So is this a vision statement? I'm sure if somebody develops Thorium reactor technology and battery technology with a order of magnitude greater energy density than today's tech we can start talking.
It was obviously just an announcement to appease certain groups and make them feel good. Just like the general idea of the G7 is for rich people to get together, enjoy a fancy chateau, pat each other on the back for a job well done and feel good about it.
How can they possibly say they will phase something out when there is no realistic replacement?
So is someone in the government going to develop a replacement for fossil fuel, or does that happen in a private lab?
Quote:
Originally Posted by CroFlames
How can they possibly say they will phase something out when there is no realistic replacement?
You may have heard of Tesla? Electricity already powers much of our infrastructure and there is no reason that as technology advances it can't power most of transportation too.
A second example of alternative "fuels" is hydrogen. Fuel cells may indeed be the future as they allow for the same conveniences we have now such as quick fill up times, long range and good performance. There is a reason major car companies such as Toyota and Mercedes-Benz have already invested millions of dollars in this technology and finally are putting cars on the road. This technology is lacking infrastructure but that could change fast especially in Japan and Europe.
I don't think change is going to happen overnight but it is inevitable as we the human race moves forward. To think otherwise is silly and those that do soon will be dinosaurs.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to CASe333 For This Useful Post:
Invest in "batteries". And by batteries I mean an electrical energy storage device. It doesn't have to be some lead acid box. An example would be a hydrogen electrolysis / fuel cell combo.
The single greatest characteristic of fossil fuels is that they are a very transportable source of dense energy that can easily be transformed into other forms of energy using well established technologies. e.g. internal combustion engine -> kinetic energy, boilers+turbines -> electrical energy, fire -> thermal energy.
The same technologies exist for transforming electrical energy (electric motor -> kinetic energy, wire -> electrical energy, resistors -> thermal energy). The only thing that's missing is the extremely transportable and dense part.
Nail the battery and you eventually kill fossil fuels.
One of the interesting developments with expanding renewable energy systems is that they're creating excess energy at certain times of the day/year. For example in the spring in California when it's sunny but not very hot, these systems are creating excess generation meaning that business opportunities are opening up to be a consumer of energy.
Some of the ideas are just as Frequitude mentions, use that energy to produce hydrogen or use it to desalinate water. The capacity of energy needed to be consumed at times are on the order of 1 GW of power. Hydrogen is basically a battery. The one thing holding it back is a distribution system but there are lots of benefits to it when compared to batteries.
i agree that eventually something will replace fossil fuels, but for the government today to madate it is a giant waste of time - perhaps at the same rpesser they could have mandated the end of child hunger, domestic abuse and a bunch of other stuff at the same time.
what are the reprocussions if this decree si not met? is the government goign to stop taking in the tax on fossils fuels in protest?
as i said, stupid mandate is stupid.
__________________
If I do not come back avenge my death
Why is it stupid, why should we not set goals? We have one of the biggest challenges our species have faced and we need to move away from dirty energy and move towards renewable clean energy.
Not to mention the next billionaires are going to be made in the green sector, the potential money to be made is astronomical and this will drive the change and hopefully save us from future catastrophe.
Wasn't there a quote somewhere about how the next big wars being about water?
Fossil fuels might be the least of our worries. Or... water becomes a fuel of the future. I agree batteries and high efficiency transmission is the future as other posters have noted though.
In regards to energy, all avenues of power generation need to be researched and heavily utilized. Particularly nuclear and, in my opinion, a lot can be still be done with natural gas.
We also need to reevaluate our consumption based society. Oil & gas is currently used as the feedstock for nearly everything in our lives in one way or another (agriculture, pharmaceuticals, manufacturing etc.). I believe that oil & gas will continue playing a significant role in this regard, but greater research and emphasis needs to be done on the three "R"'s (reduce, reuse, recycle). I'm not talking about the hokey 1980's concept, but rather aspects such as advanced plastics recycling for either new plastics or chemically transformed new products. Battery technologies have been huge for technology in our lifetime, and I agree that we could see further revolutions to our daily lives with further research.
I think the coming decades will be very interesting from an entrepreneurial perspective.
Why is it stupid, why should we not set goals? We have one of the biggest challenges our species have faced and we need to move away from dirty energy and move towards renewable clean energy.
Not to mention the next billionaires are going to be made in the green sector, the potential money to be made is astronomical and this will drive the change and hopefully save us from future catastrophe.
We should set goals - however we also need some sort of plan to achieve them. I could set a goal to earn a billion dollars this year but if I don't know how I'm going to do it, it isn't going to happen.
You may have heard of Tesla? Electricity already powers much of our infrastructure and there is no reason that as technology advances it can't power most of transportation too.
A second example of alternative "fuels" is hydrogen. Fuel cells may indeed be the future as they allow for the same conveniences we have now such as quick fill up times, long range and good performance. There is a reason major car companies such as Toyota and Mercedes-Benz have already invested millions of dollars in this technology and finally are putting cars on the road. This technology is lacking infrastructure but that could change fast especially in Japan and Europe.
I don't think change is going to happen overnight but it is inevitable as we the human race moves forward. To think otherwise is silly and those that do soon will be dinosaurs.
About 2/3 of that electricity is generated by fossil fuels.
We should set goals - however we also need some sort of plan to achieve them. I could set a goal to earn a billion dollars this year but if I don't know how I'm going to do it, it isn't going to happen.
This is one of the things Neil deGrasse Tyson harps on all the time, the fact we used to have leaders who wanted to inspire the people to a goal, to dream, to mobilize and inspire. Now we live in an age where so many are ready to dump on any attempts to do anything of the like. Could you imagine if this JFK speech was made today, what Fox news would say, what social media would say?
Why is it stupid, why should we not set goals? We have one of the biggest challenges our species have faced and we need to move away from dirty energy and move towards renewable clean energy.
Not to mention the next billionaires are going to be made in the green sector, the potential money to be made is astronomical and this will drive the change and hopefully save us from future catastrophe.
It's stupid for a bunch of non-technical government leaders to set goals in a fancy hotel somewhere because it doesn't matter. As the cost of fossil fuels increases more and more market driven research flows into renewables. It's likely that there will be a big breakthrough in energy density or large scale electricity storage at some point (I'm not vain enough to try and predict what it will be) but it almost certainly won't be gov't driven. Once that is economic it will take off on its own, and as long as its uneconomic a bunch of politicians flapping their lips won't get it to take off.
The Following User Says Thank You to bizaro86 For This Useful Post:
While I agree its pretty pointless as our leaders have no ability to look beyond the next election cycle, it is possible, the new deal was a great example of mobilizing people, not to mention the aftermath of WW2 what people accomplished.
But our politics now is so utterly useless so my hope is in the science and tech sectors to be our salvation.
You may have heard of Tesla? Electricity already powers much of our infrastructure and there is no reason that as technology advances it can't power most of transportation too.
A second example of alternative "fuels" is hydrogen. Fuel cells may indeed be the future as they allow for the same conveniences we have now such as quick fill up times, long range and good performance. There is a reason major car companies such as Toyota and Mercedes-Benz have already invested millions of dollars in this technology and finally are putting cars on the road. This technology is lacking infrastructure but that could change fast especially in Japan and Europe.
I don't think change is going to happen overnight but it is inevitable as we the human race moves forward. To think otherwise is silly and those that do soon will be dinosaurs.
I don't think hydrogen will ever fly as a source of fuel, at least not a primary source. Simply because you have to make it and that takes a lot of energy itself...in theory the same amount of energy you get out of it so its net net zero (and worse when you consider inefficiencies and resistance). So where are you going to get that energy from. It does have potential as an electrical energy storage device though (electricity electrolyzes water to make hydrogen as a energy storage medium, then when you want to use it you run the hydrogen through a fuel cell).
One of the interesting developments with expanding renewable energy systems is that they're creating excess energy at certain times of the day/year. For example in the spring in California when it's sunny but not very hot, these systems are creating excess generation meaning that business opportunities are opening up to be a consumer of energy.
Some of the ideas are just as Frequitude mentions, use that energy to produce hydrogen or use it to desalinate water. The capacity of energy needed to be consumed at times are on the order of 1 GW of power. Hydrogen is basically a battery. The one thing holding it back is a distribution system but there are lots of benefits to it when compared to batteries.
I don't want to derail, and it's clear renewables are growing and will continue to grow which is great. It just seemed a little premature to suggest there are instances where renewable energy generation exceeded consumption anywhere.
On topic, I believe Alberta should start with a focus on CO2 conversion to ease impact of emissions while we transition to a world where fossils are secondary to renewables. Once the transition is complete, Alberta will be a leader in recycling materials required to manufacture solar panels and batteries.
The Following User Says Thank You to Leeman4Gilmour For This Useful Post:
I don't think hydrogen will ever fly as a source of fuel, at least not a primary source. Simply because you have to make it and that takes a lot of energy itself...in theory the same amount of energy you get out of it so its net net zero (and worse when you consider inefficiencies and resistance). So where are you going to get that energy from. It does have potential as an electrical energy storage device though (electricity electrolyzes water to make hydrogen as a energy storage medium, then when you want to use it you run the hydrogen through a fuel cell).
I agree with this. It's also not only about making hydrogen, but also pressurizing it, which takes a lot of energy. Hydrogen is mostly only useful in the ways people think when it's pressurized. Methanol might be a better practical energy storage medium.
The Following User Says Thank You to Kybosh For This Useful Post:
The collective inability of Internet forum crowd to discuss an issue at hand rationally, without immediate urge to proclaim everyone's own stand on all world problems is truly depressing.
__________________
"An idea is always a generalization, and generalization is a property of thinking. To generalize means to think." Georg Hegel
“To generalize is to be an idiot.” William Blake
