Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Wednesday June 10 2015, @11:57AM   Printer-friendly
from the brains-unite! dept.

A group of scientists have called for a "moonshot" renewable energy research program called the "Global Apollo":

They say they have generated interest from major nations in their plan for an investment of 0.02% of their GDP [about $150 billion over 10 years, and about the cost of the Apollo program in 2015 dollars] into research, development and demonstration (RD&D) of clean electricity. Their report, launched at London's Royal Society, says on current projections the world will exceed the 2C danger threshold of climate change by 2035.

The academics are led by the UK's former chief scientist Professor Sir David King. He told BBC News: "We have already discovered enough fossil fuels to wreck the climate many times over. There's only one thing that's going to stop us burning it – and that's if renewables become cheaper than fossil fuels. "Under our plan, we are aiming to make that happen globally within a decade." Another of the authors, former Cabinet Secretary Lord O'Donnell, told BBC News: "People never believed we could put a man on the Moon - but we did. People don't believe we can solve climate change - but we have no choice."

It complains that renewable energy has been starved of investment to a shocking degree, with publicly funded RD&D on renewable energy only $6bn a year – under 2% of the total of publicly funded research and development. The authors say this compares poorly with the $101bn spent worldwide on production subsidies for renewables and the $550bn "counter-productive" subsidies for fossil fuel energy.

Solar is the most favoured renewable source as the group says it has greatest potential for technology breakthroughs, and most new energy demand will be in sunny countries. The cost of solar has been plummeting and is already approaching competitive prices in places as different as Germany, California and Chile. But the authors believe next-generation plastic photovoltaics can to keep prices tumbling. They believe battery technology is improving fast – but think batteries and other forms of storage need to be massively developed to store intermittent renewable energy. The authors say much smarter software is needed to enable electricity grids to cope with the new sources of power. Some experts believe that energy technology has developed so fast that it simply needs further price support to keep volumes rising and costs falling. Others will complain that the Apollo group has done little to tackle the immense problem of replacing fossil fuels in heating.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Wednesday June 10 2015, @05:34PM

    by MichaelDavidCrawford (2339) Subscriber Badge <mdcrawford@gmail.com> on Wednesday June 10 2015, @05:34PM (#194599) Homepage Journal

    not long ago I read a lengthy wall street journal article about the "problems" of solar and wind power. You see they present a threat to coal, as well as to electricity transmission.

    It cost a lot to build all those power lines, transformers and so on, the investors put all that money in and don't want their dividend checks to stop coming.

    That the earth will be uninhabitable to humans in a few centuries wasn't mentioned in the article.

    Consider the problem of homelessness in the US. I understand that there are 4000 homeless people in Portland, Oregon. A good-quality 2-man tent costs sixty bucks at walmart. We also have vast quantities of steel shipping containers that we have no use for.

    It would be trivial to house and feed all the homeless people, but the folks with the money, and those who make campaign "donations" do not permit it.

    --
    Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by bradley13 on Wednesday June 10 2015, @06:58PM

    by bradley13 (3053) on Wednesday June 10 2015, @06:58PM (#194631) Homepage Journal

    Money does talk, and certainly a company that feels threatened will do whatever it can to preserve it's market. Most often, this involves bribing politicians to pass stupid legislation (Tesla and direct car sales, Über and taxi companies), or else abusing the legal system (the music and publishing industries suing file-sharers; the legal assault on Mega and Kim Dotcom). That's all true, but in the power industry there are also big companies on the other side. Consider Lockheed Martin and their hope to provide fusion in the next few years. Now that would be disruptive, but Lockheed Martin can pay just as many lobbyists as anyone else. Stupid battles, futile, you can't stop change, but they can and do slow it down...

    Your comment about the homeless, on the other hand, is very different. Money really isn't an issue - there's no money to be made by keeping someone homeless. In most cities there are shelters they could go to, if they really wanted a roof over their heads. Being homeless is often a side effect of other problems: drug abuse, alcoholism or mental illness. Provide a homeless person with a tent, and the chances are pretty good that they won't live in it for long. It may be sold for their next hit or bottle of booze, or they may destroy it, or it will be stolen by a street gang.

    --
    Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
    • (Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Wednesday June 10 2015, @07:05PM

      by MichaelDavidCrawford (2339) Subscriber Badge <mdcrawford@gmail.com> on Wednesday June 10 2015, @07:05PM (#194633) Homepage Journal

      Surely you're familiar with the expression "Not In My Backyard"?

      A common reason that shelters are not permitted is that neighborhood homeowners fear that their presence will decrease property values.

      It is quite definitely the case that there aren't enough shelter beds. In Santa Cruz there is only one shelter, with a maximum stay of thirty days as well as a long waiting list to get in. The Portland Rescue Mission holds a lottery every night; many are turned away.

      I know a lovely young woman who ran away from home because her father sexually assaulted her. There are special shelters for vulnerable people like her but even so the waiting lists are months long.

      You are quite mistaken about homelessness.

      --
      Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]