Pollux wrote:Hello,
I do not entirely agree with you Rulian, solar energy could provide current global consumption if 5% of the planet was used for solar collection. the best way to do this would be to cover half the Sahara with thermal panels and to transport and store energy. it is of course a utopia for reasons as much geopolitical as of storage and transport of energy, but that remains theoretically feasible.
In theory it may be possible but in practice it is impractical. The materials required for the infrastructure represent an enormous quantity that is almost impossible to find. The massive transport of heat over long distances is a sweet utopia. I'm not even talking about storage. AND do you think that covering 5% of the planet panel will be harmless from an environmental point of view? I doubt. As for photovoltaic solar, it is very expensive, uses materials which are not very available and presents a very doubtful overall energy and environmental balance.
So we agree, in "theory" anything is possible, but in practice should not dream. Given the energy situation in the world, we must stop with speculation "in theory". A little pragmatism please.
Pollux wrote:renewable energies, if managed on a global level, can provide the energy we need, especially if we play on the complementarity of solar-biomass-wind-turbine.
if the man calms down and realizes that energy decrease is a necessity, this utopia could become a reality. the question is whether we still have enough time to sufficiently mitigate the effects of the big catfish that is falling on us.
But we totally agree, renewable can be enough for our NEEDS, but certainly not for our consumption as we practice them today. The nuances are very important. Energy decrease is the watchword but it is an idea that people do not want to admit that it calls into question their way of life. Believe in my experience of "apocalypse crier", few are those who accept to open their eyes, most prefer to remain blind, the truth is too scary even if it is obvious.
Pollux wrote:PS: sorry for the off topic ... we will have to get out of nuclear as much as oil without falling into the coal, and EDF will not help us.
This is the main risk hanging in our face, I agree with you, it would be dramatic.
I find that we tend to agree, in fact, I'm just talking a little more bluntly about the thing. It is a habit that I took to shock my interlocutors a little who always answer me "We will find a solution" (of course a gadget which will exempt us from reducing our consumption).