|
Title: Renewables - 7~10% of BTU's in US Post by: illy on September 27, 2008, 07:19:09 AM From "Renewable Energy Is On the Rise in U.S."
seekingalpha.com/article/97468-renewable-energy-is-on-the-rise-in-u-s: Quote Renewables made up 10.6 percent of the energy produced in the United States in the first half of the year, said the U.S. Energy Information Administration in a report released this week. According to the report, renewable energy accounted for 3.61 quadrillion British thermal units of the 34.16 quadrillion Btu domestically produced energy the country used from January to June. Woo Hoo!!! Drill Baby Drill!!! By this I mean drill for some geo-technical studies to see what the necessary specs of the foundation for a new wind turbine will be. Quote According to the report, the country used 50.67 quadrillion Btu of energy, of which 16.51 quadrillion Btu were imported. Including the 24 trillion Btu of imported renewable energy, renewables made up 7.36 percent of the total U.S. energy consumption. Ok, so 7.36% isn't quite as good as 10%, but we're on our way. Considering that nuclear only contributes only 8%, an argument that nuclear is more viable than renewable sources is bunk. I say, a turbine in every viewshed, and a chopped up bat on every mountain ridge. I won't try to make the claim that wind farms are always "green". There are some obvious drawbacks, but I'd rather be staring at a row of 20 turbines than a coal plant. Wind is just the renewable source with the most growth at present (up 49% from last year according to the article). Solar, IMO, is even more promising assuming that we can get it to where it's profitable. We need to subsidize it to get it there. It will be well worth it once we do. Despite the fact that bio-fuels constitute the largest portion of renewables, they still emit carbon, and last I checked wind and solar don't mess with food prices. Propagandists for coal, nuclear and petro have been intentionally misrepresenting the contribution of renewables to make them look un-viable (to be fair, I do a lot of work for wind companies, so I won't try to hide my own bias). From the article: Quote The significant contribution being made by renewable energy sources to the nation's energy supply documented by the U.S. Energy Information Administration is far greater than most Americans realize. Repeated statements by nuclear and fossil fuel interests that renewables contribute only a tiny fraction of the nation's energy supply are not only misleading but flatly wrong. This is an undeniably good thing for America. We can do it. I know we can. We just have to try. Title: Re: Renewables - 7~10% of BTU's in US Post by: Gojira on September 27, 2008, 02:14:08 PM Ok, so 7.36% isn't quite as good as 10%, but we're on our way. Considering that nuclear only contributes only 8%, an argument that nuclear is more viable than renewable sources is bunk. That's BS and you know it. Nuclear is obviously a more viable option, but not the only one. http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf02.html America's energy portfolio needs to be a diversified one. We will need more than just solar and wind, especially if the solar and wind efficiencies don't catch up with our energy problems. How about just investing in reducing solar and wind costs? Start building nuclear facilities, including reproccessing and storage? AND Put a cap on carbon emissions to utilize carbon capture and make all alternatives -- solar, wind, hydrothermal, nuclear, and biomass -- economically viable. Title: Re: Renewables - 7~10% of BTU's in US Post by: illy on September 28, 2008, 01:09:36 PM I had a long reply typed and the system logged me out without giving me the chance to go back and copy so I could past once logging in. This pisses me off to no end, as this has been happening to me very frequently on this site lately. What I said on viability of nuclear does appear to have been wrong, but my intention was not to deceive. I was under some faulty impressions about nuclear and wind regarding c/kWh, public funds that generation necessitates and growth in nuclear generation over the last decade.
I will post more this evening after catching what's left of the Skins vs Cowboys game. Title: Re: Renewables - 7~10% of BTU's in US Post by: Gojira on September 28, 2008, 01:59:10 PM I had a long reply typed and the system logged me out without giving me the chance to go back and copy so I could past once logging in. This pisses me off to no end, as this has been happening to me very frequently on this site lately. What I said on viability of nuclear does appear to have been wrong, but my intention was not to deceive. I was under some faulty impressions about nuclear and wind regarding c/kWh, public funds that generation necessitates and growth in nuclear generation over the last decade. I will post more this evening after catching what's left of the Skins vs Cowboys game. Sorry to hear about that. I hate it when that happens.
Powered by SMF 1.1.5 |
SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines LLC
Joomla Bridge by JoomlaHacks.com |