[Graeme]

Well, they don't get the message from this website! Get off fossil fuels.

[Graeme]

Good you recognize that ff are "bad". But the FF industry couldn't give a damn.

Turning to 100% renewable energy is certainly a major part of the solutions. There are many "good" people in your country who recognize this notably Jacobson from Stanford who has published a plan for the US to reach there within a few decades.

There are other solutions which are not relevant to this thread. There are numerous threads on this site promoting RE. It should be obvious that RE development in the US is growing and will continue to do so.

[ennui2]

If that island can do it, so can the rest of the world.

That is perhaps the most naive thing you've ever written. Don't you know these sorts of reports have holes in them huge enough to drive a truck through them?

Take Iceland for instance. It has rampant geothermal resources. But are they going to supply all their food? All their modern consumer electronics? There's more to this than just raw power. It's all consumables.

Unless this island is operating like Gilligan's Island, it's not totally off-the-grid.

[Graeme]

That's why it will take time. Ideally, as fast as possible coz of looming declining oil production and AGW. We are definitely making some progress toward 100% RE (some have already reached there) but I believe that more financial resources must be directed toward RE. It's becoming clear that FF investment is not a good bet (see PO review Oct 6 in recent news).

I've just seen this report from the conservative EIA. This is not encouraging news from them.

The United States Energy Information Agency estimates that 11 percent of the world's total energy comes from renewable sources, a number they project will grow modestly to 15 percent by 2040. They also estimate that 21 percent of the world's electricity came from renewable energy in 2011, and they expect that to grow to 25 percent by 2040. These percentage changes must be viewed in the context of worldwide growth in energy consumption. According to the United States Energy Information Agency:

...world energy consumption will grow by 56% between 2010 and 2040, from 524 quadrillion British thermal units (Btu) to 820 quadrillion Btu. Most of this growth will come from non-OECD (non-Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) countries, where demand is driven by strong economic growth. Renewable energy and nuclear power are the world's fastest-growing energy sources, each increasing 2.5% per year. However, fossil fuels continue to supply nearly 80% of world energy use through 2040. Natural gas is the fastest-growing fossil fuel, as global supplies of tight gas, shale gas, and coalbed methane increase.


Imagine if a similar technological development and commercialization process were applied to solar energy. Just as the smart phone has transformed the way we live, a renewable energy breakthrough could alter the future of the planet. It will take such a breakthrough, along with many other policy-driven incentives, to alter the trend lines projected by the Energy Information Agency. Hastening the transition to a renewable energy economy is a difficult but feasible task.

[ralfy]

Besides manufacturing and even mechanized agriculture that's dependent on oil, there's also peak minerals, issues concerning water supply, etc.

As pointed out in another thread, the global population is now in overshoot given the current size of the middle class.

[KaiserJeep]

In fact, the Middle Class - defined as those who are not rich but who have access to enough education to anticipate problems and enough disposable income to do something to anticipate and avoid them - is disappearing. In the new world order that is decades along already, you are either a "one percenter" or a toady of the one percenters, or watching your lifestyle decline until you cannot any longer deny that you are Lower Class. For ours is the last generation that has a Middle Class, and which enjoyed a standard of living unknown to all those who came before us. Some few of us understood it was because we burned all the accessible fossil fuel in the last 250 years. Others are still watching football and Zombie cinema and wondering why they feel vaguely uneasy.

[Graeme]

Renewables could satisfy Britain’s electricity needs by 2050, says Loughborough expert

Britain could generate all its electricity from renewable sources by 2050 if politicians grasp the nettle, according to a Loughborough University expert on wind energy.

Simon Watson, Professor of Wind Energy, says it is possible for wind, solar and water power to take over from nuclear, coal and gas within 36 years.

“There is no reason at all why we can’t be generating 100 per cent of our electricity needs from renewables by 2050,” said Professor Watson.

“But it’s down to political will and the social acceptability of it. Also, the fossil fuel lobby is very strong.

“Thirty six years is not a long time to complete the changeover, but think back to where we were in 1990 and how much renewable generation we had then.

“There was some small scale hydro, and renewables were at about two per cent of all electricity generated. Now it’s 15 per cent and it’s accelerating.”

Professor Watson was speaking ahead of his Inaugural Lecture* at the university on Wednesday, October 8 when he will look at some of the main challenges facing wind energy.

Wind power is at the forefront of the drive towards renewable energy at a time when there is increasing demand for carbon-free energy generation to combat climate change caused by CO2 emissions.

loughboroughecho

[Graeme]

I have a contact who says it can be done in a much shorter time frame and cheaper than today's infrastructure. I've asked him how. If he gets back to me, I'll post his response.

Here is his response:

http://www.hydrogenambassadors.com/back ... er-3P+.php

And watch video:

http://www.hydrogenambassadors.com/aae/ ... 014-e.html

[ralfy]

It's possible but will require years of extensive regulation of economies and cooperation between them, sacrifices (such as halting various middle class amenities and even military spending and using saved material resources and energy for the transition), and localization.

Unfortunately, what we have seen for many decades is the opposite.

[sparky]

.
there is absolutely no problems getting to 100% renewable energy
bring back sailing ships , water mills , oxen plowing and slavery .....no problems

[Graeme]

South Australia Achieves 100% Renewable Energy For A Whole Working Day

There have been several instances in recent months when wind energy has accounted for all, or nearly all, electricity demand in South Australia. Last Tuesday, however, set a new benchmark – the combination of wind energy and rooftop solar provided more than 100 per cent of the state’s electricity needs, for a whole working day between 9.30am and 6pm.

The data comes from Hugh Saddler, at consultants Pitt & Sherry, and is part of his monthly overview of electricity market, emissions and pricing trends in Australia.

Saddler notes there were several periods in South Australia from Saturday September 27, and over the following days, when wind generation was greater than total state NEM demand. (South Australia has nearly half the country’s wind capacity with around 1.5GW of wind energy).

It occurred briefly on Saturday afternoon, for much of Sunday, and again, most strikingly, between about 9.30am and 6.00pm on Tuesday, September 30, a normal working day.

In reality, renewables contributed well over 100 per cent because they were generating and consuming their own electricity from rooftop solar – the state has 550MW of rooftop solar, with nearly one in four houses with rooftop modules.

That meant that “true” demand by consumers on that day, i.e. the amount of electricity being used by consumers, including rooftop solar, was in fact considerably higher than NEM demand — up to 20 per cent according to the Australian Photovoltaic Institute — because of the contribution of rooftop PV to total electricity supply.

Here are the two key graphs. The first shows wind generation (blueish line) exceeds total demand (green line) at several points, but particularly for large periods on September 30, the Tuesday.

cleantechnica

[cualcrees]

Abundant Clean Renewables? Think Again!

Although "renewable" energy is growing faster than ever before, it is neither carbon neutral, "clean" nor sustainable. We need to transform into low-energy societies that meet human - not corporate - needs.

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/27392-abundant-clean-renewables-think-again

[sunweb]

It would be elegant if wind and solar energy capturing devices could actually maintain a modicum of the wonderfully rich lifestyles many of us live. I believe this is a false dream and that BAU (business as usual) is not sustainable or “green” nor really desirable for the future of the earth or even our species.

I have researched the energy requirements and the CO2 emissions for just the rebar and concrete used for the base of a 2.5 megawatt wind energy capturing device (wind turbine). Notice also all the equipment needed throughout the process of making and installing; these in themselves have an input of energy the materials.There are charts and pictures. It is sobering.
See charts and data at: http://sunweber.blogspot.com/2014/11/pr ... wrong.html

[vtsnowedin]

Your article never gets around to mentioning the lifetime power output of the proposed wind turbines. Without those figures of energy returned to compare to energy invested you can draw no conclusions about viability. Also the numbers proposed are enormous but you do have seven billion people to put on the project so on a world wide scale is not nearly so daunting.
In the real world large wind turbines are energy positive, much more then PV panels but their intermittenticy will restrict their practical use to twenty percent of grid power. But even twenty percent would be quite a stroke and solve that much of the problem. There are two questions. One question is would building that many wind turbines cause you to run out of some resource integral to their construction. Silver, copper or some rare earth metal or something used in the carbon fiber process of making the blades. The second is what strain this much construction would place on the concrete and steel supply and what effect that would have on prices.

[tom_s2]

Hi sunweb,

I responded to your article on my blog:

http://bountifulenergy.blogspot.com/201 ... mbers.html

-Tom S

[tom_s2]

vtsnowedin,

(wind turbines') intermittenticy will restrict their practical use to twenty percent of grid power

That figure could be increased by using time-of-use pricing. The price of electricity could fluctuate based on its current scarcity. When the wind isn't blowing and the sun isn't shining, at all, electricity could be much more expensive (and of course, electricity would be much cheaper when it's sunny and windy).

It's quite possible to transmit the current price of electricity over the power grid, using slight fluctuations in frequency. Then digital receivers on appliances could determine whether the appliances should run now or not.

There are appliances such as refrigerators and air conditioners which can make a big block of ice when electricity is cheap, then use it up when electricity is more expensive. Or space heaters which can heat an insulated thermal mass when electricity is cheap, then draw down the thermal mass when electricity is more expensive.

Storing heat and cold for a few days in a thermal mass is far cheaper and simpler than batteries.

Most household electricity (60%+) is expended in producing heat and cold (for things like air conditioning, refrigerators, space heaters, electric water heaters, dishwashers which usually have a heating element, and so on). It would be entirely possible to "move around" that 60% of household electricity usage based upon current electricity supply, and thereby mitigate the intermittency of renewables.

-Tom S