4 ms·

It's always a feedback loop. You can get it cheaper because we have better technologies that make it possible and we have better technologies available because

It's always a feedback loop. You can get it cheaper because we have better technologies that make it possible and we have better technologies available because we can make it cheaper. There are real attempts at all sorts of things. That doesn't mean they are feasible at- scale. And we are talking energy here not just electricity. Thanks for the warning but you couldn't be further from the reality with regards to that part.

epistasis 6y ago
True about the feedback loops! However I think we often underestimate what can be done simply by scaling up an economy. Nobody (as in no published estimates) anticipated the precipitous drop in battery costs, or solar PV costs. And even more people were skeptical of the dramatic costs on wind turbines. Many (most?) utility executives and planners aren't aware of these cost drops, based on their planned deployments and their IRP processes. They often use old cost estimates rather than projections of costs into the future, even! I wish you tons of luck on your ventures, we really need more people like you out there!
- ThomPete 6y ago
  I wish it was that simple. Solar and wind are less than 1% of world energy consumption and not expected to grow substantially. It's nothing what so ever and there is a reason why a lot of funding for renewables died out in the beginning of this century and only countries with a political agenda is left. China reduced their investments into alternatives last year too. With regards to storage until we have proper fuel-cells that are mobile and easy to fill up we aren't closer to anything useful than we are to fusion or Thorium, in fact Thorium and fusion might be more likely to happen.
  - Tade0 6y ago
    Solar and wind are less than 1% of world energy consumption and not expected to grow substantially. Citation needed, as I was unable to find a source that backed up any of these claims. in fact Thorium and fusion might be more likely to happen. What signs point to that?
    - ThomPete 6y ago
      https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/?country=WORLD&fuel=Energy%20consumption&indicator=Total%20final%20consumption%20(TFC)%20by%20source https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/?country=WORLD&fuel=... With regards to Thorium and Fusion. Again i don't think anyone here really appreciates how hard a problem energy storage is. Fuel Cells that can actually be used like oil or gas or coal is sci-fi and the some still to be seen magic grid won't change that. A good tell is that I have gotten 20 downvotes from this discussion but not a single piece of evidence that what I am saying is wrong. Not a single technology or system in use at scale. Only wishful thinking.
      - epistasis 6y ago
        You have been very wrong, and refused to acknowledge the rebuttals to your false points. For example, you point to IEA'a current solar usage stats, so you are presumably using them for your far more controversial statement "not expected to grow substantially," which is a somewhat comical thing to say. The people who have been making that prediction of "not expected to grow substantially" have been ludicrously wrong, for a looooong time. This is from way back in 2017, and the IEA has not improved their projections since then: https://steinbuch.wordpress.com/2017/06/12/photovoltaic-growth-reality-versus-projections-of-the-international-energy-agency/ https://steinbuch.wordpress.com/2017/06/12/photovoltaic-grow... The IEA stats are probably correct for current usage. It's a lot harder to put your thumb on the scale when it comes to grid measurements. But when it comes to renewable tech, the IEA has been hilariously wrong because they are backward looking and refuse to acknowledge the reality of what's going on right now. Accusing others of "wishful thinking" when you can't back up your own claims, is not a very civil thing to do. To ignore the cited examples of where storage has worked is also not a very civil thing to do. To make such broad proclamations about the feasibility of a technology without even being aware of the current deployments is not a very wise position to take. Talking about shipping technologies low adoption rates as proof that they cannot grow is a logically incorrect statement. But to then propose technologies that are not shipping and are no where close to shipping (thorium, fusion), as more realistic, well, let's bring up again who is doing the wishful thinking and wearing rose colored glasses.

epistasis 6y ago

True about the feedback loops! However I think we often underestimate what can be done simply by scaling up an economy. Nobody (as in no published estimates) anticipated the precipitous drop in battery costs, or solar PV costs. And even more people were skeptical of the dramatic costs on wind turbines. Many (most?) utility executives and planners aren't aware of these cost drops, based on their planned deployments and their IRP processes. They often use old cost estimates rather than projections of costs into the future, even! I wish you tons of luck on your ventures, we really need more people like you out there!

ThomPete 6y ago
I wish it was that simple. Solar and wind are less than 1% of world energy consumption and not expected to grow substantially. It's nothing what so ever and there is a reason why a lot of funding for renewables died out in the beginning of this century and only countries with a political agenda is left. China reduced their investments into alternatives last year too. With regards to storage until we have proper fuel-cells that are mobile and easy to fill up we aren't closer to anything useful than we are to fusion or Thorium, in fact Thorium and fusion might be more likely to happen.
- Tade0 6y ago
  Solar and wind are less than 1% of world energy consumption and not expected to grow substantially. Citation needed, as I was unable to find a source that backed up any of these claims. in fact Thorium and fusion might be more likely to happen. What signs point to that?
  - ThomPete 6y ago
    https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/?country=WORLD&fuel=Energy%20consumption&indicator=Total%20final%20consumption%20(TFC)%20by%20source https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/?country=WORLD&fuel=... With regards to Thorium and Fusion. Again i don't think anyone here really appreciates how hard a problem energy storage is. Fuel Cells that can actually be used like oil or gas or coal is sci-fi and the some still to be seen magic grid won't change that. A good tell is that I have gotten 20 downvotes from this discussion but not a single piece of evidence that what I am saying is wrong. Not a single technology or system in use at scale. Only wishful thinking.
    - epistasis 6y ago
      You have been very wrong, and refused to acknowledge the rebuttals to your false points. For example, you point to IEA'a current solar usage stats, so you are presumably using them for your far more controversial statement "not expected to grow substantially," which is a somewhat comical thing to say. The people who have been making that prediction of "not expected to grow substantially" have been ludicrously wrong, for a looooong time. This is from way back in 2017, and the IEA has not improved their projections since then: https://steinbuch.wordpress.com/2017/06/12/photovoltaic-growth-reality-versus-projections-of-the-international-energy-agency/ https://steinbuch.wordpress.com/2017/06/12/photovoltaic-grow... The IEA stats are probably correct for current usage. It's a lot harder to put your thumb on the scale when it comes to grid measurements. But when it comes to renewable tech, the IEA has been hilariously wrong because they are backward looking and refuse to acknowledge the reality of what's going on right now. Accusing others of "wishful thinking" when you can't back up your own claims, is not a very civil thing to do. To ignore the cited examples of where storage has worked is also not a very civil thing to do. To make such broad proclamations about the feasibility of a technology without even being aware of the current deployments is not a very wise position to take. Talking about shipping technologies low adoption rates as proof that they cannot grow is a logically incorrect statement. But to then propose technologies that are not shipping and are no where close to shipping (thorium, fusion), as more realistic, well, let's bring up again who is doing the wishful thinking and wearing rose colored glasses.