Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Celebrating Memorial Day!
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-02-2015, 10:04 AM
 
Location: Massatucky
1,187 posts, read 2,393,886 times
Reputation: 1916

Advertisements

No, to answer the OP's question. Based on consumption and insolation, can't be done.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-02-2015, 11:33 AM
 
Location: DC
6,848 posts, read 7,989,918 times
Reputation: 3572
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwaggy View Post
No, to answer the OP's question. Based on consumption and insolation, can't be done.
While I doubt the world will be 100% solar in the next 100 years, both of your reasons are wrong. The earth receives about 100,000 TW of solar energy and uses about 15 TW of energy in total. Even using today's conversion efficiency it's feasible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2015, 05:56 PM
 
5,760 posts, read 11,544,169 times
Reputation: 4949
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCforever View Post
Nukes don't complement renewables well because they have very high capital costs and don't ramp well. Simple cycle CT or hydro are the best complements to renewable generation.
Oh, I completely agree that Nukes do not make sense, and never really have.

But sensibility does not seem to be the driver on some of this stuff.

Some of the Upper End folks that like them . . . . really seem to like them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2015, 01:25 AM
 
4,715 posts, read 10,518,260 times
Reputation: 2186
What about nuclear powered subs?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2015, 04:11 AM
 
Location: DC
6,848 posts, read 7,989,918 times
Reputation: 3572
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philip T View Post
Oh, I completely agree that Nukes do not make sense, and never really have.

But sensibility does not seem to be the driver on some of this stuff.

Some of the Upper End folks that like them . . . . really seem to like them.
Business people do not like nukes. They only get built when regulators and corporations decide to shaft consumers. The poor people of Georgia are going to get hosed with Vogtle 3&4
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2015, 04:13 AM
 
Location: DC
6,848 posts, read 7,989,918 times
Reputation: 3572
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dakster View Post
What about nuclear powered subs?
What about them? I was an engineering officer on one in the 70s.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2015, 08:01 AM
 
5,760 posts, read 11,544,169 times
Reputation: 4949
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dakster View Post
What about nuclear powered subs?
Yeah. Various Weapons Systems.

That's the folks that like the Nukes.

All the folks in High Places are not just business people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2015, 08:04 AM
 
24,488 posts, read 41,134,517 times
Reputation: 12920
Quote:
Originally Posted by plwhit View Post
The world will look so good utilizing billions of solar panels, just look at the beauty of Ivanpah...



Now picture the OP's 100% solar world...

One other thing, the OP cites a study from MIT yet that study doesn't seem to jive with reality (the largest solar installation in the world, Ivanpah):



More Problems for CSP: Ivanpah Solar Plant Falling Short of Expected Electricity Production : Greentech Media
That's a breath of fresh air. Now picture our current world...



Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2015, 11:44 AM
 
Location: Forests of Maine
37,461 posts, read 61,379,739 times
Reputation: 30409
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dakster View Post
What about nuclear powered subs?
Nuclear power plants can be made to be very safe and reliable. Which is why we continue to produce a few of them every year.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2015, 05:30 PM
 
Location: Central Atlantic Region, though consults worldwide
266 posts, read 449,848 times
Reputation: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by OpenD View Post
Absolutely. Without question. Many, many times over.

This simple fact, as clear as it is to experts, still seems to be a radical idea to many members of the public, who appear unaware of the vast amounts of clean, free, renewable energy we have available to use, if we only will.

According to a June report from an MIT conference on renewable energy, using current technology we could harvest an amount of energy equal to the entire consumption of the US utilizing only 6/10ths of 1% of American land area.
http://www.eforenergy.org/docactivid...compressed.pdf
Previous calculations from MIT have stated that the current energy consumption of the entire world could be equalled by solar power installations occupying only 10% of the unpopulated deserts of the world. Get the picture yet?

The following details come from an unusually informative infographic which strives to make this point clear to one and all in a visual display. You can find it at https://www.quickquid.co.uk/quid-cor...rld-100-solar/

The solar energy falling on one square mile of earth in a year is equivalent to 4 million barrels of oil.

In one 40 minute period, all the energy falling on the earth could fulfill mankind's current energy needs for a year.

The near-total annual energy consumption by mankind in 2013 was about 500 Exajoules.
The total annual solar energy absorbed by the earth's atmosphere each year is 3.9 Million Exajoules
If you're not good with math, that means that the sun provides 7,800X as much energy to the earth as the total of all the energy mankind currently uses.

But what does that mean in terms of... you know... those PV panels people are putting on their roofs? If you covered Germany in PV panels, that amount of surface area, properly placed, could provide as much energy as the entire world currently uses. In other words, it would only take .2 % of the land area of the globe.

The infographic then goes on to show how much total surface area would be required at the rate of 15% efficiency, like current PV panels; at 19.2%, like thin film collectors; and at 31.8%, like concentrated PV panels, which use optics to concentrate light on PV cells. It's very interesting, when you see the areas actually needed mapped onto the whole world, to finally recognize how small that area really is.

Sure, we need to develop the infrastructure to support the switch to using clean renewable energy, but the energy is there, anytime we're ready to use it.

Here are more than 40 references that were consulted in the making of this infographic...

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwK...pHdkNJa1U/view
Yes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top