by Graeme » Tue 18 Oct 2011, 17:34:33
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Graeme', 'A')mong the report’s points of emphasis: wind power alone is capable of supplying more than 100 percent of future demand.
The big problem I can't see around is intermitency. That little puff piece didn't really have any details, just the same old "They'll figure it out, resume cruise control."
TOD talked about the
Nation Sized Battery recently, and even recent-er was
Got Storage, How Hard Can It Be? talking about how hard home power storage
can be. Of course there are all sorts of schemes but I'm not sure where they are headed.
I think renewables will be the future, simple because non-renewables for some reason aren't renewing, but that future isn't going to spring forth fully formed and ironically the progress towards a non-fossil fueled economy depends in large part on the current FFed one. The recession pretty well
collapsed wind installations in 2010. And of course we all know how large is the ideological resistance against the very idea of renewable energy. I'm not sure exactly the root cause of the distaste for conservation, stewardship, "green energy", etc -
it is counter intuitive but it is pretty obvious.
And finally, the reason for investing in a business is to earn a return. I'm going to guess that if there is a prolonged
fall in energy consumption like the 7.6 drop 2008-2009 as a result of the recession, investors are going to shy away from building new capacity of any kind.
Still, as Gail Tverberg says, renewables are great fossil fuel "extenders" - sorta Hamburger Helper for Petro-Based Society.
I don't think there will be a problem with intermittency because wind farms will be linked by a smart grid - not an original idea I might add. This has been mentioned before on this board. Wind is doing pretty well in the
. In the US, renewable energy development will be spearheaded by the
.