/3 of the way into the month in which they were, at last report, to be shut down (and replaced with two smaller gas units). Guess we'll see what happens on December 1. 🔌💡
Chart from U.S. Energy Information Administration (https://www.eia.gov/electricity/gridmonitor/dashboard/electric_overview/balancing_authority/LDWP) showing hourly electricity generation under the Los Angeles Dept. of Water and Power balancing authority over the most recent week. The chart has separate curves for different energy sources, principally gas, solar, wind, and coal, with the curve for coal highlighted here. Over the last week this curve has gone up and down in the approximate range 340 to 640 MW. (As far as I can tell, the Intermountain Power Plant in Delta, Utah, is the only coal-burning electricity source under the LADWP balancing authority.)
November 21, 2025 at 2:36 PM
dvschroeder.bsky.social
Let's compare the @iea.org WEO2025 electricity mix projections for 2035 to 2024.

Solar soars in all scenarios!

But even the new Stated Policies scenario projects smaller increases in wind+solar, a smaller decrease in coal, and increased gas, compared to what IEA projected last year. 🔌💡
Four side-by-side column charts, each showing world electricity generation by source. At left is a chart for 2024, when coal generated the most electricity, followed by gas, hydro, nuclear, wind, solar, bioenergy, oil, and geothermal, in that order. The other three charts are projections for the year 2035; all three show a projected decline in oil generation and modest increases in nuclear, hydro, bioenergy, and geothermal. The second and third charts show the Current Policies and Stated Policies scenarios from the International Energy Agency's World Energy Outlook 2025. In the Current Policies scenario, coal generation has declined only slightly in 2035, while gas, wind, and solar rise significantly. In the Stated Policies scenario, coal declines somewhat more while gas rises somewhat less and wind and solar rise somewhat more. At the far right is the Stated Policies scenario from last year's World Energy Outlook 2024, projecting a greater decline in coal, essentially no change in gas, and even greater increases in wind and solar.
November 13, 2025 at 8:10 PM
dvschroeder.bsky.social
Thank you!

@solarchase.bsky.social do you know why BNEF's numbers for the last four years are higher than IEA's? The 60 GW discrepancy for 2024 seems kinda significant.
Column graph from https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-tools/renewable-energy-progress-tracker showing global solar net capacity additions by year from 2000 through 2024, with projections through 2030. Each column is divided into two pieces, for distributed and utility-scale systems. The totals for 2020 through 2024, in gigawatts (DC), are 150, 166, 222, 424, and 538. Earlier values were much lower, as solar technology was still being developed. The projection shows only small changes for 2025 through 2030, all of these being pretty close to 600 GW.
November 12, 2025 at 11:51 PM
dvschroeder.bsky.social
I can't say how much of this article is accurate, but I do know the Sierra Club never had a "singular focus on climate change".

The Club's historical mission was to "explore, enjoy, and protect" public lands. Later it took on public health issues and eventually climate—rather awkwardly.
Screen capture of headline and sub-head from https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/07/us/politics/sierra-club-social-justice.html. "The Sierra Club Embraced Social Justice. Then It Tore Itself Apart. The environmental group gave up its singular focus on climate change for a broader agenda. The ensuing internal strife left it weakened as it takes on the Trump administration."
November 7, 2025 at 6:14 PM
dvschroeder.bsky.social
Looks like both of the incumbents have lost to their challengers in the Ogden city-wide council races—despite endorsements from the mayor and what's left of the local paper. Hard to say exactly why, but I'm glad we'll have some younger voices adding fresh perspectives.
Screen capture from election results page for two nonpartisan Ogden City Council races. As of election night, the results show that Alicia Washington leads Marcia White by more than 10 percentage points in the Seat A race, while Kevin Lundell leads Bart Blair by more than 18 percentage points in the Seat B race.
November 5, 2025 at 12:09 PM
dvschroeder.bsky.social
They paved paradise and put up a parking lot.
A mid-day autumn scene in the foothills of the Wasatch Mountains just east of Ogden, Utah. In the distance, a steep grassy slope, dotted with brown-leaved clumps of trees and shrubs, rises to steeper talus slopes and then tan-colored cliffs, below a clear blue sky. In the foreground is a newly paved and striped asphalt parking lot, big enough to hold 60 parked cars, edged with concrete curb and gutter work. The lot is empty except for two small treaded earth-moving machines.
November 3, 2025 at 4:55 AM
dvschroeder.bsky.social
Interesting patterns in this map of under-construction solar farms. 🔌💡 seia.org/research-res...
Map of the contiguous 48 US states with a red dot for every utility-scale solar farm currently under construction. Dots are sized by solar farm capacity. There is a major concentration of dots in Texas. A notable band of dots runs from Michigan southward into Indiana, western Ohio, southern Illinois, and down the Mississippi river into northeastern Arkansas.There are also significant numbers across the southwest, from southern California through southern Arizona and New Mexico, and in Florida and the mid-Atlantic region. A few dots are scattered across other western states and Minnesota. Notable gaps. There are gaps with relatively few solar farms under construction in the northeastern states, the southern Appalachian area, the northern Great Plains, and much of the Northwest.
October 31, 2025 at 11:36 PM
dvschroeder.bsky.social
The three-way convergence approaches!

12-month world totals as of August 2025:
Nuclear 9.0%
Wind 8.7%
Solar 8.3%

Thanks to @ember-energy.org for the data update! 🔌💡☢️🌬️🌞
Chart of world electricity generation, 12-month running totals, broken down by source, from January 2020 through August 2025. From top to bottom are curves for coal, gas, hydro, nuclear, wind, solar, other fossil (mostly oil), biomass, and other renewables (mostly geothermal). The data come from ember-energy.org. Most of the curves have been pretty flat for the last year or more, but wind is gradually rising to approach nuclear, while solar is quickly rising to approach both wind and nuclear. It appears that the solar, wind, and nuclear curves will cross within the next few months.
October 25, 2025 at 2:34 PM
dvschroeder.bsky.social
So for now, you can charge the battery but not discharge it? How can this be right—or what am I missing?
Screen capture of a paragraph from the article at https://www.canarymedia.com/articles/batteries/pila-plug-in-backup-power-renters-homes that reads in part, "For now, Pila's software is configured to only allow power to flow from wall sockets into its batteries, not vice versa, Ashman emphasized."
October 21, 2025 at 2:53 PM
dvschroeder.bsky.social
Here's a little more about the buffer and BNEF's methodology, from the 2021 version of this thread. x.com/solar_chase/...
October 21, 2025 at 2:08 PM