Our future with renewable energy.

[poodle63]

its always the capital needed that become the main thing that keeps renewable energy from massively implemented.
we've seen the bad effects of coal energy although its relatively cheap to generate energy its non renewable energy and it also causes natural damage.
right now the most prominent renewable energy that i've seen gaining massive attention is solar panel, but it simply costs too much for it to be widely adopted by the masses.
therefore I think government somehow needs to give subsidies towards any form of renewable energy infrastructure that the people can get.

[1715054843]

1715054843

[1715054843]

1715054843

[letteredhub]

Renewable energy development is capital intensive and demands groundbreaking effort to actualize it' and only well advanced nations are capable of achieving the feat and sustaining it . If we're looking at hydropower and geothermal energy only a very few countries can afford it's development.

Even as that those other sources of renewable energy preferably wind, solar that are regarded as the most cost-effective energy yet there are some countries that can't afford developing it, particularly those countries of the south pole that are battling to maintain non-renewable energy

[Sayeds56]

In principle, you're right. Renewable energy - despite its vigorous promotion - is unlikely to beat conventional means of generating energy. The market monopolists simply won't let it happen. Yes, some part of the market is quite possible, but not the whole energy market

Your perspective is certainly valid, when we take into account the significant impact of vested interests on government policies, However, when we broaden our perspective to encompass the challenges of global warning, climate change, rising cost of energy worldwide and growing public support for environmental protection, there is a reason for optimism. Clearly, it becomes evident that renewable energy has the potential to eventually surpass conventual means of energy generation, particularly those reliant on fossil fuels, which are most harmful to the environment.

[Renampun]

...
In conclusion, it is possible for the world to be 100% dependent on renewable energy, but it would require a significant transformation of the current energy system and a collective effort from all stakeholders. Some countries and regions have already achieved or are close to achieving this goal, such as Iceland, Brazil, New Zealand’s South Island, Denmark’s Samsø island, and Germany’s Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and Schleswig-Holstein regions. These examples show that 100% renewable energy is not only feasible but also desirable for a sustainable future.

with the increasing effect of greenhouse gases in our atmosphere, making global warming increasingly uncontrollable, renewable energy is something that the earth really needs right now, but it is not easy to realize a world that uses 100% renewable energy, there are many factors that influence it; like politics, just imagine if the use of oil or coal is stopped then oil or coal entrepreneurs will no longer be able to make a profit, so they are as many as possible lobbying leaders in developing countries to continue to depend on oil and coal, Pollution in several big cities is also quite worrying. As recently happened in Jakarta, so far no one cares about the air in Jakarta, the residents are only busy with their own interests and the government doesn't care about that even though the carbon gas created by the daily activities of Jakarta residents is quite worrying.

[bayu7adi]

I await the moment when renewable energy is truly realized, as there will be no more fossil fuels left on the face of the Earth. This transition will be a monumental shift, and I believe it has already commenced with the trend of using electricity as the driving force in vehicles. This signifies that fossil fuels and petroleum can indeed be replaced by something inexhaustible.

I myself remain curious about the "Wardenclyffe Tower," which was once a conspiracy theory and purported to be Tesla's tower capable of generating free energy. If this is indeed real, it means we would no longer need to pay utility bills to the government, and with this free energy, at the very least, there would be no more environmental pollution caused by motor engines that rely on oil as fuel.

I am highly optimistic that this will genuinely occur one day, and hopefully, there won't be any monopolies when it is introduced on an international scale.

[Upgrade00]

I await the moment when renewable energy is truly realized, as there will be no more fossil fuels left on the face of the Earth. This transition will be a monumental shift, and I believe it has already commenced with the trend of using electricity as the driving force in vehicles. This signifies that fossil fuels and petroleum can indeed be replaced by something inexhaustible.

Electric vehicles is just one small step towards less carbon emissions but we still have a very long way to go. The electricity needed to power EV are mostly generated using fossil fuels and other non renewable sources, so by extension it still causes some level of pollution.

As more experiments into radioactive energy and renewable sources continue as they have for several years, it is seemingly almost impossible for the whole world or even a majority of the world to make the switch towards safer sources of environment for the planet, maybe until it becomes very obvious that non renewable sources are going to be depleted soon.

[bayu7adi]

maybe until it becomes very obvious that non renewable sources are going to be depleted soon.

That's what I mean – when everyone can no longer extract oil due to its depletion, they won't be able to resist adopting alternative energy sources to power their vehicles and businesses once more. The exhaustion of oil will serve as the primary catalyst for this energy usage transition, which will likely heavily rely on electric energy or whatever it may be.

If, indeed, scientists of our era fail to discover a source of energy derived from renewable resources, the myth of the hidden Tesla conspiracy theory could emerge as their ace in the hole. Who knows if that will be the case? Even if it remains just a myth and never materializes, it signifies that we'll be facing a significant challenge in the foreseeable future.

[Fuso.hp]

Energy that never runs out is commonly known as renewable energy. The use of renewable energy is very low in most countries. People now find it easier to generate electricity using nuclear energy than to generate electricity by harnessing sunlight. Where it is very cost effective to generate electricity through wind power or hydropower, electricity is now being generated through fossil fuels. It is never possible to fully ensure the use of renewable energy in all countries of the world. Every country in the world has built nuclear power plants or fossil fuel plants to generate electricity, they will never take the risk of shutting down those power plants and using renewable energy.  Countries that supply energy will also oppose it as they are earning foreign remittances by exporting energy.

[kryptqnick]

I think that eventually we can switch to fully renewable energy by investing in relevant technologies, including methods of conservation of energy. But in the meantime, some things really depend on the climate and nature of a specific country, and for many it's not possible to fully rely on such sources. So a good alternative is the middle ground of nuclear energy. It's nowhere nearly as harmful as burning coal or gas, it is renewable, but it does have a nuclear waste issue which is, again, something we should work on. Unlike many eco-friendly sources, it's stable and independent of climate and weather conditions.
Generally, I agree with the op that it's a complex choice, but one we need to make because it has clear benefits.

[davis196]

The biggest obstacle towards renewable energy is the Li-Ion batteries. They are used in both electric vehicles and in big batteries, which are used to store renewable energy when the solar panels and wind turbines are working at maximum capacity. Lithium is getting more and more expensive and Lithium mining extremely dirty(not to mention the protest of local people against the creation of new Lithium mines). This will create a Lithium shortage in the future and the price of Lithium will skyrocket. We need a cheaper replacement of Lithium for EV batteries and for big industrial batteries, which could store the electricity produced by solar and wind.

[TheSpiral]

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

Yes it can take place but lengthy period of time is required for it and you also know that economic situations are not stable in any country therefore its not very easy to be depended completely on renewable energy.

In our country many people transformed from electricity towards solar energy because as compared to the electricity the solar system is quite lower in cost. Although plant requires huge money but after that there is no such amount needed to pay bills etc.

transformation of renewable energy can be possible but it will also harsh effects on humans as well as on climate of the world because if we are moving towards new technologies then there are some benefits at start but later we know that harmful effect of such technologies also there.

[CageMabok]

Renewable energy development is capital intensive and demands groundbreaking effort to actualize it' and only well advanced nations are capable of achieving the feat and sustaining it . If we're looking at hydropower and geothermal energy only a very few countries can afford it's development.

In reality, this is still the case because of the many countries in the world, only a few countries are able to develop renewable energy, which is the newest model that has never been used by many less developed countries. However, as long as renewable energy can provide more positive things for the environment and the country, I think several countries that are not yet developed and are making themselves more developed should also study this so that in the future they can also use renewable energy for themselves.

Even as that those other sources of renewable energy preferably wind, solar that are regarded as the most cost-effective energy yet there are some countries that can't afford developing it, particularly those countries of the south pole that are battling to maintain non-renewable energy

Each country's ability to develop something like renewable energy is different because it not only concerns natural resources, but also involves human resources and certain tools needed. So when renewable energy already exists in several developed countries now, other countries also need to see it as a very important thing so that in the future they can also use it as used by these developed countries. Because developments in good things need to be considered so that countries that are not yet developed are not always left behind in terms of renewable energy.

[franky1]

here is the secret everyone in media does not say.

fossil fuel reserves will deplete before 2100 anyway.. in the 1980's the estimates were depletion by 2050..
this magic number is no coincidence.. the 1990's gulf war was waged due to the threat of fossil fuel reserve concerns.

we will have to transition to renewables even without a #climate tagline

the secret though is by making it a human survival threat it then makes people more empathetic that taxes should be used to fund private businesses transitions to renewables, whilst those same private companies can take profits from their charges they ask customers to pay.

so when you hear stories of "we need to stop using fossil fuel by 2050" its not to save the planet from smog. because we would naturally deplete fossil fuel by that same period anyway. instead its to reduce usage so that it can extend the longevity of fossil fuel reserves passed 2100, but at a usage rate of under 10% of the current usage to prolong the reserves.

im not saying fossil fuel does not cause climate change, but if we continue using fossil as we do now we will use it all up by 2050 anyway and the environment will heal itself afterwards all by itself

these funding programs for transitions to renewable is just to allow private businesses to continue making profit instead of using their income to self sustain their business by progressing themselves without tax grants

[Gyfts]

Yes, it's technically "possible" to switch to renewables entirely. The pertinent question is how much GDP growth and how much wealth a country is willing to give up in order to take on the burden of switching to renewable energy. The cost analysis is rather clear that renewables will not generate a positive ROI, they will not pay for themselves. The countries that switched to renewables that you've laid out are either misleading on what percentage of their energy comes from renewables (meaning they still have carbon based energy sources that they rely on and therefore aren't entirely CO2 emissions free) or they don't have a large energy demand to begin with.

Carbon based energy sources are cheap and efficient. Having India, China, and the U.S. switching entirely to renewables within the next 20-30 years is economic suicide. The U.S. is on track to lower their emissions more than India and China, but even they would need something like 50+ years to go zero emissions.

And at which point, I've been informed by the climate alarmists, it'll be too late and we'll all die from climate change so what difference would it make.

[Lida93]

...
In conclusion, it is possible for the world to be 100% dependent on renewable energy, but it would require a significant transformation of the current energy system and a collective effort from all stakeholders. Some countries and regions have already achieved or are close to achieving this goal, such as Iceland, Brazil, New Zealand’s South Island, Denmark’s Samsø island, and Germany’s Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and Schleswig-Holstein regions. These examples show that 100% renewable energy is not only feasible but also desirable for a sustainable future.

with the increasing effect of greenhouse gases in our atmosphere, making global warming increasingly uncontrollable, renewable energy is something that the earth really needs right now, but it is not easy to realize a world that uses 100% renewable energy, there are many factors that influence it; like politics, just imagine if the use of oil or coal is stopped then oil or coal entrepreneurs will no longer be able to make a profit, so they are as many as possible lobbying leaders in developing countries to continue to depend on oil and coal, Pollution in several big cities is also quite worrying. As recently happened in Jakarta, so far no one cares about the air in Jakarta, the residents are only busy with their own interests and the government doesn't care about that even though the carbon gas created by the daily activities of Jakarta residents is quite worrying.

You made a very strong point here when you mentioned about the politics that's involve when considering those countries hat economy depends on crude oil the "OPEC" countries the idea of renewable energy development despite how it sounds good for the climate against the effect of green house  gases on the global environment

to the oil producing countries it's a bad business for them and that's why the world at large will not be taken over by renewable energy even in the next 50 years because there's a strong politics underground from those OPEC countries.

As for atmospheric population generation from oil and coal I think same can be talked about with renewable energy like hydropower plants, where is the waste deposited and what are the health effect  is a question we have not asked ourselves.

[icalical]

I believe, at least in some places / countries can 100% depends on renewable energy. One of the biggest challenge is that renewable energy is very difficult to be distributed, compared to oil and coal which is very easy to be distributed. Sun can not be distributed, some places doesn't get enough sun at a certain time each year. Some places don't have enough geo thermal and water stream to depend on hydropower and both is very expensive on to be distributed.

[YOSHIE]

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

It is possible and it is definitely sustainable, in more detail you can understand a little about renewable energy.

Renewable energy is an energy source that is available by nature and can be utilized continuously. This is in line with the statement from the International Energy Agency (IEA) which also states that renewable energy is energy that comes from natural processes that is continuously replenished.

The term "renewable energy" was born as a solution to the potential limitations of non-renewable energy sources that are widely used today.

Now you can find out the negative impacts caused by fossil energy throughout the world, such as: greenhouse gases which produce CO2, SO2 gas and NO2 and so on which can have a lasting impact on human life, whether economically, health and so on.

If renewable energy is used, it will certainly be beneficial for the continuity of human life, such as utilizing natural resources such as water, wind, sun, air and so on, all of which will have a positive and environmentally friendly impact, which have negative impacts caused by pollution and exploration, there are many benefits that arise from using renewable energy rather than non-renewable energy.

The use of renewable energy will have a positive impact on the economic session, by optimizing independent energy for the community, without having to depend and supply imported energy as now, This means that significantly, the presence of renewable energy will boost the economy of society as a whole due to its independence in using renewable energy without dependence on non-renewable energy.

[moha sasa]

It's a false hope

we can't depend on renewable. it's an economic trap

to make people poor & sick to control'em

[ChuckBuck]

Well, you're not entirely wrong, but you're not entirely right either. Your argument skims the renewable energy discussion without getting into economics. You say "long-term benefits" outweigh costs, but have you considered discounted cash flows or capital opportunity cost?

Remember that money runs the world. Who will pay for the massive upfront investments needed to switch from fossil fuels to renewables? Taxpayers? Large-scale economic transformations are typically difficult for governments. Manufacturing decline in the rust belt caused economic displacement.

Your third challenge about social and political acceptance is laughable. Public awareness campaigns? Please. More than pretty advertising and hashtags may change a global economy. Economic incentives speak louder than words. Market forces, not public opinion, will drive renewables. A harsh but simple fact. 

[bitgolden]

Yes, it's technically "possible" to switch to renewables entirely. The pertinent question is how much GDP growth and how much wealth a country is willing to give up in order to take on the burden of switching to renewable energy. The cost analysis is rather clear that renewables will not generate a positive ROI, they will not pay for themselves. The countries that switched to renewables that you've laid out are either misleading on what percentage of their energy comes from renewables (meaning they still have carbon based energy sources that they rely on and therefore aren't entirely CO2 emissions free) or they don't have a large energy demand to begin with.

Carbon based energy sources are cheap and efficient. Having India, China, and the U.S. switching entirely to renewables within the next 20-30 years is economic suicide. The U.S. is on track to lower their emissions more than India and China, but even they would need something like 50+ years to go zero emissions.

And at which point, I've been informed by the climate alarmists, it'll be too late and we'll all die from climate change so what difference would it make.

I think considering the terrible economy we live in right now for the poor people, we could assume that world would be even more expensive if governments decided to spend more on it.

In a dreamy world, we would not have corruption, and that money would go to education, health, renewable energy and more stuff that are great for us like that, but it's not. That money goes to oil and gas subsidies where politicians get bribes from, and not secretly neither, a congressman could be getting "donation" from shell or bp, and then vote on something that will help them and this is perfectly legal. No idea how that's still perfectly legal, should be banned, but it is. Which is why we are not going to get any good renewable energy anytime soon.