Outrageous Energy Sources of the Future
Every week or so, someone sends me an article from a popular magazine that covers futuristic sources of energy. I’d sound rather like the Grinch if I said I objected to publications like this, though I have to confess that I disapprove of presenting malarkey to the man/woman-on-the-street. Developing the right energy is a tough job, and it’s not made any easier by confusing people.
In this example I’m somewhat mollified that the editor chose to title it: Outrageous Energy Sources of the Future.
In any case, my friend asked for my comments, so here they are:
Next-gen nuclear (including fission and fusion): Fortunately for us all, there is a great deal of promise here, especially fission that isn’t based on the 75-year-old (U238) technology; this is known as “advanced nuclear.” I say “fortunately,” as there is real doubt that renewables can scale fast enough to serve humankind’s needs and avert the different forms of environmental catastrophe caused by carbon emissions: climate disruption, ocean acidification, loss of biodiversity, etc. Are we sure that nuclear needs to play a role? That depends on whom you ask; the pro-nuke people who have a cadre of experts who scoff at solar and wind, where most of the rest of the scientific community favors the rapid development of these technologies that passively capture a fraction of the sun’s energy.
Carbon capture and sequestration: This isn’t a source of energy, it’s an expensive way of dealing with the pollution from coal plants that would otherwise be discharged into the atmosphere. I’m very confident that solar, wind, and next-gen nuclear will soon be so inexpensive that coal will be obsolete. That’s very good news, considering that coal releases vast amounts of carbon, and many far worse pollutants: oxides of nitrogen and sulfur, cadmium, selenium, mercury, thallium, and a whole array of different radioactive isotopes. Getting rid of coal obviates the need for CCS, which is promoted only by the fossil fuel boys who want us to look the other way while coal steadily destroys our planet.
Off-shore wind: This is happening, but, as anyone could guess simply by looking at a photo, it’s expensive. Of course, there is value here; if there weren’t, no one would be even talking about it. In particular, every wind turbine we put 12 miles out to sea is one fewer that someone has to look at, and the higher wind densities mean bigger and more efficient turbines. Going back to the only really important issue: can this be cost-effective? In a word: No.
Geothermal: Anywhere you go on this planet, there is one heck of a lot of heat energy within the first half mile beneath your feet. But let’s look at the practicality: In most places geothermal represents a risky and very expensive venture. True, some other places, it’s bubbling up all around us. Almost all the energy in Iceland, for example, is generated by geothermal, since the resources are fantastic and the alternatives are terrible.
Energy from space: We can imagine a huge solar array in orbit around the Earth which uses microwaves to “beam down” the energy. The benefits are land use (if it’s not on your roof, solar takes up land that could be used for something else) and “capacity factor,” i.e., the fact that solar only works when the sun is shining; in space, that’s very near 100%. People have also talked about putting an enormous solar array on the moon. Both ideas are preposterous, though, given the expense, and there is no chance whatsoever that this will change in the future, regardless of how “outrageous” it becomes.
Solar fuels. It’s possible to store excess energy from variable sources like solar or wind in a variety of ways, of which converting it to a liquid fuel like gasoline or diesel is one. In fact, the concept has been around for almost 100 years; the Nazis used it to make fuel for their tanks after we had destroyed their oil refineries. The value here, of course, is that the energy is not only stored, but it’s made portable as well. The issues, as always, are efficiency—and thus cost-effectiveness. My guess is terms of energy storage is that it will soon take the form of batteries used to power electric vehicles. Not everyone agrees with me (needless to say).
There you go; hope this helped.
