4 ms·
What are you talking about "history shows"? There's plenty of technologies that we are using today that previously failed. Like touch screens, now they are eve
by cracell 9y ago
What are you talking about "history shows"?
There's plenty of technologies that we are using today that previously failed. Like touch screens, now they are everywhere. And pretty much ever single technology had naysayers saying it wouldn't work for one reason or another.
And yeah most of the time the naysayers are right. Most attempts to innovate fail.
But maybe in 20 years these could completely replace traditional wind turbines and people will see them as the non-viable technology.
We don't know. Hence the need for research and development.
- scblock 9y agoThe history of "innovative" renewable energy development ideas of this general type over the last 15 or so years. Wind energy is my field, and I pay close attention to these ideas because I find them interesting. It's also why I'm so negative at this point: exactly zero of the ideas I've looked at have become commercial, and very few are still in active research. Most have quietly died. I'm not remotely disagreeing with the general need for research and development. But I am firmly of the opinion that it should be research and development, not something planned to go from concept to commercial with an aggressive timeline like this.