Re: Renewable Energy
 

I have a feeling that the professors theory about meeting our transportation needs with wind energy relied upon the assumption that you could get the owners of all of America's trains, planes and automobiles to convert or replace their vehicles with electric powered ones. I'm not going to call this impossible, but I will call it difficult. I will also be very impressed the day a jumbo jet can be run coast-to-coast on only electric power. It is possible that we will see something like this in our lifetime. If so, I will be impressed - and happy.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

[ QUOTE ]
^^Im pretty sure middle eastern countries have more concerns with the US than just the pruchase of oil. LOL at the theory of introducing renewable sources of energy will combat terrorism

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree.

1. The US needs a reliable source of oil.-->
2. MidEast-on-MidEast religion-fueled violence threatens that supply.-->
3. The US takes sides in an attempt to stabilize the region and secure their oil supply.-->
4. The unchosen group is unhappy and animosity toward the US spreads, leading to Jihad.

The problem in the MidEast is that they don't separate religion from politics. So, as a foreign country, if you play politics with them, you also play religion.

If the US does not need MidEast oil, the root cause of our interactions is eliminated, along with the consequences. The US would interact with these nations no more than they do with any other random nation of similar population size.

As another way of illustrating, picture the MidEast with no oil. If you think the US is involved with an oil-poor MidEast, take a look at Africa. And again, no interaction means no animosity.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Solar PV is EXTREMELY reliable. EXTREMELY. The first modern PV cell manufactured at Bell labs in 1954 still works. New modules are warrantied for 25 years and will work for much longer. They require little or no maintenance.

[/ QUOTE ]

I did not mean mechanically reliable. I mean that the sun doesn't shine 24 hours a day 7 days a week.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's true. The recent surge (such as it is) in PV could not be happening without net metering. Most systems are installed on properties that are still connected to the grid. When you use more power than you produce with your PV panels you draw power from the grid. When you produce more than you use, you supply power to the grid and your meter turns backwards. Some systems have separate meters.

Solar PV obviously can not be the only solution for power since it does not produce at night. On a utility level pumping water in conjunction with hydroelectric power is a fairly efficient way to store energy, but at this point I'm just involved in systems that provide power for use on site, not for sale.*

In off-grid settings PV with battery back-up and sometimes with wind power is economically viable even though it is more expensive because bringing in electric power or transporting fuel is even more expensive. That is a very small part of the market though.

*Net metering is sorta for sale, but they just take it off your bill. None of the net metering deals I know about allow you to sell more than you use over the course of a year. (in the US I mean - In Germany - the world leader in Solar - they allow you to sell back w/e you produce)

Re: Renewable Energy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Solar PV is EXTREMELY reliable. EXTREMELY. The first modern PV cell manufactured at Bell labs in 1954 still works. New modules are warrantied for 25 years and will work for much longer. They require little or no maintenance.

[/ QUOTE ]

I did not mean mechanically reliable. I mean that the sun doesn't shine 24 hours a day 7 days a week.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's why we have capacitors.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

I watched this last night too and found it interesting. One interesting tidbit was that at some point it will become economically feasible to make oil from coal. The US has the largest coal deposits in the world, essentially turning us into the world equivalent of Saudi Arabia once the cheap oil runs out.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

[ QUOTE ]

1. The US needs a reliable source of oil.-->
2. MidEast-on-MidEast religion-fueled violence threatens that supply.-->
3. The US takes sides in an attempt to stabilize the region and secure their oil supply.-->
4. The unchosen group is unhappy and animosity toward the US spreads, leading to Jihad.


[/ QUOTE ]

It's pretty sad that so many people share this misperception.

Oil has almost no impact on Middle East wars. It's all about Israel and Palestine. The don't hate us because of oil, they hate us because we created and support Israel.

Oil makes them tons of money...which is why Saudi Arabia likes us.

So...the people making the tons of money from oil like the countries buying the oil. The ones that are more religiously ideological, and those that aren't the priviledged ones making tons of money from selling us oil...those are the ones that want to kill us.

'us' here is not just the USofA, btw.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

1. The US needs a reliable source of oil.-->
2. MidEast-on-MidEast religion-fueled violence threatens that supply.-->
3. The US takes sides in an attempt to stabilize the region and secure their oil supply.-->
4. The unchosen group is unhappy and animosity toward the US spreads, leading to Jihad.


[/ QUOTE ]

It's pretty sad that so many people share this misperception.

Oil has almost no impact on Middle East wars. It's all about Israel and Palestine. The don't hate us because of oil, they hate us because we created and support Israel.

Oil makes them tons of money...which is why Saudi Arabia likes us.

So...the people making the tons of money from oil like the countries buying the oil. The ones that are more religiously ideological, and those that aren't the priviledged ones making tons of money from selling us oil...those are the ones that want to kill us.

'us' here is not just the USofA, btw.

[/ QUOTE ]

This belongs in politics for sure, but this is total BS.

Iraq and Iran have a history with the US that has nothing to do with Israel. Saudis don't all love us. They are the ones that crashed the planes in the WTC. Many there resent the US military presence in Saudi Arabia, not Palestine/Israel. And, our support of Israel has a lot to do with projecting power in the area, which has a lot to do with oil.

US/Israeli relations have had a lot to do with US relations with bordering countries (Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria) but those have never been the big exporters of oil to the US.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

[ QUOTE ]
^^Im pretty sure middle eastern countries have more concerns with the US than just the pruchase of oil. LOL at the theory of introducing renewable sources of energy will combat terrorism

[/ QUOTE ]

It's actually one of the best reasons to ween ourselves off oil. The middle east has little of interest to us with the exception of oil.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

Cool show (rerun) on Discovery Channel right now about fuels for cars in the future.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

[ QUOTE ]

in a class i'm taking this quarter, the professor went through the calculations to show that ALL of america's transportation system (cars/trucks/motorcycles/semi's/planes/etc) could be powered by 120,000 windmills.

[/ QUOTE ]

Assuming your professor's calculations are correct, 120,000 windmills produces enough power for all of USA's transportation only when you neglect the energy cost of transporting the energy. There is considerable energy lost just pumping it through powerlines, so a central power station will almost never be the solution.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

in a class i'm taking this quarter, the professor went through the calculations to show that ALL of america's transportation system (cars/trucks/motorcycles/semi's/planes/etc) could be powered by 120,000 windmills.

[/ QUOTE ]

Assuming your professor's calculations are correct, 120,000 windmills produces enough power for all of USA's transportation only when you neglect the energy cost of transporting the energy. There is considerable energy lost just pumping it through powerlines, so a central power station will almost never be the solution.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, maybe the prof included that or maybe you need a few more windmills, but central power generation is the status quo. In Southern California we get power from as far away as coal plants in Utah.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

Its less about getting people to do good because they should be concerned, and more about finding the proper incentives to make people choose economically. If gas was 3.50/gallon when I bought my SUV 5 years ago, I would have a more fuel efficient car now. I would fully support a gas tax (although I would hate seeing the prices fill up every week) as an incentive to spur renewable sources of energy. Oil will always be around, cheap oil will not. Lets get a head start now so it doesn't hit our society like a ton of bricks.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

[ QUOTE ]

Well, maybe the prof included that or maybe you need a few more windmills, but central power generation is the status quo. In Southern California we get power from as far away as coal plants in Utah.

[/ QUOTE ]

That doesn't mean that pumping electricity in from Utah is efficient, just that it is the best available solution.

I doubt the professor knows the length of electrical wiring that comprises the entire power grid of the US, so I would guess that those figures haven't been included in his calculations.

I could be wrong about how much energy is lost in the transfer, of course.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

[ QUOTE ]
I would fully support a gas tax

[/ QUOTE ]

Gas is already heavily taxed in a lot of areas.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

[ QUOTE ]
That's true. The recent surge (such as it is) in PV could not be happening without net metering. Most systems are installed on properties that are still connected to the grid. When you use more power than you produce with your PV panels you draw power from the grid. When you produce more than you use, you supply power to the grid and your meter turns backwards. Some systems have separate meters.

Solar PV obviously can not be the only solution for power since it does not produce at night. On a utility level pumping water in conjunction with hydroelectric power is a fairly efficient way to store energy, but at this point I'm just involved in systems that provide power for use on site, not for sale.*

In off-grid settings PV with battery back-up and sometimes with wind power is economically viable even though it is more expensive because bringing in electric power or transporting fuel is even more expensive. That is a very small part of the market though.

*Net metering is sorta for sale, but they just take it off your bill. None of the net metering deals I know about allow you to sell more than you use over the course of a year. (in the US I mean - In Germany - the world leader in Solar - they allow you to sell back w/e you produce)

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah I really like Germany's initiative with solar power. I watched Nova a little while back and they had a program on solar power. Very interesting.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That's true. The recent surge (such as it is) in PV could not be happening without net metering. Most systems are installed on properties that are still connected to the grid. When you use more power than you produce with your PV panels you draw power from the grid. When you produce more than you use, you supply power to the grid and your meter turns backwards. Some systems have separate meters.

Solar PV obviously can not be the only solution for power since it does not produce at night. On a utility level pumping water in conjunction with hydroelectric power is a fairly efficient way to store energy, but at this point I'm just involved in systems that provide power for use on site, not for sale.*

In off-grid settings PV with battery back-up and sometimes with wind power is economically viable even though it is more expensive because bringing in electric power or transporting fuel is even more expensive. That is a very small part of the market though.

*Net metering is sorta for sale, but they just take it off your bill. None of the net metering deals I know about allow you to sell more than you use over the course of a year. (in the US I mean - In Germany - the world leader in Solar - they allow you to sell back w/e you produce)

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah I really like Germany's initiative with solar power. I watched Nova a little while back and they had a program on solar power. Very interesting.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, what's not to like about a government intervention that diverts a huge portion of the world's PV resources to sunny, sunny Germany? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Re: Renewable Energy
 

It's really not as simple as simple calculations make it seem.

The biggest problems with solar and wind farms are economics, intermittent power, and the fact that no one wants them. All of which ultimately relate back to economics.

In a nutshell, you get power when the sun shines and when the wind blows. Power generators contract their power out under long-term contracts, largely, which means not supplying what they promised carries significant penalties. Failing to supply that intermittent renewable power can get expensive in a hurry.

I've seen interesting stats that a greater reliance on solar and wind will actually increase our peak usage of natural gas, because when it comes to quick response times NG is the choice fuel.

The you have the problem that building 10,000 acres of wind farms is great in the middle of nowehere, but also missing is thousands of miles of transmission line to carry the power.

And the fact that local municipalities fight to keep out wind farms, or LNG import terminals, or really anything that disturbs the status quo. While the certification of the infrastructure mostly resides at the federal level, and the feds well certificate just about anything, local governments usually control land use permits and can delaye the process significantly.

While I love a good renewable-v-big-fossil-fuel debate as much as anyone, the intricacies involved really make broad debates pointless.

The real solutions will probably come by way of diversified enegry portfolios and an extremely gradual shift towards alternative sources. Carbon sequestration, the implementation of a cap and trade market for carbon credits, a global LNG market and greater on-site generation for industrial and large commercial consumers.

And blah blah blah.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

[ QUOTE ]

I’m not saying that we should build a huge 10,000 mile mirror in the dessert in Nevada. All though the government does own an absurd amount of land in Nevada, upwards of over 90%. And I am not saying that we need to turn the Dakotas in to wind farms either.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, I like both these ideas. Just leave some space for Vegas in the middle of the huge mirror.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I’m not saying that we should build a huge 10,000 mile mirror in the dessert in Nevada. All though the government does own an absurd amount of land in Nevada, upwards of over 90%. And I am not saying that we need to turn the Dakotas in to wind farms either.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, I like both these ideas. Just leave some space for Vegas in the middle of the huge mirror.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you have any idea the number of birds that could be blinded by this gigantic mirror?

And while I'm not being serious, someone, somewhere, would be.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I’m not saying that we should build a huge 10,000 mile mirror in the dessert in Nevada. All though the government does own an absurd amount of land in Nevada, upwards of over 90%. And I am not saying that we need to turn the Dakotas in to wind farms either.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, I like both these ideas. Just leave some space for Vegas in the middle of the huge mirror.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you have any idea the number of birds that could be blinded by this gigantic mirror?

And while I'm not being serious, someone, somewhere, would be.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why not control the human population, then we wouldnt need such a mirror.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

blackize,

[ QUOTE ]
That doesn't mean that pumping electricity in from Utah is efficient, just that it is the best available solution.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I'm not saying it's efficient to send power a long distance. I am in the business of generating power on-site.

[ QUOTE ]
Gas is already heavily taxed in a lot of areas.

[/ QUOTE ]

Gas is also heavily subsidized in lots of direct and indirect ways.


bobman,

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, what's not to like about a government intervention that diverts a huge portion of the world's PV resources to sunny, sunny Germany?

[/ QUOTE ]

Energy supply is loaded with government intervention and there's significantly more intervention in oil and nuclear power than in solar power. Germany has hogged the solar modules though and the prices of modules have not been going down much in the last few years despite increase in supply and cheaper manufacturing, largely because of the huge demand in Germany.


ElSapo,

Part of that depends on the area. In the southwest the peak usage is caused by air-conditioning.

Also, solar power can be generated efficiently on-site for residential and small commercial consumers as well.


Wynton,

There's a huge mirror project in Barstow, CA.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

[ QUOTE ]
Part of that depends on the area. In the southwest the peak usage is caused by air-conditioning.

[/ QUOTE ]

Power gen is really on the rise in the Southwest - helped along, of course, by California's own resistance to building power plants. Funny - a few towns outside of Phoenix, Ariz., are up in arms about a pipeline expansion that would feed power gen in Phoenix. They're pissed, at least partly, because that generation isn't really benefitting them, it's benefitting Calfornia.

Anyways.... Peak demand from AC or heating, either way, I think it's the same problem. Wind doesn't blow all the time, and whe it doesn't wind generators can face hefty tariff fines, and what you'll see is a spike in traditional fuel use.

There are proposals to alter power tariffs for renewable generators so that these problems are not quite so heavy.

Now, if you mean AC demand correlates to solar power potential, I dunno. Solar power thus far has shown to be more effective onsite and in small scale, at least economically speaking. More tightly linking solar power to smart metering is probably a big step, so people can see ust how much power they have. Basically linking solar power with demand reduction/conservation.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

Elsapo,

Cali has net-metering and indeed being able to watch the meter (see it spin backwards) seems to be a big selling point. 40 states have net-metering laws for solar. I haven't looked at the details outside of California.

Database of State Incentives for Renewables and Efficiency (net-metering page)

Re: Renewable Energy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And this is what must change. Because if it doesn't, bad bad bad things will eventually happen. Maybe not in 20 or even 50 years. But eventually.

[/ QUOTE ]

It must be easy to be a scientist that has to prove nothing empirically. You can continually move the goal posts of when impending doom is coming, and never be wrong!

[/ QUOTE ]


I'm not trying to prove anything. Though it seems that if we are just about completely reliant on fossil fuels and they run out, we are in a world of [censored].

Re: Renewable Energy
 

In Sweden, the gas costs 8$ per gallon.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And the thing that pisses me off the most is paying $3.50 a gallon for gas, while Exxon/Mobile post record profits each month.

[/ QUOTE ]
How dare they.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok so when does it stop? It's ok for them to keep raising prices, making more and more money, and blaming it on something else? I know barrels are high, but this shouldn't be an excuse for oil companies to make more money. Thank Bush.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not trying to prove anything. Though it seems that if we are just about completely reliant on fossil fuels and they run out, we are in a world of [censored].

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to worry. The prospect of running out of fossil fuels is overblown and will not occur in your grandkids' grandkids' lifetimes. Further, it will NEVER run out because as the supply diminishes, the price of oil will increase and oil will become a luxury item for even the richest people. By this logic, it is a certainty that economic incentive for alternative energies will appear at some point.

Running out of fossil fuel is not the problem here - pollution and warming is the problem. It would be better for us if we were closer to the bottom of the oil well and the economic incentive arrived today.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

ElSapo

[ QUOTE ]
The biggest problems with solar and wind farms are economics, intermittent power, and the fact that no one wants them.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've been thinking about this a bit and thought that pumping water and then generating hydro power would be a good way to store energy when the sun isn't shining or the wind isn't blowing. This process can be up to 85% efficient currently and I just discovered that here in Southern California there is a pumped-storage hydroelectric plant.

They pump water from one lake (Castaic) into a higher lake (Pyramid) at night and then generate power during the day when demand is higher.

Solar power could be added to the grid until it shaves off the peak demand and after that it could generate more power and as long as some was used to pump water into such a system it wouldn't cause the problem of too much power sometimes and not enough other times.

Castaic Dam wiki

Re: Renewable Energy
 

[ QUOTE ]

Yeah, what's not to like about a government intervention that diverts a huge portion of the world's PV resources to sunny, sunny Germany? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

This program doesn't divert the resources. It creates a major new source of demand, which is answered by new a new supply in constructed units (more factories have to be built, of course and resources used...). By econimies of scale and incentives for new research this reduces the price of solar power world-wide.

So yeah, exactly. What's not to like?? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: Renewable Energy
 

[ QUOTE ]
ElSapo

[ QUOTE ]
The biggest problems with solar and wind farms are economics, intermittent power, and the fact that no one wants them.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've been thinking about this a bit and thought that pumping water and then generating hydro power would be a good way to store energy when the sun isn't shining or the wind isn't blowing. This process can be up to 85% efficient currently and I just discovered that here in Southern California there is a pumped-storage hydroelectric plant.

They pump water from one lake (Castaic) into a higher lake (Pyramid) at night and then generate power during the day when demand is higher.

Solar power could be added to the grid until it shaves off the peak demand and after that it could generate more power and as long as some was used to pump water into such a system it wouldn't cause the problem of too much power sometimes and not enough other times.

Castaic Dam wiki

[/ QUOTE ]

We're getting over my head here. I deal mostly with natural gas infrastructure and long-term forecasts, so while the specifics of renewable energy definitely play a part there I don't see it on an individual project basis.

Generally, most people don't consider hydro to be "renewable energy" because of the tremendous environmental impacts. But the pumped project you mention sounds different.

I don't mean to sound overly skeptical of renewable energy - without a doubt, it will play an increasing role in meeting the U.S. energy demands (and demands globally). It's just that debates that center on largely general ideas of "if we had X amount of X renewable resource, we wouldn't need Y amount of Z fossil fuel" are way too vauge.

The energy industry and markets are really, really complicated in my opinion - from fuel specifications to pipeline interconnects to regional power authorities, real shifts towards renewable power will be gradual and will require new policies, regulations and markets.

Ultimately, for large scale, wind is the most economic right now. Solar seems to function well for on-site generation, and net meering done at some places actually has customers -generating excess- power rather than being a net user, at least at certain times of day and year. Geothermal has been talked about, but right now is absurdly expensive. Clean(er) coal may well be the solution for the next several decades. Natural gas and oil and not going anywhere, no time soon and quite possibly ever.

But despite the huge roadblocks, innovation does continue. Small solar projects do make a difference, and eventually large projects do get permitted (though it takes an eternity). We're not going to "run out" of energy, that won't ever happen. But there will always be a need for new sources, conservation and concern.

At one point, nuclear power was supposed to make electricity "too cheap to meter." Most conventional wisdom will turn out to be wrong. Probably most of what I just typed will be wrong.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And the thing that pisses me off the most is paying $3.50 a gallon for gas, while Exxon/Mobile post record profits each month.

[/ QUOTE ]
How dare they.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok so when does it stop? It's ok for them to keep raising prices, making more and more money, and blaming it on something else? I know barrels are high, but this shouldn't be an excuse for oil companies to make more money. Thank Bush.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, it's okay, because people continue to buy their products. If you don't like it, limit your consumption of gas. Don't depend on the government to do [censored] you should stand up for.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And the thing that pisses me off the most is paying $3.50 a gallon for gas, while Exxon/Mobile post record profits each month.

[/ QUOTE ]
How dare they.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok so when does it stop? It's ok for them to keep raising prices, making more and more money, and blaming it on something else? I know barrels are high, but this shouldn't be an excuse for oil companies to make more money. Thank Bush.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, it's okay, because people continue to buy their products. If you don't like it, limit your consumption of gas. Don't depend on the government to do [censored] you should stand up for.

[/ QUOTE ]
What he said. Don't like it? Call your broker and tell him to buy XOM. If you can't beat 'em, buy a piece of 'em.

The fact that Bush is president really has nothing to do with it.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

Okay as someone who works in this industry (Electric Power and Relaibility), I feel an unnatural need to chime in.
Wind, Solar, Nuclear all need to be a part of the future of energy production in this country and the world, but as was stated previously, the wind doesn't blow 24/7, even in North Dakota, and the sun doesn't shine brightly every day. The storage devices currently employed are okay, but not sufficient on a large scale to be implemented like some of you are suggesting.

The other issue with wind power is that, at least in the upper midwest, when electric demand is the highest (July and August) the wind is blowing the least.

And we don't even want to start a discussion about the transmission lines that would need to be constructed to go with a large scale wind farm or solar farm. Not to mention the stability concerns on the entire system caused by the minute to minute fluctuations that can happen with these generation methods.
Capacitor banks can help, but those aren't exactly the cheapest or best methods either.

This is where Nuclear and Coal come in. These are used for base load and are always running pretty much full bore 24/7 which helps the system stay on frequency when wind and other sorts of fluctuating generation sources come on line.

Pretty much, there is no easy solution, despite what some environmentalists would have you think, but by using everything available to us, we can certainly start taking steps in the right direction.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Why doesn’t the government force us to make use of more renewable forms of energy?

[/ QUOTE ]

Change should be adopted because people have an economic incentive to do so. (i.e. they are paying more for oil than other energy sources), not because the government forces action.

Government action has tons of unintended consequences, some of which lead to creating a bigger problem than existed in the first place.

Corn based ethanol comes to my mind. The U.S. is handing out large subsidies to corn farmers to produce corn for ethanol, which in turn is driving up the global demand for corn, which in turn is driving up the price of corn on the free market, which in turn is making corn (many third world countries primary food source) much more expensive.

Corn is also the primary grain used in livestock feed, so as the price of corn goes up, so do items such as milk, beef, chicken, eggs, etc.

Other problems with corn ethanol, is that the amount of energy required to create 1 "unit" of ethanol energy, is greater than the energy required.

Sugar ethanol (primarily produced by Brazil) is much more energy efficient than corn ethanol, yet due mostly to tariffs and import regulations, the U.S. doesn't produce it, and instead hands out government subsidies to U.S. farmers who grow corn for ethanol.

Sorry if this belongs in politics, people's misconceptions about economics and energy is a pet peeve of mine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Global warming is an example of a negative externality. The unfettered market arrives at an inefficient equilibrium. Either massive cooperation or government intervention is required for the market to reach the ideal equilibrium.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

The new wave in solar technology: Nanosolar. Some pretty heavy hitters are backing this:

http://www.popsci.com/popsci/flat/bo...n/item_59.html

Re: Renewable Energy
 

Energy policy in America is much more than a simple question of quantity and sources. All energy providers have to plan for periods of peak energy usage, as all businesses with large fixed costs. For example a retail store is built to handle busy weekends, not just slow nights. So that means there are big problems with energy sources whose timetables can't be predicted. Some firms have excess power generation than demanded at a given time, some have too little. To some extent the market is already helping solve this by letting power providers buy and sell power from one another. But there's still lots of innovation left in capacitor and storage technology where excess energy can be stored for peak energy times. This is the single largest problem with solar and wind power, NOT the absolute quantity of power maximally provided. Fresh ideas like plug-in hybrids are emerging, where you can return the energy you don't use back to the grid. Imagine, for example, how much more incentivized to turn off idle appliances you would be if you could sell excess power you didn't use (by reducing your power bill) back to the power company. The solution to our complicated power problems will never be conservation or giant fields, it's going to come from a combination of different renewable sources. And the poster who mentioned how impossible it is to live without oil products (plastics anyone?!) is right - we are going to be "dependent" on fossil fuels for a long, long time.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

[ QUOTE ]
The new wave in solar technology: Nanosolar. Some pretty heavy hitters are backing this:

http://www.popsci.com/popsci/flat/bo...n/item_59.html

[/ QUOTE ]

One way or another solar will become much cheaper in the near future. Even without new technology this will happen because there is a lot of investment going into increasing silicon production and prices are currently somewhat high because of a spike in demand largely from Germany.

There is also plenty of room for some new technology or manufacturing method like the link above to drop prices to a small fraction of what they currently are.

As coolio and others mentioned there are issues about storing energy and a mix of solutions is required, but in some areas with good solar resources and nearby mountains/hills solar in combination with pumped-storage hydroelectric power could supply a very large portion of power.

I think conservation pretty much goes without saying here a well. I just want to mention that if you think compact fluorescents suck you might try again or try not getting the cheapest bulbs available. As far as light quality and the time it takes to get to full brightness there is a HUGE difference between older or cheaper bulbs and newer better bulbs (not that expensive, like $4 or $5).

In the not too distant future LED lights might be providing a lot more of the light and use a lot less power.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The new wave in solar technology: Nanosolar. Some pretty heavy hitters are backing this:

http://www.popsci.com/popsci/flat/bo...n/item_59.html

[/ QUOTE ]

One way or another solar will become much cheaper in the near future. Even without new technology this will happen because there is a lot of investment going into increasing silicon production and prices are currently somewhat high because of a spike in demand largely from Germany.

There is also plenty of room for some new technology or manufacturing method like the link above to drop prices to a small fraction of what they currently are.

As coolio and others mentioned there are issues about storing energy and a mix of solutions is required, but in some areas with good solar resources and nearby mountains/hills solar in combination with pumped-storage hydroelectric power could supply a very large portion of power.

I think conservation pretty much goes without saying here a well. I just want to mention that if you think compact fluorescents suck you might try again or try not getting the cheapest bulbs available. As far as light quality and the time it takes to get to full brightness there is a HUGE difference between older or cheaper bulbs and newer better bulbs (not that expensive, like $4 or $5).

In the not too distant future LED lights might be providing a lot more of the light and use a lot less power.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not really that well read into this, but I think I have read that hydroelectric power is just a plain bad idea. There are so many unintended consequences from manipulating water sources to the environment, like killing fish and depleting the land, and combined with the negligible amount of energy actually produced makes it pretty much moot for any vast plans. And the basic solar technology seems to be falling really fast, making investments on that side much better. See the horrors of the Chinese Three Gorges dam.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

How much energy could a human produce through physical labor/activity? Seems like if an efficient way to do this was created, we could employ a bunch of homeless people to basically work out.

Re: Renewable Energy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The new wave in solar technology: Nanosolar. Some pretty heavy hitters are backing this:

http://www.popsci.com/popsci/flat/bo...n/item_59.html

[/ QUOTE ]

One way or another solar will become much cheaper in the near future. Even without new technology this will happen because there is a lot of investment going into increasing silicon production and prices are currently somewhat high because of a spike in demand largely from Germany.

There is also plenty of room for some new technology or manufacturing method like the link above to drop prices to a small fraction of what they currently are.

As coolio and others mentioned there are issues about storing energy and a mix of solutions is required, but in some areas with good solar resources and nearby mountains/hills solar in combination with pumped-storage hydroelectric power could supply a very large portion of power.

I think conservation pretty much goes without saying here a well. I just want to mention that if you think compact fluorescents suck you might try again or try not getting the cheapest bulbs available. As far as light quality and the time it takes to get to full brightness there is a HUGE difference between older or cheaper bulbs and newer better bulbs (not that expensive, like $4 or $5).

In the not too distant future LED lights might be providing a lot more of the light and use a lot less power.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not really that well read into this, but I think I have read that hydroelectric power is just a plain bad idea. There are so many unintended consequences from manipulating water sources to the environment, like killing fish and depleting the land, and combined with the negligible amount of energy actually produced makes it pretty much moot for any vast plans. And the basic solar technology seems to be falling really fast, making investments on that side much better. See the horrors of the Chinese Three Gorges dam.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hydroelectric produces 19% of world electricity. Costs and damage to the environment vary a lot. What I'm talking about is a little different in pumped storage which is pumping water up hill (behind a dam or a higher lake), getting the energy back and pumping it back. The total process is 70-85% efficient and is a way to store energy from intermittent power supplies like solar or wind. It's something that will work much better in some locations than others, but will always have some environment effects that have to be weighed against the alternatives.

At any rate, I didn't mean to get that into the global picture. The whole problem of energy and pollution/global warming/peak oil is going to take a long time to turn around no matter how hard people try. For my part I think that installing as much solar power as possible (in my area) and doing what I can for conservation is what needs to be done the most and problems like what to do when we have so much solar power that we need to balance the supply at night with something else is still a ways off.