Power paradox: Clean might not be green forever
Basically, this New Scientist piece points out that power consumption increases may well cause noticeable local or global climate effects, even if we use the "greenest" sources of energy. The main issue is waste heat.
The trouble with this lifestyle is that it consumes a lot of power. If everyone in the world started living like wealthy Americans, we'd need to generate more than 10 times as much energy each year. And if, in a century or three, we all expect to be looked after by an army of robots and zoom up into space on holidays, we are going to need a vast amount more. Where are we going to get so much power from?
It is clear that continuing to rely on fossil fuels will have catastrophic results, because of the dramatic warming effect of carbon dioxide. But alternative power sources will affect the climate too. For now, the climatic effects of "clean energy" sources are trivial compared with those that spew out greenhouse gases, but if we keep on using ever more power over the coming centuries, they will become ever more significant.
While this kind of work is still at an early stage, some startling conclusions are already beginning to emerge. Nuclear power - including fusion - is not the long-term answer to our energy problems. Even renewable energies such as wind power will have to be used with caution, because large-scale extraction could have both local and global effects. These effects are not necessarily a bad thing, though. We might be able to exploit them to geoengineer the climate and combat global warming.
= new reply since forum marked as read
... with that kind of energy we could eat the entire planet.
Even without ANY technology or consumption of fossil fuels, we are too many for the carrying capacity of this planet.
Even using 100% green energy, even using half of it, even if our population stopped growing, we are TOO much for this planet to carry without degradation, even for one week.
Most governments turn a blind eye to the population question, without addressing it everything else is just finding ways to delay inevitable collapse.
I will not build my own car. I will buy it pre-made.
I will not build my own solar panel either. I would buy it pre-made as well.
I will not build my own nuclear reactor. I cannot buy one retail.
I don’t have solar panels on my home. I don’t have a wind turbine.
Economies of scale make sense to me.
I purchase “green” electricity (40% wind, 60% “certified low-impact hydro”) through my utility.
Although, if my house were situated differently… I might just do it!
Be that as it may, I think you will agree that grid electricity prices will continue to increase while the cost of home photovoltaic systems will continue to decrease (right?)
As such, a home photovoltaic system (which produces most of its electricity during “peak” demand hours) will make more and more economic sense as time goes on.
However, there are other things to consider here. Like, between you and me, “Climate Change?” it’s real.
Homeowners who are concerned about this reality can put solar panels on their roofs much faster than utilities can build new nuclear plants.