Can Alternatives/Renewables Improve Upon THIS?

[Mr. H.]

By how much, and at what cost? More importantly, at WHO'S cost?

It's obvious that the hydrocarbon industries have been doing something right over the decades.

Since 1970, population up 51%... energy consumption up 44%... vehicle miles traveled up 170%... GDP (closely correlated with energy consumption) up 210%.

Aggregate emissions... down 71%.

Obama said it himself... he wants to tax billions from the hydrocarbon industries and invest it- through the government poop chute - into alternatives and renewables.

If accomplished, how might these illustrations change over the succeeding years?

http://alfin2300.blogspot.com/2012/05/peak-oil-meet-hard-facts-energy-primer.html

 

[Old Rocks]

Yes, renewables can improve on this. But it will take a combination of grid scale batteries and a national grid that is not an antique. And it will happen. Not over night, but in the coming decades, there will be a time that we regard fossil fuels the same as we regard horse drawn carriages today. Something that was neccessary at the time, but just an oddity now.

 

[Mr. H.]

Am I mistaken in interpreting Obama's intentions as trying to hasten the process by circumventing market forces with federal dollars and chasing after technologies that otherwise could not compete with hydrocarbons?

 

[Old Rocks]

Should this work, the alternatives will not only compete with the fossil fuels, they will drive them out of the market.

http://cleantechnica.com/2012/04/14/donald-sadowy-liquid-batteries-ted-talk/

 

[Mr. H.]

Should this work, the alternatives will not only compete with the fossil fuels, they will drive them out of the market.

Donald Sadoway Liquid Batteries TED Talk - CleanTechnica

Designed to the market price point... without subsidy.
Cool vid.

But what is our "current energy situation" this guy refers to?
Hydrocarbons are perfectly capable of carrying us far into the future and, as my attached images show, do it with increasing efficiency while reducing aggregate emissions.

I wish this guy success, and on a grand scale.

Oh- the company that he started. When they invest in expensive equipment do you suppose they're allow to depreciate it? Sort of like oil and gas companies depreciate their equipment? Only that one's called a subsidy right?

 

[westwall]

Should this work, the alternatives will not only compete with the fossil fuels, they will drive them out of the market.

Donald Sadoway Liquid Batteries TED Talk - CleanTechnica

That looks promising. I found the paper and here's the link to it. It is sadly paywalled so i won't copy it here, but it looks very interesting.

Semi-Solid Lithium Rechargeable Flow Battery - Duduta - 2011 - Advanced Energy Materials - Wiley Online Library

 

[Mr. H.]

I met with my Congressman today and showed him printouts of the above-attached images.

This one immediately caught his eye. He said he will be involved in committee hearings and wants to use it.

Damn I'm good.

 

[skookerasbil]

Yes, renewables can improve on this. But it will take a combination of grid scale batteries and a national grid that is not an antique. And it will happen. Not over night, but in the coming decades, there will be a time that we regard fossil fuels the same as we regard horse drawn carriages today. Something that was neccessary at the time, but just an oddity now.

We'll both be dead a long, long time Ray.......decades in fact.

 

[skookerasbil]

Ray....Im sorta shocked you have not posted up this yet........

Gravity lighting.......real interesting. Not sure of the cost though but heard the inventors the other day on the radio.

GravityLight: lighting for developing countries. | Indiegogo

 

[AmyNation]

The reason we are pumping so much into renewables is because the Chinese are. They want to be the future of energy, which, if they were successful, would set them up as the worlds dominate superpower for the foreseeable future. We would end up more dependant on them then we are the ME now.

 

[bripat9643]

Should this work, the alternatives will not only compete with the fossil fuels, they will drive them out of the market.

Donald Sadoway Liquid Batteries TED Talk - CleanTechnica

Then there's no need for any government subsidies, is there?

 

[Mr. H.]

The reason we are pumping so much into renewables is because the Chinese are. They want to be the future of energy, which, if they were successful, would set them up as the worlds dominate superpower for the foreseeable future. We would end up more dependant on them then we are the ME now.

More dependent on the Chinese for... renewables?

Renewables simply can not power economies at the pace hydrocarbons do.
And renewables certainly wouldn't be able to keep up with a growing population with ever-demanding needs.

Taking the graph as illustration, assuming zero hydrocarbon usage, extrapolate those curves 40 years hence. What would we be looking at.

0% emissions? Far out.

Effect on GDP? Catastrophic.

 

[Mr. H.]

Should this work, the alternatives will not only compete with the fossil fuels, they will drive them out of the market.

Donald Sadoway Liquid Batteries TED Talk - CleanTechnica

Then there's no need for any government subsidies, is there?

As the speaker in the video pointed out... Designed to the market price point... without subsidy.

I think that is yet to be seen once they scale this up to the 40' trailer model.

 

[AmyNation]

The reason we are pumping so much into renewables is because the Chinese are. They want to be the future of energy, which, if they were successful, would set them up as the worlds dominate superpower for the foreseeable future. We would end up more dependant on them then we are the ME now.

More dependent on the Chinese for... renewables?

Renewables simply can not power economies at the pace hydrocarbons do.
And renewables certainly wouldn't be able to keep up with a growing population with ever-demanding needs.

Taking the graph as illustration, assuming zero hydrocarbon usage, extrapolate those curves 40 years hence. What would we be looking at.

0% emissions? Far out.

Effect on GDP? Catastrophic.

I agree with everything your saying, as it stands right now.But that's the point, we are in an energy race with China to see who can develop the technology 1st, because we all know we are going to need it in the future.

 

[edthecynic]

Aggregate emissions... down 71%.

"Aggregate emissions" sounds like a SUBSET of total emissions. Why didn't you post the numbers for total emissions?

 

[Flopper]

It's obvious that the hydrocarbon industries have been doing something right over the decades.

Since 1970, population up 51%... energy consumption up 44%... vehicle miles traveled up 170%... GDP (closely correlated with energy consumption) up 210%.

Aggregate emissions... down 71%.

Correlation is not the same as cause an effect. Population is up 51% due to hydrocarbons?

 

[Mr. H.]

The reason we are pumping so much into renewables is because the Chinese are. They want to be the future of energy, which, if they were successful, would set them up as the worlds dominate superpower for the foreseeable future. We would end up more dependant on them then we are the ME now.

More dependent on the Chinese for... renewables?

Renewables simply can not power economies at the pace hydrocarbons do.
And renewables certainly wouldn't be able to keep up with a growing population with ever-demanding needs.

Taking the graph as illustration, assuming zero hydrocarbon usage, extrapolate those curves 40 years hence. What would we be looking at.

0% emissions? Far out.

Effect on GDP? Catastrophic.

I agree with everything your saying, as it stands right now.But that's the point, we are in an energy race with China to see who can develop the technology 1st, because we all know we are going to need it in the future.

Thanks. But why "race" China. Why chase the syndrome? I have no doubt that this country has the ability to unilaterally develop and implement a first class state of the art industry based upon renewables and alternatives. IF those events are left to flourish (or flounder) in a market-driven economy.

Why? Because that is the most expedient path. The United States gave birth to the oil and gas industries in the sense that our technological and innovative advancements were born of repetitive failure. Risky, expensive failure. Government-funded enterprises are expensive, but there is no risk. Risk is a great motivator for success. The risk of private capital.

We have no need to chase China in these frontiers.

The graph illustrates that hydrocarbons, for the last 40 years, have propelled us to ever-expanding heights in terms of GDP... and have done so with accelerated efficiencies and continuously reduced aggregate emissions. And hydrocarbons will continue to do so.

And this... is what bides us time. The only "race".... the only "chase" is the one propagated by the petrophobic Left. The environmentalists. The earth-firsters.

Put some Goddamn faith in what has been working... through work. And get to work with alternatives and renewables... in the marketplace.

 

[Mr. H.]

Aggregate emissions... down 71%.

"Aggregate emissions" sounds like a SUBSET of total emissions. Why didn't you post the numbers for total emissions?

Ask the EPA.

 

[edthecynic]

Aggregate emissions... down 71%.

"Aggregate emissions" sounds like a SUBSET of total emissions. Why didn't you post the numbers for total emissions?

Ask the EPA.

I don't have to, your evasion reveals everything.
Thank you.

 

[Mr. H.]

"Aggregate emissions" sounds like a SUBSET of total emissions. Why didn't you post the numbers for total emissions?

Ask the EPA.

I don't have to, your evasion reveals everything.
Thank you.

And your aversion of the facts reveals yet more.