4 ms·

There's a considerable amount of embodied energy and embodied pollution in Solar Panel and Wind Turbine construction. I think this is lost on most people in Si

There's a considerable amount of embodied energy and embodied pollution in Solar Panel and Wind Turbine construction. I think this is lost on most people in Silicon Valley.

ori_b 10y ago
Got a better alternative?
- LightskinKanye 10y ago
  They have billions but aren't sponsoring scholarships for graduate physics degrees like Boeing or any "corporate" company does. If they want to see their 10xs breakthroughs (which they sure talk a lot about) they should be throwing money at condensed matter physics research and just support in general for physics. Its easy to get a 10x in software but energy is a whole different game. That way the smartest people won't have to decide between taking a high paying engineering/programming job or going into physics. It all comes down to probabilities and the amount of people in the field is really the best approach towards making a breakthrough.
  - kumarski 10y ago
    high paying code writing or going into physics/engineering. Engineering is much different than software architecture. One requires hard sciences competency, whereas one you can go into for years with none, and be successful.
    - LightskinKanye 10y ago
      But when the smartest undergrads are looking at potential career choices they see engineering and CS as means to a good life. Without the support and money from companies who care, many will choose the highest paying option
    - walshemj 10y ago
      I think you will find that doing what google does at scale does require some "hard science" :-)
      - kumarski 10y ago
        Exceptional case. Most don't.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
kevinchen 10y ago
Yes, but there is also a considerable amount of energy involved with extracting fossil fuels, refining them, and delivering them between those steps and the end users. And there are so many pollution externalities: increased risk of disasters like spills, and people who get respiratory diseases/cancers from breathing polluted air and die early.
philipkglass 10y ago
The full life cycle emissions-equivalence impacts of solar/wind are much lower than any fossil source, so reminding people of the embodied energy feels more diversionary than informative. The IPCC's 2014 median estimates indicated that the heaviest-lifecycle renewable source (utility scale solar PV) has only 9.8% of the impact of the lightest fossil source (combined cycle gas turbine). Onshore wind power has only 2.2% of the impact. (For comparison with coal the numbers are respectively 5.8% and 1.3%) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life-cycle_greenhouse-gas_emissions_of_energy_sources#2014_IPCC.2C_Global_warming_potential_of_selected_electricity_sources https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life-cycle_greenhouse-gas_emis...
st3v3r 10y ago
And considerably more in using fossil fuels.
- kumarski 10y ago
  Grid shifting takes 30-80 years and is usually only partial.

There's a considerable amount of embodied energy and embodied pollution in Solar Panel and Wind Turbine construction. I think this is lost on most people in Silicon Valley.

ori_b 10y ago

Got a better alternative?

LightskinKanye 10y ago
They have billions but aren't sponsoring scholarships for graduate physics degrees like Boeing or any "corporate" company does. If they want to see their 10xs breakthroughs (which they sure talk a lot about) they should be throwing money at condensed matter physics research and just support in general for physics. Its easy to get a 10x in software but energy is a whole different game. That way the smartest people won't have to decide between taking a high paying engineering/programming job or going into physics. It all comes down to probabilities and the amount of people in the field is really the best approach towards making a breakthrough.
- kumarski 10y ago
  high paying code writing or going into physics/engineering. Engineering is much different than software architecture. One requires hard sciences competency, whereas one you can go into for years with none, and be successful.
  - LightskinKanye 10y ago
    But when the smartest undergrads are looking at potential career choices they see engineering and CS as means to a good life. Without the support and money from companies who care, many will choose the highest paying option
  - walshemj 10y ago
    I think you will find that doing what google does at scale does require some "hard science" :-)
    - kumarski 10y ago
      Exceptional case. Most don't.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

kevinchen 10y ago

Yes, but there is also a considerable amount of energy involved with extracting fossil fuels, refining them, and delivering them between those steps and the end users. And there are so many pollution externalities: increased risk of disasters like spills, and people who get respiratory diseases/cancers from breathing polluted air and die early.

philipkglass 10y ago

The full life cycle emissions-equivalence impacts of solar/wind are much lower than any fossil source, so reminding people of the embodied energy feels more diversionary than informative. The IPCC's 2014 median estimates indicated that the heaviest-lifecycle renewable source (utility scale solar PV) has only 9.8% of the impact of the lightest fossil source (combined cycle gas turbine). Onshore wind power has only 2.2% of the impact. (For comparison with coal the numbers are respectively 5.8% and 1.3%) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life-cycle_greenhouse-gas_emissions_of_energy_sources#2014_IPCC.2C_Global_warming_potential_of_selected_electricity_sources https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life-cycle_greenhouse-gas_emis...

st3v3r 10y ago

And considerably more in using fossil fuels.

kumarski 10y ago
Grid shifting takes 30-80 years and is usually only partial.