5 ms·
The details can be debated, but the trend is real and has tremendous real world implications. Clean air, enables 100% solar, 2.4 sec zero to sixty, and so on.
by marze 10y ago
The details can be debated, but the trend is real and has tremendous real world implications.
Clean air, enables 100% solar, 2.4 sec zero to sixty, and so on.
- Neliquat 10y agoClean in the city, most of that power is still from coal, just further from your tailpipe. You are just moving numbers around.
- Cerium 10y agoStill, it is cheaper to add emissions monitoring and control on a single power plant than a few hundred thousand moving power plants.
- SomeCallMeTim 10y agoMy roof is covered in solar, enough so that I'm net negative on electricity. No coal power here.
- akshayn 10y agoThis is no longer true in most of the USA (and many other countries) [1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_long_tailpipe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_long_tailpipe
- johngalt 10y agoBut those numbers being moved around are not equivalent. A centralized power plant is vastly more efficient and clean than thousands of little gasoline engines. This is true even for coal. Not to mention it allows us to make policy decisions about where our energy comes from at the source without changing anything at the consumer side. If we find out that <energy source> is unhealthy, unsustainable, running out etc... We can change one power plant rather than millions of autos. If OPEC turns the taps off, we aren't all suddenly paying twice as much to drive to work.
- woodandsteel 10y agoWe are moving from fossil fuels to renewables. There are a number of different parts in the ff system, and we can't replace the whole thing all at once, so we are working on different parts, and over time. And it's working. But I bet you already knew that.
- ekianjo 10y ago100% solar? we are super far from that and we need anyway to produce energy even at night.
- mikeash 10y agoWe need to have energy at night. With enough storage capability, you don't have to produce it at night.
- Reason077 10y agoIt doesn't just have to be solar. There's plenty of other forms of renewable energy (hydro, wind, tidal) that all become more viable and efficient if you can add storage. Better grid technology will help too. If we can transmit energy efficiently over long distances, there's less storage required. Build a global grid and the whole planet can run on renewables: it's always sunny (or windy) somewhere.
- ekianjo 10y ago> With enough storage capability, you don't have to produce it at night. I'm not talking about powering one's home, I'm talking about powering cities and infrastructure - we are far away from having this kind of storage capability, and it's cheaper to produce electricity 24/7 than to build that kind of storage capacity anyway. It's all a matter of ROI.
- mikeash 10y agoPowering cities and infrastructure is qualitatively the same, it just takes more. And sure, the capacity is far from being there, but it's a matter of building it out.
- ekianjo 10y agoAs I said it's not just a matter of "can we build it", because obviously there's always a way to build it, but does it make financial sense instead of having a local powerplant running 24/7. So far, it's clearly not the case - capacity is way more expensive.