3 ms·
> Collecting 1% of that energy could easily support a western style lifestyle for 10 billion people. Yes, but how can we collect that 1%? Even considering 100%
by pif 14y ago
> Collecting 1% of that energy could easily support a western style lifestyle for 10 billion people.
Yes, but how can we collect that 1%? Even considering 100% efficiency for solar panels, we'd need to cover 1% of the global Earth surface (land and oceans). Even more, we'd need at least to double it in order to have a 1% covered 24h/24. I'm afraid we don't have all the required material.
- Retric 14y agoWind and Hydro collect far more solar power than a solar panel as far a surface area is concerned and requires little in the way of rare materials. Also, we cover more than 1% of the earth with plants, but they don't tend to be all that efficient bump them into the 15+% range by say genetically engineering something to collect wavelengths that Chlorophyll skips over and the numbers get intense. We also farm the oceans but focus way to high on the food chain to get much in the way of efficiency. PS: There are also plenty of raw materials to cover the earth in solar panels but that's hardly unnecessary. But as far as the raw numbers go, covering 10% of the worlds oceans with floating solar collectors is vary doable and has a lower impact. (At the cost of significant climate change.)
- Retric 14y agoAlso the earth is a sphere, if you focus on where the sun is, and used tracking solar collectors you could probably get away with 1/2 of 1% of the earths total surface area @100% efficiency. And even less than that if you added wind, hydro, and geothermal. PS: Or ~1.5% with 33% efficient solar panels. Which might seem like a lot, but we already use a lot of land to generate energy.