[Graeme]

Shifting the world to 100 percent clean, renewable energy as early as 2030 -- here are the numbers

Most of the technology needed to shift the world from fossil fuel to clean, renewable energy already exists. Implementing that technology requires overcoming obstacles in planning and politics, but doing so could result in a 30 percent decrease in global power demand, say Stanford civil and environmental engineering Professor Mark Z. Jacobson and University of California-Davis researcher Mark Delucchi.

To make clear the extent of those hurdles – and how they could be overcome – they have written an article that is the cover story in the November issue of Scientific American. In it, they present new research mapping out and evaluating a quantitative plan for powering the entire world on wind, water and solar energy, including an assessment of the materials needed and costs. And it will ultimately be cheaper than sticking with fossil fuel or going nuclear, they say.

The key is turning to wind, water and solar energy to generate electrical power – making a massive commitment to them – and eliminating combustion as a way to generate power for vehicles as well as for normal electricity use.

eurekalert

[eastbay]

Ok. In 20 years. We better hurry. 5% of the way to this mighty goal each and every year. Yes, it's doable. But we have other things going on diverting our increasingly scarce resources. So I rather doubt this will be a priority.

[mos6507]

But we have other things going on diverting our increasingly scarce resources.

Yep, it's that time of year again.

[Homesteader]

But we have other things going on diverting our increasingly scarce resources.

Yep, it's that time of year again.

Yeah, that and candy corn should drive the BDI up a couple of hundred points.

[billg]

Clean is not hydro, solar, wind...

Clean is Eugene Mallove, Stanley Meyer, Tom Valone...

TPTB only want you to know about alternatives that aren't really competitive with fossil fuels. Peak Oil is a complete scam. "Scam" meaning.. there may be a finite supply of fossil fuels in the ground...and the peak supply may be near...but there are no shortage of competitive substitutes...in fact no shortage of substitutes that are superior to fossil fuels in a myriad of ways.

[ian807]

Looks like a bunch of messages got deleted from this post since yesterday.

To reiterate....

Yes, the technology exists. Yes, we could do it. We have plenty of ability to save ourselves and no, we won't do it in a timeframe that matters.

Rome didn't have to fall. Neither did the Mayans, Sumerians, or most other large civilizations. There are always solutions. Often, both the problem and the answer is known ahead of time, but power politics prevents effective action.

[mcgowanjm]

Baltic Exchange Dry Index (BDI)
& Crude Oil (red)

They track each other like a mirror.

So we're gonna make these CapeSize/Panamax run
on solar?

By Thanksgiving both will be collapsing.

Banks are controlling this country and policy. Until they are brought
to heel:

“All of the so-called solutions to global warming take industrial capitalism as a given,” said Jensen, who wrote “Endgame” and “The Culture of Make Believe.” “The natural world is supposed to conform to industrial capitalism. This is insane. It is out of touch with physical reality. What’s real is real. Any social system—it does not matter if we are talking about industrial capitalism or an indigenous Tolowa people—their way of life, is dependent upon a real, physical world. Without a real, physical world you don’t have anything. When you separate yourself from the real world you start to hallucinate. You believe the machines are more real than real life. How many machines are within 10 feet of you and how many wild animals are within a hundred yards? How many machines do you have a daily relationship with? We have forgotten what is real.”

[yesplease]

Ok. In 20 years. We better hurry. 5% of the way to this mighty goal each and every year. Yes, it's doable. But we have other things going on diverting our increasingly scarce resources. So I rather doubt this will be a priority.

What resources are scarce?

[yesplease]

Yes. I responded earlier to show that the cost to replace our ICE car with electric would cost (approximate) twelve quadrilion (thousand trillions) for the cars and a mere 12 trillion for the panels.

Where?

[Tyler_JC]

12 quadrillion?

1.7 million dollars per human being on planet earth?

That seems like a pretty high estimate.

There are 700 million cars in the world (give or take).

Even if you replaced all of them with a Tesla roadster ($100K/each), that would still only be $70 trillion.

[yesplease]

Right. My wrong. 14 trillion at $20,000 per

That's a pretty excessive premium for a PHEV, what are your assumptions based on? With your $12 trillion dollar figure for solar, at $7.50/W, that's ~1600gW of capacity, enough to make an extra ~3 trillion kWh/year give or take, and with drivers at ~3 trillion miles per year, that would place the U.S. passenger fleet at about 1000Wh/mile. A small 3000+lb SUV is at ~250Wh/mile, so your fleet would have to be composed of ~10000+lb SUVs.

In that case, I guess $20,000 per is suitable, but it's a bit excessive, don't you think? I mean, I think most people would be O.K. with a $27,000 40 mile PHEV along the lines of the Prius, but if you've been getting all Corny w/ TheAntiDoomer, I ain't one to complain. You can choose whatever lifestyle ya want.