SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The global cost of securing a clean energy future is rising by the year, the International Energy Agency (IEA) warned Monday, estimating that an additional $44 trillion of investment was needed to meet 2050 carbon reduction targets. Releasing its biennial "Energy Technology Perspectives" report in Seoul, the agency said electricity would increasingly power the world's economies in the decades to come, rivalling oil as the dominant energy carrier. Surging electricity demand posed serious challenges, said IEA executive director Maria van der Hoeven.
"We must get it right, but we're on the wrong path at the moment," Van der Hoeven told reporters in the South Korean capital.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
$44 Trillion Needed for Clean Energy Future
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 39 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
We are now enjoying total mutual interaction in an imaginary hot tub ...
(Score: 2) by EvilJim on Thursday May 15 2014, @09:38PM
anyone have an estimate of the value of scrap lead, steel, aluminium,copper, depleted uranium and other metals the various military's have left lying around in places like Afghanistan/Iraq? :)
when I was unemployed it was easy to get drinking money just cleaning up a bit of bush area of rubbish. Trillions are just drinking money to governments
(Score: 2) by mendax on Thursday May 15 2014, @10:03PM
Well, $44 trillion is not exactly petty cash for any government. I think that may be most of the gross domestic product for the entire world economy. Maybe $44 billion for the U.S. government is petty cash, considering that the Federal Reserve can create it out of thin air as they have been doing regularly lately in buying U.S. government bonds to stimulate the economy.
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
(Score: 2) by EvilJim on Thursday May 15 2014, @10:17PM
it's a 'global cost' so there would be more than just one government involved, if they all chip in for a round if drinkys they can probably do this :) of course I am trolling...slightly.
(Score: 2) by khallow on Thursday May 15 2014, @10:17PM
My guess is tens of millions of dollars at best. The locals know how to salvage and most of the stuff you mention would have negative value to actually extract it from the landscape.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by EvilJim on Thursday May 15 2014, @10:42PM
good answer, I've often wondered how long a place would have to be a warzone before it was worth mining... same for old garbage dumps in the west, there must be tonnes of metals and other usable resources down there.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Friday May 16 2014, @01:12AM
Why go back to a war zone and piss them off all over again.
Just send your miners out to your local garbage dump / land fill / junk yard, etc.
There is more metal laying around than you might realize. There is a US steel company (Nucor) who's whole business model revolves around metal recovery rather than mining.
There is scrap steal laying all over this country (any country, actually).
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by EvilJim on Friday May 16 2014, @02:18AM
I was thinking along the lines of specific metal requirements like high concentrations of lead when mentioning war zones, absolutely there would be political problems with foreigners coming in to do it..
(Score: 2) by frojack on Friday May 16 2014, @02:45AM
Pretty dispersed though I imagine. Unless you happen on one of those caches live of mortar rounds the terrorists use to make truck bombs. There seem to be an endless supply of these cached around the country. [google.com]
Maybe we can make them a deal. You keep the HE, just sell us the lead.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by EvilJim on Friday May 16 2014, @03:00AM
haha, yeah, I've heard they cook with the explosives... :)I just did some mental gymnastics and leaps of logic and it would only take 50g of metallic lead in 500g dirt to be equivalent to typical lead ore (wiki actually says less than 10%) but then you also have the benefit of not having to convert it to metal and separate the other metals from it that are usually in lead ore, so dunno, there might be some deposits in heavily fought over areas worth something.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead#Occurrence [wikipedia.org]