Has anyone else realized how far we are away from running civilization fully on wind and solar?

[SparkyJJO]

It’s always going to be a portfolio of generation.

e.g.:

According to the Electric Reliability Council of Texas(ERCOT), wind power accounted for at least 15.7% of the electricity generated in Texas during 2017, as wind was 17.4% of electricity generated in ERCOT, which manages 90% of Texas's power.[4][5]ERCOT set a new wind output record of nearly 19.7 GW at 7:19 pm Central Standard Time on Monday, January 21, 2019.[6]

Yeah, and look at the huge problems Texas has from those windmills now.

 

[OzSolar]

On a related note I just recently heard this term for the first time. Subconsciously I knew it existed but seeing the actual day was a real punch in the gut.

July 28 will be Earth Overshoot Day in 2022
Marks the date when humanity has used all the biological resources that Earth regenerates during the entire year.

Earth Overshoot Day home - #MoveTheDate

Overshoot occurs when humanity's demand on nature exceeds Earth's biocapacity. In 2023, Earth Overshoot Day falls on August 2nd.

www.overshootday.org

 

[svetz]

Has anyone ..realized how far we are away from running society on wind and solar? ... Any Thoughts? Other countries are going to finish ahead of schedule, some already halfway there, and they've grown their GDP doing it. They're doing it by embracing the change rather than resisting it. ref 100 years ago only half the homes in the U.S. cities had electricity. 90 years ago only 10% of rural America did. What can we do in 30 years? Don't forget that most power infrastructure (e.g., coal-power plant) doesn't last more than 35 years, so most of the power infrastructure of the country would change once during that time anyway. From the chart to the right, we've had no problem supplying the increase in demand of 2% per year. It's the norm. On the upside, there's no drilling or exploration, or leaks, or wars that need to be fought to protect strategic locations.

We have about 3 decades to go to 0%, that's about 3% per year rather than 2%, and lately growth has been flat. So, doesn't seem that bad to me.

Of course, the more people act stupidly and actively fight against the goal then sure, it could be a problem. For example, the republicans recently passed a bill in Florida (HR 741) that would have devasted the last decade's solar industry growth in the state. The bill was at the behest of the power utility, the vote was by party line and as the Republicans had the majority it passed. There was no proof of any benefit to passing it, from where I sit it looked like they did it because they were told to do it.

I just happen to be a Republican, so I was very disappointed that my party would do such a thing to hurt so many businesses, destroy built up infrastructure, and set the state back wasting millions of tax-payer dollars. It's honestly not what the Republican party is about, not even close. Fortunately, the Governor (also a Republican) rose above petty politics and vetoed it. As much as it pains me, I'll vote democrat before I vote for the same guy (house)/gal (senate) I did last time since both broke their campaign promise.

So we need to grow about 1% more for electricity than we have historically to cover the Electricity sector. But, Electricity is only 40% of the marketplace, 28% is transportation. If it was 100% EVs, then that's about 1.7% more growth per year than we normally do. However, it's stupid to think that ALL cars must be electric, that's just crap. Those saying it are pushing their own agenda for whatever means, possibly to get people to think conversion is futile. Shell, Mobile, BP, Chevron all have green-fuel programs, they are betting that ICE isn't going anywhere. By 2050 my guess is you'll see predominately green-ICE, EVs, and then fuel cell cars.

Most likely homeowners will favor EVs and those without easy charging access will prefer GreenICE. Those companies are also aggressively pursuing Carbon capture technologies, so they also expect to be net-zero while still supplying fossil fuels.

If 50% of the cars are EVs, then that's 14% of the transportation sector, or an additional 0.3% growth of electricity needed, or 1.3% beyond what we've historically accomplished. So, seems doable to me.

 

[timselectric]

Plain and simple.
If it's drastically cheaper, and well published as such.
Everyone will be rushing to jump on board.

 

[Mattb4]

Yeah, and look at the huge problems Texas has from those windmills now.

There is also a huge problem that the utility companies have with individuals supplying grid tied solar. Although the grid might appear to be a great way for an individual to store the solar power they generate to use later the grid is not a battery. It can and does get destabilized by being supplied power that is highly variable and perhaps in excess to loading. Concepts of Base load, and Peak loading have to be kept in mind.

 

[Bluedog225]

Yeah, and look at the huge problems Texas has from those windmills now.

Yeah. It sucks if it doesn’t blow.

 

[John Frum]

Try electrified train network like rest of the civilized world outside of US

I guess nuclear powered container ships will be required.

 

[Hedges]

 

[upnorthandpersonal]

PSA - we will leave this thread up as long as the discussion stays civilized and follows the rules of the forum. That usually means keeping politics and other 'loaded' topics out of it. Should the rules not be followed, the thread will be removed, or moved to the chit-chat forum.

 

[houseofancients]

saw and responded to this same thing on facebook..

renewables is a choice, and it is very possible to get most , if not all out of renewables, but not while corporations bribe politicians

 

[MattiFin]

I guess nuclear powered container ships will be required.

Yeah, container ships are bigger problem than land transport.
Hydrogen, methane or methanol might be possible option for those.

 

[x98myers7]

nuclear gets a bad rap. I personally see it as the solution to all of our problems. I vote we can start by not installing plants on fault lines on tiny islands, for one. #fukushima

 

[skillet]

View attachment 104069

nice horse

 

[efficientPV]

I believe global plagues and food shortages will solve the energy crisis now that we can't depend on wars..

 

[houseofancients]

nuclear gets a bad rap. I personally see it as the solution to all of our problems. I vote we can start by not installing plants on fault lines on tiny islands, for one. #fukushima

you found a solution to the waste yet ?
it only takes a 100.000 years to become non lethal

while rare, accidents impact the planet and people too profoundly when it does happen.
look at fukushima or chernobile that matter

both are reasons enough for me to NEVER be pro nuclear

 

[x98myers7]

you found a solution to the waste yet ?

yes 1-3% of it.

 

[SparkyJJO]

nuclear gets a bad rap. I personally see it as the solution to all of our problems. I vote we can start by not installing plants on fault lines on tiny islands, for one. #fukushima

Yeah I never understood why they put them in some terrible places. With a little bit of forethought issues like that wouldn't exist.

 

[upnorthandpersonal]

you found a solution to the waste yet ?

Recycle as fuel. In this 'waste', there is over 90% of the energy left. France does this for example.

By the way, if you take all the nuclear waste ever produced by every commercial reactor ever since the late 1950s, it would only cover a football field to a height of about 10 meters - and we can control this waste. Coal plants release more radioactive material than nuclear plants for the same energy output, and release it in the air where we don't control it.

I know Chernobyl and Fukushima get brought up all the time. I've actually been to Chernobyl. About 15 000 people died because of the tsunami in Japan. One person died because of radiation exposure, six others have developed thyroid cancer. I'll leave this here:

 

[houseofancients]

Recycle as fuel. In this 'waste', there is over 90% of the energy left. France does this for example.

By the way, if you take all the nuclear waste ever produced by every commercial reactor ever since the late 1950s, it would only cover a football field to a height of about 10 meters - and we can control this waste. Coal plants release more radioactive material than nuclear plants for the same energy output, and release it in the air where we don't control it.

I know Chernobyl and Fukushima get brought up all the time. I've actually been to Chernobyl. About 15 000 people died because of the tsunami in Japan. One person died because of radiation exposure, six others have developed thyroid cancer. I'll leave this here:

recycling is done on a very small scale to my knowledge, and certainly not ready for additional waste to be added.

granted, there are some good developments going on, but we as humanity should learn to crawle before we try to run..

you know about 600 russian soldiers died this year digging small holes for their shit at chernobyl?

 

[MeicalNissyen]

Admin pls check this I want to adhere to rules.
BUT. Has anyone else realized how far we are away from running society on wind and solar? We are here in this group talking about how to squeeze out a few watts to add a refrigerator to a 5kw - 20kw home system, and we, as a nation (US), are being told that we can go green in time to not crash and burn even if “they” cut off fossil fuels. I get that the average joe/josephene doesn’t know that hooking up a tesla car to your rig is like adding a second battery bank that must be charged from the same hours of sunlight that couldn’t quite keep your home as well powered as by utility power...... I was thinking that since we solar peeps know a little more we could educate our friends before it gets to be too late. I think we‘ re years away yet from being fossil fuel independent, yet still functional. as great as that will be someday. Any Thoughts?