Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-l] Get Aggressive On Global Warming




In a message dated 4/21/2007 11:24:57 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
hhaskell@mindspring.com writes:

At 09:35 -0500 4/21/07, James Mackey wrote:

How do you get around the problem of variability with windpower? How do
you find appropriate sites for your windpower generators? How many do
you need to build to replace the coal fired plants? Do I want to pay the
much higher energy costs? At best windpower, solar power remain
supplementary power sources, primarily because they are low quality
energy sources.
Any activity that calls for drastic energy reduction without equivalent
economic advantage to consumers is doomed to failure.

Wind Power isn't going to solve the problem by itself, nor will any
other option. Current costs for wind power are around $0.05 per KWh,
so cost is not the driving factor. Siting windmill farms in areas of
higher sustained winds will be necessary, and they will have to be
networked over fairly large areas so that a more or less constant
output from the aggregate can be expected. These are problems that
need to be addressed. The Power grid will have to be improved and
upgraded to handle it (but that will be needed anyway, since the
current power grid is hanging on by little more than a thread). Most
of the sustained wind areas are not close to populated areas, so the
power produced from wind generators will have to be "trucked" over
long distances. But having them in less populated areas will also
make it easier to build them since opposition to having windmills all
over the place will be less.

The problem with the electric power problem, as I see it is that
nearly everything that we can do to mitigate the production of
greenhouse gases involves doing something that we are not doing now,
either because it has not been economically feasible up to this
point, it has not been sufficiently technologically developed, or it
wasn't significantly less polluting that the current sources of
power. We have to change our thinking, and we don't have a whole lot
of time. The point at which serious damage to the coastal areas of
the world due to sea level rise is estimated to be at a concentration
of CO2 in the atmosphere of between 450-600 ppm. We are presently at
about 390, and it is growing by about 2 ppm per year. At to that the
concentration of about 45 ppm for methane and other greenhouse gases,
and we have a real problem.

No source of electricity is without its ecological or economic
footprint. We need to face up to that and figure out ways to deal
with it. One way would be to start charging the full cost of the
power that we now use, which, because the power companies don't have
to pay for getting the greenhouse gases out of the atmosphere, or
keeping them out, means that we are in effect subsidizing the
production of greenhouse gases which are likely to have the effect of
killing us all.

I rather like Pacala and Socolow's approach--the mitigation wedge
strategy--where each possible mitigation technology is assigned its
sector and then expanded or contracted as the developing technology
requires or permits. That allows us to hedge our bets and to follow
the best leads with the least time lost. We cannot put all our eggs
in one basket. Carbon Capping & Sequestration is still in its early
development stages, and is likely to be expensive, but it may help in
hte longer term, if it can be developed in such a way that it doesn't
just give the coal companies incentives to further destroy the
ecology of the coal-producing areas.

There is no magic bullet solution to this problem. We need to pursue
every avenue until it is shown to be unproductive. And we need to
work very hard to not only stop population growth but to actually
reduce world population to a managemable level--almost certainly less
than the current world population.

Hugh





Excellent Summary Hugh.

Bob Zannelli



************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.