Discussion about this post

User's avatar
MikeW's avatar

The challenge for wind-energy (or solar-energy) installation is even more massive than you indicate because, in addition to the huge number of wind turbines that have to be built, an even huger number of batteries (or other storage devices) have to be built. I think the storage is an even bigger challenge than the carbon-free generation.

Expand full comment
John Plodinec's avatar

A few comments:

• "Achieving Net Zero by ____" is about as defensible as "Limiting global temperature increase to 1.5 (or 2) C by _____."

• I freely admit that decreasing the pollution associated with burning coal (and natural gas, to a lesser extent) would be a good thing. But preventing those living in developing countries from using fossil fuels if those are the most readily available to them would be, quite frankly, immoral.

• I've said it before and I will continue beating the drum: the US needs a sensible plan to phase out of fossil fuels, if that's to be our energy policy. California's periodic brownouts caused by the intermittency of solar and wind - exacerbated by drought-impacted hydro - further exacerbated by the "feel good" closures of fossil and nuclear plants - should be grim reminders that we don't have a plan, but rather posturing politicians making policy.

• That plan MUST consider both generation and transmission. There are significant efficiencies possible if we upgrade our aging transmission system.

• The silliness of effectively banning gas stoves, urging people to eat less meat, and so on signals the triumph of emotion (it feels good) over reason (it will make a real difference).

Expand full comment
68 more comments...

No posts