We Have the Renewable Energy We Need to Power the World—So What's Stopping Us?

[xchrom]

http://www.alternet.org/environment/are-you-ready-100-percent-renewable-energy

***SNIP

That’s why it’s great that there are people like Mark Z. Jacobson, a professor of civil and environmental engineering at Stanford University. While it is one thing to say we want to stop burning fossil fuels, Jacobson (and a team of researchers) are telling us how to do it.

Jacobson was recently on the “David Letterman Show,” where he proclaimed that we have enough wind and solar to power the world.

Is he right? Can renewables really replace fossil fuels? If so, are we willing to do what’s necessary to get there? Let’s take a look at his work and some other new developments.

A Renewable World

In 2009 Jacobson and Mark A. Delucchi, a research scientist at the University of California, Davis Institute of Transportation Studies, published a cover story in Scientific American outlining a plan to power 100 percent of the world’s energy (for all purposes) using wind, water and solar technologies (WWS for shorthand). Their list of acceptable technologies includes several different kinds of solar power, on- and offshore wind turbines, geothermal, tidal, and hydropower. No nukes, no natural gas, no ethanol—only the real deal renewables.

“Our plan calls for millions of wind turbines, water machines and solar installations,” they wrote. “The numbers are large, but the scale is not an insurmountable hurdle; society has achieved massive transformations before,” including our massive highway system and our industrial rampup during World War II.

[CanSocDem]

1. I think what's stopping us is...

...the belief that if we can just get through this life, somebody else will worry about the dead planet.

"We did our best but we're on our way to heaven now. Sorry about the mess."



.

[madokie]

2. Too many end timers no doubt

too many making decisions the rest of us have to live with. IMO

[CanSocDem]

3. "End timers" and oil barons.

A marketing opportunity made in.........well, you know.

.

[RoccoR5955]

4. Corporations who get tax write-offs

while making the largest profits in the history of civilization are to blame.
Also to blame are power corporations, who believe that we have to have only centralized power.
There is nothing ever said about small scale power production, where people make their own power, with little streams, small windmills, and small solar banks, because power companies do not want these on their grid.

[marmar]

5. k/r

[TBF]

6. Oil is still profitable silly,

we'll get to renewables after we drill every single drop out ...

[grahamhgreen]

7. Big oil, gas, nukes & greed?

[progressoid]

12. Yep.

[Orrex]

8. I'm worried about all of the unreported wind spills in North Dakota

And why haven't we heard about the huge, toxic sun leak last month in Arizona?

[xchrom]

10. GASP!11 a sun leak in arizona?

[Heather MC]

23. And Solar Flares, the President should have warned the American people

[Orrex]

24. Solar flares caused Benghazi.

True fact.

[sylvanus]

9. I completely agree, it's called Geothermal Energy

The super volcano under Yellowstone Nat. Park is
a giant geothermal furnace waiting to be tapped and it could
solve a lot of problems.

[7962]

11. Geo is one we never really hear much about but should

ALthough I have recently seen ads for geothermal home heat & air units. Dont know the cost difference though.

[Marrah_G]

21. I think the big issue with geo is cost

Not cost of the energy, but cost of drilling. Since it isn't that common there aren't tons of companies out there with the equipment. Pretty sure that is what I read a few years back...frankly to tired today to go looking for the information.

[jeff47]

30. Cost and location, mostly

You need an area with a lot of heat that is fairly shallow, or geothermal gets extremely expensive. For example, the Yosemite caldara the grand-parent-poster was discussing would be a good place for some geothermal power generation. But that's not going to be able to power the East coast.

However, geothermal can be a good boost for heating and cooling everywhere - the stable temperature a hundred-or-so feet below ground can be used to "pre-cool" and "pre-heat" for HVAC and water. But in that situation a traditional water heater or HVAC is used to finish off the heating and cooling.

[bluedeathray]

13. Greed, at all income and educational levels.

And the unwillingness of people who know better to interrupt the current structure and begin a meaningful change.

Yeah I know, easy to say. And I don't want to go to prison either.

[CFLDem]

14. Corruption nt

[RC]

15. What is stopping us is reality.

How do you power a passenger or cargo plane on wind, solar or hydro power? How do you get enough energy to refine iron or aluminum ore into the finished metal? How do you power that tractor working out in the field all day? What about the energy needed to refine the ingredients to make the batteries to power our vehicles, let alone keep them charged?

The real problem concerning our energy needs is too many people for this wet rock to support. We get our numbers down to something reasonable and our energy needs drop accordingly. Our skies clear, our carbon footprint shrinks.
Otherwise we are just dealing with the symptoms.

[bigbrother05]

25. Energy storage and transmission are limiting factors

Centralized production was the model used to build the grid and the local companies don't want to let the small scale producers come online. That alone would help greatly.

Battery technology development is furious at this time, so if we look at the increases in efficiency and density, you can see it is improving, but costs are problematic. Currently, lithium is the at the top of the heap, but is costly to produce. Have heard it said that there is plenty available in nature, but extraction is the issue. At one time, aluminum was more "precious" than gold, but breakthroughs in extracting and refining made it cheap and abundant for daily use. If that happens with lithium, high performance batteries will be common and cheap.

With improvements in fuel cell technology, using renewables to extract hydrogen would go a long way to meeting both the storage and portability issues. Just think, if cars and power generation were removed from the oil equation, how much and at what price would jet fuel be available. With fewer customers, do you think the oil companies would be so arrogant in their pricing models? With decreased demand, the oil reserves would not be so stressed and the incentive to produce in marginal areas with high extraction costs and environmental impacts would be much less attractive.

Have always thought that using such a finite resource to cruise Main was a foolish cultural ritual and that is coming from someone that grew up with 23 cent gas in an oil producing area.

[jeff47]

32. The only one of your examples that's a problem is the airplane.

Bauxite (aluminum ore) actually takes tons of electricity to refine it to aluminum - you have to use electricity to separate the oxygen from the aluminum. That's why a bunch of aluminum plants were built near Niagara Falls after the dams were built.

Iron, OTOH, just takes heat. Which electricity can also produce just fine - we already have electrodes that can get up to multiple thousands of degrees. Other fuels are easier, so we currently use those. But that doesn't mean an electronic approach would not work.

And that tractor can be easily powered via batteries. Even "all day".

What about the energy needed to refine the ingredients to make the batteries to power our vehicles

Electricity can still work for this too. Other fuels are easier, which is why we currently use them. But electricity will work.

let alone keep them charged?

Uh.....not really a problem. You charge the batteries via electricity, and the article is talking about having solar and wind produce all electricity.

[RC]

36. I do not think you really understand how much power we are dealing with here.

Why aren't we doing that already, if the technology is so great? What is stopping someone, anyone, from operating a steel mill or aluminum smelter or buying or making battery powered farm equipment? How much would that add to the cost of the $150,000/250,000 combine, or the $100,000 tractor?
A bank of solar cells or even a wind farm would be hard put to supply enough power to run a steel mill or refine aluminum.
And as for that tractor, I supposed you could hitch a trailer between the tractor and the tiller/windrow/drill/plow/whatever for the batteries. Then there is the little matter of the cost of solar array or wind turbine to charge those batteries between midnight and sunrise. Assuming the wind blows enough or the sun is shining at night. By-by family farm because of the set-up costs too.

[jeff47]

37. No, I'm well aware of the quantities involved

Why aren't we doing that already, if the technology is so great?

Because the technology to scale it up is relatively new.

What is stopping someone, anyone, from operating a steel mill or aluminum smelter or buying or making battery powered farm equipment?

First, every aluminum smelter is already an "electric aluminum smelter", as I mentioned above.

As for steel, what is stopping them at the moment is cost. Other fuels are currently cheaper than electricity. Widespread adoption of wind and solar power should change that. The gradually shrinking availability of fossil fuels will definitely shrink that.

As for farm equipment, it's the same as electric cars: when fossil fuels are cheap, electric cars are more expensive. Until relatively recently, fossil fuels have been cheap.

The entirety of my point is you were claiming it just isn't possible to use electricity for these things. It's possible to do all of them except the airplane example, due to weight.

How much would that add to the cost of the $150,000/250,000 combine, or the $100,000 tractor?

I presume it would be somewhat like the costs of a "regular" car vs. a hybrid. The "regular" car is cheaper to purchase, but the hybrid is cheaper to operate. I'd expect a similar dynamic with an electric tractor but we won't know until someone starts producing one.

A bank of solar cells or even a wind farm would be hard put to supply enough power to run a steel mill or refine aluminum.

Fortunately, there's this thing called "the electric grid" which ties together many banks of solar cells and wind farms.

And as for that tractor, I supposed you could hitch a trailer between the tractor and the tiller/windrow/drill/plow/whatever for the batteries.

I doubt that would be needed. Electric motors are much smaller than internal combustion engines and the related components. That should provide plenty of room for a battery within the tractor.

Then there is the little matter of the cost of solar array or wind turbine to charge those batteries between midnight and sunrise. Assuming the wind blows enough or the sun is shining at night.

Because there is no such thing as an electric grid. And it would not be possible to have two batteries, one charging during the day while the other is being used.

By-by family farm because of the set-up costs too.

Family farms have largely abandoned specialized equipment such as combines. They pay for a service to bring combines to their fields to harvest, simply because it doesn't make sense to buy a piece of equipment that expensive for one farm to use it for such a short period of time.

Which leaves basic vehicles like tractors and trucks, which are not nearly so astronomically expensive. Be they fossil fuel powered or battery powered.

[dreamnightwind]

43. Thank you for this post

[hunter]

39. Yep. The math is against us.

If it was not, plants would walk, run, fly, or swim about.

Picture a field of corn flying away like birds as soon as you tried to harvest it.

Picture trees running away from giraffes, grass running away from cows... Imagine great migrations of trees between the northern and southern hemispheres to avoid freezing weather.

The reason that doesn't happen is that solar energy is adequate if you stay in one place and slowly grow, but inadequate for a more active lifestyle.

[NewJeffCT]

16. well, wasn't there that Congressman from Texas

who claimed that wind is a finite resource that causes global warming? I think attitudes like that don't help, either.

[KansDem]

27. I'm not sure about that one

But there was one who claimed greenhouses gases are good because greenhouses grow things...

Why, here he is!

...and he's the Chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee!

[NewJeffCT]

33. here is his quote on the wind being a finite resource

http://washingtonindependent.com/60035/bartons-greatest-hits-wind-power-might-mess-up-global-wind-patterns-and-make-the-earth-warmer

Wouldn’t it be ironic if in the interest of global warming we mandated massive switches to energy, which is a finite resource, which slows the winds down, which causes the temperature to go up?

[KansDem]

35. Unbelievable!

I didn't realize at first it was the same guy: "Mr. Greenhouse Gases are Good & Wind is a Finite Resource." This is what passes for "statesmanship?"

I don't know whether to laugh hysterically or bemoan the fact these morons are in positions of power that could render detrimental policies that will affect us all for centuries to come...

[allan01]

17. re:We Have the Renewable Energy We Need to Power the World—So What's Stopping Us?

money

[solarhydrocan]

41. money sure isn't stopping the us from bombing and invading lands 8000 miles away

http://nationalpriorities.org/cost-of/

Count to 10.

There's $20,000. >$2000 per second. Every second. Every hour and every day.

It's the biggest ripoff ever perpetrated on humans. And it's happening right now, in front of everyone's eyes.

Historians will say "How did this happen?"

[nxylas]

18. Here's what environmentalist turned nuclear power shill George Monbiot had to say about the report

http://www.monbiot.com/?s=Jacobson+Delucchi

[CanonRay]

19. Exxon. Shell. BP. Koch Brothers.

etc, etc, etc,

[Marrah_G]

20. Greed

Greed is why every single person on this plant does not have all the energy, food, water, shelter and healthcare they need.

[LWolf]

42. +1

[Arneoker]

22. What's stopping us is that we don't have the right incentives

There needs to be a tax on carbon emissions, so that the cost to society of carbon emissions is borne by those producing it. That will create incentives to shift towards low and no carbon energy.

[The2ndWheel]

26. The world is already powered by renewable energy

What's stopping us is that we want more than that, but it's difficult to do, and comes with a cost.

[DetlefK]

28. Pure unfiltered Laziness.

Before switching off hundreds of reactors and thousands of refineries, we would first have to reduce energy-consumption. This includes gas. And this means people would have to switch to electric cars or use public transport.

Ask a republican and he will tell you that cheap gas and driving a car is the cultural heritage of the US. Remember the upcoming apocalypse caused by introducing energy-efficient light-bulbs?

[panader0]

29. I read somewhere that the energy from the sun

for one hour on the equator was enough to power all of mankinds needs for a year.

[hunter]

31. One quits smoking by quitting smoking. One quits fossil fuels by quitting fossil fuels.

Anyone here can quit fossil fuel and nuclear electricity. Get off your butt, walk out to the main breaker of your place of residence, and flip it off. Done!

Anyone can quit burning gasoline in their automobile. Disassemble your automobile. Turn it into arts and crafts. Use the windows for greenhouses, the body panels for roofing materials, the seats for furniture. Attach the alternator to a stationary bicycle and generate your own electricity, get plenty of exercise too!

Anyone can quit being a "consumer." Quit buying stuff! Those huge diesel engine container ships will stop crossing oceans.

My point is that a world powered by "renewable" energy is a very different place then the world most people reading this live in. Renewables are not an "alternative" to fossil fuels or nuclear power, they are not a drop-in replacement. A civilization without fossil fuels or nuclear power would look very different than the civilization we live in now.

A world powered by renewable energy is slow paced world without personal automobiles, airlines or any other high speed transportation. People walk to work. They walk to the grocery store. It's a world without big box stores, fast food places, superhighways, or low-density suburbs. It's a world largely without central air conditioning and heating.

The only way we can maintain our current sort of civilization without fossil fuels is nuclear power. You end up with something that looks a lot like a future France might. More high speed rail and much less airline traffic. Fewer automobiles, but all electric.

Without nuclear power the optimal sustainable lifestyle is much simpler. There's room for high technology in this world, it's not impossible to keep cell phones, personal computers, and a worldwide communication system operating on renewable energy alone. It's not impossible to provide electric wheels or legs for the disabled. But in a world powered by renewable energy sources most of us are going to be getting around town on the power of our own legs.

As the energy math works now renewable sources of energy ARE NOT replacing fossil fuels or nuclear power, they simply allow those fossil fuels or nuclear power to be diverted elsewhere. As we burn less coal here in the U.S.A. (using fracked gas instead, a really dirty fuel...) our coal companies begin itching to export coal to Asia. As we import less oil from overseas, Canada is happy to sell us tar sand oil (a really, really, dirty fuel.) When Germany turned off its nuclear plants they build more coal fired plants, in spite of their installed solar and wind capacity.

I'm an advocate of a slow-paced high technology civilization. Few things in this civilization would travel much faster than a fast human can run. Most commerce would be local. World travel would be accomplished by robust, very advanced sailing ships. Rapid high-energy transport would be reserved for emergencies.

There are many sorts of "renewable" energy that are just as loathsome as fossil fuels. Tidal power and giant hydro-electric schemes are some. Huge solar power plants on undeveloped deserts are another. Chipping down and shredding forests for fuel is a wretched idea too. Every last square inch of remaining wilderness should remain wild and our civilization needs to pull back and restore much of the wilderness we have destroyed.

I'm not optimistic humans can accomplish any kind of sustainable civilization. We haven't yet. Every major civilization has fallen. If we can't accomplish it eventually Nature will remove us from the playing field entirely and a million or so years in the future little will remain of us but a confusing layer of trash in the geologic record and a few peculiar outer space artifacts.

[dreamnightwind]

44. Here's some tech that looks interesting

re this remark of yours:
"There are many sorts of "renewable" energy that are just as loathsome as fossil fuels. Tidal power and giant hydro-electric schemes are some. "

Here's one possibility...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/112757069
http://inhabitat.com/underwater-kites-could-harvest-64-times-more-power-than-wind-turbines/

How can we generate more power from renewable sources without using massive plots of land for solar and wind farms? Go fly a kite. According to David Olinger, an associate professor of mechanical engineering at Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI), tethered underwater kites could be used to generate large amounts of electricity by harnessing the power of ocean waves and currents. Olinger recently received a three-year, $300,000 grant from the National Science Foundation (NSF) to develop this technology, and work is scheduled to begin in January.

Also from your post:
"If we can't accomplish it eventually Nature will remove us from the playing field entirely and a million or so years in the future little will remain of us but a confusing layer of trash in the geologic record and a few peculiar outer space artifacts. "

Here's a project that is pretty amazing to think about. They are working on ways to at least present evidence of our civilization to beings far in the future, which the more you think about it the more difficult it seems. Anyway I find this project to be pretty fascinating:
http://longnow.org/

Very sad though that we have made so little progress in the existential battle of sustainable living.

[Aristus]

34. These:

[Zorra]

38. 5 Star Recommend. Thanks, xchrom. nt

[solarhydrocan]

40. fuel from water (H20- Hydrogen) powered by solar photovoltaics- Free!

Former Area 51 employee Bob Lazar is interviewed by Visual Effects Supervisor Jon Farhat. In this video, they discuss what H1 (hydrogen) is, how it is created and it's potential in the automotive sector. In addition, Bob show us he has his own particle accelerator which he uses to create 6Li (lithium-6) H (hydride) for H1 storage.

Honda makes cars that run on hydrogen right now!!



Honda unveiled the FCX Clarity fuel cell vehicle at the 2007 Los Angeles Auto Show, and an announced that a limited number of southern Californians will have the opportunity to lease one in the next few years. This is the first time a customer can obtain a fuel cell car directly from a retail dealer. The company is also showing progress with the creation of a hydrogen home fueling station...

http://www.hybridcars.com/honda-fcx-clarity-hydrogen-home-refueling/