3 ms·
Let's recall that the author of that first link literally sued his scientific critics who published a peer-reviewed take-down of his 100% renewable plan a few y
by acidburnNSA 7y ago
Let's recall that the author of that first link literally sued his scientific critics who published a peer-reviewed take-down of his 100% renewable plan a few years ago.
https://www.technologyreview.com/f/609308/a-renewable-energy-champion-is-suing-his-scientific-critics/ https://www.technologyreview.com/f/609308/a-renewable-energy...
One element not often mentioned in these is the Energy Return On Investment which drops to around 5:1 as intermittent renewables with massive backup systems ramp up. This low level (5:1) seriously challenges the renewable transition plans.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2019.100399 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2019.100399
Nuclear eroi is closer to 50:1.
- kragen 7y agoThat paper looks very interesting, thanks! I'll have to read it. I agree that the cost of storage is an important concern, but the calculations I've done don't substantiate the worries I've often seen. On skimming the paper, it isn't obvious what level of overprovisioning, utility-scale storage, and demand response they're presuming, or what learning curves for PV and battery costs (including energy and material costs). Have you been able to find where they described those assumptions?