[Graeme]

No your reasoning is false: we do not need conventional oil at all. It's the FF industry who are promoting this garbage. We can make other forms of renewable lubrication and provide substitutes for rare elements required in the RE industry. You don't need to keep digging up natural resources to grow the economy. I've already pointed out many times that you can recycle much of the rare elements and move toward a predominant service economy using RE and energy efficiency to power it.

Could the World Be 100 Percent Solar?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'P')erhaps the only thing more unrealistic than the idea of a modern world powered 100 percent on solar energy is the idea that extracting every last bit of fossil energy is sustainable, good for the long-term economy or a habitable planet.

Building a new energy economy is fraught with many challenges. Many of them are technical – but these challenges can be overcome. With each passing year solar energy gets cheaper. more efficient and more widespread. perhaps the most difficult challenge to overcome is not technical, but envisioning a new world.

I can’t say if a modern, energy-intensive society could run 100 percent on solar (it doesn’t have to anyway, other forms of renewable energy are available and growing as well).

What I can say is that a continued and accelerating reliance on fossil fuels and the determination to extract every last bit of it from the earth to power that world is how we can make 100 percent sure that one day it will end forever.

The following infographic outlines some key facts and figures about solar energy vs. fossil fuel.

[Quinny]

Well your reasoning is obviously spot on!

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Graeme', 'N')o your reasoning is false: we do not need conventional oil at all.

[Graeme]

Let's qualify that by adding "once the world has reached 100% renewable energy status".

[ralfy]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Graeme', 'N')o your reasoning is false: we do not need conventional oil at all. It's the FF industry who are promoting this garbage. We can make other forms of renewable lubrication and provide substitutes for rare elements required in the RE industry. You don't need to keep digging up natural resources to grow the economy. I've already pointed out many times that you can recycle much of the rare elements and move toward a predominant service economy using RE and energy efficiency to power it.

Could the World Be 100 Percent Solar?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'P')erhaps the only thing more unrealistic than the idea of a modern world powered 100 percent on solar energy is the idea that extracting every last bit of fossil energy is sustainable, good for the long-term economy or a habitable planet.

Building a new energy economy is fraught with many challenges. Many of them are technical – but these challenges can be overcome. With each passing year solar energy gets cheaper. more efficient and more widespread. perhaps the most difficult challenge to overcome is not technical, but envisioning a new world.

I can’t say if a modern, energy-intensive society could run 100 percent on solar (it doesn’t have to anyway, other forms of renewable energy are available and growing as well).

What I can say is that a continued and accelerating reliance on fossil fuels and the determination to extract every last bit of it from the earth to power that world is how we can make 100 percent sure that one day it will end forever.

The following infographic outlines some key facts and figures about solar energy vs. fossil fuel.

[Keith_McClary]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Graeme', 'I')t will have 30 megawatts of power capacity, and the battery storage facility will have 11 megawatts.

[Graeme]

R, Your extremely weak arguments are not going to dissuade me that RE and economic growth are essential. I'm not going to supply a point by point rebuttal every time you post.
K, We've discussed this before in the storage thread.

Six Renewable Energy Trends to Watch in 2015

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '2')014 was a solid twelve months, for the most part, for renewable technologies. Solar firmly solidified its role as a major source of power in the future, LED sales continued to climb and investors began to more seriously look how efficiency gains can be measured and hence monetized in large commercial buildings. Meanwhile, large utilities began to question the long-term value of coal-burning power plants, a slide in oil prices gave investors the willies and nuclear advocates saw their once-theorized Renaissance get pushed out again.

Heck, even the DOE loan program that was so intently scrutinized during the Solyndra fiasco posted a profit.

It was a very good year.

So what’s on tap for 2015?

1. Finance Enters its Cambrian Period

Over the past few years, some of the big success stories in clean technology have been companies such as SunRun, Clean Power Finance and SunEdison that have developed and/or promoted innovative ways for consumers or businesses to fund efficiency or renewable projects. Renovate America went from being a company few had heard of in the beginning of 2014 to arguably the breakout success story of the year with its HERO program for improving the efficiency of homes in California.

You’d think the market was saturated already, but you’re going to see the launch of a whole new raft of companies next year. Jigar Shah just launched Generate Capital. Clean Fund is coming out of stealth. There are a whole bunch of others that haven’t been announced yet. In a nutshell, investors have seen enough data to realize that solar and even efficiency retrofits can provide a solid, stable return on investment that will beat bond funds but with far less volatility than the stock market. Large banks will also increasingly expand their clean loan portfolio.

[Graeme]

P, FF dependence is diminishing, dah. Why are you here on this board? Dependence on RE can only increase. Again the trend toward recycling despite some setbacks will also increase. Take note of posts in sustainability and circular economy threads.
I've covered storage units in the storage thread. Don't lecture to me.
You think that solar is going to stay at "0.43%"? You are mistaken.

[Graeme]

P/R, Yes there is some merit in looking at thermodynamics and recycling. I found the following ref chosen at random which summarizes the state of the art in 2008.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')n general this area is just being developed as recycling grows in importance, and new developments and applications can be expected. For example, there are several efforts that
address the application of various entropic metrics for characterizing and optimizing recycling and other end-of-life processes.

[Graeme]

Actually, you've pointed out a very important topic that I don't want to discuss further in this thread. Please see the circular economy thread where I will post key extracts from the wiki article on recycling.

[ralfy]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Graeme', 'R'), Your extremely weak arguments are not going to dissuade me that RE and economic growth are essential. I'm not going to supply a point by point rebuttal every time you post.
K, We've discussed this before in the storage thread.

Six Renewable Energy Trends to Watch in 2015

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '2')014 was a solid twelve months, for the most part, for renewable technologies. Solar firmly solidified its role as a major source of power in the future, LED sales continued to climb and investors began to more seriously look how efficiency gains can be measured and hence monetized in large commercial buildings. Meanwhile, large utilities began to question the long-term value of coal-burning power plants, a slide in oil prices gave investors the willies and nuclear advocates saw their once-theorized Renaissance get pushed out again.

Heck, even the DOE loan program that was so intently scrutinized during the Solyndra fiasco posted a profit.

It was a very good year.

So what’s on tap for 2015?

1. Finance Enters its Cambrian Period

Over the past few years, some of the big success stories in clean technology have been companies such as SunRun, Clean Power Finance and SunEdison that have developed and/or promoted innovative ways for consumers or businesses to fund efficiency or renewable projects. Renovate America went from being a company few had heard of in the beginning of 2014 to arguably the breakout success story of the year with its HERO program for improving the efficiency of homes in California.

You’d think the market was saturated already, but you’re going to see the launch of a whole new raft of companies next year. Jigar Shah just launched Generate Capital. Clean Fund is coming out of stealth. There are a whole bunch of others that haven’t been announced yet. In a nutshell, investors have seen enough data to realize that solar and even efficiency retrofits can provide a solid, stable return on investment that will beat bond funds but with far less volatility than the stock market. Large banks will also increasingly expand their clean loan portfolio.

[Graeme]

No, your assumptions are false. We can have economic growth solely with RE because most of the components are not that rare - silica for example. Decoupling of GDP from energy has already begun - we've discussed this before. In any case, we are both making such broad generalizations without knowing all details. That's why the arguments are weak. We haven't a clue what decisions are made in board rooms and governments on a day-to-day basis nor do we know all business plans. On top of that we don't have all knowledge published at our fingertips. We make generalizations based on scant knowledge. I'm hoping for the best; you want to put a spanner in the works. New knowledge emerges every day. For example:

Scientists use supercomputers to search for innovative answers to rare-earth supply needs

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'D')aily, new inventions are increasing the uses for rare-earths, but the mined and processed totals are falling short. Green energy technology needs rare earth materials for wind turbines, rechargeable batteries, and batteries for electric and hybrid vehicles. Although these elements are found throughout the world, as recently as 2012 the United States produced only 800 metric tons of the global production of 110,000 tons. This amount - far short of its needs - means the United States is relying on uncertain and costly imports for manufacturing and energy output. Researchers in the Critical Materials Institute (CMI) at the DOE's Ames Laboratory are looking for innovative answers to rare-earth supply problems. As an Energy Innovation Hub funded out of the Advanced Manufacturing Office in the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, the CMI mission is to diversify the global supply, discover substitutes, and invent new ways to re-use and recycle the rare-earths.


A team led by Ames Laboratory senior scientist Bruce Harmon - who recently retired - has been given up to 45 million core hours on Titan to look at multi-element materials. With its 27 petaflops (27,000 trillion calculations per second) processing power, Titan is able to examine the interactions of hundreds of thousands of atoms in three- and even four-element compounds.

"We finally have the computing capability to explore greater complexities using quantum mechanics – greater numbers of atoms, the possible crystal structures, and their properties," said Harmon. With the data from Titan's calculations, Harmon's team will select promising compositions as new magnetic materials to test.

[Graeme]

Rubbish - see page 1 of this thread:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')e discussed earlier that GDP growth has decoupled from energy consumption. As noted on page three (see part 1 old thread), in the US, this decoupling occurred within the last few years by a combination of a switch from coal to natural gas, greater energy efficiency, and a rise in renewable power (in order of importance). So your conclusions are false.

[ralfy]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Graeme', 'N')o, your assumptions are false. We can have economic growth solely with RE because most of the components are not that rare - silica for example. Decoupling of GDP from energy has already begun - we've discussed this before. In any case, we are both making such broad generalizations without knowing all details. That's why the arguments are weak. We haven't a clue what decisions are made in board rooms and governments on a day-to-day basis nor do we know all business plans. On top of that we don't have all knowledge published at our fingertips. We make generalizations based on scant knowledge. I'm hoping for the best; you want to put a spanner in the works. New knowledge emerges every day. For example:

Scientists use supercomputers to search for innovative answers to rare-earth supply needs

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'D')aily, new inventions are increasing the uses for rare-earths, but the mined and processed totals are falling short. Green energy technology needs rare earth materials for wind turbines, rechargeable batteries, and batteries for electric and hybrid vehicles. Although these elements are found throughout the world, as recently as 2012 the United States produced only 800 metric tons of the global production of 110,000 tons. This amount - far short of its needs - means the United States is relying on uncertain and costly imports for manufacturing and energy output. Researchers in the Critical Materials Institute (CMI) at the DOE's Ames Laboratory are looking for innovative answers to rare-earth supply problems. As an Energy Innovation Hub funded out of the Advanced Manufacturing Office in the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, the CMI mission is to diversify the global supply, discover substitutes, and invent new ways to re-use and recycle the rare-earths.


A team led by Ames Laboratory senior scientist Bruce Harmon - who recently retired - has been given up to 45 million core hours on Titan to look at multi-element materials. With its 27 petaflops (27,000 trillion calculations per second) processing power, Titan is able to examine the interactions of hundreds of thousands of atoms in three- and even four-element compounds.

"We finally have the computing capability to explore greater complexities using quantum mechanics – greater numbers of atoms, the possible crystal structures, and their properties," said Harmon. With the data from Titan's calculations, Harmon's team will select promising compositions as new magnetic materials to test.

[ralfy]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Graeme', 'R')ubbish - see page 1 of this thread:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')e discussed earlier that GDP growth has decoupled from energy consumption. As noted on page three (see part 1 old thread), in the US, this decoupling occurred within the last few years by a combination of a switch from coal to natural gas, greater energy efficiency, and a rise in renewable power (in order of importance). So your conclusions are false.

[Graeme]

More meaningless generalized gobbledygook. I just pointed out to you that GDP and "energy" decoupled in the USA a few years ago. You show a figure in your link that has data which ends in 2011! That's when decoupling started.

Now I'll show you more recent data for renewable energy growth and better economic policy.

Fact Sheet: Renewable Energy Job Numbers

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A') 2013 report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) found 3.4 million green jobs in the United States at the end of 2011. This is the latest data available from BLS, due to the elimination of its Green Careers program. On March 1, 2013, the across-the board spending cuts referred to as sequestration, required by the amended Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act, came into effect. As part of those budget cuts, BLS stopped offering all “measuring green jobs” products.

The BLS Green Jobs Initiative to measure green jobs across the United States was operational beginning in fiscal year 2010. The Initiative sought to provide reliable data to the public on the number of existing green jobs in the country, the changes in job numbers over time, the distribution of green jobs, and the wages workers earn in these jobs. BLS defined “green jobs” as jobs that “produce goods or provide services that benefit the environment or conserve natural resources.” The data BLS provided on green jobs for 2009, 2010 and 2011, has been widely used by government agencies, think tanks, and non-profit organizations. The lack of reliable data updates from BLS is a big loss for green job estimates.

Nevertheless, the Environmental and Energy Study Institute (EESI) was able to cite the job figures below using data from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the Bureau of Labor Statics (BLS), as well as international organizations, national non-profits, think tanks and national trade associations.