Why is 'Green Energy' Alternative?

0
hugs

Renewable energy is:

Energy resources that are naturally replenishing but flow-limited. They are virtually inexhaustible in duration but limited in the amount of energy that is available per unit of time.

Some types of green energy include: Solar; Wind; Hydro and tidal/wave; Geothermal and Ocean thermal; and Biomass/Bioenergy/Biofeuls. Despite our knowledge of the need to turn towards Green Energy, as opposed to conventional energy generation, it continues to be viewed as alternative. There will be a time, though, when it will be mainstream -- either by necessity or choice.

Reasons and arguments for why green energy is alternative

There are many reasons why Green Energy remains alternative. Some are based on fact, some are fanciful, and others are completely biased by vested interests. Here are some:

  • In certain fields the technology is available. In others, however, the technology just aint quite there yet. Research and development dollars have been used in other areas or in existing conventional energy generation (not renewable electricity generation). This is no excuse, though, as we know enough to get started (evidenced by the already existing renewable technologies).
  • Costs can be prohibitive (i.e. on the macro level). The cost of implementing infrastructure is neither cheap nor simple. The amount required at start-up can be huge. This is outweighed, however, by the “free fuel” once established (e.g. solar, wind).
  • Renewable energy generation is also environmentally destructive. Media concentration tends towards wind farms and bird migration paths. Hydropower is also another biggie that negatively impacts upon the ecology. Myself, I worry about hydropower and the negative impacts that it creates. Compared to the use of fossil fuels I wonder which is the lesser evil? The weigh up is no Great Barrier Reef (in Australia) left due to climate change or the use of hydropower (where actions can be taken to mitigate environmental destruction).
  • Inefficiencies in technology. That is, the vast amounts of surface area required for solar or the land area needed for green wind power. Also, the inefficiencies due to the lack of correct weather conditions required to generate energy.  And your point is?
  • Green energy is a polluter. If you consider the whole of the life cycle and not just the actual fuel, green is not the first word that comes to mind. Well every little bit helps right.
  • Loss of jobs. Carbon reduction means unemployment.  On the other hand, job creation occurs with the adoption of new technology and industries.
  • The economy will go bust. Nice try!
  • If we use renewable energy, we will get a large growth on our nose and start running through sunflower fields with no shoes and long hair.
 

Ok, ok. So the last argument was made up! Partly to see if you are concentrating and partly to show how bizarre the reasons for non-adoption are. 

Urine, Vibrations, and Artificial Plants as a Green Energy Source

On a final note, here are some interesting green energy ideas:

  1. Urine to power batteries (read more).
  2. Using city vibrations (feet, traffic) to power lights (work in progress) (read more).
  3. Using artificial plants/trees to generate green energy using wind and solar (read more).

For some great practical ideas, check out C Robbs comments (Resilience Thinking).

Comments

Recycling of course!

Recycling of course! One of your best bits of advice yet! Anymore handy hints like that C Robb? Look forward to it :)

I see the loss of jobs argument mainly presented by big business here in Australia (and the government that was in at the time which was so far in their pocket that they could not see the light of day) rather than the Unions. But I see your point TPWard.

I am not so sure about the birth rate debate either. Of course we have a carrying capacity, but I see the problem to be more about our pure greed??? It's simple. Just stop consuming so much!

Recycled Tea or Urine powered personal thermal generation

When snorkeling or surfing in cold water, in which you will be wearing a wet suit, always drink lots of hot tea before going in. It will help warm you up prior  to that first icy flow of water into the suit. The nice thing about Tea is that it goes in hot and comes out hot too! Just be sure to thoroughly rinse the suit later ;-) Hmmm.... is that reusing or recycling?

 

Hey I know these batteries

Hey I know these urine batteries (Actually they are more like "anything liquid" batteries:saliva, water, ...). They were demonstrated last year at the CES conference:aa-nopopo-0 and I can prove it! :-)

 

Mainstream indeed!

 If we're going to talk about using urine to power batteries, that's mainstream in a different way, isn't it?  ;)  (And do you still think my last post was too much information?)

On a weightier note, the arguments you lay out against the mainstreaming of green energy are frustrating ones, since some of them (pollution, environmental destruction, inefficiencies) can describe coal, oil, and other mainstream energy sources as well.  And the whole job-loss argument is soooo reactionary . . . should we have stopped advancing technology to protect buggy-whip and typewriter manufacturers?  It's the cause of featherbedding (union contracts to keep obsolete jobs intact) in the United States and will continue to be an excuse to do things like we always have.

Of course, the more innovative companies will just greenwash their current operations, like the push towards clean coal.  It's like when I was a little kid and I would drag myself through the process of cleaning my room or doing other chores; ultimately I spent far more time and energy trying to avoid fulfilling my obligations than I ever would have just "manning up" and doing the job right the first time.  I learned that lesson; I wonder if the big energy companies ever will?

The truth is, most of the downsides of green energy production have to do with scale, just as the problems with conventional (can we call it "black?") production.  We're paying the price for doing such a fine job on reducing the death rate and being unwilling to reduce the birth rate, so producing enough energy for the evergrowing billions of humans is tougher and tougher.  Each billion souls we add makes the impacts of our energy production geometrically, if not logarithmically, more painful for the planet.

President Jimmy Carter wanted the USA to make the painful choice to switch to solar power in the 1970s, and it's getting harder every year to make the switch off of oil.  I wonder how painful it will have to be before we follow your advice?

 

Post new comment

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <p> <span> <div> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <img> <map> <area> <hr> <br> <br /> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <table> <tr> <td> <em> <b> <u> <i> <strong> <del> <ins> <sub> <sup> <quote> <blockquote> <pre> <address> <code> <cite> <embed> <object> <param> <strike> <caption> <tbody>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

Notifications
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.