Renewable energy’s magic carpet ride
Steppenwolf’s 1969 song “Magic Carpet Ride” describes letting go of reality and entering a fantasy world. Similarly, advocates of eliminating all hydrocarbon fuels and replacing them with renewable energy enter their own fantasy world.
For example, Bernie Sanders’ fantasy would switch electricity generation and transportation to 100 percent renewables by 2030 for a paltry $16.3 trillion: “After 2035 electricity will be virtually free, aside from operations and maintenance costs.” He’s old enough to remember when nuclear power was going to be so cheap that utilities wouldn’t bother to meter it.
Renewable energy lends itself to fantasy and politicians’ needs for panaceas that will solve all of society’s problems. But 100 percent renewable energy is limited by immutable laws of physics and the environmental havoc that would be required to implement it.
First, the laws of physics. We’ve become accustomed to electronics and communications devices becoming both smaller and more capable year after year. This phenomenon is described in Moore’s Law (not a physical law but an observation), in which the number of transistors in an integrated circuit doubles about every two years.
But there is no similar phenomenon at work in renewable energy. Yes, both solar and wind energy efficiency have improved over time, but both are running up against real laws of physics that will dramatically limit further improvement.
The Shockley-Queisser Limit describes how atomic physics limits a maximum of 33.7 percent of solar energy to be converted into electricity in a perfect solar cell; today’s best commercial photovoltaic technology exceeds 26 percent.
Wind turbine efficiency is likewise running up against its theoretical maximum efficiency. The Betz Limit shows that no more than 60 percent of wind’s kinetic energy can be captured by a perfect turbine; commercial turbines today exceed 40 percent.
Renewable energy has no parallel to Moore’s Law. Marginal efficiency improvements are likely but will be limited to the 10 percent range or so.
Batteries are an even bigger impediment to 100 percent renewable fantasies.
Today’s ubiquitous lithium-ion batteries won’t do. The annual output of Tesla’s Gigafactory, the world’s largest battery factory, could store only three minutes’ worth of U.S. electricity demand. It would take 500 years to make enough batteries to store one day’s worth.
Battery technology is among the hottest areas of research, and press releases abound touting “breakthrough” technologies. None of them have borne fruit.
The federal Department of Energy announced a new battery technology that has since disappeared. Bill Gates committed almost $2 billion of his own money into battery research without success. Elon Musk would love to have better batteries for his Tesla automobiles but remains skeptical of the parade of “breakthrough” announcements.
Without adequate batteries and contrary to their claims, no city or state can claim to use 100 percent renewable energy. Just ask them where their power comes from at night or on calm, cloudy days.
Going “all in” on renewable energy ignores another inconvenient truth: the huge quantity of material needed to construct renewable energy facilities.
Wind and solar equipment and batteries are constructed from nonrenewable materials. For example, a single modern wind turbine uses 900 tons of steel, 2,500 tons of concrete, and 45 tons of plastic.
Environmentalists who were aghast at the petroleum industry’s “Drill, baby, drill” mantra would be obliged to chant “Dig, baby, dig.” And not just for a one-time renewable build-out: Both wind and solar equipment wears out and must be replaced.
In addition, disposing of old equipment will be a challenge. The International Renewable Energy Agency estimates that year 2050 solar power goals consistent with the Paris Accords would require disposing of more than 80 million tons of non-recyclable solar panels laden with toxic chemicals like cadmium and lead. Forget using regular landfills.
I fully support practical renewable energy applications. I hope that battery research will find ways to store massive amounts of electrical power at affordable cost. Putting my money where my mouth is, I drive a hybrid.
But I’m dismayed by politicians who pander for votes from an energy-illiterate public. An old adage says that you can tell when politicians are lying by seeing when their lips move. When you see Democratic candidates discussing renewable energy in this coming week’s televised debate, watch their lips.
The viewpoints expressed above are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of The Independent.
How to submit an article, guest opinion piece, or letter to the editor to The Independent
Do you have something to say? Want your voice to be heard by thousands of readers? Send The Independent your letter to the editor or guest opinion piece. All submissions will be considered for publication by our editorial staff. If your letter or editorial is accepted, it will run on suindependent.com, and we’ll promote it through all of our social media channels. We may even decide to include it in our monthly print edition. Just follow our simple submission guidelines and make your voice heard:
—Submissions should be between 300 and 1,500 words.
—Submissions must be sent to editor@infowest.com as a .doc, .docx, .txt, or .rtf file.
—The subject line of the email containing your submission should read “Letter to the editor.”
—Attach your name to both the email and the document file (we don’t run anonymous letters).
—If you have a photo or image you’d like us to use and it’s in .jpg format, at least 1200 X 754 pixels large, and your intellectual property (you own the copyright), feel free to attach it as well, though we reserve the right to choose a different image.
—If you are on Twitter and would like a shout-out when your piece or letter is published, include that in your correspondence and we’ll give you a mention at the time of publication.
Articles related to “Renewable energy’s magic carpet ride”
The Green New Deal is proof that environmentalists can’t do math
PacifiCorp and Rocky Mountain Power miss renewable energy opportunities
“When you see Democratic candidates discussing renewable energy in this coming week’s televised debate, watch their lips.”
And there it is. Just can’t write a single opinion piece without getting those jabs in at Democrats.
As if Republicans will do anything, ever. Get real.
I write political opinion columns and I am a conservative. All the major Democratic presidential candidates are smart enough to know they are blowing smoke and certainly have staffers who are knowledgeable on this subject. The fact that they persist with their hugely expensive proposals is pure politics.
And what have conservatives done?
NOTHING!!!
You want to talk about a group of people who do blow smoke? You align yourself with the worst this country has to offer. Liars and frauds.
Your kind is, thankfully, a dying breed. You people are fascist scum.
Death before Conservatism.
So does this mean Burlington, VT; Aspen, CO; Greensburg, KS; Georgetown, TX, Rockport, MO; Kodiak Island, AK; who are already running their power sectors on 100% renewable energy are just fantasies?
Fran: I posted my reply to your comment as a separate entry. Sorry and I hope you’ll go to The Independent web site to see my reply.
None of them use only renewable energy despite their claims. All probably have some renewable energy facilities locally and have arranged to purchase renewable energy from others that have excess DAYTIME renewable energy like California. The combination of these two energy sources equals the total amount of the power they use over 24 hours, hence their claim.
But no one anywhere in the country is generating renewable energy on calm nights. (Hydro power is available 24/7 but can’t come anywhere close to meeting the nation’s nighttime needs.) There are no massive battery installations that save up renewable energy during the day. Hence all or almost all nighttime power used in these cities comes from non-renewable sources.
Playing this game is pure politics and environmental virtue signalling. If the entire country generated enough renewable energy to match its combined day and night power needs, there would be now way to store it during the day for use at night. This is happening already in California. It generates more than it can use in the daytime so it sells any excess it can and the rest is shunted to ground.