Dark

A reality check on renewables - David MacKay

TED-Ed
Subscribe
Views 713 519
92% 9 107 719

How much land mass would renewables need to power a nation like the UK? An entire country's worth. In this pragmatic talk, David MacKay tours the basic mathematics that show worrying limitations on our sustainable energy options and explains why we should pursue them anyway. (Filmed at TEDxWarwick.)
Lesson by David MacKay.

Published on

 

Jun 26, 2013

\renewable energy\energysustainability\DavidMacKay\TEDTEDxTEDxWarwickTED-Ed\TEDEd\TEDEducation

Share:

Link:

Download:

Loading link...

Add to:

My playlist
Watch later
Comments 3 302
Heather Viramontes Lopez
The bat is a new technology and is in the air, for crowded countries
Mountain Whale
Mountain Whale 19 hours ago
I wish the audio wasn't so terrible, but the talk itself seems worth enduring it for.
Sanjay Maharaj
125kWh!!!! In my neighbourhood in ZA we use only 20kWh per day
redo348
redo348 21 hour ago
125kWh is total energy, not just electricity.
semih oguzcan
semih oguzcan 3 days ago
We need degrowth. For this we need to get rid of capitalism and monetary system and adopt alternatives.
Jim Miller
Jim Miller 16 hours ago
And the alternatives would be ... ?
fanOmry
fanOmry 7 days ago
A Few things he didn't mention.. 1.Storm Towers- There are several versions. but in the end they all simulate a hurricane. For power. 2. Bio Fuels.. There're several ways to skin that cat. 2a. huge tanks full of A Water solution with Algae. 2b. Hollow polls with plants growing on the walls. 2c. The Prior two will be far more expensive than people like.. this is far cheaper. Cannabis. Grows three meters in three months. That is a lot of biomass. very fast.
redo348
redo348 6 days ago
He covers a range of biomass in his book. They are all around 1W/m^2. There are just better renewable options. Rooftop solar is 20 times higher power density. www.withouthotair.com/c6/page_43.shtml
John Cottis
John Cottis 10 days ago
Population density isn’t very meaningful. Canada, Australia and Russia have comparatively large areas of uninhabitable land, like the Arctic and the deserts. Similarly areas in Africa. It’s not comparing apples to apples to include that area, just as we don’t include Antarctica.
redo348
redo348 6 days ago
He isn't suggesting people live there.
Aqua Vitae
Aqua Vitae 11 days ago
#LTR Liquid Thorium Reactors.
Gordy Bishop
Gordy Bishop 13 days ago
Does this guy not know of examples in his own area like was shown on Fully Charged years ago and doing better even today? His back of envelope is far from accurate
redo348
redo348 10 days ago
@Gordy Bishop Well we don't have to debate the meaning of adjectives, we can just use numbers. Let me run you through the calculations. UK primary energy use is 125 kWh/person/day. Agreed? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_the_United_Kingdom
Gordy Bishop
Gordy Bishop 10 days ago
This doesn’t look substantial to me and they are exporting ruvid.net/video/video-VEh7V9_uIqM.html
Gordy Bishop
Gordy Bishop 10 days ago
I believe substantial is far from the right word to use
redo348
redo348 10 days ago
@Gordy Bishop That isn't what he said. Here is what he said (from 10 minutes onwards) "Here's a summary so far, all renewables much as I love them are diffuse, they all have a small power per unit area. That means if you do want renewables to make a substantial difference for a country like the united kingdom, on the scale of today's consumption, you need to be imagining renewable facilities that are country sized, not the entire country but a substantial fraction." That is still correct of course.
Gordy Bishop
Gordy Bishop 11 days ago
That we don’t have enough space for renewables
Mule83
Mule83 13 days ago
The issue I see with bio-fuels is that plants require CO2, so it will be a catch 22 when our parts per million will get too low. So a balance of fossil fuel use and bio fuel. Unfortunately, energy cannot be created nor destroyed, so on the energy issues, we will be robbing Peter to pay Paul. We still need an x amount of CO2. Lack of CO2 was the cause of some Ice Age....I am not knocking the use of bio energy, just make sure we address that to the public about going back and forth...Great video
redo348
redo348 12 days ago
We burn biofuel. The CO2 goes back into the air.
David Cuthbertson
David Cuthbertson 14 days ago
This is the chicken little story in person
Fla-bushcraft Prepper
All three of the renewable he likes is killing the planet. #1 Wind Generators are very toxic to make. Also they kill millions of flying species every year around the world. Also the batteries in the homes and city facilities are very toxic to make. #2 The Solar Power Plants incinerate millions of flying species each year around the world. Also they are very toxic to make. I am not kidding. If you research Toxic Renewable Solar and Wind, you would be sickened at the toxic lakes at those facilities. #3 Nuclear. What can I say? Fukashima is sill polluting the Pacific Ocean to this day in 2019. Given the rate of Nuclear incidents and the fact that humans have detonated over 2,000 nuclear bombs on earth to see what they do, it is not sane to consider nuclear Power Plants. The waste is extremely toxic. The fact is Human Science is destroying the earth. just live as peaceful as you can and teach others to love one another. If you can afford to cut back then do so. If you can plant a tree or clean up the waters or lands some, then do so. Humans are destroying the earth and time for it expired long ago when a human decided to pick up a stone and kill his brother. So do not be like those type humans. Show love and tolerance to your ENEMIES but do not let them corrupt you into the ways of the world.
redo348
redo348 12 days ago
Fossil fuels are around 10 times deadlier than nuclear and wind. www.withouthotair.com/c24/page_168.shtml
Wilbert Robichaud
Wilbert Robichaud 14 days ago
Astronomy is a science; astrology is a pseudoscience. Evolution is science; creationism is pseudoscience. Molecular biology is science; homeopathy is pseudoscience. Vaccination is science; the MMR scare is pseudoscience. Oxygen is science; phlogiston was pseudoscience. CO2 a trace gas is science;CO2 is carbon is pseudo science Chemistry is science; alchemy was pseudoscience. Climate change is science;antropogenic climate change is pseudoscience . CO2 is an atmospheric gas is science ;CO2 is a pollutant is pseudoscience. .
Mel Royale
Mel Royale 17 days ago
once you put stuff into numbers then we can drop our opinions. If 28 mill cars in the UK were replaced by electric cars at £27,000 each, total would be £760 billion. To power this number of cars covering peak flows, we would need 60GW of extra power. Draz power station produces 4GW. So thats 15 more Drax power stations, at £20 bill each. So this is £1100 bill, when UK military budget is £44 Bill per year.I love numbers
09Libertarian
09Libertarian 17 days ago
Of course the big difference is that one provides something useful while the other is utterly wasted money
valdis teivans
valdis teivans 17 days ago
Just restrict the amount of children per couple (birth rates control) just like what China did, which is a rather good idea
Pip Santos
Pip Santos 17 days ago
But activists want to power society with pixie dust. Free with no side effects.
Hope Young
Hope Young 17 days ago
Renewables are better termed unreliables. Considering the carbon used in making and maintaining wind turbines exceeds its output.
redo348
redo348 17 days ago
"Considering the carbon used in making and maintaining turbines exceeds its output" False. The energy yield ratio of wind is 40 to 70. That is, the generate 40 to 70 times more energy that it takes to make them. www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S036054420400115X
JasJones123
JasJones123 18 days ago
When people talk about climate change read real data from our past to help explain the future. ruvid.net/video/video-Phw8OlN_x1E.html
Brad Davies
Brad Davies 18 days ago
What is wrong with you tree-hugging-dirt-munching Druids? Renewable energy sucks, it is a joke, it does not work as claimed and it is a money pit, it also is tyrannical.
cineffect
cineffect 18 days ago
So reducing the energy consumption is the only way...
Hope Young
Hope Young 17 days ago
Yep. Time to depopulate.
James Hally
James Hally 23 days ago
Scotland generates enough wind electricity in 2019 to power TWO SCOTLANDS www.independent.co.uk/environment/scotland-wind-power-on-shore-renewable-energy-climate-change-uk-a9013066.html
redo348
redo348 21 day ago
@James Hally James, that doesn't much change the maths! If we convert the 85% of non-electrical energy use to electricity, then we will use more electricity. "Between Scotland and Ireland, there is enough tidal potential to power over half the European Union." I'm pretty sure that's just plain wrong. If we capture 10% of the tidal energy of the whole north and irish sea and transmit it at 50% efficiecy that comes to about 5% of the UKs total energy use. www.withouthotair.com/c14/page_83.shtml
James Hally
James Hally 21 day ago
@redo348 With more and more electric transport coming along, as well as electric home heating systems and house retrofitting, other fuel-using sectors are undoubtedly feeling the draw to electricity. Between Scotland and Ireland, there is enough tidal potential to power over half the European Union.
redo348
redo348 21 day ago
That's electricity, which is only around 15% of total energy use.
Vega
Vega 25 days ago
This guy should have met Nobel Loreate. It would have saved him lots of frustration
Larry Brennan
Larry Brennan 27 days ago
All ignoring fallacious argument that carbon is a "pollutant" in the first place.
Gary Lake
Gary Lake 25 days ago
Carbon Dioxide in itself, is not a pullutant, it is however, a gas that increases the greenhouse effect of the Earth. Does Mackay say it is a pollutant?
Matthias Heinze
Matthias Heinze 28 days ago
Sad to hear he passed. Just one correction, wind power is not scalable. Wind turbines deduct energy from each other, to power Europe with wind, the necessary number of turbines will drastically change the earths climate by increasing resistance to air moving. Air is kinetic & thermal energy but also humidity- enough wind turbines will make it rain less in Europe - at least that could be one scenario....we just know it will live very difficult for humans if we use that much wind power. Please look up the study by the Reneseller institute, Max Planck (jet stream kite turbines) etc.
Jim Caplinger
Jim Caplinger 28 days ago
Great presentation; sorry to hear he's gone. For ideas not covered: "A Step Farther Out" by Jerry Pournelle, "The High Frontier" by Gerard K. O'Neill, and "The Third Industrial Revolution" by G. Harry Stine. There are other options, but The Man can't keep His control over us if we head that direction. It's not that there aren't other alternatives, it's just that the Powers That Be don't think they can profit by them or control them. Or maybe They are not smart enough to understand.
jim Curtis
jim Curtis 29 days ago
This guy is missing the fact that solar panels fit on the roofs of homes , buildings and shades for parking lots . Our community library has solar panels shading it's parking lot and makes so much electricity that it sells the extra electricity to 4 different businesses in the area Norway and Germany has a lot of solar as well ....and are not the sunniest places in the world . i don't think 25% of land is needed . You seem to be married to large central projects like utilities witch benefits large companies rather then the consumer witch could choose home solar which would be a no brainier .
Sammy Kovic
Sammy Kovic 29 days ago
I have a roof but for me to get my money back on initial outlay would take 60 years,This was some years ago.The company also said the south facing roof wasn't big enough.Thats you bolloxed.
redo348
redo348 29 days ago
You are missing the key point of this talk. Numbers, not words. How much rooftop is there? Is it enough if we cover it all with solar? Either you do the sums or you don't know. It's that simple. He did the sums, which you can check here: www.withouthotair.com/c6/page_38.shtml
Richard Boland
Richard Boland Month ago
For nuclear you need to add the area from mining and refining operations, not just the reactor.
redo348
redo348 27 days ago
@Richard Boland W/m^2 tells you what area you need, which gives you an impression how realistic a plan is. See the graph at 7.30. Energy sources below 1 W/m^2 (like biofuel) need to be over and area bigger than the UK to power the UK. Wind and solar farming at 5-15Wm^2 need a large proportion of the country (e.g. 10%). Is that realistic?
Richard Boland
Richard Boland 29 days ago
@redo348 I guess Watts per m2 isn't the metric that matters. It's not like it's an area optimization problem.
redo348
redo348 29 days ago
The same is true for wind, solar, coal etc, so not sure why you would pick out nuclear specifically. I don't have the numbers, but I'd predict from an equivalent power installation covering 100s of times the area that solar uses more mining.
Wombah 0070
Wombah 0070 Month ago
Solar panels rated at 20 watts per square metre???????????? Oh really! If they were THAT bad you couldn't give them away! Please check your figures!
redo348
redo348 Month ago
No, average actual power not rated power. The number is correct, you should check your figures.
Frederick Malouf
One had to ask what we are using all this energy for. Take out the energy of debt based banking and defence and wonder how much energy we would not need.
redo348
redo348 Month ago
Transport, heating, manufactured goods, food
Bob Meinetz
Bob Meinetz Month ago
No - McKay never "explains why we should pursue them [sustainable energy options] anyway." If anything, he shows renewables to be a fool's errand.
Carskinify
Carskinify Month ago
So, there are billions of tons of co2 buried in coal and oil deposits. Where was the co2 before it was buried? Wouldn't that have caused climate change? Isn't trapping co2 in the earth similar to what the coal and oil deposits have been doing? What was the climate like before all the coal and oil was buried?
redo348
redo348 Month ago
Yes, the CO2 was in the air before it was buried. For example, during the Cambrian when temperatures were around 7 degrees hotter. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambrian
James iPad
James iPad Month ago
So nuclear it is
Rockin Atheist
Rockin Atheist Month ago
Millions of people are doing little bits to reduce global warming but your chances of meeting anyone who's prepared to make the sacrifices necessary to make a real difference are close to zero. Like, imagine having to go without MacDonalds and Burger King...
ddale20
ddale20 Month ago
If we can only get our politicians to watch this video so they can have a 'grown up' conversation instead of emotional outbursts, as if they have Tourette syndrome, and actually get things done. We will be our own downfall from within since we have children in congress instead of leaders.
ART R
ART R Month ago
I just have to wonder if AOC and Bernie watch these videos.
Z Coleman
Z Coleman Month ago
He is equally a cultist of the "low co2 revolution"
James CRoss
James CRoss Month ago
love how he chastizes countries for 'excess power consumption' while not adjusting for climate... Canada vs Bangladesh??? gee... I wonder what the difference is??? try a 70 degree C difference... down! Nice drama, bad comparisons....
redo348
redo348 Month ago
I suppose that's why californias use less power than the inuits?
Brian
Brian Month ago
Don't worry, when resources become a big issue we will have a nuclear war and wipe out 90% of the population. Then resources won't be a big deal.
bashful228
bashful228 Month ago
but who in their right mind is proposing biofuels for cars and general transportation? biofuel researchers winning grants, FF company execs and PR people running "predatory delay" that's who? EVs and AEVs are the way forward, powered by wind, sun and (moving) water.
redo348
redo348 Month ago
@bashful228 _Beyond Zero Emissions in Australia. Powering EV, and trains, trams and HSR is not a major increase in load on current grid demand_ Can you copy/paste those calculations here? By my calculations, coverting all cars to EVs would roughly double electricity use. (see below) I checked their report, and don't find any mention of the increased grid demand. bze.org.au/wp-content/uploads/BZE-Electric-Vehicles-Report-Beyond-Zero-Emissions-Australia.pdf Here are my calculations: Ball park figures driving a car uses 40kWh/day www.withouthotair.com/c3/page_29.shtml Electricity use is about 8kWh/day/person. So let's say around half the population uses a car, around 50% more efficient than current cars. That's ~10kWh/day/person. So add that onto the electrical grid you rouhgly double electricity use.
bashful228
bashful228 Month ago
@redo348 many people have done the sums. including Beyond Zero Emissions in Australia. Powering EV, and trains, trams and HSR is not a major increase in load on current grid demand. Energy efficiency can reduce current demand by half, especially in Australian buildings which are largely poor in energy efficiency terms. RE, wind solar and various forms of storage can get to ~80% on Australian grids for the same prices as connoting with coal and gas and replacing ageing units with new. To get to 100% RE on todays prices is a little bit more, but by the time we get to 80% RE, wind solar and storage will be considerably cheaper, and overdeployment behind the meter will continue as it makes good commercial sense when competing with retail power prices. As to the bio-fuels, there may have been some hype in your corner of the world, but it was never anything more than hype, the joke one researcher told me was who's making money out of biofuels/algae-fuel other than the journal editors and conference organisers?
redo348
redo348 Month ago
The talk is a little outdated on that front. Biofuels were said to be the next big thing, but Mackay was proven right. They do not add up. EVs indeed come out of the analysis better, but I think you are missing the key point here. Numbers, not words. Can we realistically power our current vehicle fleet as EVs using wind and solar? How much wind and solar is that compared to what we have now? Either you do the sums or you don't know.
Gafferlv
Gafferlv Month ago
Can't stand the smacking of his lips constantly throughout the presentation. Very distracting. Take a sip of water!
Razz16mm
Razz16mm Month ago
Scotland got 70% of it’s electricity from wind in 2018, up from 27% in 2009. McKay’s numbers don’t reflect the realities of the renewables as technologies improve and costs drop. Renewables with grid tied storage and natural gas combined cycle turbines for backup are currently the cheapest and lowest carbon foot print method of producing electricity. Gas turbines have half the carbon footprint of coal per KWH.
redo348
redo348 Month ago
Well that's good for scotland, but: 1) Scotland is very sparsely populated and with a relatively large wind resource 2) Electricity is only 15% of energy use. So 70% of electricity is around 10% of energy. So scotland is still 90% fossil fuel. Contrary to what you claim, MacKay's numbers are still correct. Check the W/m^2.
adlsaias
adlsaias Month ago
He is leaving out the energy transportation costs. What a great hero that he will help cost the death of thousands from energy poverty. Since he has apparently died since this broadcast, we can all have a reality check on bad karma coming around
Kent Thomas
Kent Thomas 23 days ago
huh?
Jim Stack
Jim Stack Month ago
He is too smart to see the real future. People need to be more efficient. An LED light uses 1/10th power of an incadecent. Shade cuts heat gain and is passive solar. So many ways to be more efficient. An electric car is 4 times or more than a gas car. You can make power from solar, wind, geo thermsl and hydro. So use all the tools we have to reduce , use all the clean choices we have to make power. We can do it.
Dwayne Mattson
Dwayne Mattson Month ago
Oil is not a fossil fuel.
redo348
redo348 Month ago
1) Yes it is 2) Is a debate about terminology really the most important thing here?
Victor Dupree
Victor Dupree Month ago
Another possible solution check out "Canadian Answer to World Energy Crisis" ruvid.net/video/video-PucnwcN39lk.html
Doug Blakely
Doug Blakely Month ago
One HUGE thing I didn't hear: "renewable" sources of energy are not reliable! They are intermittent so that means fossil fuels are required to back them up! Germany has discovered the nightmare and energy costs are much more expensive now and many seniors are dying because they cannot afford to stay warm. Then there is the energy required to make solar panels and windmills and the toxicity of the manufacture. Millions of birds are slaughtered by wind machines and many people have died. Then there are the serious health issues from living near them. Solar farms also kill tons of birds. Then there is the issue that doing all of this will have zero impact on CO2 and it is very unclear that CO2 is the boogie man they say it is. Just sayin'.
Doug Blakely
Doug Blakely Month ago
@Santiago Rubio Wind and solar are a mess.There is no way to use them seriously and they eat up so much land. Some talk about storage but it's practically impossible, due to the cost. We need WAY MORE energy. The US has abundant supply but much of the rest of the world doesn't. I prefer thorium reactors for electric power and they would have zero emissions which would make many people happy. Of course, our idiotic US laws make nuclear difficult and expensive to employ. Once producing it's really cheap. Fossil fuels have been amazing for our species, especially when you consider the by-products. Nuclear is clearly the safest form of electrical energy. From research I've been doing for a number of years, CO2 has essentially nothing to do with the earth's temperature. I know that is quite radical. There is a huge body of work on RUvid demonstrating that and I'd be glad to link to some if you're curious. Thanks for the chat!
Santiago Rubio
Santiago Rubio Month ago
so what's your solution for integrating renewable energy sources? or just continue living like we do with large energy consumption?
Russell Theisen
Russell Theisen Month ago
[LFTR] Liquid Floride Thorium Reactor is the best Energy Generation option for our Future.
Naum Rusomarov
Naum Rusomarov Month ago
"A reality check on renewables". Brought to you by the fossil fuels lobby. We all hope you enjoy your day and burn as much coal and gas as possible.
redo348
redo348 Month ago
Except 1) David was employed by the University of Cambridge and was not a lobbyist. 2) He was actually quite pro-renewables. He had solar panels on his roof and his main mode of transport was bicycle. (past tense because he died, not because he became a lobbyist etc)
Shane Reinholdt
Shane Reinholdt Month ago
Elon Musk - master plan What would be the point indeed, and of course I mean this from a purely economic view point. I mean real game changer is among us with a technological revolution occurring right now involving orbital space launch vehicles and steep reduction per launch costings and per tonne of equipment costs to send into orbit those necessary assets to start utilizing that space just above our heads where the sun always shining. Plus all the necessary technology actually already exists to make all this work... Voltaic energy converted to microwaves. Brain child Elon Musk - master plan .....voltaic cells built by Solar-City - Elon Musk .....delivered by Space-X - Elon Musk ..... Energy created used to fueling his massive of electrical Cars, Trucks, etc. - Elon Musk Back by the DOD ‘Department of Defence ‘ NOTE: solar city - sim city; where this technology is featured …. And obviously inspired Elon Musk no doubt
Bent Hestad
Bent Hestad Month ago
Brilliant man. Thanks!
Shane Reinholdt
Shane Reinholdt Month ago
Elon Musk - master plan What would be the point indeed, and of course I mean this from a purely economic view point. I mean real game changer is among us with a technological revolution occurring right now involving orbital space launch vehicles and steep reduction per launch costings and per tonne of equipment costs to send into orbit those necessary assets to start utilizing that space just above our heads where the sun always shining. Plus all the necessary technology actually already exists to make all this work... Voltaic energy converted to microwaves. Brain child Elon Musk - master plan .....voltaic cells built by Solar-City - Elon Musk .....delivered by Space-X - Elon Musk ..... Energy created used to fueling his massive of electrical Cars, Trucks, etc. - Elon Musk Back by the DOD ‘Department of Defense ‘ NOTE: solar city - sim city; where this technology is featured …. And obviously inspired Elon Musk no doubt
Kelly Arthur
Kelly Arthur Month ago
Yeah, terrestrial PV makes just _enormous_ sense & is just _so_ eco-friendly: put thousands of hectares into _permanent shadow_ for a power source _that only works in daylight_ & is best when it's not cloudy. (Yeah, how many days is that true in Britain every year, about five?) And the fusion option has wasted billions of dollars over the last _75yr_ without producing _a single watt of power_ . For that amount of money, we could have had working solar power satellites & ocean thermal conversion systems a generation ago. How do you reduce population? It's actually pretty easy: raise standards of living. That does seem to require more energy use _per capita_ , however... I also reject your proposition there are no other supply options. Not least the prospect of algal biofuels, which don't appear to need anything like the same area as crop biofuels.
Kelly Arthur
Kelly Arthur Month ago
Using PV for an SPS is an expensive lunacy. Do it with (big!) Mylar mirrors & helium turbogenerators. And do it _soon_ .
Shane Reinholdt
Shane Reinholdt Month ago
Elon Musk - master plan What would be the point indeed, and of course I mean this from a purely economic view point. I mean real game changer is among us with a technological revolution occurring right now involving orbital space launch vehicles and steep reduction per launch costings and per tonne of equipment costs to send into orbit those necessary assets to start utilizing that space just above our heads where the sun always shining. Plus all the necessary technology actually already exists to make all this work... Voltaic energy converted to microwaves. Brain child Elon Musk - master plan .....voltaic cells built by Solar-City - Elon Musk .....delivered by Space-X - Elon Musk ..... Energy created used to fueling his massive of electrical Cars, Trucks, etc. - Elon Musk Back by the DOD ‘Department of Defense ‘ NOTE: solar city - sim city; where this technology is featured …. And obviously inspired Elon Musk no doubt
Jeff Rudloff
Jeff Rudloff Month ago
If 90 percent of the electricity used is produced by fossil fuels, then in essence, electric cars run on fossil fuel.
Dominic Adams
Dominic Adams Month ago
But with a higher efficiency. Also the video is quite old and on a sunny, windy day we get around 50% from carbon free sources in 2019
Russell Auger
Russell Auger Month ago
Renewables increase Carbon 13 and thus Carbon 13 into the human genome altering current fidelity of the human genome. I hope we like becoming something new as we speed from primate to human to the new generation x 0.1% with renewables.
Dominic Adams
Dominic Adams Month ago
I'd love to read your source claiming renewables can alter the nuclear structure of carbon.
Barskor1
Barskor1 Month ago
What is fossil oil made from? Algae so if you want to replace fossil fuels with renewables you need the most productive plant on the planet and that is algae. You can feed a city worth of sewage to enclosed algae factories and get most of the energy back from all the land farming from food production as oil and methane and have natural fertilizer for more food production.
Ed SR
Ed SR Month ago
“We could reduce population, I’m not sure how we could do that” Thanos: Hold my beer
Red Divinity
Red Divinity Month ago
“We could reduce population, I’m not sure how we could do that” Bill Gates: "Better Vaccines"
Kevin Odom
Kevin Odom Month ago
West was reducing but now we’ve invited millions in which will greatly expand foot print. Makes no sense but whatever
Shane Reinholdt
Shane Reinholdt Month ago
Elon Musk - master plan What would be the point indeed, and of course I mean this from a purely economic view point. I mean real game changer is among us with a technological revolution occurring right now involving orbital space launch vehicles and steep reduction per launch costings and per tonne of equipment costs to send into orbit those necessary assets to start utilizing that space just above our heads where the sun always shining. Plus all the necessary technology actually already exists to make all this work... Voltaic energy converted to microwaves. Brain child Elon Musk - master plan .....voltaic cells built by Solar-City - Elon Musk .....delivered by Space-X - Elon Musk ..... Energy created used to fueling his massive of electrical Cars, Trucks, etc. - Elon Musk Back by the DOD ‘Department of Defence ‘ NOTE: solar city - sim city; where this technology is featured …. And obviously inspired Elon Musk no doubt
Barskor1
Barskor1 Month ago
Malthusian claptrap when will "smart" people actually pay attention to history when it comes to resources and population size? every time humans solve the problem and how it is done is by having more people to think about solutions, not by self neutering and mass murder.
zeusfriends
zeusfriends Month ago
Well nice presentation, but , of course missing a lot. 1- how much 1KhW costs from renewable? (100% fossiel fuel). so in order to save the world, you will have to pay double what you pay for the same amount of consumption. 2- Due to low efficiency of renewable, and the scale of solar panels, plus the operating batteries, which polluting the weather as well .... you will need to cover at least 50% of UK. with huge amount of costs and running costs... also double costs of fossiel fuel. 3- if you use the sub-Sahara region to generate renewable that means 200% cost rise, and you simply ship pollution from UK to sub sahara. ... and hence the sub sahara the ability to kill the switch if not obey or not paying the tarrifs (welcome) 4- that population map you suggested means that people need to relocate the high density consumption to a low places for balance, which means nobody is free to live where he wants. so how you gonna convince people with that? ... 5- isolation costs man !!! ...
Shane Reinholdt
Shane Reinholdt Month ago
Elon Musk - master plan What would be the point indeed, and of course I mean this from a purely economic view point. I mean real game changer is among us with a technological revolution occurring right now involving orbital space launch vehicles and steep reduction per launch costings and per tonne of equipment costs to send into orbit those necessary assets to start utilizing that space just above our heads where the sun always shining. Plus all the necessary technology actually already exists to make all this work... Voltaic energy converted to microwaves. Brain child Elon Musk - master plan .....voltaic cells built by Solar-City - Elon Musk .....delivered by Space-X - Elon Musk ..... Energy created used to fueling his massive of electrical Cars, Trucks, etc. - Elon Musk Back by the DOD ‘Department of Defence ‘ NOTE: solar city - sim city; where this technology is featured …. And obviously inspired Elon Musk no doubt
CSXRockford
CSXRockford Month ago
oil renews, it is a biological product. the earth is always making oil and gas.
redo348
redo348 Month ago
We use fossil fuels it *much* faster than they are made. The estimates for natural oil production are tens of thousands *per year*. The US alone uses 20million *per day*.
Bruce MacKinnon
Bruce MacKinnon Month ago
In an insulated house the bacteria count doubles for every 1% reduction in oxygen level. That is compound, not straight line.
Kent Thomas
Kent Thomas 23 days ago
@Bruce MacKinnon Good point. I was wondering why air exchangers are standard building code on new houses
Bruce MacKinnon
Bruce MacKinnon Month ago
A house without fresh air is a sick house.
Bruce MacKinnon
Bruce MacKinnon Month ago
There is a progressive loss of electric power in power lines. The further, the bigger the loss.
Shane Reinholdt
Shane Reinholdt Month ago
Elon Musk - master plan What would be the point indeed, and of course I mean this from a purely economic view point. I mean real game changer is among us with a technological revolution occurring right now involving orbital space launch vehicles and steep reduction per launch costings and per tonne of equipment costs to send into orbit those necessary assets to start utilizing that space just above our heads where the sun always shining. Plus all the necessary technology actually already exists to make all this work... Voltaic energy converted to microwaves. Brain child Elon Musk - master plan .....voltaic cells built by Solar-City - Elon Musk .....delivered by Space-X - Elon Musk ..... Energy created used to fueling his massive of electrical Cars, Trucks, etc. - Elon Musk Back by the DOD ‘Department of Defense ‘ NOTE: solar city - sim city; where this technology is featured …. And obviously inspired Elon Musk no doubt
Karl Pilkington
Karl Pilkington Month ago
If everyone grew their own food the total energy usage of the world would drop by 10% The third green revolution will facilitate this because now there are things like 'FarmBot' which will grow food in your backyard whilst you are away doing other things. Using.less than a single light bulb of energy per day out of the 125 we spend per.capita So buying a low end spin off of FarmBot for about £500, from then your food.will be free for life (except energy to power the FarmBot motor)... and also it will reduce your yearly energy usage by about 10%. And you will get fresh food straight from garden
Norman Normal
Norman Normal Month ago
tl;dr --- just go nuclear and also do all the common sense stuff like cycle and don't waste energy which everyone has known about for decades. Enough of the green tech hype.
157 239n
157 239n Month ago
@Shane Reinholdt I don't get your point here?
Shane Reinholdt
Shane Reinholdt Month ago
Elon Musk - master plan What would be the point indeed, and of course I mean this from a purely economic view point. I mean real game changer is among us with a technological revolution occurring right now involving orbital space launch vehicles and steep reduction per launch costings and per tonne of equipment costs to send into orbit those necessary assets to start utilizing that space just above our heads where the sun always shining. Plus all the necessary technology actually already exists to make all this work... Voltaic energy converted to microwaves. Brain child Elon Musk - master plan .....voltaic cells built by Solar-City - Elon Musk .....delivered by Space-X - Elon Musk ..... Energy created used to fueling his massive of electrical Cars, Trucks, etc. - Elon Musk Back by the DOD ‘Department of Defence ‘ NOTE: solar city - sim city; where this technology is featured …. And obviously inspired Elon Musk no doubt
Right Wing Nuclear Armed Aussie
Thanks for showing what a joke renewable energy sources are!!! - Solar only works when the sun is shining, plus it is highly expensive and to make them it damages the environment and energy intensive to make them. - Wind only works when the wind is blowing. Plus it damages the environment during construction of them plus mining the materials and is very energy intensive to make them. - Biomass takes up so much land area that it massively damages the environment and increases the cost of food production. I an Earth Scientist with a strong understanding of climate science. The whole thing is a PROVEN CON and a money making SCAM designed to destroy Western economies and transfer massive amounts of $$$ to the 3rd World. Everyone wake up!! This whole renewables thing is a massive waste of time and money!!!
Eduardo Martinez
Every 50 years or so the renewable infrastructure will need need to be renewed. This takes energy and has not been factored in.
Shane Reinholdt
Shane Reinholdt Month ago
Elon Musk - master plan What would be the point indeed, and of course I mean this from a purely economic view point. I mean real game changer is among us with a technological revolution occurring right now involving orbital space launch vehicles and steep reduction per launch costings and per tonne of equipment costs to send into orbit those necessary assets to start utilizing that space just above our heads where the sun always shining. Plus all the necessary technology actually already exists to make all this work... Voltaic energy converted to microwaves. Brain child Elon Musk - master plan .....voltaic cells built by Solar-City - Elon Musk .....delivered by Space-X - Elon Musk ..... Energy created used to fueling his massive of electrical Cars, Trucks, etc. - Elon Musk Back by the DOD ‘Department of Defence ‘ NOTE: solar city - sim city; where this technology is featured …. And obviously inspired Elon Musk no doubt
Francis Manns
Francis Manns Month ago
Two fallacies here: 1) The world has plenty of fossil fuel. Shortages result in exploration and resources are in the ground. 2) The carbon world has caused anthropogenic warming. Read and understands the essay below. The world is warming naturally and has reached a hiatus. www.dropbox.com/s/xdfdblxggw87n0z/Volcanoes%20ENSO%20and%20Carbon%20Dioxide.pdf?dl=0
redo348
redo348 Month ago
@Francis Manns _The alarmist consensus is freaking out over a hiatus._ Ok, let's check with the alarmist consensus on that. Here are the 5 year temperature anomaly averages: 95-0.32 C 00-0.45 05-0.55 10-0.64 15-0.68 (18)-0.92 So...there isn't a hiatus. climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/
Francis Manns
Francis Manns Month ago
@redo348 The alarmist consensus is freaking out over a hiatus. Where have you been? There has been no statistically anomalous warming for the 21st century.
redo348
redo348 Month ago
"The world is warming naturally and has reached a hiatus" What hiatus? There isn't one.
Skodaman2
Skodaman2 Month ago
Grand Solar Minimum is on it's way. Time to start mining coal again. Carbon taxes and global warming are a tax scam.
Kevin Bartram
Kevin Bartram Month ago
People need to realise land used to produce renewables generally can't be used to grow food. Not sure which you consider more important?
Alexander Schilcher
Nuclear FTW
pia suoja
pia suoja Month ago
no climate change, and we will perish if we ditch oil and coal and gas.....this man is speding dangerous lies
Kent Thomas
Kent Thomas 23 days ago
I assume you live off the grid?
Zebra Jerky
Zebra Jerky 2 months ago
ruvid.net/video/video-eiPIvH49X-E.html
Timothy Jones
Timothy Jones 2 months ago
Renewables need to be built into the homes so that the space renewables need is equal to the space the people use. Maybe the energy industry needs to take less space and let the people benefit without them.
Gorm Auslander
Gorm Auslander 2 months ago
The problem is that renewables and taking action at all has popularity issues. It's not about what's popular. It's about what's right.
Jordan TRusso
Jordan TRusso 2 months ago
So Nuclear energy is the obvious way of the future.
Téssio Fechine
Téssio Fechine 2 months ago
What would the W/m² for fusion power be?
redo348
redo348 2 months ago
Nuclear fission is ~1000W/m^2
Richard
Richard 2 months ago
The problem is it's not actually being used in "real life" yet so we don't know how much we'll actually get from any one plant. Any answers/numbers given would be pure speculation and have no basis in reality at this time.
Sam Lair
Sam Lair 2 months ago
The Glorious Temptations of Fossil Fuels - On Earth, in this life and in the future, it is understandable that we would want to continue using fossil fuels to fuel growth. We’ve developed marvelous technologies and wonderful industrial capacities based upon their use. However, it is inevitable that technology and science will evolve to higher and more sophisticated levels. Just as we no longer rely on wax and whale oil to light our nights, we will outgrow the need for coal and oil to power our civilizations; however..... samslair.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-glorious-temptations-of-fossil-fuels.html?m=1
TheMozzaok
TheMozzaok 2 months ago
50 years ago I was anti-nuclear power, because we had no way to safely store the waste, which remains toxic for many thousands of time's longer, than any human civilisation has lasted. At the time, science told us that a safe solution was just around the corner, and they would have THAT problem solved very, very soon. The hubris to believe we have the ability to store and manage a product of such toxicity for tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of years, always leaves me shaking my head in disappointment. Currently there is over 250,000 metric tonnes of HIGH level nuclear waste being stored around the world. I wonder when people talk the economics of Nuclear power, what costing do they use to "SAFELY" store/manage/protect/guard??? for the danger period of 40,000 to 250,000 years? At a measly one dollar, per tonne, per year, it would be 100,000,000,000, but we all know the real cost would be thousands of times more than that, so when they tell us how cost effective nuclear is, do they even think about nuclear waste, or are they planning to drop it down a big hole, and hope for the best? Goodbye humanity, make sure you destroy all life on earth before you turn the lights off.
redo348
redo348 2 months ago
High level waste (the worst stuff) needs to be stored for 1000 years to have the same radioactivity as uranium ore. The empire of Japan is 1700 years old an counting, so what you have said is a bit off. There are valid concerns about nuclear waste but it is good to have the numbers right.
richardnail Historical
Scattered presentation, complicated graphs shown for seconds, but more importantly what this guy is fundamentally saying: our living standards have to go down to support the ever increasing world population, it will continue to go down every time more people are added. Moral: your choice, want more population then accept destruction of the environment (this guy said over 20% of the land would be needed for renewables), which will result in a substantial degrading of lifestyle not to mention wildlife habitat. Bottom line, 8 billion humans on this planet is exactly 6.2 billion too many for sustainable living.
Daniel Wasilewski
Daniel Wasilewski 2 months ago
well, as much as I admire that speech and healthy reasoning, one obvious overlooked question comes to my mind. What is a total area of Roof tops in UK that housing that population? You could also say... ohh!
redo348
redo348 13 days ago
@Daniel Wasilewski "Speaking of utilising extra area to cover country with solars is BS" No, it is maths. See above. Current energy use is the equivalent of ~250m^2 solar per person. There isn't that much roof. As for the link, it looks like marketing balony to me. Do they actually cover the energy they use? There's a noticable lack of any numbers confirming that. I tried to check their numbers but on their website they list solar installations as "10 MW/h/p". Megawatts per hour per person? Well, that's not a unit that actually makes any physical sense (maybe they mean megawatt hours per person?) so that doesn't exactly inspire confidence.
Daniel Wasilewski
Daniel Wasilewski 13 days ago
@redo348 Well, just watch all that roof space and what they have achieved /watch?v=WCKz8ykyI2E. And that's the vision I had i mind. Speaking of utilising extra area to cover country with solars is BS. It is about improving/ modernising existing area. Victorian houses will not cut it.
redo348
redo348 2 months ago
@Daniel Wasilewski There are too many points for me to respond to it all there. I'll just pick a few things I think are crucial. "Somehow Germany estimated they will go 100% renewable in 2040" The target I find on Wikipedia is 80% of electricity by 2050. That's a big difference because electricity is only 15% of energy use. Planes, cars, gas heating are most of the 85%. Likewise I suspect this is most of the issue with the off grid thing. The electrical grid is a relatively small portion of the energy we use. Do they have cars? Do they fly? Do they buy manufactured goods? If yes then they aren't off grid in the sense that I think you mean (renewables meeting their energy use). My explanation for how it is possible for people to live off grid is either they don't, or they live unrealistically frugal lives that we aren't going to convince most people to copy, or they use more land than the average person has. Do I want the UK to fall behind? No, I want the UK to catch up with France, who have met that 2050 Germany target with a low carbon power source for two decades already. France is half a century ahead of Germany's optimistic target. That's results, right? Nuclear works. Put the same political push that renewables are getting into making nuclear better. My worry is we push ahead with an unrealistic view of what renewables can deliver. We get to that 2050 Germany electricity target and make it... but wait, 70%+ of our total energy is still fossil fuels, our economy has grown by 30% and we have actually made zero impact on carbon output. Aside from that I suggest you read his book (or maybe just a few chapters that seem interesting to you). For example, you will see he didn't forget about roof space, he specifically did that calculation. The book is free online. www.withouthotair.com
Daniel Wasilewski
Daniel Wasilewski 2 months ago
@redo348 I'm not ignoring him, I do believe that he wanted to inform people the green energy is not as simple as people believe or institutions portrait to be. But I also believe he ignored the factor that a roof coverage wasn't taken into account. He showed it with assumption we need to convert extra land to achieve those numbers. My only point is, we already did cover large areas of UK with roofs that we can simply re-purpose existing infrastructure without any extra land grab, especially with new technology coming into this field. Maybe you even pushing for more conservative numbers like 15% efficiency of wind turbine. I would argue with that because there are people off grid showing efficiency of that hybrid systems in practice and for personal/family use 20KW per day is enough to be happy. 125KW comes from the fact industry needs that much, not a householders. There are commercial installations that can achieve they needs too. Sure that comes with bigger investment. My point is, with all we have in our disposal if every single unit, household, factory office would be responsible for providing as much energy as it needs to function, we can do it. Obviously that would mean making energy provider monopoly obsolete and this is something those that holds to that 'power' will fight against. This is over century establishment hard to remove form our mentality. Because reading in between the words, that video was the only suggestion to push for nuclear power to support it all and THAT was a hidden agenda that I disagree with. Somehow Germany estimated they will go 100% renewable in 2040. You want to see UK falling behind that? This will not work without an effort of every single country. Also, UK leads in a field of Fusion energy and they estimated there will be ready in by 2050. That may be just in time. The danger behind such video is to make people think. Oh.. so, some scientist prove it is all BS, it's a pipe dream, keep the fossils burning.
redo348
redo348 2 months ago
@Daniel Wasilewski Those are not realistic numbers. 15% capacity factor is real "typical" data I found for small turbines. For solar, again real data, household installations average 20W/m^2. I'm also not sure why you are ignoring that a Cambridge physics professor has already done and checked the sums!
Mike K
Mike K 2 months ago
If the planet got warmer you would need less heat
Éamon Ó Catháin
Éamon Ó Catháin 2 months ago
The problem with biofuels grown abroad for any country is the energy needed to then bring the fuels over sea to the country in which they're going to be burned. I suppose if you're already going to be setting up lines for bringing solar power over long distances you could probably do the same with power generated from bio though..
LaughingInfidel
LaughingInfidel 2 months ago
It should be mentioned that wind can be combined with solar or agriculture on the same land.
LFTRnow
LFTRnow 2 months ago
1 kW light bulbs?
LFTRnow
LFTRnow 2 months ago
@redo348 Ah! Now I see - kWh not kW. That makes much more sense. You are 100% correct, thanks. I wish he just said 40W bulbs, but this is clear now.
redo348
redo348 2 months ago
1kWh/day = 40W
pOgan pAgan
pOgan pAgan 2 months ago
As an student of electrical engineer, there is a fundamental problem with this. The solar, wind or wave power plants are a regulators not a consistent source of energy. WHY? because for a main source you need a constant input, lets say 100 GW/h and they can't change that must always be 100 GW/h but from all renewable you have drastic changes so they will be used like Dams, yes dams mostly are used for regulating the input in the system not as a main source.
redo348
redo348 2 months ago
The storage problem is a problem in addition to this analysis, not instead of. If you don't make enough average power to begin with, then whether you can store it so you have it right time is a moot point. If you are comfortable with logic terms, then he is talking about a necessary but not sufficient condition- power density.
Next videos
The Little Brother Rap
3:25
UFC 241: Training for war
3:26