MonteQuest wrote:This man thinks it wouldn't be "insignificant."
Similarly, if humans divert a fraction of solar energy away from the environment to create ordered structures for their own purposes (i.e., houses, appliances, transportation infrastructure, communication systems, etc.), less energy is available to maintain highlyordered dissipative structures in nature. The disturbance of these structures translates into the various environmental impacts that are associated with renewable energy generation.
Limits to Sustainability
Frankly, that's a load of bollocks when taken in isolation. He's merely referring to the inability of that sunlight to get to species at the start of the ecosystem by referring to the second law of thermodynamics
"Thus, the second law of thermodynamics dictates that it
is impossible to avoid environmental impacts (disorder)
when diverting solar energy for human purposes."
We could easily outweigh any solar use from energy production by replanting wooded areas and getting rid of asphalted roads.
Also "Pimentel et al. (1994) have estimated that ca. 20%
of the U.S. land area would have to be dedicated to solar
energy generation to produce 37 quads (10.7 · 1012 kWh),
which is only ca. 40% of current total U.S. energy demand." is more than suspect. If the report is based on this kind of statement, I'd be inclined to question who was pulling the strings.