diy solar

diy solar

Is There Enough To Go Around?

Woody

Solar Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 13, 2020
Messages
159
Location
High Plains Northern Nevada
I’m seeing more articles finally asking the question, Is there enough rare earth materials to support everyone in the world going green? Here’s a recent article on what would be required for the UK to implement their net zero emissions by 2050.


California wants to go EV sales only by 2030. Nevada, wanting to one up Cali, just past a legislation for monitoring government buildings CO2 emissions to be in compliance with the Paris Agreement on Climate Change.


Nevada wants to be The Number One Solar Producing State. So where’s all the materials coming from? Where and what dried lake beds, mountains, … are we going to tear up to obtain these materials? I guess what I’m asking is what areas and countries do we lay waste too so that the rest of civilization can have a clean pristine environment?

When will we stop and honesty evaluate is this the correct green implementation? I’d say we need to slow down if not outright pause to find green energy solutions that are less toxic, less damaging to the environment, and can be nearly 100% recycled.
 
Last edited:
When will we stop and honesty evaluate is this the correct green implementation? I’d say we need to slow down if not outright pause to find green energy solutions that are less toxic, less damaging to the environment, and can be nearly 100% recycled.

When we stop being human and are forced to do it.

While the "green energy" solutions of today are still damaging, they are a crapton better than coal/gas, etc.
 
Here’s an example of a “better” green energy product.


Yes, it’s not a high energy charge/discharge battery type but virtually 100% recyclable, not a toxic stew for the environment, and rather safe compared to other battery chemistry.

I think we need more solutions along this lines where there is less toxic and less environmental damage.
 
Others:



 
Last edited:
When will we stop and honesty evaluate is this the correct green implementation? I’d say we need to slow down if not outright pause to find green energy solutions that are less toxic, less damaging to the environment, and can be nearly 100% recycled.
And keep expanding what we are currently doing? Even if we continue as is it will take a century to really achieve anything close to carbon neutral and minimal environmental impact. The more we do the more progress can be made not just at reaching a goal but achieving it in a better way. Progress in conservation has improved many things already.
 
1) each country/area can only support "X" people; neither resource distribution nor life are "fair" which is a good thing for evolution
2) each country is responsible to manage its OWN resources and take care of its own citizens first so you are not a burden to others
3) if a country produces more people than they can support, do not let them into your managed country or they will never learn from their mistakes
4) no country has the right to demand from another country
5) peoples demands are infinite, resources are finite
6)governments "produce" nothing, if you are in a country where the government starts giving more away than it has you are starting on a death spiral
7)if you are in a country where the government is the largest employer you are WELL into a death spiral

if you think any country/business is "too big to fail", well, I hate to tell ya but...never in history has any civilization or business lived forever (well, ok prostitution and bars will last as long as there are people...)

and of course, I want a liquid metal battery!!!
 
Hehe, in my opinion, going green with energy production is only half the battle. We need to educate more on energy conservation (turn off a light), building passive homes, etc... A lot of the energy demand is unnecessary usage.
 
I guess you should hurry up and buy your electric car and install your solar panels before the world runs out of the stuff needed to build them.
 
It doesn't matter if there's enough raw materials, we're going to run out of grid capacity sooner that that. The people mandating this stuff are clueless. I'm about as far from a tree hugger as you can be. But I also don't believe in being wasteful, or never innovating. That said, as an electrician, I can guarantee that there isn't enough infrastructure (at least here in the corn patch) to support even 15 to 20% of the population switching to ev's. Look whats happening in California.
 
When the Shakers “decided” to use water energy to power saw blades and other production devices three specific things had to happen
- consider the work (demand)
- harness the energy (infrastructure)
- implement the mechanics

EVERYTHING ever developed has to at base process those elements.

We’re maybe 1/3 developed on the harness end for EV (tech development not available resources), and I suspect 50% capable of implementing.

The demand part: we’ve not really addressed this- it’s really all reactionary. The demand part is predicated on availability of the energy.

Simple example: I can heat water off-grid with propane and a few milliwatts to initiate ignition. The cost is almost nothing. But how much does it cost to heat that same water with solar electric? At the demand level “we” expect?

Sure, individually we can make it work and people do- but on the same “scale” of BTUs how many of us can produce enough watts to charge an EV to begin with- or economically at all? Can we afford to wait two weeks or mire for two days of vehicle use?

These are odd little thoughts that the mainstream do not consider because they essentially think one can just plug in to limitless power and the world will be doing a happy dance.
 
It doesn't matter if there's enough raw materials, we're going to run out of grid capacity sooner that that. The people mandating this stuff are clueless. I'm about as far from a tree hugger as you can be. But I also don't believe in being wasteful, or never innovating. That said, as an electrician, I can guarantee that there isn't enough infrastructure (at least here in the corn patch) to support even 15 to 20% of the population switching to ev's. Look whats happening in California.
CA is doing just fine and continuously improving the grid to meet the demand every day. Is that what you meant?
 
California has asked ev users not to charge right now. That doesn't sound fine to me..
I have received no such message. Link?

Reality is CA utilities have been saying to give your appliances the afternoon off since at least the 1960s. No solar or wind back then.
 
Well..... seems like it is 1/2 true. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/california-electric-cars-charge/

But .... has anyone really tried to calculate how much additional demand there is going to be on the power grid if a large % of people ... and 18 wheelers are electric vehicles? It seems to me that residential electrical demand is going to increase dramatically if everyone is trying to charge their EV overnight. A hot summer night would be a S^*T show.
It there enough money in this infrastructure bill they are trying to pass to make any difference? It seems to me that the grid is going to have to be REALLY beefed up and I'm not sure that can happen fast enough.
Every car maker is heading towards EVs at a very fast pace and it doesn't seem to me that anyone who has the power to do anything about the power grid it has really thought this thru.

I would love to see the grid power more "modularized". About 10 years ago, I though ever body would have a refrigerator sized fuel cell behind their house that would be providing their power.
Where I live, I'd have to have my neighbors cut their trees down to have any shot at enough solar production. Heck, I can't even get satellite TV.

I would like to have an EV .... but want more like 450 miles range ... and unlike Will, I am never going to be able to harvest enough solar to power an EV. Heck, the Rivian plant is only about 40 miles from where I live.
 
I would like to have an EV .... but want more like 450 miles range ...
Take a look at a PHEV like the Honda Clarity. 40 miles electric only and ~350 miles range per tank (unlimited range with gasoline fill-ups). Very sporty!
 
Take a look at a PHEV like the Honda Clarity. 40 miles electric only and ~350 miles range per tank (unlimited range with gasoline fill-ups). Very sporty!
That's a pretty nice looking vehicle .... and they even have a fuel cell version.

I think someone should make a hybrid version where the vehicle is always powered by electric and has a diesel engine that only acts as a generator .... get rid of the transmission and differential .... They could call it the locomotive ...LOL
 
That's a pretty nice looking vehicle .... and they even have a fuel cell version.

I think someone should make a hybrid version where the vehicle is always powered by electric and has a diesel engine that only acts as a generator .... get rid of the transmission and differential .... They could call it the locomotive ...LOL
First gen Chevy Volt was like that, but it was not diesel engine.
 
I would like to have an EV .... but want more like 450 miles range ... and unlike Will, I am never going to be able to harvest enough solar to power an EV. Heck, the Rivian plant is only about 40 miles from where I live.
You can invent any criteria you like to avoid an EV. I have seen two Rivian trucks in my city in the past month. Nice vehicle.

I want a decent vehicle that can be fueled at less than 8 cents a mile. I am now stuck driving an EV. ;)
 
Back
Top