100 Percent Renewable Energy in 20 Years

[EricWilliams]

From a friend and business partner - Ken Fields as Independent Presidential Candidate for 2016 running on a single platform, more or less, of 100% Renewable Energy in 20 Years.

Happy to hear complaints or praise either way, since this is a discussion forum I expect to get quite a lot.

E

 

[Crick]

How does he plan to accomplish that? I assume that nuclear would not be included under his "renewable". Is that correct?

 

[skookerasbil]

Got one bit of advice for the nice fella..............

"U'll loSe!!"

 

[EricWilliams]

Got one bit of advice for the nice fella..............

"U'll loSe!!"

I'm assuming he's well aware of that. I'm simply helping by giving him a little PR, for whatever that's worth.

 

[EricWilliams]

How does he plan to accomplish that? I assume that nuclear would not be included under his "renewable". Is that correct?

I've read his website, it's good. Moderately informational, and well informed, although not 100% clear on plans. Most of it he's copied from previous ideas of others that haven't really gained any traction. To the best of my knowledge there is zero mention of any nuclear.

 

[flacaltenn]

How does he plan to accomplish that? I assume that nuclear would not be included under his "renewable". Is that correct?

I've read his website, it's good. Moderately informational, and well informed, although not 100% clear on plans. Most of it he's copied from previous ideas of others that haven't really gained any traction. To the best of my knowledge there is zero mention of any nuclear.

The 'not clear on plans' is because he's got NOTHING that will reliably power an advanced nation GUARANTEED every day of the year, every minute of the day, in every REGION of the country.. It's smoke and mirrors. Or self-delusion..

Long list of "alternatives" really boils down to wind and solar. Maybe he hasn't noticed the sun is only effective for Large Scale solar electricity about 6 hours a day..

 

[EricWilliams]

How does he plan to accomplish that? I assume that nuclear would not be included under his "renewable". Is that correct?

I've read his website, it's good. Moderately informational, and well informed, although not 100% clear on plans. Most of it he's copied from previous ideas of others that haven't really gained any traction. To the best of my knowledge there is zero mention of any nuclear.

The 'not clear on plans' is because he's got NOTHING that will reliably power an advanced nation GUARANTEED every day of the year, every minute of the day, in every REGION of the country.. It's smoke and mirrors. Or self-delusion..

Long list of "alternatives" really boils down to wind and solar. Maybe he hasn't noticed the sun is only effective for Large Scale solar electricity about 6 hours a day..

I happen to be a hippie optimist at heart myself so I'd like to think there's a way around all that, but you're probably right.

 

[flacaltenn]

How does he plan to accomplish that? I assume that nuclear would not be included under his "renewable". Is that correct?

I've read his website, it's good. Moderately informational, and well informed, although not 100% clear on plans. Most of it he's copied from previous ideas of others that haven't really gained any traction. To the best of my knowledge there is zero mention of any nuclear.

The 'not clear on plans' is because he's got NOTHING that will reliably power an advanced nation GUARANTEED every day of the year, every minute of the day, in every REGION of the country.. It's smoke and mirrors. Or self-delusion..

Long list of "alternatives" really boils down to wind and solar. Maybe he hasn't noticed the sun is only effective for Large Scale solar electricity about 6 hours a day..

I happen to be a hippie optimist at heart myself so I'd like to think there's a way around all that, but you're probably right.

I appreciate your naive honesty.. There's a long trail of unhappy Greenies pushing things that they never really understood. There was a huge sales pitch on "Biomass Conversation" in the UK. The eco-left HELPED it take root. And when it came to their neighborhoods --- they were SHOCKED to find out this was just another term for garbage incinerators. Not really clean. Not really green.. So TODAY -- you can go google UK Biomass opposition and find DOZENS of pissed off Greenies.. I LOVE the idea of geothermal electricity generation. But that too is being misrepresented as clean and green. It is not. It's a dirty mining operation. And its not truly "renewable" either since each well peters out eventually and has to be redrilled or extended.

Not much on that list that your friend is gonna power hospitals, airports, and businesses with 24/7/365.. Better uses for wind/solar than making electricity -- but that's another story..

 

[80zephyr]

I graduated architectural school in1976. And solar power was the next "big thing". I won't hold my breath.

Mark

 

[ScienceRocks]

How does he plan to accomplish that? I assume that nuclear would not be included under his "renewable". Is that correct?

If we could make fusion work I think it would be possible!

 

[Old Rocks]

I graduated architectural school in1976. And solar power was the next "big thing". I won't hold my breath.

Mark

Cheapest Solar Ever: Austin Energy Gets 1.2 Gigawatts of Solar Bids for Less Than 4 Cents

Correction: Khalil Shalabi said was that 1,295 megawatts were priced below the Recurrent solar deal from last year, which was under 5 cents per kilowatt-hour not under 4 cents per kilowatt-hour.

A lot more cheap solar is coming for Austin, Texas.

The city's utility, Austin Energy, just released new data on developer bids for PV projects as part of a 600-megawatt procurement. The numbers show how far solar prices have come down over the last year -- and will continue to drop.

According to Khalil Shalabi, Austin Energy's vice president of resource planning, the utility received offers for 7,976 megawatts of projects after issuing a request for bids in April. Out of those bids, 1,295 megawatts of projects were priced below 4 cents per kilowatt-hour.

"The technology is getting better and the prices are decreasing with time," said Shalabi during a presentation in front of the Austin city council last week.

Things don't change over night. However, that is a big improvement right there.

 

[80zephyr]

I graduated architectural school in1976. And solar power was the next "big thing". I won't hold my breath.

Mark

Cheapest Solar Ever: Austin Energy Gets 1.2 Gigawatts of Solar Bids for Less Than 4 Cents

Correction: Khalil Shalabi said was that 1,295 megawatts were priced below the Recurrent solar deal from last year, which was under 5 cents per kilowatt-hour not under 4 cents per kilowatt-hour.

A lot more cheap solar is coming for Austin, Texas.

The city's utility, Austin Energy, just released new data on developer bids for PV projects as part of a 600-megawatt procurement. The numbers show how far solar prices have come down over the last year -- and will continue to drop.

According to Khalil Shalabi, Austin Energy's vice president of resource planning, the utility received offers for 7,976 megawatts of projects after issuing a request for bids in April. Out of those bids, 1,295 megawatts of projects were priced below 4 cents per kilowatt-hour.

"The technology is getting better and the prices are decreasing with time," said Shalabi during a presentation in front of the Austin city council last week.

Things don't change over night. However, that is a big improvement right there.

I wonder if any "green" government money is offsetting the cost. My son just finished a class on solar water heat. The system cost was about 6 thousand dollars and it would pay itself off in 30 years IF no repairs were needed.

Mark

 

[Billy_Bob]

I graduated architectural school in1976. And solar power was the next "big thing". I won't hold my breath.

Mark

Cheapest Solar Ever: Austin Energy Gets 1.2 Gigawatts of Solar Bids for Less Than 4 Cents

Correction: Khalil Shalabi said was that 1,295 megawatts were priced below the Recurrent solar deal from last year, which was under 5 cents per kilowatt-hour not under 4 cents per kilowatt-hour.

A lot more cheap solar is coming for Austin, Texas.

The city's utility, Austin Energy, just released new data on developer bids for PV projects as part of a 600-megawatt procurement. The numbers show how far solar prices have come down over the last year -- and will continue to drop.

According to Khalil Shalabi, Austin Energy's vice president of resource planning, the utility received offers for 7,976 megawatts of projects after issuing a request for bids in April. Out of those bids, 1,295 megawatts of projects were priced below 4 cents per kilowatt-hour.

"The technology is getting better and the prices are decreasing with time," said Shalabi during a presentation in front of the Austin city council last week.

Things don't change over night. However, that is a big improvement right there.

I wonder if any "green" government money is offsetting the cost. My son just finished a class on solar water heat. The system cost was about 6 thousand dollars and it would pay itself off in 30 years IF no repairs were needed.

Mark

The average solar panel lasts just 10 years... Fat Chance of ever recovering what you spent..

 

[skookerasbil]

I graduated architectural school in1976. And solar power was the next "big thing". I won't hold my breath.

Mark

Cheapest Solar Ever: Austin Energy Gets 1.2 Gigawatts of Solar Bids for Less Than 4 Cents

Correction: Khalil Shalabi said was that 1,295 megawatts were priced below the Recurrent solar deal from last year, which was under 5 cents per kilowatt-hour not under 4 cents per kilowatt-hour.

A lot more cheap solar is coming for Austin, Texas.

The city's utility, Austin Energy, just released new data on developer bids for PV projects as part of a 600-megawatt procurement. The numbers show how far solar prices have come down over the last year -- and will continue to drop.

According to Khalil Shalabi, Austin Energy's vice president of resource planning, the utility received offers for 7,976 megawatts of projects after issuing a request for bids in April. Out of those bids, 1,295 megawatts of projects were priced below 4 cents per kilowatt-hour.

"The technology is getting better and the prices are decreasing with time," said Shalabi during a presentation in front of the Austin city council last week.

Things don't change over night. However, that is a big improvement right there.

Can we please get an operational definition of "big"?

Sorry, as a behavioral psychologist, we never deal in vague terms!! In my field, terms like "increase"........"larger".........."decreasing"........"down"..........."up"......"better"..........."drop"............

don't cut it.......because they are not operationally defined. I notice vague terms are used almost exclusively be those in the AGW alarmist camp. Because vague terms work for the low-information people of the world.

In my field, you use vague terms to describe observations, you're out!!!

Highly amateur.




ghey


Also, when figures and data are presented and not compared to anything, they mean NOTHING

 

[Maggdy]

From a friend and business partner - Ken Fields as Independent Presidential Candidate for 2016 running on a single platform, more or less, of 100% Renewable Energy in 20 Years.

Happy to hear complaints or praise either way, since this is a discussion forum I expect to get quite a lot.

E

I like this is objective target. I believe the solar energy there and here will be a solution.
I live in a backward country. I have three sons who are full of ambition. (They 21, 23, 25 years old) They have perfect knowledge of all the laws of Einsrein. They're professionals for realization. They understand all kinds of electronics, electricity, wiring etc. both weak and strong amperage in the electricity.

 

[skookerasbil]

I know its only feb but this will be a top nominee for STOOPIDEST THEAD OF THE YEAR award

 

[elektra]

From a friend and business partner - Ken Fields as Independent Presidential Candidate for 2016 running on a single platform, more or less, of 100% Renewable Energy in 20 Years.

Happy to hear complaints or praise either way, since this is a discussion forum I expect to get quite a lot.

E

I like this is objective target. I believe the solar energy there and here will be a solution.
I live in a backward country. I have three sons who are full of ambition. (They 21, 23, 25 years old) They have perfect knowledge of all the laws of Einsrein. They're professionals for realization. They understand all kinds of electronics, electricity, wiring etc. both weak and strong amperage in the electricity.View attachment 65110

Do you believe in using 30 solar cars to replace one fossil fuel car? Each one needs to be manufactured, meaning you must use more stuff to build them.

How much stuff will it take to build a 10,000 square mile Solar Panel?

 

[Crick]

Who's pushing solar cars?

The question isn't how much material it will take to build 10,000 square miles of solar panel. The question is how much material will that panel have used by the time it's worn out - let's say, in 25 years.

Let's say the panel contains one pound of steel per square meter. That's being generous. The photovoltaic material is lain on by vapor deposition and is microns thick, but let's be very generous and say we need an ounce per square meter. Glass cover will weigh 5 kg (Glass Weight Calculator - Glass Technology Services Ltd (GTS)) per square meter. So, for the entire assembly, we will need

10,000 square miles = 25,900,000,000 sq m -> 25,900,000,000 pounds of steel, 1,618,750,000 pounds of germanium and 284,900,000,000 pounds of glazing

And at the end of that 25 years, aside from what's been lost to corrosion and damage, every bit of that is available for recycling and reuse.

At an efficiency of 20%, that 10,000 sq mi panel would produce about

10,000 sq mi x 5280 x5280 x 12 x 12 = 40,144,896,000,000
divide by 3003 sq in. in a std panel = 13,368,263,736 panels.
Times 225W power from a standard panel = 3,007,859,340,659 equals roughly 3 TW.
(See Solar Panel Output: What's the Average? - Pure Energies)

Let's produce one terrawatt each from coal, natural gas and petroleum.

One TW would require 952.4 million pounds of coal per hour
One TW would require 101 billion cu feet of natural gas per hour
One TW would require 70 million gallons of petroleum per hour.
(See How much coal, natural gas, or petroleum is used to generate a kilowatthour of electricity? - FAQ - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA))

In 25 years we would need to burn more than

208.575 trillion pounds of coal
22.12 quadrillion cubic feet of natural gas
15.33 trillion gallons of petroleum

Every bit of which is in the Earth's atmosphere, oceans or settled out as soot.

Get it?

 

[elektra]

Who's pushing solar cars?

The question isn't how much material it will take to build 10,000 square miles of solar panel. The question is how much material will that panel have used by the time it's worn out - let's say, in 25 years.

Let's say the panel contains one pound of steel per square meter. That's being generous. The photovoltaic material is lain on by vapor deposition and is microns thick, but let's be very generous and say we need an ounce per square meter. Glass cover will weigh 5 kg (Glass Weight Calculator - Glass Technology Services Ltd (GTS)) per square meter. So, for the entire assembly, we will need

10,000 square miles = 25,900,000,000 sq m -> 25,900,000,000 pounds of steel, 1,618,750,000 pounds of germanium and 284,900,000,000 pounds of glazing

At an efficiency of 20%, that 10,000 sq mi panel would produce about

10,000 sq mi x 5280 x5280 x 12 x 12 = 40,144,896,000,000
divide by 3003 sq in. in a std panel = 13,368,263,736 panels.
Times 225W power from a standard panel = 3,007,859,340,659 equals roughly 3 TW.

Let's produce one terrawatt each from coal, natural gas and petroleum.

One TW would require 952.4 million pounds of coal per hour
One TW would require 101 billion cu feet of natural gas per hour
One TW would require 70 million gallons of petroleum per hour.

In 25 years we would need to burn more than

208.575 trillion pounds of coal
22.12 quadrillion cubic feet of natural gas
15.33 trillion gallons of petroleum

Get it?

Actually it is more important to know how much we will increase the use of Natural Resources to build Solar Panels forever, which is what is proposed.

 

[Crick]

You didn't read my post. I clearly demonstrate that your contention that alternative energy technologies will use more resources than fossil fuel generation to be out and out nonsense.

Where are you planning on getting fossil fuels forever?

How will humanity get along when temperatures are up 10C and sea level is up 20 meters or so?

Why would you need to build solar panels forever? They are not consumed by the production of electricity.