Energy: Local, National, Global - Fossil vs. Alternative vs. ??

[woob]

Here we go. Share your thoughts/opinions, articles, news clips, etc. Debate to your hearts content and let the discussions flow.

[CroFlames]

Renewable resources are great if done correctly. Kinda hard to extract fossil fuels correctly - it's inherently a dirty job.

This place was not done correctly.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivanpah...Power_Facility

The Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System is a concentrated solar thermal plant in the California Mojave Desert, 64 km (40 miles) southwest of Las Vegas, with a gross capacity of 392 megawatts (MW).[5] It deploys 173,500 heliostats, each with two mirrors, focusing solar energy on boilers located on three centralized solar power towers.[5] Unit 1 of the project was connected to the grid in September 2013 in an initial sync testing.[6] The facility formally opened on February 13, 2014,[1] and it is currently the world's largest solar thermal power station.[7][8]
The project was developed by BrightSource Energy and Bechtel.[9] It cost $2.2 billion; the largest investor in the project is NRG Energy, a power generating company based in Princeton, New Jersey, that has contributed $300 million. Google has contributed $168 million.[10] In 2010, the project was scaled back from the original 440-megawatt (590,050 hp) design, to avoid building on the habitat of the desert tortoise.[11]
In November 2014, Associated Press reported that the plant was producing only "about half of its expected annual output". The California Energy Commission issued a statement blaming this on "clouds, jet contrails and weather".[12]

I'm not sure why they didn't just build a traditional solar panel farm instead of a solar thermal plant. At a cost of $2.2 billion no less.

More along the lines of: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_E...rating_Systems

Don't get me started on that stupid desert tortoise either.

[troutman]

Tony Stark promised to share his arc reactor technology with the rest of us.

[Bownesian]

I posted this in the other thread but I found this graphic to be interesting. It's from an Oilpro article and contains Exxon Mobil's assessment of future growth in various energy sources (note, this is all energy, not just electricity like the green lobby likes to focus on).

Even with 25 years of 7.7% average per annum growth in Solar (which is a huge amount), Solar will still add up to just a few percents of consumption worldwide. If that growth continues over the subsequent 25 years, that bar will start to add up to a significant amount:




http://oilpro.com/post/13695/exxonmo...0-year-smear-o

[Coys1882]

For those interested in 2014 Calgary had about 350 residential microgeneration sites - the monthly average of electricity sent to the grid per house was 91 kwh.

[DoubleK]

Is that net of consumption?

[Ashartus]

I think we need to get away from the mindset of a single energy source such as solar replacing fossil fuels. All energy sources have their advantages and disadvantages. Wind and solar have some great aspects, but variable supply. Fossil fuels have a more consistent supply but greenhouse gas and other environmental issues. The best long-term energy solution will in my opinion include a diverse mix of sources. I believe we do need to work to increase the percentage of sources other than fossil fuels though.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by Ashartus

I think we need to get away from the mindset of a single energy source such as solar replacing fossil fuels. All energy sources have their advantages and disadvantages. Wind and solar have some great aspects, but variable supply. Fossil fuels have a more consistent supply but greenhouse gas and other environmental issues. The best long-term energy solution will in my opinion include a diverse mix of sources. I believe we do need to work to increase the percentage of sources other than fossil fuels though.

Oh, you mean we won't be seeing solar powered airliners in the next 5 to 10 years? Or battery powered cargo ships? Weird.

[Coys1882]

Originally Posted by DoubleK

Is that net of consumption?

That's the surplus of all electricity not consumed by load at the time of generation.

[karl262]

Nuclear power. It's a zero emission renewable and a reliable source of power that's able to meet our growing energy requirements.

[Coys1882]

Originally Posted by karl262

Nuclear power. It's a zero emission renewable and a reliable source of power that's able to meet our growing energy requirements.

But terrifying to the general public.

[Bownesian]

...Kind of like GMO foods, Vaccination, and Anthropogenic Global Warming - accepted overwhelmingly by the scientific community; rejected vociferously by many laypeople.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Bownesian

I posted this in the other thread but I found this graphic to be interesting. It's from an Oilpro article and contains Exxon Mobil's assessment of future growth in various energy sources (note, this is all energy, not just electricity like the green lobby likes to focus on).

Even with 25 years of 7.7% average per annum growth in Solar (which is a huge amount), Solar will still add up to just a few percents of consumption worldwide. If that growth continues over the subsequent 25 years, that bar will start to add up to a significant amount:




http://oilpro.com/post/13695/exxonmo...0-year-smear-o

The issues with solar and wind is that it grows exponentially as the technology improves. The non-renewable sources have capped growth and will show negative growth at some point.

[Bownesian]

Do you think there is capital enough to support an exponential growth in electricity infrastructure?

Do you think there is a means to replace oil as a long-range transportation fuel?

Do you think that if solar and wind were to become so much cheaper than non-renewable sources (which has far from happened yet), that the prices would continue to sustain exponential growth?

Basically, do you have any evidence to support that assertion?

[woob]

Originally Posted by troutman

Tony Stark promised to share his arc reactor technology with the rest of us.

Does that fall under the ?? part? Or is it still considered an alternative source?

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Bownesian

Do you think there is capital enough to support an exponential growth in electricity infrastructure?

Do you think there is a means to replace oil as a long-range transportation fuel?

Do you think that if solar and wind were to become so much cheaper than non-renewable sources (which has far from happened yet), that the prices would continue to sustain exponential growth?

Basically, do you have any evidence to support that assertion?

Well...obviously there is a limit to how much power is produced based on how much power we actually need...so I guess you've won that point in that it won't grow exponentially in perpetuity.

Overall, what's holding back solar power is the cost of producing the solar units and proper battery storage. Both things that are getting cheaper and more efficient all the time. Yes, you are right, I have no proof that we will finally reach that barrier when units and battery storage become cheap and efficient enough to replace other forms of power. However, you have no proof that it won't happen either.

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by Bownesian

I posted this in the other thread but I found this graphic to be interesting. It's from an Oilpro article and contains Exxon Mobil's assessment of future growth in various energy sources (note, this is all energy, not just electricity like the green lobby likes to focus on).

Even with 25 years of 7.7% average per annum growth in Solar (which is a huge amount), Solar will still add up to just a few percents of consumption worldwide. If that growth continues over the subsequent 25 years, that bar will start to add up to a significant amount:




http://oilpro.com/post/13695/exxonmo...0-year-smear-o

Weird, that graph isn't from that Exxon report that it's referencing, and the numbers only partially match up with the data in the data tables of that report. The Exxon report only breaks out 'hydro' and 'other' on the demand side, and 'hydro', 'wind', and 'other' on the power generation side, and the numbers for solar & wind and other on this graph don't match up with either.

The whole report seems like a really good read and actually comes across less biased than the Oilpro article that's referencing it.

http://cdn.exxonmobil.com/~/media/gl...int-resolution

[Caged Great]

The things I am looking most forward to is Thorium reactors and hoping there are breakthroughs in fusion.

[SeeGeeWhy]

I heard some IT guys are getting laid off at TCPL. IT is a really valuable and underrated service.

[woob]

^ well played.