by yesplease » Mon 30 Jun 2008, 16:41:05
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('VMarcHart', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', 'G')iven how little energy is required for the manufacturing of large scale renewable power generation, especially compared to the energy output by it.
I'm a large scale renewable power developer. Let's look at wind. An 80-meter tower weighs about 110 metric tons. Try to visualize from digging the mine, extracting ore, transporting, making steel, cutting sheets, transporting, rolling, welding, painting, transporting, erecting, assembling, etc, etc, commission, operation, maintenance, etc, etc. I'm sure I skipped 50 steps and that's just for tower. Think nacelles, blades, cables, roads, etc. There's nothing sustainable or of little energy about renewables. Whereas vital for tomorrow, I wish we had started the day before yesterday. It's a race against the clock, and I'm bearish on technology.
I wouldn't fall into that trap if I were you. Sure, one windmill, or even a few, isn't sustainable, but once sufficient power from different sustainable methods comes online, it is. This is going to happen as fossil fuels deplete, since by our accounting methods, fossil fuels are cheaper for electricity generation, transportation, etc... Barring of course the cases where they aren't due to accounting for the cost of externalities like pollution and whatnot, and as the deplete the price increases until sustainable alternatives become viable. If we had next to no oil/NG, were 3/4s of the way down the coal depeltion curve, w/ no renewables or research into 'em, then I think it'd be OMGz time. But as it stands we may not even be at peak and still there are literally tons of alternatives for the majority of oil use waiting in the wings. Given the price drop of the 80s, I imagine some are being cautious, but the higher oil gets the more alternatives I see sprouting up, and I imagine the same is similar for other industries that rely on other fossil fuels.