There are many a mystery in the world. Why do philosophies that result in mountains of dead people and poverty still get serious consideration from some? Why do people who favor decreasing law enforcement seem surprised when crime goes up? Why is the restriction of speech on campus seen as liberal? There are countless current beliefs that rival Middle Ages religion.
Perhaps the greatest current mystery--certainly in the damage promised--is the shift away from fossil fuel. Now this concept includes a basic, astonishing dogma: people and cultures who have not yet gained from the use of fossil fuel will not get to do so.
The switch away from fossil fuels is based upon a speculation. The Little Ice Age in Europe began around 1300; a sharper and more abrupt onset of cold started in 1570 and lasted for about a hundred and ten years. Since then, there has been a rise in the earth's temperature. That rise is said to threaten life on earth and is said to be the result of fossil fuel use. The answer is to stop fossil fuel use.
The question of modeling here is probably the basic one. Are the modeling estimates convincing enough to reverse the greatest engine of economic, health, and comfort growth in history? That aside, what are the complexities? And what are the environmental and economic costs of this alternative miracle?
First, efficiency. Solar panels convert photons to electricity. The maximal conversion is about 33%. We currently are about 27% efficient. Wind turbines convert wind energy to electricity at about 60% max. Current technology is at about 45%. Coal efficiency is about 40% and natural gas efficiency is around 60%. This, coupled with the variability of the sun and wind, has stimulated the hope of a battery rescue.
There have not been significant advances in the battery in the last one hundred years. And the task is daunting. It is said that Tesla's huge battery factory in Nevada would need 500 years to build enough batteries to supply the U.S. with its needs for a single year. We could stack them on the border.
Second, the creation of a battery. A single EV battery weighs about 1/2 tons but requires the mining of 250 tons of earth for the minerals within it. Each. That is a huge project and will require a lot of environmental sacrifices. The scale is considerable. A 100 Megawatt wind farm could supply 75,000 American homes. However, it would take 30,000 tons of iron ore, 50,000 tons of concrete, and 900 tons of nonrecyclable plastics to build. Each. To build a solar farm for 75,000 homes would require 150% more iron ore, cement, and plastics. Each.
The mining of rare earths would have to increase by up to 2000%. This requires deference to nations incredibly hostile to the U.S., mostly child labor to turn a blind eye to, and an undetermined destruction of environmental resources with the historic risk of species extinction and the release of new perhaps toxic organisms. (China accounts for over 60% of rare earth element production in the world and controls around thirty percent of the world’s reserves, estimated at 99 million tons.)
There are other components. There are sizable energy requirements in the mining and refining. There is an unmeasured nonrecyclable waste. Wind and solar equipment last 20 years, gas turbines last 40. By 2050 the nonrecyclable solar waste will be 2X the current plastic waste. Plus wind and battery waste. (a lot from Mills)
Wealth does not come from making people safe. It comes from shortages.
First, efficiency. Solar panels convert photons to electricity. The maximal conversion is about 33%. We currently are about 27% efficient. Wind turbines convert wind energy to electricity at about 60% max. Current technology is at about 45%. Coal efficiency is about 40% and natural gas efficiency is around 60%. This, coupled with the variability of the sun and wind, has stimulated the hope of a battery rescue.
There have not been significant advances in the battery in the last one hundred years. And the task is daunting. It is said that Tesla's huge battery factory in Nevada would need 500 years to build enough batteries to supply the U.S. with its needs for a single year. We could stack them on the border.
Second, the creation of a battery. A single EV battery weighs about 1/2 tons but requires the mining of 250 tons of earth for the minerals within it. Each. That is a huge project and will require a lot of environmental sacrifices. The scale is considerable. A 100 Megawatt wind farm could supply 75,000 American homes. However, it would take 30,000 tons of iron ore, 50,000 tons of concrete, and 900 tons of nonrecyclable plastics to build. Each. To build a solar farm for 75,000 homes would require 150% more iron ore, cement, and plastics. Each.
The mining of rare earths would have to increase by up to 2000%. This requires deference to nations incredibly hostile to the U.S., mostly child labor to turn a blind eye to, and an undetermined destruction of environmental resources with the historic risk of species extinction and the release of new perhaps toxic organisms. (China accounts for over 60% of rare earth element production in the world and controls around thirty percent of the world’s reserves, estimated at 99 million tons.)
There are other components. There are sizable energy requirements in the mining and refining. There is an unmeasured nonrecyclable waste. Wind and solar equipment last 20 years, gas turbines last 40. By 2050 the nonrecyclable solar waste will be 2X the current plastic waste. Plus wind and battery waste. (a lot from Mills)
Wealth does not come from making people safe. It comes from shortages.
1 comment:
History is violent Ideals are not
Plato thought that the nature of man was violence
Post a Comment