Gore: U.S. Can Get 100 Percent Renewable Energy in 10 Years ?

[Besoeker]

Originally Posted by prashamk

Great news. But news seems impossible. US needs around 1 TW electricity per year.

Not sure where you got your figures from.
US consumption is about 3.816 trillion kWh
Or 3816 teraWatt hours.

But I agree with your point. 100% renewables in 10 years is, at best, poetic licence.

Gore talked mostly about wind, solar and geothermal as the primary providers of electricity. Those resources, mixed with robust energy efficiency measures and advanced storage, could make up for the nation's electricity needs, he said. The country also needs to work toward creating a national grid that could support the nation's fleet of electric automobiles, he added.

Not a cat in hell's chance of all that in 10 years.

[LMagic007]

It's perhaps somewhat evident the approx 1 TW US grid capacity may have been misinterpreted and represented as a yearly figure. Not sure, but it seems perhaps a plausible explanation for figure used.

[prashamk]

Originally Posted by Besoeker

Not sure where you got your figures from.
US consumption is about 3.816 trillion kWh
Or 3816 teraWatt hours.

But I agree with your point. 100% renewables in 10 years is, at best, poetic licence.

Not a cat in hell's chance of all that in 10 years.

I had read it somewhere but I can't recollect it now. Anyways I cross checked it and yes your figures are right.

But the point is, THE TASK SET BY AL GORE IS IMPOSSIBLE.

[LMagic007]

Gore is a big ideas person and there would perhaps be relatively few people taking that idea seriously, however I also think Gore is an intelligent enough person to realize that it's not just about the process, but it's also about the message. Gore is a politician not a scientist, engineer, town planner or economist and he's doing what politicians best do. i.e. get out the message. We have seen plenty of half truths and far worse from the current Bush regime. Yes it's politics and about helping shape and shift public perception. Unlikely to be achieved, but I have little doubt in my mind that if everyone truly felt it was of such a high priority, that it could be achieved.


However, the reality is that most of us have such priorities in this world that would work against such an achievement ever being attainable. Unless of course those priorities were put at such great risk that we were forced to produce a given result in a given time for our very survival. Because we are talking time scales of 2050 and beyond, man will naturally adjust his rate of change and adaptation to approximately fit that window of time scale. That tends to be the law of nature, only expending the required effort at the required rate to help ensure survival.

If however hypothetically of course, it became a reality that the world would end in 10 years if we did not become 100% dependant on renewable energy, I have little doubt man would rise to the occasion and meet the challenge. If anything however, I think the general reactions to article when viewed in context, may more likely highlight where mans priorities really lie, though given scientific opinion, I understand we have more than ten years available to help resolve the problems and if that's the case, then it might be better to proceed at a more measured pace of change.

[spadlet]

Originally Posted by LMagic007

[font=Arial][size=2][font=Arial][size=2][font=Arial][size=2][font=Arial][size=2][font=Arial][size=2][font=Arial][size=2]Gore is a big ideas person and there would perhaps be relatively few people taking that idea seriously

That sentance sums up my personal problems with politics.

[LMagic007]

Originally Posted by spadlet

That sentance sums up my personal problems with politics.

Indeed, though like many things, for better or worse politics is a simple fact of life in wide ranging facets.

[Besoeker]

Originally Posted by LMagic007

Not sure about most of that obfuscation, but yes I agree PV will become a significant player along with other renewables. It depends on how growth trends. If growth continues at its current rate ( around 40% ) for the next 10 years then definitely yes the solar PV industry will be massive by 2020. The question is will growth continue at its current rate ? Probably not but that's difficult to be sure about. Even an average growth of around 20% per year would see a significant solar PV industry by 2020.

I recall that I did some calculations on this a while back and submitted the data as an Excel chart. I used the data you provided to show growth and a crossover point which I think was between 2020 and 2030.
Unfortunately, my computer got stolen (at Malta airport I think... ) so I lost the data.
Perhaps you would be kind enough to provide it again?

[Besoeker]

Originally Posted by LMagic007

It's perhaps somewhat evident the approx 1 TW US grid capacity may have been misinterpreted and represented as a yearly figure. Not sure, but it seems perhaps a plausible explanation for figure used.

A somewhat related article:
The U. S. electric grid: will it be our undoing? | Energy Bulletin
and another
Research

[Besoeker]

Originally Posted by prashamk

I had read it somewhere but I can't recollect it now. Anyways I cross checked it and yes your figures are right.

But the point is, THE TASK SET BY AL GORE IS IMPOSSIBLE.

Thank you. Glad we agree on both points.

[LMagic007]

Originally Posted by Besoeker

Thank you. Glad we agree on both points.

It's also that the desire to achieve such a task is likely not present to sufficient degree. i.e. a political unlikelihood, rather than just a technical impediment. Think how many billion has been spent on a war in Iraq deemed to be of dubious value. Ah but the desire was there to spend the money on war. I've seen estimates that the war could cost over one trillion dollars. I think the war has cost around $500 billion already. Imagine that amount being spent on improving renewable energy technology and infrastructure. I understand the war is costing about $300 million per day.

Imagine the US spending $300 million per day on renewable energy projects to help decouple its energy and strategic security from oil. I think the more significant message in Gore's mantra, is not so much the headline grabbing 10 years, but the fact that if the US could steel it's attention toward a more noble goals, it might find itself in a place where it's economy could benefit and perhaps its dependency upon oil producing nations reduced and of course last but not least the environment itself stands to benefit.

I like to make my private point, public that I am convinced that the only way the world will beat long term issues restraining economic growth, is to aggressively pursue sustainable renewable energy. I'm not the only one to hold that view though. The planet simply can't offer us much more capacity with our old habits continuing as they are.