"Comment Two highly qualified Google engineers who have spent years studying and trying to improve renewable energy technology have stated quite bluntly that renewables will never permit the human race to cut CO2 emissions to the levels demanded by climate activists. Whatever the future holds, it is not a renewables-powered civilisation: such a thing is impossible.
Both men are Stanford PhDs, Ross Koningstein having trained in aerospace engineering and David Fork in applied physics. These aren't guys who fiddle about with websites or data analytics or "technology" of that sort: they are real engineers who understand difficult maths and physics, and top-bracket even among that distinguished company. The duo were employed at Google on the RE<C project, which sought to enhance renewable technology to the point where it could produce energy more cheaply than coal.
RE<C was a failure, and Google closed it down after four years. "........
"Google cofounder Larry Page is fond of saying that if you choose a harder problem to tackle, you’ll have less competition. This business philosophy has clearly worked out well for the company and led to some remarkably successful “moon shot” projects: a translation engine that knows 80 languages, self-driving cars, and the wearable computer system Google Glass, to name just a few.
Starting in 2007, Google committed significant resources to tackle the world’s climate and energy problems. A few of these efforts proved very successful: Google deployed some of the most energy-efficient data centers in the world, purchased large amounts of renewable energy, and offset what remained of its carbon footprint.
Google’s boldest energy move was an effort known as RE<C, which aimed to develop renewable energy sources that would generate electricity more cheaply than coal-fired power plants do. "...
FredHayek wrote: Disagree, fossil fuels are renewable energy. More are being created everyday.
Harnessing cow farts or this?
"Self Replenishing Abiotic Oil Wells
If correct, the abiotic oil theory means that petroleum sources are probably not as limited as currently thought and may indeed be in plentiful supply. It is also likely that since removing the oil in reservoirs reduces the pressure in that area, further seepage of oil from the mantle to that part of the crust is more likely. The equilibrium law of chemical reactions also predicts that this removal of petroleum from close to the mantle will encourage further production. "
If correct, the abiotic oil theory means that petroleum sources are probably not as limited as currently thought and may indeed be in plentiful supply. It is also likely that since removing the oil in reservoirs reduces the pressure in that area, further seepage of oil from the mantle to that part of the crust is more likely. The equilibrium law of chemical reactions also predicts that this removal of petroleum from close to the mantle will encourage further production. "
I am so pleased to be informed of this that I'm going to go out in the garage and run a full tank of fuel/oil mix through all of my two stroke motors for no other reason than to run the tanks dry (well, that and to complete the winterizing I should have finished last month...). Maybe as a grand finale I'll pop my last can of R-12 and fire off a couple gross of BBs through my 1970's vintage BB machine gun!
I can explain it to you but I can't understand it for you.
"Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the Government take care of him; better take a closer look at the American Indian." - Henry Ford
Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges; When the Republic is at its most corrupt the laws are most numerous. - Publius Cornelius Tacitus
Quote from the OP - yep this is pretty much true and nails it. The Base load of Energy is HUGE, and probably could be provided CO2-free with Nuclear, but that was shut down in the 70's by the Enviro experts of the time. The average Joe six pak doesn't know a flippin milliwatt from a Giga watt, and is only worried about their latest Facebook like, or youtube flick and wants them instantly available and free.
"Whenever somebody with a decent grasp of maths and physics looks into the idea of a fully renewables-powered civilized future for the human race with a reasonably open mind, they normally come to the conclusion that it simply isn't feasible. "
If you want to be, press one. If you want not to be, press 2
Republicans are red, democrats are blue, neither of them, gives a flip about you.
IF and when people open their eyes to the fear-mongering, $100 billion/year CO2 scam and realize that higher levels of CO2 eons ago did not destroy the planet and will not destroy it in the future, we can begin to reach solutions to energy related challenges. For now, renewables are, and should be, part of the energy equation. Who knows what future advancements in technology could mean to PV or wind energy efficiency, or energy storage? There are some very interesting technologies being developed and who knows what the future holds? For the Google experts to say it is “impossible” for renewable energy production to meet demands in the future is, I feel, short sighted.
However, I also believe the idea of “fossil fuels” or that oil came from dying dinosaurs is largely a myth. Look at the oil production in India, Vietnam, and especially Russia from deep-oil wells. They are producing oil from over 40,000 feet below the surface. How? Perhaps Vladimir Porfir’yev was correct and geochemical processes are responsible for oil deposits. If not, someone needs to explain how decaying dinosaurs get 8 miles below the surface and create oil.
www.energyandcapital.com/resources/the-depth-of-oil-wells
