Saturday, March 16, 2013

The Light at the End of the Energy Tunnel

The United States is facing a crossroads in its future energy usage.  Will we choose to stay on the traditional fossil fuel track for the foreseeable future facing the same environmental, health, and political problems, or will we choose to start down a more sustainable path?  Although some have criticized solar energy, it offers one of the few large-scale solutions to our future energy needs.  Some sobering environmental facts may help to shed light on solar energy’s potential and importance.

The current population of the earth is seven billion and still growing.  It is estimated that it will peak at between 9 and 14 billion.  Not only is the population growing, but average per capita resource use is increasing and predicted to continue to do so.  The planet’s energy consumption will sky-rocket in the future.  Can fossil fuels meet the demand?  Oil production is predicted to peak in the next 20 years and then decline.  Natural gas, for all its promise will do the same, peaking in probably 30 to 40 years.  The cost of both of these will only increase over time.  Coal could produce energy for another 900 years or so in the United States.  However, coal is the dirtiest of the fossil fuels.  Coal combustion emits many more radioactive particles into the air than the nuclear industry.  As the largest emitter of mercury, particulates, sulfides, nitrous oxides, hydrocarbons (smog), and CO2, coal has considerable environmental and health costs every year, leading to the deaths of an estimated 200,000 to 600,000 people in the US alone.  Cleaning up coal would add considerably to its price.  The nuclear industry promises a long-term supply, but still faces the problem of safely transporting and disposing of, not only radioactive spent fuel rods, but also used radioactive piping and production equipment.  To date no practical solution has been found, and the radioactive waste has been stored on site at the nuclear plants.  Many of these plants are running out of room for the waste.  In addition, many of the plants that were scheduled for decommission are still in use and operating at greater risk of releasing radioactivity, because the solution to the radioactive waste has not been found. 

In the end, uranium, like the fossil fuels, is finite and polluting, eventually necessitating the switch to renewable energy sources.  But which renewable energy source to use?  Biofuels are often touted.  Most agricultural experts agree that, in order to feed 9 – 14 billion people into the future, most or all of our current agricultural land must remain in food production and not converted to energy use.  Opening up more wilderness areas for agriculture would put our ecosystems and global ecological services at risk.  Some promising new biofuels such as artificial oil produced from algae, ethanol produced from discarded agricultural waste such as corn stalks, or methane produced from livestock waste, offer perhaps limited and select solutions and should be considered.  However, biofuels still face the cost of distribution and will probably never be able to supply all of humanity’s needs.  Hydropower has been maxed out – we have dammed nearly every river possible.  Wind and tidal power have much more potential left and together with solar offer the hope for the future.  However, they are more limited geographically to areas with wind or tide potential.

What about solar?  Why will it be the major work horse of the future?  The reasons are numerous. 

1) In short, it is ubiquitous – it is found everywhere in the temperate and tropical zones in abundance.  Everyone can use it.  Germany, the world’s leader in solar energy production, is higher in latitude and so receives much less direct sunlight than the US – there is so much more potential here.  In addition, it is much cloudier than many parts of the United States, demonstrating that solar energy can still be utilized to a great extent in areas with significant cloud cover. 

2) Solar eliminates energy loss through transmission and the expense of erecting power transmission infrastructure, because it can be locally generated.  Delivering energy to impoverished rural areas would be less burdensome for developing countries.  Solar would allow developing nations to leapfrog dirtier, costlier energy sources and the building of costly power distribution systems in order to achieve rapid development in rural areas. 

3) Solar is the only energy source that is getting LESS expensive and will continue to do so, despite receiving far fewer government subsidies than the fossil fuels. 

4) Solar would allow us to build a smarter, more efficient grid system with more decentralized energy production that would be more resistant to mass power failures. 

5) Solar is, of course, much cleaner than fossil fuels and nuclear energy.  Switching to solar energy in cities would help to reduce CO2 production and urban air pollution and their resulting health and environmental costs, and solar involves no radioactive waste.

6) Finally, solar is the only source of energy that can supply the energy of our growing world population into the future.  The energy from sunlight that strikes the earth in one hour is more than is used by the entire world’s population in one year.  This means that there is an ample and endlessly continuing supply of solar energy for a future world of fourteen billion people and a global high-tech economy.  No other energy source offers this light at the end of the tunnel.
 
Plano Solar Energy Advocate (MY)

4 comments:

  1. How to increase Solar usage nation wide in the shortest amount of time:
    What is holding America Back?
    http://www.grist.org/solar-power/2011-08-08-clever-accounting-lets-utilities-cash-in-when-you-go-solar

    The Utilities want to maximize the profits for the shareholders and so they donate to Candidates to get them to support traditional Energy Production, which does not include anything but a token amount of Solar... We are being "forced" to accept their Energy "mix", instead of using our own and being fairly paid for the Energy we produce and push INTO the grid!!

    When The Energy Utilities pay each of us for the energy we put into the grid, at the same rate that the Utility charges for that same energy someone else uses at that exact time, then you will see Solar being installed Nation wide!

    ReplyDelete
  2. For all those that continue to spread disinformation about Solar not working:

    The Germans are leading the world and here is what they say:

    The Future of Nuclear and fossil fuels: Only for Back-up for renewables
    http://wp.me/p26pKF-2Ff
    snip
    The two largest electricity utilities in Germany – E.ON and RWE – have declared they will build no more fossil fuel generation plants because they are not needed, challenging a widespread belief that the phasing out of nuclear in Europe’s most industrialized economy will require more coal-fired generation to be built.

    Both E.ON and RWE say the rapid expansion of renewable energy, particularly solar but also wind, would make up for the loss of capacity from nuclear. “We won’t be building any more gas and coal power generation plants in western Europe, because the market does not need them,” a spokesman for E.ON told reporters at a briefing at the group’s headquarters on Friday. RWE made a similar statement a week earlier. A third major operator, Vattenfall, agreed that the market in Western Europe is oversupplied but said some limited capacity may be needed in the southern part of Germany.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Historical Subsidies to Energy in the United States: What's Missing from MISI

    http://www.earthtrack.net/blog/historical-subsidies-energy-united-states-whats-missing-misi

    ReplyDelete
  4. This blog post is excellent probably because of how well the subject was developed. I like some of the comments too though I would prefer we all stay on the subject in order add value to the subject!

    pool heating

    ReplyDelete