Are Renewable Energy sources the future?

[juliepower]

Renewable energy in the future is predicted that by 2024, solar capacity in the world will grow by 600 gigawatts. Renewable energy is providing affordable electricity across the country and can help stabilize energy prices in the future. Hope it will be successfully done.

[Rahman11]

In the UK, renewable capacity is expected to increase by 30% by 2024, with a majority of this utilising the country's plentiful offshore wind potential. More specific forecasts for the UK in relation to energy are published annually by the department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS).

[CaVO32]

Currently, developed countries are interested in energy issues and energy use. They have a preference for renewable energy. The research and application of renewable energy is becoming more frequent. Wind power, solar power, electric cars, tides are things that are being talked about a lot.
In Germany, there is a road installed with solar panels.
Policies of countries to promote renewable energy. In many developed countries, there is a policy to buy back electricity at a higher price than electricity from fossil energy sources. I believe renewable energy is the future of the world, but we also need to acknowledge the important role of fossil energy such as oil, gas, coal... in the marine industry, metallurgy industry, chemistry...

We are heading in that direction, where the government is promoting the utilization of renewable energy sources. It may not be an easy path, but slowly, people are recognizing the benefits of investing into these renewable energy sources like putting up their own solar panels/wind generator at home. Some countries even have their incentives like in Australia - they called renewable power incentives (not only solar) - https://www.energy.gov.au/rebates/renewable-power-incentives. This will encourage people to set-up their own renewable energy source. Not only helping their financials but the environment also.

[aoluain]

Energy is a really complicated topic. There's a massive number of ways you can combine production and distribution, and figuring out the optimal balance for any geographic area requires a lot of surveying and understanding of the local environment, natural resources, as well as trade relationships between neighbouring countries.

I think renewables will be forced onto consumers in the developed world, especially in the West. This isn't inherently a bad thing, but depending on some of the factors I mentioned above, there will be pos/neg consequences at smaller geographic scales. For example, NYC just decommisioned a nuclear power planet, leading to blackouts throughout the state and NYC. California also voted to decommission Diablo Canyon, and they have no plan for an alternative source of energy, they just state it has to be carbon neutral. These are (in my opinion) poor choices, and will have extremely negative consequences regardless of the renewable energy source that may or may not fill in the gap.

Poor excuses for switching to renewables aside, there are legitimate problems with renewables. They're still much more unreliable than oil/natural gas, storage of excess energy is an issue (one that Bitcoin mining can actually help alleviate), and the actual production of things like solar panels require rare earth materials and metals which are mined in developing nations with poor regulatory oversight. Often, the extraction and purification of these materials results in environmental degradation that goes unchecked in parts of the world where end consumers tend to not care about (so much for "clean" energy). These issues will be resolved or become insignificant enough to ignore over time, but they exist for now and it's silly to pretend renewable energy is some holy grail that we can just have for free (which is how politicians treat it).

So in the short term, I expect a lot of decommissioning of functioning nuclear plants (bad) and aging coal/gas plants (better). In the medium term, these things will be replaced by renewables where they make sense, some countries/provinces/states may just decide to stop producing energy and start importing it entirely. In the long term, I think we're looking at nuclear, although if people were serious about stopping climate change, we would be building nuclear plants at a monotonically increasing rate.

I have just read the first page of this thread and two posts which I have quoted
hits the nail on the head [above],
and the one below along with pretty much all other posts on the first page and I'm
guessing the vast majority of the other pages fal into what we are being fed by
governments and media.

The big question here is, can the world be 100% dependent on renewable energy sources? How can that be achieved and are they sustainable?

In an environment where the world is running out of conventional fossil fuels, it is refreshing to learn about the renewable resources that are now a reality. Alternative energy sources such as solar and wind, biomass, geothermal and hydropower seem to be a future of this world, with innovations such as "smart" products that harvest energy by tapping into the environment. I am a supporter of renewable energy sources, with hydrogen fueling cars (combined with electric cars) and fuel cells as a feasible replacement for fossil fuels. But, can the world be 100% dependent on renewable energy sources? My belief is that it is possible. The question is only how long it will take and what it would take.

I couldnt find anything to watch on TV this evening and youtube suggested I might
like > Michael Moore Presents: Planet of the Humans | Full Documentary | Directed by Jeff Gibbs

https://youtu.be/Zk11vI-7czE

. . . and I hated it, such an embarrasing and depressing movie, a worrying movie and
a movie which highlights many lies we are being fed.

Currently renewable energy is running at a loss, the energy used to produce the tools
which are used to create green renewable energy far outweigh the energy created
by those tools. The resources which are used to make solar panels and wind turbines
are stripped from the earth and processed with a massive amount of energy and
fossil fuels.

The movie above literally focuses on everything from Solar, Wind, Hydro and Biomass,
combined with industries and big business and highlights how we are actually accelerating
the problems they are actually telling us the are trying to fix.

Biomass in particular is a massive problem which is not sustainable, the joke is that by using
biomass we are using one of the very few things which cam help the planet, vegitation,
particularly Trees. By using Biomass we are burning biodiversity.

It all just feeds into capitalism and consumerism and the winners are big business, not us.

I voted NO

[Sithara007]

A complete switch from fossil fuels to renewable is highly unlikely within 2050, zero emissions may sound ideal but I'm not sure on how it can be achieved. I hope I'm proved wrong, but the time period looks quite small for something so large.

In my opinion, it'll be a success even if fossil fuel usage is reduced by 50%. Renewable sources sound like a panacea, but I'm not exactly sure on how easy and efficient the transition can be.

For electricity generation, now many forms of renewable energy are more cost-effective when compared to the non-renewable sources. Cost of generating solar power and wind power has gone down by 20x or more during the last two decades. But the main issue is not with electricity, but with automobile fuel. This is the problematic area. The conversion of gasoline driven vehicles to EVs are not happening in a big way, because the EVs have a limited range, and they are much more expensive when compared to the gasoline driven vehicles.

[xSkylarx]

A complete switch from fossil fuels to renewable is highly unlikely within 2050, zero emissions may sound ideal but I'm not sure on how it can be achieved. I hope I'm proved wrong, but the time period looks quite small for something so large.

In my opinion, it'll be a success even if fossil fuel usage is reduced by 50%. Renewable sources sound like a panacea, but I'm not exactly sure on how easy and efficient the transition can be.

For electricity generation, now many forms of renewable energy are more cost-effective when compared to the non-renewable sources. Cost of generating solar power and wind power has gone down by 20x or more during the last two decades. But the main issue is not with electricity, but with automobile fuel. This is the problematic area. The conversion of gasoline driven vehicles to EVs are not happening in a big way, because the EVs have a limited range, and they are much more expensive when compared to the gasoline driven vehicles.

Agree to this and there are only few charging station of it and really you cant drive really really long distance. Regarding renewable energy there are a lot of people now a days in their homes buying a solar power light since it could save energy and also lets say that it could make the environment better. I think the future in renewable energy in terms of electricity is really great, but the gasoline powered vehicle is the next problem tho

[aoluain]

A complete switch from fossil fuels to renewable is highly unlikely within 2050, zero emissions may sound ideal but I'm not sure on how it can be achieved. I hope I'm proved wrong, but the time period looks quite small for something so large.

In my opinion, it'll be a success even if fossil fuel usage is reduced by 50%. Renewable sources sound like a panacea, but I'm not exactly sure on how easy and efficient the transition can be.

For electricity generation, now many forms of renewable energy are more cost-effective when compared to the non-renewable sources. Cost of generating solar power and wind power has gone down by 20x or more during the last two decades. But the main issue is not with electricity, but with automobile fuel. This is the problematic area. The conversion of gasoline driven vehicles to EVs are not happening in a big way, because the EVs have a limited range, and they are much more expensive when compared to the gasoline driven vehicles.

Agree to this and there are only few charging station of it and really you cant drive really really long distance. Regarding renewable energy there are a lot of people now a days in their homes buying a solar power light since it could save energy and also lets say that it could make the environment better. I think the future in renewable energy in terms of electricity is really great, but the gasoline powered vehicle is the next problem tho

So when we are driving around in our new electric powered cars carbon
emissions and global warming will be neutralised and the planet will begin to heal
itself?

With more EV's produced the need for electricity  increases, surprise, surprise.
So we produce more solar panels, more turbines, we block more rivers and burn more
trees and gas.

For example Solar panels are made from Quartz and Coal, extracted and transported by
Diesel and melted together in furnaces.

It doesnt make sense, we are consuming more and more of the earths resources in
order to produce renewable clean energy.

The agenda is to sell us more products.

Best thing we can all do is buy land and plant trees (as a start.)

 

[bryant.coleman]

Agree to this and there are only few charging station of it and really you cant drive really really long distance. Regarding renewable energy there are a lot of people now a days in their homes buying a solar power light since it could save energy and also lets say that it could make the environment better. I think the future in renewable energy in terms of electricity is really great, but the gasoline powered vehicle is the next problem tho

That still doesn't solve the issue of affordability. The Tesla Model S costs around $100,000. This is around 3 times the price of a similar automobile which runs on gasoline. Personally I don't afford paying up to 50% more for an EV. But 200%? That doesn't make any sense for me. They need to reduce the cost and make the vehicles more affordable. And for that, they need to dump the current Lithium-Nickel-Cobalt-Aluminium batteries and move towards a battery technology that uses less expensive metals. I am afraid that it may not happen anytime soon.

[fullhdpixel]

That still doesn't solve the issue of affordability. The Tesla Model S costs around $100,000. This is around 3 times the price of a similar automobile which runs on gasoline. Personally I don't afford paying up to 50% more for an EV. But 200%? That doesn't make any sense for me. They need to reduce the cost and make the vehicles more affordable. And for that, they need to dump the current Lithium-Nickel-Cobalt-Aluminium batteries and move towards a battery technology that uses less expensive metals. I am afraid that it may not happen anytime soon.

It is not just about EV or anything, it is both a symbol plus it is a much better car. If it was only EV that you are looking for, then you can get a lot cheaper cars, you can find hybrid for as low as 10-20k, that means there are cars with 80% discount on a tesla model S, and if you would like to, you can buy them, and yes 50% cheaper EV that is a lot better. However tesla is a symbol, just like how iphone was the most expensive phone you could get for a long time, it is getting closer these days but still it is the most expensive one, why? Because it is a symbol and not just the product.

If your aim is only to get an EV then you can do so cheaper but if you want to have a symbol (no not renault) then you could pay more and get a tesla. Plus the fact that it is so much better is a big plus, it literally drives itself, how many EV cars can drive itself on the road?

[Ucy]

I doubt that the result from using renewable energy on the environment will be convincing enough to make the world rely on it completely. It's more like a drug everyone has high hope on but once the drug is not working as expected they don't depend on it too as a cure for their problems.

[Cafex]

Yes, of course. Renewable energies are very crucial for the environment the most. People must stop using fossil fuels for good and replace them with renewable energy sources. This will help us keep the environment in a good condition in the future too. And these energy sources are very important for cryptocurrencies also. For example, Bitcoin mining was using fossil fuels at a high rate. But this has started to change since miners started using renewable energy sources.

[bryant.coleman]

It is not just about EV or anything, it is both a symbol plus it is a much better car. If it was only EV that you are looking for, then you can get a lot cheaper cars, you can find hybrid for as low as 10-20k, that means there are cars with 80% discount on a tesla model S, and if you would like to, you can buy them, and yes 50% cheaper EV that is a lot better. However tesla is a symbol, just like how iphone was the most expensive phone you could get for a long time, it is getting closer these days but still it is the most expensive one, why? Because it is a symbol and not just the product.

If your aim is only to get an EV then you can do so cheaper but if you want to have a symbol (no not renault) then you could pay more and get a tesla. Plus the fact that it is so much better is a big plus, it literally drives itself, how many EV cars can drive itself on the road?

Well.... agree with most parts. I agree that there are cheaper EVs available in the market and over the years, they have become more affordable. But as I said, the only negative point for me is the battery technology. They are still unable to create a battery from cheaper ingredients. Nickel may not be that rare, but the same can't be said about Lithium and Cobalt. The latter is especially in short supply. Right now, the supplies seems to be enough. But Cobalt can create a bottleneck in the future, as the deposits are concentrated in a few high-risk nations such as DR Congo. 

[Ultegra134]

Agree to this and there are only few charging station of it and really you cant drive really really long distance. Regarding renewable energy there are a lot of people now a days in their homes buying a solar power light since it could save energy and also lets say that it could make the environment better. I think the future in renewable energy in terms of electricity is really great, but the gasoline powered vehicle is the next problem tho

That still doesn't solve the issue of affordability. The Tesla Model S costs around $100,000. This is around 3 times the price of a similar automobile which runs on gasoline. Personally I don't afford paying up to 50% more for an EV. But 200%? That doesn't make any sense for me. They need to reduce the cost and make the vehicles more affordable. And for that, they need to dump the current Lithium-Nickel-Cobalt-Aluminium batteries and move towards a battery technology that uses less expensive metals. I am afraid that it may not happen anytime soon.

I'm all in for electric vehicles, I mostly like their concept and its benefits, not paying for petrol, they have immense acceleration and so on. However, I don't believe that they are fully developed for mass usage. They are still quite expensive and till a few years ago, Tesla was the largest competitor. The Tesla Model 3 for instance, costs approximately $50-60.000.

During the past few years, more and more EVs are being developed, such as Hyundai, Volkswagen, KIA, Volvo and a few others.

[Sithara007]

I'm all in for electric vehicles, I mostly like their concept and its benefits, not paying for petrol, they have immense acceleration and so on. However, I don't believe that they are fully developed for mass usage. They are still quite expensive and till a few years ago, Tesla was the largest competitor. The Tesla Model 3 for instance, costs approximately $50-60.000.

During the past few years, more and more EVs are being developed, such as Hyundai, Volkswagen, KIA, Volvo and a few others.

Increased competition should result in these vehicles becoming more affordable. I can see a considerable reduction in the monopoly in high-end EVs that Tesla had, in recent times. Tesla had the advantage that they were the first ones to mass produce EVs, but now other automobile manufacturers seems to have realized that EVs are going to be the next big thing in this sector. And despite the monopoly that Tesla had, they never contributed anything positive to the EV sector. If they had done something useful, then we would be having a much more affordable and reliable battery technology by now.

[Ultegra134]

I'm all in for electric vehicles, I mostly like their concept and its benefits, not paying for petrol, they have immense acceleration and so on. However, I don't believe that they are fully developed for mass usage. They are still quite expensive and till a few years ago, Tesla was the largest competitor. The Tesla Model 3 for instance, costs approximately $50-60.000.

During the past few years, more and more EVs are being developed, such as Hyundai, Volkswagen, KIA, Volvo and a few others.

Increased competition should result in these vehicles becoming more affordable. I can see a considerable reduction in the monopoly in high-end EVs that Tesla had, in recent times. Tesla had the advantage that they were the first ones to mass produce EVs, but now other automobile manufacturers seems to have realized that EVs are going to be the next big thing in this sector. And despite the monopoly that Tesla had, they never contributed anything positive to the EV sector. If they had done something useful, then we would be having a much more affordable and reliable battery technology by now.

Tesla used to be the main competitor in the EV sector, that's why their prices were so high as well. On top of that, Tesla had a terrible policy when it came to servicing and salvage vehicles. Despite EVs being a pretty new market, there are already quite a few models, from different companies, that have recently been introduced to the market, reducing the monopoly effect Tesla had on the market.

[Ozero]

I doubt that the result from using renewable energy on the environment will be convincing enough to make the world rely on it completely. It's more like a drug everyone has high hope on but once the drug is not working as expected they don't depend on it too as a cure for their problems.

We do not yet have a reasonable enough way out than to rely on the increasing use of renewable energy sources. I have been interested in solar panels for a long time and see that their cost is constantly falling, and the efficiency is growing. For this, other, cheaper materials and new technologies and inventions are used. It was necessary to switch to renewable energy sources much earlier, now there would be no problems with the environment, climate change and the energy crisis. The corporations that produced oil and gas slowed down this process. The world will now be forced to switch to alternative energy sources. I also think that soon we will see various inventions regarding other energy sources. Of course, all these new sources of energy are the future.

[STT]

Solar is great, the chart for cost per watt is like a ski jump.  Its fallen so much I hope solar is massively more viable ongoing then it used to be even in fairly northern parts of the world, obviously its been viable in a desert terrain for a while.    Big one I heard is skyscrapers with all the windows able to function as part solar panels, thereby the building becomes justified in its energy usage; really big if true since cities are natural polluters.

storage of excess energy is an issue (one that Bitcoin mining can actually help alleviate)

I see a few people really disagree with this idea but I do think BTC is useful for remote energy use out of hours and so on it has a purpose not obvious at first site.   I think the simple idea of pumping water up a mountain to a reservoir is superior for storing energy longer term.   Theres a few other ideas but on a base level BTC is finance efficiency not the literal storage of the physical.   These two things arent really separate, its really about timing and peak energy usage being available so yes I think BTC has relevance in its continual demand and ability to be placed almost anywhere.

[Mauser]

Solar is great, the chart for cost per watt is like a ski jump.  Its fallen so much I hope solar is massively more viable ongoing then it used to be even in fairly northern parts of the world, obviously its been viable in a desert terrain for a while.    Big one I heard is skyscrapers with all the windows able to function as part solar panels, thereby the building becomes justified in its energy usage; really big if true since cities are natural polluters.

I agree with you, Solar power is the future and we will see another push in the next 5-10 years. The efficiency of solar power is constantly growing and once we solve the problem of more easy ways to transfer and store energy it will be the main of energy. Building large Solar farms at the best locations on earth with plenty of sunlight and then transferring the energy to unfavourable locations will be the key. Why not take advantage of free energy that is provided by the sun every day? In my country the government is just changing the law, and any new build residential roof needs to have solar panels on top of it in the future. This will transform the energy consumption for the residential sector. As for industry solar power is probably not strong enough and requires other forms of energy. In my opinion Solar and Nuclear power is going to be the future.

[Webetcoins]

We do not yet have a reasonable enough way out than to rely on the increasing use of renewable energy sources. I have been interested in solar panels for a long time and see that their cost is constantly falling, and the efficiency is growing. For this, other, cheaper materials and new technologies and inventions are used. It was necessary to switch to renewable energy sources much earlier, now there would be no problems with the environment, climate change and the energy crisis. The corporations that produced oil and gas slowed down this process. The world will now be forced to switch to alternative energy sources. I also think that soon we will see various inventions regarding other energy sources. Of course, all these new sources of energy are the future.

Yes the cost of solar panels have greatly reduced over the years and as we can see we now have a lot of devices that can be easily powered by solar. Not only that they are cheap but they are also friendly to the environment.

I think this can encourage more people to switch on solar than to the standard type of electricity. Haven't heard any new inventions related on the renewable energy. Did they run out of idea already? Because there have been a good number of inventions that we saw on the past but I believe that they modify it and they make it more better. Renewable energies are the future because like I said earlier they are more cheaper and more greener.

[Ultegra134]

While solar panels are great and have gotten way cheaper than they used to, in order to have an effect globally, it would require mass adoption, which is quite a procedure for most households. On the other hand, if I had my own house, I'd definitely invest in producing my own energy. Along with an electric car, it would significantly reduce living costs and achieve ROI within a few years.