Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Myth: Renewable Energies can replace fossil fuels

General discussions of the systemic, societal and civilisational effects of depletion.

Re: Myth: Renewable Energies can replace fossil fuels

Unread postby dashster » Fri 12 Dec 2014, 11:05:08

Strummer wrote:
techsan wrote:what I am doing is actually less expensive and more sustainable than what most people are already doing.


Most people within your tiny little bubble, you mean.


I wouldn't call the United States tiny. And that is just for starters as there are plenty of people in other countries that drive gas-powered cars and don't have solar panels on their roof.
dashster
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 385
Joined: Fri 28 Dec 2012, 08:39:24
Location: California

Re: Myth: Renewable Energies can replace fossil fuels

Unread postby Strummer » Fri 12 Dec 2014, 11:32:03

dashster wrote:I wouldn't call the United States tiny.


I don't think that the lifestyle described by techsan applies to the whole USA, does it? It applies to the (shrinking) upper middle class, which is in fact a tiny minority within the global world population.

He's like a citizen of Rome in the 4th century, wondering what the fuzz is all about, while the border regions are already crumbling.
Strummer
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 691
Joined: Thu 04 Jul 2013, 04:42:14

Re: Myth: Renewable Energies can replace fossil fuels

Unread postby dashster » Fri 12 Dec 2014, 12:23:20

sparky wrote:.
Renewables use a lot of aluminum , alumina smelters are energy glutton , 24/7 ,it's a continuous manufacturing
structural steel is produced in very, very large smelters large amount of coal are needed both for the energy and the process
nickel also is used ,it is called the devil metal due to its horribly expensive energy processing cost
silicium for solar panel are made with fossil fuel , there is no alternative

It is typical of greenies wannabee to concentrate on their individual consumption as being the end all of conservation
no concept whatsoever of where all those little green goodies com from


It doesn't matter if the materials on someone's roof took energy to make, what matters is the energy it took versus what they produce. Are you contending that the EROEI for solar and wind is below 1?

What is silicium? Is that silicon? I only see coal mentioned with regard to metallurgical silicon production.
dashster
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 385
Joined: Fri 28 Dec 2012, 08:39:24
Location: California

Re: Myth: Renewable Energies can replace fossil fuels

Unread postby dashster » Fri 12 Dec 2014, 12:34:51

Strummer wrote:
dashster wrote:I wouldn't call the United States tiny.


I don't think that the lifestyle described by techsan applies to the whole USA, does it? It applies to the (shrinking) upper middle class, which is in fact a tiny minority within the global world population.



"what I am doing is actually less expensive and more sustainable than what most people are already doing."

In re-looking at it, the already seems out of place, so maybe I am misreading it, but I see it as he is comparing himself to others. All others. Not just people who drive electric cars and have solar panels on their roofs, but people who drive gas cars and have no solar panels on their roofs. Which would be the majority of America, Canada and Australia. And whatever the percentage of people who drive gas cars and don't have solar panels on their roofs are in the rest of the OECD countries, it is a large number.
dashster
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 385
Joined: Fri 28 Dec 2012, 08:39:24
Location: California

Re: Myth: Renewable Energies can replace fossil fuels

Unread postby sureshbansal342 » Sat 13 Dec 2014, 03:48:21

TRUE ORIGIN OF HYDROCARBONS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have sufficient evidences that majority of commercially interesting hydrocarbons have been expelled from organic rich source rock and are trapped in the reservoir rocks. We also have the evidences showing presence of biological molecules in all commercial oils.

We have observed the abundance of similar hydrocarbons on many other planetary bodies viz. comets and moons (eg. Titan) etc. which are thought to have been formed without any involvement of any biological material . The common association of hydrocarbons with the inert gas helium is also not explainable in current theory of biotic origin of petroleum. We have observed presence of some traces element like V, Ni, Cu, Co, Zn.. etc in hydrocarbons which also do not clearly explain the biotic origin of petroleum ( szatmari et al,2005). According to the author of the paper ,they have analyzed 68 Brazilian oil and nine foreign oils and determined 24 metal traces in the oils showed fine correlation of the oils with CI chondrite and mantle peridotites, and worse correlation with oceanic and continental crust, and none with seawater. No doubt, the biotic theory has some important evidences but on the other hand the followers of abiotic theory also have strong evidences which cannot be denied. So we require a new theory that can reconcile the strong evidences of both the current theories. Taking strong evidences of both the theories we can easily conclude it.
Majority of commercially interesting hydrocarbons accumulations have been formed from the organic rich sedimentary source rocks but essentially from those which has been formed with the involvement of abiotic hydrocarbons. And these abiotic hydrocarbons were once hugely present on the surface of the earth in past geological time. Sedimentary rocks that have been formed without any involvement of these abiotic hydrocarbons are not suitable to form commercial hydrocarbons deposits. So abiotic sources are the major contributor in the commercial accumulations of hydrocarbons. Hence a well balanced theory is today’s major requirement which will help future hydrocarbon exploration efficiently.

AUTHOR
SURESH BANSAL
PB,INDIA
[email protected]
http://www.universetoday.com/12800/tita ... han-earth/
2) http://cdn.intechweb.org/pdfs/14082.pdf
sureshbansal342
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat 20 Aug 2011, 03:55:17

Re: Myth: Renewable Energies can replace fossil fuels

Unread postby SeaGypsy » Sat 13 Dec 2014, 04:07:14

Bollicks.
SeaGypsy
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 9284
Joined: Wed 04 Feb 2009, 04:00:00

Re: Myth: Renewable Energies can replace fossil fuels

Unread postby DesuMaiden » Sat 13 Dec 2014, 04:52:43

Even though oil is organic in origin, it is a substance that is poisonous to life as the recent BP oil spill demonstrated. Millions of animals died from the oil that was spilled from the BP oil spill.
History repeats itself. Just everytime with different characters and players.
DesuMaiden
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 886
Joined: Mon 06 Oct 2014, 16:00:31

Re: Myth: Renewable Energies can replace fossil fuels

Unread postby tom_s2 » Wed 17 Dec 2014, 07:16:51

Hi Desumaiden,

DesuMaiden wrote:So it is basically impossible for anything but fossil fuels to power our current level of consumption...there is no way wind and solar energy can provide the same quality and quantity of energy as coal, oil and natural gas. Just accept this fact and stop hyping renewable energies as the savior of industrial civilization...it is a stupid myth promoted by liberals.

Without fossil fuels, we will have to use far less energy. Just accept this fact and let's move on.


I've read that article, and it provides absolutely no valid evidence or reasoning to support its position. Instead, it relies on the usual mix of pop psychoanalysis, name-calling, and so on, which the author wrongly interprets as evidence.

Let's take a look at a few things from the article:

" Denial is the biggest game in town. Denial, as well as a misunderstanding about some fundamental features of energy, is.."

That's ad hominem pop-psychoanalysis.

"...flies in the face of nearly all the stories we tell ourselves about ourselves."

Again, ad hominem pop-psychoanalysis.

"Consider this for a moment: a single $3 gallon of gasoline provides the equivalent of about 80 days of hard manual labor."

That's just totally beside the point, because the alternative here is solar panels, etc, not human labor. Even if it would take 80 days of hard manual labor, that says nothing about whether or not it would be possible to transition to renewables.

"but then compare them to our current energy appetite, and you quickly see that we still run out of space, vital minerals and other raw materials,"

That's just factually wrong and trivially refutable. We are not running out of space or materials for solar panels. The author should have looked that up.

"Murphy calculates that a battery capable of storing this electricity in the U.S. alone (otherwise no electricity at night or during cloudy or windless spells) would require about three times as much lead as geologists estimate may exist in all reserves, most of which remain unknown."

This is the best point in the entire article, and it's still wrong. There are grid storage batteries which do not require any uncommon elements such as lead. There is even a company (Aquion Energy) which now has a commercial product.

Without fossil fuels, we will have to use far less energy. Just accept this fact and let's move on.


Desumaiden, it's not sufficient just to label something a "fact" and say "let's move on". You would need to demonstrate the point, not just declare it a fact. If that were a valid form of reasoning, then the singularity-is-near crowd could just label it a "fact" and say "let's move on".

It's not just a matter of re-stating your conclusions.

The article you referred to is nowhere near to providing the evidence or reasoning needed to demonstrate its thesis. As a result, its conclusions are not factual. Its conclusions might be right for other reasons, but you or someone else would have to provide some kind of valid evidence (not pop psychoanalysis or name-calling) to demonstrate that.

-Tom S
tom_s2
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Wed 08 Oct 2014, 15:20:24

Re: Myth: Renewable Energies can replace fossil fuels

Unread postby tom_s2 » Wed 17 Dec 2014, 07:56:01

SeaGypsy wrote:Lol... 8) does that mean I can't call this guy a rich selfish jerk who thinks he helps the world by helping himself?


Yuppie wanker.


SeaGypsy, do you think you're making some kind of point with that remark?

Why don't you listen and respond to what the author says, rather than just having an emotional outburst?

The author pointed out that he's an EE and a PhD scientist. I have no way of verifying that, but it seems possible that he knows something about the topic, in which case you could learn something from him.

-Tom S
tom_s2
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Wed 08 Oct 2014, 15:20:24

Re: Myth: Renewable Energies can replace fossil fuels

Unread postby dashster » Sat 20 Dec 2014, 04:46:06

pstarr wrote:There is neither the political will, money, or time to install an alternative energy (read electric energy) transport infrastructure to compete with (much less replace) the energy-density, portability, and convenience of a diesel/gasoline system.


But there is the time and money to install one that just transports people around. There will be the will after Peak Oil hits. Even if people aren't driving around in Nissan Leafs and Teslas, they could be riding around in light rail, subways and electrified cross country trains. Just think about how much money the US military spends on useless armaments. Once we get the will, all that money becomes available for electrified mass transit.

Even without electrified transportation, there will be enough oil to move people around in diesel buses and trains for a long time. Eliminating commuting by car frees up a lot of oil.
dashster
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 385
Joined: Fri 28 Dec 2012, 08:39:24
Location: California

Re: Myth: Renewable Energies can replace fossil fuels

Unread postby dashster » Sat 20 Dec 2014, 16:31:47

pstarr wrote:Dashster, the US has a woefully inadequate rail system . . . pre-peak. How could it be better after we run out of money?
Unless you live in the city by an existing rail line, you won't have railroads post peak.


We built the original cross-country rail system when we had less money then we will have post-peak.


Rail won't be built in the suburbs, where it is needed. Neither you nor your neighbors would want that.


Why would me and my neighbors not want it, if it is needed?
dashster
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 385
Joined: Fri 28 Dec 2012, 08:39:24
Location: California

Re: Myth: Renewable Energies can replace fossil fuels

Unread postby lpetrich » Sat 03 Jan 2015, 05:48:02

DesuMaiden wrote:Let me repeat this point. The truth is far more inconvenient than this: it will be all but impossible for our current level of consumption to be powered by anything but fossil fuels

Evidence?

I read your linked article, Six Myths About Climate Change that Liberals Rarely Question, and it was mostly hand-waving.

Smaller, cheaper, faster: Does Moore’s law apply to solar cells? | Guest Blog, Scientific American Blog Network Typical prices of photovoltaic cells have been dropping a factor of 2 each 11 years, measured in constant dollars. Solar PV Module Prices Have Fallen 80% Since 2008, Wind Turbines 29% | CleanTechnica has a graph that shows a similar decline for wind energy, a drop by a factor of 2 each 14 years.In neither case does the improvement seem to be leveling off.

Contrary to what that article seems to imply, nobody's looking at using nothing but lead-acid batteries -- I've seen several other sorts of batteries, and various other technologies also. Like vanadium flow batteries.
User avatar
lpetrich
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Thu 22 Jun 2006, 03:00:00

Re: Myth: Renewable Energies can replace fossil fuels

Unread postby DesuMaiden » Fri 09 Jan 2015, 20:34:31

Renewable energy isn't entirely useless, but they cannot replace fossil fuels. Renewable energies will, however, become the only source of power in the future whether you like it or not.
History repeats itself. Just everytime with different characters and players.
DesuMaiden
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 886
Joined: Mon 06 Oct 2014, 16:00:31

Re: Myth: Renewable Energies can replace fossil fuels

Unread postby Lore » Fri 09 Jan 2015, 21:17:57

pstarr wrote:
DesuMaiden wrote:Renewable energy isn't entirely useless, but they cannot replace fossil fuels. Renewable energies will, however, become the only source of power in the future whether you like it or not.
Not nationwide. Lots of places in the US have both oil reserves and refineries, such as southern California and Gulf Coast Louisiana. Those folks will arm themselves and fight like bloody hell to keep their oil. Then the US government will invade, steal the oil and send it to Washington DC and New York City. And ration what is left for the rest of us.


Is that before or after all the honeybees die?
The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price, peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life.
... Theodore Roosevelt
User avatar
Lore
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9021
Joined: Fri 26 Aug 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Fear Of A Blank Planet

Re: Myth: Renewable Energies can replace fossil fuels

Unread postby DesuMaiden » Fri 09 Jan 2015, 23:46:18

pstarr wrote:
Lore wrote:
pstarr wrote:
DesuMaiden wrote:Renewable energy isn't entirely useless, but they cannot replace fossil fuels. Renewable energies will, however, become the only source of power in the future whether you like it or not.
Not nationwide. Lots of places in the US have both oil reserves and refineries, such as southern California and Gulf Coast Louisiana. Those folks will arm themselves and fight like bloody hell to keep their oil. Then the US government will invade, steal the oil and send it to Washington DC and New York City. And ration what is left for the rest of us.


Is that before or after all the honeybees die?
We can still pollinate the almonds with tweezers clenched by the delicate hands 16-year-old immigrants.

But that would take forever.
History repeats itself. Just everytime with different characters and players.
DesuMaiden
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 886
Joined: Mon 06 Oct 2014, 16:00:31

Re: Myth: Renewable Energies can replace fossil fuels

Unread postby Surf » Sat 10 Jan 2015, 04:19:02

We can still pollinate the almonds with tweezers clenched by the delicate hands 16-year-old immigrants.


No we will have switched to almond trees that are self pollinating.
http://www.capitalpress.com/content/js-self-pol-almonds-w-sidebar-updated

Dennis Tarry, CEO of Dave Wilson Nursery in Hickman, Calif., said that demand for the nursery's proprietary Independence variety, which was developed by Zaiger Genetics, has been high.


The chief reason growers are buying his budded Independence trees, he said, is that they eliminate the need for lower-paying pollinizer varieties that often must be harvested at different times.


What's more, Independence "lessens the pressure for bees," Tarry said. "We have set commercial crops in tented replicated trials with bee-free environments."


In those trials, one midsize dormant hive per acre set even more nuts.


Contrary to popular belief, not all crops need insects for pollination.
Surf
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 105
Joined: Sat 13 Jul 2013, 14:13:49

PreviousNext

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 93 guests