100% Renewable is the a Realistic Goal or a No Pipe Dream

100% Renewable is the a Realistic Goal or a No Pipe Dream

This is not a standard article but a look just specifically at the issue of energy. To set some basic ground rules we have to agree on some facts:

We are not in an energy crisis, we are in a crisis related to energy waste and poor and ineffective distribution and storage.
1. We waste over 58 % of the energy we use in the USA.
2. This energy waste is double what we actually need.
3. This annual energy waste, production, lack of use, distribution inefficiencies, and waste heat, in just one year in the USA could power the UK for 7 years.
4. We are leaving money on the table that could go economy and help our countries and others.

Inefficient Production
1. Wind and solar have low inefficiencies for energy production compared to other source. So they really only make sense NOW in specific corridors or regions. 
2. The primary problem is these regions are not were the core demand in the USA is located and we lack an energy distribution network. 
3. Inefficient distribution, production, and waste requires building multiple times demand capacity to meet peak demand. Because of the lack of solid storage systems, such as battery technology, inefficient distribution and production we need to overbuild to meet peak capacity if we rely sole on renewable. A thought process:

How to Get There !-   1 Quadrillion Btus per year = 2,739,730,000,000 BTUs/day
Solar (100 % Efficiency) – 433 Btu/hr per square foot
Available 24 hours per day
Need 6100 acres of Solar Panels

Waite – Solar-Assume Solar Efficiency Assume 10% (high) – Only Available about 8 hours per day
Need 182,000+ acres of Solar Panels, plus storage and duplicate capacity.

Wind- 25 % Conversion
Need about 270,000 10 MW Turbines, plus storage and duplicate capacity.

These analysis does not factor in transmission losses.  If there was only a 10% loss and no other inefficiencies, we would multiple the calculated values by 1.1, but we have a use inefficiency of 58%.  This means are multiplication factor is at least 1.9 to 2 +.   So – 360,000 acres of solar panels and 540,000 10 MW turbines.

The goal for renewable should not be based on a Carbon or CO2 hammer and we must stop this myth of Man controlled climate.  Climate on this Earth has not been constant, it is in dynamic equilibrium with Sun, Earth Process, and to a lesser extent life on Earth.

It is very likely man is having an influence on the climate, but this is not likely CO2 production but deforestation, building in the wrong places, heat island effects, and not adapting to our environment.  As an alternative approach, we are suggesting the following:

  1. Fact based discussions about energy, economy, politics, and culture.  We are humans so science (facts) and cultural discussions are linked, but we should not be using Fear as a rally cry.
  2. Concentration on energy waste reduction  – individuals, homes, small business, and government.
  3. Distribution – We should focus on “hardening” the grid and creating capacity and duplicity were needed.  We must start linking “renewable and other energy sources” and take advantage of the energy diversity in the USA.
  4. Storage – we must develop efficient storage technologies.
  5. The solution is not a CO2 hammer, electric cars, or a 100% renewable life cycle, but an all the above approach.  
  6. Remember our beaches are moving, we live on a planet with the plates move and we have the Great Earth Engine.  (Geothermal is a great asset for the USA).
  7. Energy and energy technology – we must not be hoarders, but exports of energy and energy technology and I do not mean low cost solar panels, but micro-grid energy systems that use multiple fuel stocks that can power rural villages and towns and not a Carbon Tax.
  8. If we cut our waste, we cut CO2 emissions. This makes the CO2 emissions benchmark useless and to be honest the arguments based on climate change and CO2 are weak.
  9. Stop the 100 % renewable myth (all the above approach).

I have never recommended a book to read – this is the first, but I strongly recommend “Scare Pollution“, 2016.

I also like “Human Caused Global Warming“, but I really wish the author hired and used an editor.

Bookmark and Share

Speak Your Mind

Tell us what you're thinking...