Can Green Energy Make The Grid SAFER?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 21 май 2024
- The climate community has gotten pretty loud about telling us that we need to reach net zero carbon emissions by 2050, which is fast approaching. And in order to do this, we’re going to need to electrify pretty much everything and green the grid. But this raises some pretty big questions. What will this clean, green future look like? Can we pull off this massive transition in time before some seriously dire tipping points are reached? And will our power grid even be able to handle it, considering how much more extreme our weather is getting due to climate change?
In this episode of Weathered, we speak to four different experts about this topic and dig as deep as we can to answer the question posed by the title: is the clean energy transition even possible with all this weather?
Weathered is a show hosted by weather expert Maiya May and produced by Balance Media that helps explain the most common natural disasters, what causes them, how they’re changing, and what we can do to prepare.
This episode of Weathered is licensed exclusively to RUclips.
Correction:
Peter Fox-Penner is the current CEO of Energy Impact Partners.
*****
PBS Member Stations rely on viewers like you. To support your local station, go to: to.pbs.org/DonateTerra
*****
Subscribe to PBS Terra so you never miss an episode! bit.ly/3mOfd77
And keep up with Weathered and PBS Terra on:
Facebook: / pbsdigitalst. .
Twitter: / pbsds
Instagram: / pbsds
Here's a thought - start the ball rolling by putting solar panels on school roofs. The power gathered can be used by the school, and any excess (like what's gathered on weekends and during holidays) can be fed back into the local grid. Also, school kids can get involved with the installation, learn about the technology, and become advocates for it as they get older.
Not to mention home economic classes and gardening. Even if the school is in a very urban area, gardening makes for a healthier person in general, and allows a hands on way to understand where our food comes from.
Yeah,. they'd have to change the crazy liability laws though.
Happily, I think some of that has started! Many public buildings have solar panels around where I live (NYC); you can cruise around Google Earth and see some depending on the date.
As divisive as he is, I really liked the Tesla Roof idea. (It’s basically a huge battery wired to solar panels.)
I think there was mumblings of wiring this to a grid, so you could have redundancy and/or even sell energy back via the Roof. But electric companies probably aren’t so keen on spending infra money for Elon.
Good idea, a monitor of power output or power flow could be put in the library, or classrooms. Could tie it in to some math and science lessons.
You just aren't educated or knowledgable at all. Solar panels are already frequently installed on schools and any other building with large angled rooftops. Why would you pick out schools specifically though? You put solar wherever its the most economical.
School kids would NOT get involved with the installation. That's stupid. First of all there's about 100 safety standards and regulations that would prevent this, and no company is going to have kids on the roof near ongoing construction. There's the risk of falling, there are heavy sharp objects, there are dangerous power tools, there is high voltage, and having too many people on a roof is dangerous. Really idiotic idea.. Plus kids are assholes generally speaking and they don't care at all. Maybe 1% of kids would care but if you've ever had to babysit or take care of children, you'll know they're mostly turds and they hate school. Also advocating for it as they get older is useless, you can't wait 20 years for kids to grow.
I installed solar panels on the roof of my house years ago. I bought an electric car four years ago, and have a recharge battery system set up in my garage for the car, using the solar energy.
I haven't been to a gas station in four years and doubt I will ever again.
Some months, my usage is low enough I have spare power that sell back to the electric company.
The more energy self-sufficient you can be, the less you are at the mercy of utility companies.
When the pandemic started I plotted out an acre in the backyard to grow vegetables.
I might even try a fruit plot next year.
Meanwhile I am working on a multi-rain barrel set up for watering.
Start with one project and then keep expanding from there.
Nice one!
❤ You are completely awesome. I wish my finances allowed me to do as you do.
That’s great if you’re allowed to have a house and that kind of resources. Wish we all were.
@@purpleicewitch6349 Well I kind of cheated, in that I did not buy the house, I inherited it from my father when he died.
So I definitely had an advantage over many people.
When gas and electric prices go up, you don't have to stress about it. I see more and more farms getting into solar these days.
3:48 Sounds like another justification for high-speed rail, which can double as an additional pathway for electricity transmission.
Yep, love the pathway for transmission ideas!
OOO... hadn't thought of that.
We need to put solar panels on top of parking lots, etc, instead of destroying habitat on the ground. My grocery here in AZ has a solar panel-covered parking lot. It's cool and pleasant underneath in dappled shade, and valuable energy is created overhead. It's wonderful!
I would love to see this happen by 2050. I feel like there's an option we haven't explored yet and I just can't think of what it could be. I think new construction houses should have solar panels already installed
Not to be too blunt, but socialism. The pace of climate solutions under a capitalist system is a direct, 1:1 consequence of the profitability for shareholders of particular methodologies of generating or transitioning to renewable energy -- whether that's, as it is in most cases, private shareholders (investors) or the rare cases of nationalized or public shareholders (governments), the capitalist profit motive logic remains the issue. An issue exacerbated by over 40 years of propaganda and right-wing industrial policy entrenching and expanding fossil fuel-generation and -dependant industries to the point that big oil and big auto are *substantial and unavoidable* political lobbies that can out-compete *climate scientists themselves* within the legislative and regulatory lobbying systems.
The solution that hasn't been tried, in the West, is to have a system that doesn't prioritize the shareholder's profit motive at the risk of failing fiduciary duty and the legal consequences for Board Directors therein, and to instead have a system of democracy where the average worker has democratic control of their business(es) and could have therefore been capable of independently making the decisions necessary to steer economic activity away from climate catastrophe, instead of actively trying to profit off of it for the sake of short-term profits.
Meanwhile, China seems to be literally the only entity actively interested in -- and legitimately planning for -- a proper transition away from total climate catastrophe, while also not failing to forget about the undeveloped global south who will continue to pollute if it's the cheapest thing to do and are simultaneously establishing the infrastructure necessary to develop said global south *faster and sooner* so that their respective economies can reach a level of development and sustainable energy use in the future that won't also imperil the world the same way the West's total negligence and kicking of cans down the road otherwise surely will.
Unfortunately, the only realistic hope for a genuinely renewable *global future* is almost entirely dependent on China being able to economically uplift the rest of the world to the point of being both importers and consumers of China's own China-made green infrastructure resources, EVs, etc, before mid century. Meanwhile, America is doing everything possible to support big business, prevent a rapid green revolution, and obfuscate attempts at global development and uplifting of the global south, simply because it doesn't exclusively benefit and reinforce America as the only global hegemonic superpower; yeah, okay, maybe because America has been absconding of that responsibility and actively undermining global security and legislating policy that has been contributing to hastening climate catastrophe, for the sake of American shareholder profits and scant else.
TL;DR: Avoiding climate catastrophe involves the entirely world being shifted to an entirely new energy and economic system, as fast as possible, while America has been actively making things worse for literally everybody everywhere forever, with the sole exception of billionaires and shareholders, who are having a helluva time not letting a good crisis go to waste for the past few decades; Wall Street loves this shit. They love it. That's why they've been nurturing and ensuring this catastrophe. The solution that hasn't been tried is *getting rid of the 'profit' problem.*
@@RosscoAW
Your complaint was socialism at the beginning and getting rid of capitalistic profit at the end. Make up your mind!
@@acmefixer1 they weren't complaining about socialism, they're saying it is the solution.
Research the climate crisis a bit more, mate. 2050 is 20 years too late!
@@RosscoAW agreed. It's really reminding me of all the public works projects of the 30s and 40s though. We really invested in revamping the countries infrastructure and that's what we need to be doing now. It's time for another New Deal. Now if only a non Christian like me stood a chance of getting into office 😔
Texas: Fossil fuel is reliable.
Also Texas - Fossil fuel power plants failure every winter.
I was thinking that we needed to get to the micro grid solution for stable and reliable energy. Different areas have advantages and should be tailored to that instead of generating energy hundreds of miles away from where it's used. Would also like small modular reactors to get into the mix more for areas that don't seem to have a robust renewable plan and in general to provide a cleaner safer back up to renewables. I am still looking to add storage to my solar system and want to add a handful more panels to help load it up.
Small reactors don't live up to the hype but I'll agree about domestic solar & storage. If there's flowing water on your land hydro is well worth looking into too. Domestic-scale wind is surprisingly difficult to get working because it needs to be so far above obstructions, grid-scale wind on 150 metre towers works fine.
Micro grids are becoming more common, Germany seems to be the leader at the moment.
Looks like we can do this.
Let’s get started!
Every system we can power using locally generated green power - be it info booths, foot path lights, street lights, bus stops or even electric trollys, is a step towards a greener healthier Earth.
...but still with a grid connection to cope with Dunkelflaute.
I agree, absolutely necessary.
Three things that weren’t covered :
1. Offshore wind can generate a lot of our electricity. Since most people live near the coast then the generation will be a short distance from the point of use.
2. Only a very small portion of the land, something like is 0.5%, is needed to create all the electricity needs of the country. The generation doesn’t have to be in the middle of the country and run hundreds of miles on new lines it can be more on the edge of where the winds are highest and where the sun shines the most.
3. Reduction of consumption of electricity is actually more attainable at the moment than building all new sources if people would just turn the TVs off, when not in use, or reduce the number of devices that instant on, we could probably shut down a few nuclear plants.
Well done. I was going to write the same thing!
What about solar power. I’m from Germany and here in Germany/northern Central Europe solar power is a big thing. We can generate a lot from it. We can even provide almost half of our house energy with solar energy ourselves. Although we have a more similiar climate to Seattle or Portland region. I didn’t understand why the US is not doing that although the have way more sunny days in probably 95% of the country than Germany.
@@linus4693 I am an American but also live in Germany. Solar is part of the solution. If you read point 2, you’ll see that I mention “where the sun shines the most”, meaning solar generated power. We need multiple possibilities that can be used in different situations. The point of the video was the power grid. My points were to show that there are ways to reduce the need to do massive upgrades and therefore getting quicker results. Rooftop solar is great if you can afford the initial investment.
@@russellklegraefe6425 Offshore wind is too expensive to maintain. A small portion of land is required but you are just intensifying the transmission issue. And most energy consumption comes from producing heat, so Americans need to use much less heat and A/C. That means putting on 4 layers indoors during winter and not turning on heating until it's below 40F indoors, as is the case in many Chinese households. Alternatively, rebuilding houses to passive house codes are another way to lessen electric load. Electronic devices by comparison draw far less power.
If your thermostat is above 60F in winter and below 85F in summer, you're part of the problem.
@@ruedelta offshore wind has been plenty profitable in the UK
Heck yeah, I ball parked it! My guess was, "the Dakotas?" lol.
Mine was montana
I think as long as humanity is plagued by insatiable greed we will continue to live on the very edge of our doom.
We are fleas on a dog's back.
@@myadhdSquirel if a dog had 8 billion fleas it would die very quickly
thanks capitalism 😍
I don't know if greed is exactly the best way to characterize the problem. It's a mindset and a system that has been built based upon that mindset. The system rewards continual extraction and exploitation and penalizes solutions that reduce the need for future extraction and exploitation.
The system rewards oil companies with no regard for the damage they cause. These "external" costs traditionally have been ignored by economists. When they are accounted for, we see that fossil fuels are MUCH more expensive than was previously acknowledged.
Unfortunately the oil companies have been so profitable that they have become the wealthiest and most powerful entities the world has ever seen. They reinvest part of their profits into massive lobbying efforts and propaganda campaigns that hold back any possibility of government action that could adversely affect the companies' bottom lines.
If we can break the grip of fossil fuel companies on government policies worldwide, solutions would come pouring forth like coins from a winning slot machine.
@@davidmenasco5743 a death grip, at that
Love this series, extremely informative
I really appreciated the breakdown in the video with all details. Hoping we can get it done soon. Im seeing virtual power plant projects moving forward in my area.We have a lot of opportunity to improve so lets get to it!
I think they are wrong on needing more transmission lines. If you are producting energy locally there is no need for more transmission lines. Every house should be able to produce their own energy though wind and solar by utilizing ample battery backup.
The problem is that the renewable energy resources are not close to where people live or industry is located, so they need to transmit ppwer from where the renewable resources are to where the demand is. Building a nuclear powerplant closer to the areas of demand would be far more efficient.
@@kaymish6178 if you make each house its own powerplant then very few transmission lines are needed. Have every house covered in solar panels. Utiize covered parking lots with solar roofs and of course the buiding roof itself for places like Wal Mart. We can produce enough energy locally via solar and wind with energy storage backup. Not sure how people would like a nuclear plant in their backyard. At least not till we make them 100% safe. And I really cant see that happening till we master fusion.
so...people who rent flats are only able to use a percentage of whatever the building can produce? i foresee a mad rush for bigger and bigger homes under this model
@@aaronchapin9331 not sure. But I do know each home can be energy independent with a combo of renewables and energy storage.
thanks Terra for the broad brushstroke of the needed transition to renewables
My biggest question is this: How can we get money out of politics so the zillionaires have to quit paying our lawmakers to keep renewable energy from happening?
Ban all political contributions beyond a certain amount
That is absolutely the number one issue. Sadly the current elected officials are unlikely to pass laws that reduce their own power and ability to make money even though it's disgustingly corrupt. All we can do is vote for and support progressives like AOC and Bernie Sanders. I would love to see the day that the majority of our government actually works for us again. One can dream, right?
@@ecurewitz You are asking the very same people (politicians) to ban something that they benefit from.
Wont be happening
It is human nature to consciously or unconsciously buid hirearchy
Hirearchy gave birth to politics
It is just... Inevitable... No matter how small
End Citizens United, make lobbying and bribery illegal (like it used to be), and publicly fund all elections. Laws that are already in the books MUST be enforced! And get rid of the electoral college! Those are just the start.
One question/quibble. Energy storage is typically measured in Watt Hours, not Watts. The battery amounts given were listed in GW. Was that a typo that should have been GWH, or were you showing the maximum rate that the installed batteries can release that energy?
Thank you
I dont think geothermal gets nearly enough actual attention. I would love to see 100% renewables, geothermal is and should be a massive portion of that. Theres some really good points about how wind and solar tend to compliment each other well, but they dont perfectly, we will need something that can always provide a good base load. If we get 1/5 of our production from local solar & wind sources, I think we could and absolutly should strive for almost another 2/5ths to be combined geothermal and nuclear. Personally, hydro should be out of the question, and completely phased out. If you dont know why, try fishing for Salmon on.... any river where Salmon were once plentiful....
We all hate fracking right? Fracking xists solely as a proof of concept for how to access the necessary depths to efficiently produce geothermal pretty much anywhere. And its a damn good proof too.
Costa Rica gets most of it's energy from hydro, however I agree with you on geothermal and nuclear energy are even better options. Even a country with lots of rivers like Costa Rica needed a reliable source of energy to help it cope when the rain is low. That source is currently bunker oil, but geothermal or nuclear energy would be a much better option that would help with the increasing push for electrification.
It’s kind of site-specific. Also, if you keep taking heat out of the earth, at some point you run into another problem set.
Wind and solar are more available in more places and safer in the long run. My understanding, anyway.
@@switted823 nuclear waste. Think about it.
@@solarwind907 What about it? More like "What About the Waste? The secret billion year nuclear waste repository with Dr James Conca", watch it in full.
geothermal electricity production is only feasible in a few places on the planet. and they're already doing it in those locations. if you mean, geothermal heating/cooling, that's ground source heat pump technology, which is indirect solar power. great system, but very expensive to install
I feel like it's extremely wise to keep including nuclear power plants in our array of power sources; even with the (extremely low) risk, nuclear is still a better choice than fossil fuels. The very biggest thing I'm hearing here is that demand is not going to match supply/generation, and that makes sense, because people do the things we do whenever we do 'em. The micro-grid concept seems like it would be extremely useful, for all the reasons mentioned. But I would want to see that kind of localized generation happening in the poorer quarters FIRST, or close to the same time, as the rich neighborhoods. It seems to me that the areas within our cities that are most impacted by climate change AND by the direct negative effects of fossil fuel power plants should be the places that get relief soonest. They've suffered so that the rich can be comfy, isn't it fair to just...not be like that anymore?
I recognize that the real world won't work this way, that the wealthy will continue to make the changes first and fastest, but I don't see why we can't aim for doing better.
There are SO MANY options for us, and this is a case of "Yes, and, and, and, and..." We should do ALL of them, we should pursue every single possible solution and implement them all, in whatever places they'll work best, across the globe. No one should be left to suffer, no one should be told that they can't have renewable energy, this is not a single nation's problem. This is the whole world's problem, and the solutions that will work best HAVE to be applied to the whole world if they're going to work in a way that gets us to our goal.
Adding Nuclear capacity and reducing energy waste are teh only options really...
The risks surrounding nuclear are increasing markedly because of the various things happening to water (water is used for cooling & for isolating radioactivity), particularly flooding, increased hurricanes etc & sea level rise. Almost all nuclear power stations are on coasts or large rivers.
Vulcanism is also increasing so a Fukushima-like event could be repeated.
Great stuff!
Yes, decentralized power sounds like a good idea, but little by little, power companies are removing the incentive for homeowners to be able to add their excess solar power to the grid by removing the ability to send back power to the grid. They lobby the government to lower the amount of money they have to pay, and they replace power meters so that if the power is flowing out of the home, the meter still goes in the same direction not allowing to get a pay back from the utility.
The ave annual electricity consumption is 886 kwh/month. By insulating well and using energy efficient fridges, that figure can easily drop to 240 kwh/ month. We can and should build up the grid and transition to renewable energy, but don't forget to pick the low hanging fruit. 🍓 😉 🌎
You don't need anywhere near as much transmission or energy storage if you have a locality's entire base load carried by weather-independent carbon-free sources like nuclear and geothermal
Should get Tony Seba on here--100% renewables + battery storage is not just possible, but will happen far faster than most experts predict as it's the most economically viable option today for new electricity generation, not some future technology--today. And definitely no supergrid--all more localized generation is cheaper.
First issue is how vulnerable grid elements are as recently shown again this fall with some individuals taking aim at substations, which has happened several years ago. Mixed use will be helpful in places it makes sense. But baseload is king and nuclear can do it, people need to look at what's reality and what actually is dangerous and hazardous to life.
Nuclear is really, and actually hazardous to life. Nuclear power plant controls are quite Hackable. Nuclear energy is best Kept on the sun and sent as photons to solar panels here on earth.
Pray tell why Arizona is not involved in this program? We have the most sunshine for the longest periods per day. Everyone, every household should be solar or wind, especially in the Rim Country. Especially for apartment complexes.
There are also several teams working out how to use waves to generate energy. One of my favourites (though I have no idea about feasibility) is finding coasts that have rocky narrow inlets in cliffs and sticking turbines in there. Wave crashes in, air is forced up through the turbine. Wave retreats, air is forced down through the turbine. Every time the turbine spins, it turns a generator. Almost-free power; just requires occasional maintence on the turbine and generator.
(& occasional complete replacement when a larger-than-predicted wave or tsunami blows the complete assembly into the sea or even just turns it inside out).
People have been working on this for more than 50 years & nothing of commercial scale has been produced. The problem seems to be the extreme variability of waves - from negligible ripples to geysers when amplified by these shapes, plus, certain weather conditions fill the water with highly-abrasive silt or vane-clogging seaweed.
These seem to be problematic with all wave-powered generation systems unfortunately.
Salter's Ducks seem to be the most promising but Salter & his university team have been working on them for decades with no final product.
Systems harnessing the tides are coming along very nicely though & Scotland is pretty certain it will be producing most of its electricity from the tides within a very few years. The important thing with tidal is getting stations widely spaced so that few are on slack tides at the same time & transmission of electricity can compensate.
Need to make that self-sufficiency in terms of water, food and pretty much everything else (harvesting your own lumber for building and not having to hire a certified technician to come test the lumber for moisture content...when you can buy a tester online for very cheap and build a lumber dryer for very cheap...but it's not government "approved" so if they catch you building with it they can tear your entire project down--never fool yourself, you don't own your land, the government does. That's why they can take your property and sell it if you don't pay property taxes, aka rent, the government owns "your" land). There are states that are EXTREMELY restrictive on water collection, there are cities, towns and stupid HOAs that won't let you plant gardens, have any animals that are considered farm or livestock, or have solar panels or wind generators on your property without their permission (and paying their fees). The amount of red tape that people have to go through to be "self-sufficient" is ridiculous and in some cases will never be approved because of government (state, local and federal) laws have literally made it illegal to be self-sufficient. This whole net-zero push is actually making people less self-sufficient because of the approval process for every damn thing. And don't tell me it's about safety, most people want to build safely--they don't want to live in unsafe conditions and will often over engineer their designs, so it's not about safety, it's about the government and everyone else that has their fingers in the whole damn thing getting their cut of the money. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad this video mentioned that you can generate enough power for small groups to be off-grid and not put a strain on the rest of the system (and have power if the grid does go down), but there's a lot more to being "off-grid" than just the powerline.
"Distributed energy resources..." So, folks in the community who don't own a house or property where they can put up solar.
A large number of states have community solar projects, where you buy into solar arrays set up in local parks, zoos or other public areas, and your share of the array’s output is taken off of your utility bill. It allows for any ratepayer to own a solar project, even if they’re a renter in an apartment.
Any new building permits could require wiring to the roof and an inverter that sends excess electricity into the system.
In Canada, fossil fuel taxes are horribly detested but they work. People will look for the best way for them to save money and I for one, purchased a very reliable electric bike for commuting to and from work after selling my car. I have never regretted it and I belong to a car share program that owns only hybrid vehicles for those out of town trips and carting stuff home from IKEA. New gas vehicles will not be available in Canada in 3 years so people are going to be dragged, kicking and screaming into a better tomorrow.
Scotland is another good example, all the domestic power usage is provided by wind, hydro and nuclear. A majority of the total electrical usage is too, but not 100% because of a few industrial uses. A large portion of the year, we’re sending wind energy down south to England. In low wind months we import a bit of extra nuclear from Yorkshire and Lancashire.
Most of the carbon intensity of the grid in Britain stems from southern England (and a bit from a part of Wales, blanking on whether it’s the north or south at the moment), which is also where most of the people live… I believe those gas power plants are reaching end of life around the turn of the decade though. The sub-grids in the north of the island have basically set a template to follow.
I’m all for the green energy switch, but here in Newfoundland, they proposed to build wind farms in the areas that belong to the Native Americans and have been used for hunting for thousands of years by both the locals and natives of the province and yet they don’t care about the natives and were told all day every day from main stream media we need to care about them and protect their land so that in itself confuses me
Electricity, produce, energy storage shape type hydrogen, to release in electricity again.
Rain become energy. Solar become energy. Wind become energy.
No matter the weather, becomes energy, to storage in hydrogen shape storage way.
Hydrogen pipelines networks around.
Same here in the US. Our National forests, parks, public lands, protected habitats and native reservations are all being leased out or already slated for renewable energy projects. Projects that will destroy those ecosystems as well as local economies. Indigenous land rights are being outright ignored. Even where land rights are abundantly clear and where native populations are still heavily dependent on their lands for their own subsistence. If they protest they’re confronted with armed forces in riot gear, beaten back and even killed by water cannons and other improper use of crowd control weaponry. And if their stories even make the news, very rare, they’re cast in a negative light. Oh, and environmental activism and protest is increasingly the punishable crime of terrorism.
We appear intent on sacrificing who and whatever necessary in order to perpetuate our current, wholly unsustainable current living standards. Even the environmental movement has been co-opted by “green” capitalism. They’re no longer concerned with saving wild nature, protecting ecosystems or even keeping our own environment clean and healthy. Ask them what they want, “renewable energy!”. At any cost apparently as long as we don’t have to give up our cars, computers or cell phones.
Fact is there isn’t enough lithium on the planet to pull this transition off. Or enough steel, or aluminum etc etc.
And the whole thing relies on a now globalized supply chain that depends entirely on diesel fuel, colonialism, imperialism and slavery.
Just ask the millions of Congolese slaves toiling their lives away in toxic lithium mines that will eventually kill them just so we can enjoy our cars, computers and cell phones. Ask them if they’re willing to sacrifice their lives in this heinous way just so we can enjoy our privileged lives.
If this is who we are, and apparently it is, I want no part of it.
I’d rather see our entire species die. Preferably sooner than later so the rest of life on Earth might still have a fighting chance to overcome the damage we’ve already done.
@@ricardoxavier827 what I was talking about how we are told every day to protect our natural landscapes and care about the Native Americans and native population but then also being told, we need to take away their land from them to build wind farms so we can impose our will upon them. This is just colonization, 2.0. Or at least that’s what it sounds like we’re gonna take their land from them, and force them to live our way of life not there own
Iceland's electrical service wires and power infrastucture are underground..... more expensive than telephone poles, but they don't blow over in the wind.
Excellent video. I try to be hopeful about the planet's future, but it's difficult for someone like me who first learned about climate change in Jr. High School (in 1970, hello!) ; and we still have yet to solve this problem?
Yeah, I remember those Time mags too. Why aren't we a frozen snowball yet? And what about those killer bees? Aids depopulating the entire continent of Africa? Wasn't the world supposed to end in 2012? Seems every 12 years they predict its end and then just move the date back again when the world fails to end. Rinse and repeat. Why do people listen to these things. For ever 'climate change' expert there are other accredited experts saying (with actual data) that climate change is inaccurate. The polar bears are just fine. Summertime in Antartica melts ice... then it grows back again in winter. Like usual. Carbon dioxide is beloved by plants and is probably why we aren't in Ice Age #whatever by now. I like happy plants. Good for the food markets. Yeah, carbon!
My spouse works in power systems with machine learning, specifically in batteries, and they say the way to really get the ball rolling is to make batteries more profitable.
I looked at the review the Stanford prof cited -it's worse than the asterisked "with storage" he undersold. The paper proposes the primary solution to variability and unreliability with 100% wind/solar is to build much more than we need.
Off the top of my head demand can vary upto around 40% due to time of day, weather, season, etc. -building so much more is extremely wasteful, environmentally harmful and time consuming...good thing we aren't on the clock with climate change or anything.
Overcapacity is still better than their other "solution" which is to just bet on some awesome tech being invented that will solve the problem.
"However, while it is true that keeping a system with variable sources stable is more
complex, a range of strategies can be employed that are
often ignored or underutilized in critical studies: oversizing solar and wind capacities; strengthening interconnections"
"With every iteration in the research and with every technological breakthrough in these areas, 100% RE systems become increasingly viable"
-'On the History and Future of 100% Renewable
Energy Systems Research' (2019)
Step one should be using solar and wind to pump water behind hydroelectric dams. The total generating capacity of the Grand Coulee Dam is 6,809 megawatts and its average annual energy output is about 2,300 megawatts. The total generating capacity of the Hoover Dam is 2,080 megawatts and its average annual energy output is about 478 megawatts. By using solar and wind to pump water upstream to those two dams, we could increase their output by as much as 6,111 megawatts, with months of storage. The same is true for many other hydroelectric dams.
On every high rise, install solar panels and brick tower battery devices (Instead of batteries) for storage to release at high peak and down times, that would reduce overall demand on the grid. In solar farms and wind farms you can build multiple brick tower storage devices.
In Texas the wind is strongest in midday and weakest just before dawn. Atleast where I live.
This was good, but I wish there would have been more emphasis on the reality that there are 6 carbon clean energy families: solar, wind, hydro (including tidal), geothermal, and then, yes, nuclear and bioenergy, which they seemed to disparage quite a bit which is odd, considering about 10% of global electricity is already nuclear (about 20% in the US).
Winter storms do not have names, the names applied to them by The Weather Channel etc. are not official and are therefore meaningless.
I basically never see this question asked: How long is the life span of a solar panel and how recyclable are they when that life span ends? I'm all for renewables but I've seen some wind and solar farms that are poorly maintained and only producing a fraction of what they could be, not many years after they were built.
The first experimental solar panels are still producing - they're about 40 something years old. The usual guarantees are that the panel performance will degrade by about 1% per annum - but a twenty year old panel that only produces 80% of the electricity it first did is still producing. So unless you have limited space why rip out the old panels? Just add a few new panels to bring you back up to your desired production - the newer panels are cheaper and often more efficient than the older ones so the additional investment would probably be negligible.
As for recycling them - it's currently an issue because there aren't that many panels to recycle, and because the panels basically only contain small amounts of valuable metals within them - getting to those bits in a cost effective manner is difficult. Since the US government doesn't mandate that the panels have to be recycled only 10% of American panels aren't just dumped in landfill, or whatever. On the other hand they're mostly plastic, glass, silicon and aluminium (all of which we recycle lots of) - so with the right incentive it's possible. In the EU (where makers are obliged to recycle) there are some fledgling businesses working on the issue but it's early days.
Current estimates are about 30 years before output degrades to unacceptable levels and they are nonrecyclable they just become toxic waste. Then there are panels damaged by storms; Katrina generated tons upon tons of toxic waste from smashed solar panels. They were all swept up and carted to landfill where they leach into the ground water.
Solar panels come with a 25 year warranty. Every satellite out in space is solar powered. Pretty damn reliable technology. Lasts a long, long time.
Lead acid batteries are extremely recyclable. Aluminum or steel solar racking is recyclable. Electrical wiring is recyclable.
Why don’t you provide a link to all the wind and solar farms that you’ve seen showing the operational data and how badly they failed overtime? I’d love to see that data.
One form of renewable that deserves more consideration is tidal. Its consistency and proximity to high population densities make it one of the most effective forms of renewable energy, and currently, it is one of the least used. We're already seeing great examples and implementations of this technology in the Orkney Islands.
Agreed! I'd like to look into it more.
Nuclear. Just do it right. No shortcuts. No cost cutting. It works & is safe, specially if we don’t try to nickel & dime the power plants’ construction.
Sure, right up until heatwave temperatures melt the grid causing nuclear meltdowns that strip away stratospheric ozone in a matter of hours and the sun’s UVC radiation kills us all!
What we need to do is power down all remaining operational nuclear plants before this happens.
I totally agree.
Electricity, produce, energy storage shape type hydrogen, to release in electricity again.
Rain become energy. Solar become energy. Wind become energy.
No matter the weather, becomes energy, to storage in hydrogen shape storage way.
Hydrogen pipelines networks around.
Except the spent fuel will remain radioactive for longer than the great pyramids of giza have existed. I wish it was easy to swap out a coal plant for a nuclear plant, but it doesn't seem responsible to generate waste that will be invisibly dangerous for 1000 times longer than our own lifetimes.
@@kimberleemodel7182 Uranium isn’t the only fissile material. Fission will heat water to turn a turbine. I’ve heard Thorium reactors yield waste that stops being dangerous in ~200-300 years; that’s manageable.
The 'future' is already here! Tell this green plan energy transformation to the petro companies.
i wonder if energy prices become much lower in certain areas of the US, would that cause people to move? factories might move to use the cheaper energy, moving jobs.
I have been interested in this subject since the 1970’s. Adoption of RE is being held up by our present system. For-profit companies are the gatekeepers and they have in interest in the status quo.
Many projects are held up and charged a connection fee to be linked to the grid. Some are never built because of this reason. Public utilities and non-profit corporations in cooperation with local citizens and local governments would be the best way to get RE rolled out and maintained. It would require federal and state governments’ cooperation with all involved. Compare it to rural electrification from the 1930’s on here in the USA.
The presenter made an excellent point about using the preexisting built environment (before) disruption of natural habitats. It's more efficient in terms of the sourcing of raw materials to buildout the grid AND in terms of reducing energy losses due to resistance heat loss found along long transmission lines. The utilisation of energy production & consumption at or near point of use is simply a first principles of physics way of thinking, one that we should do much more of if we want a sustainable future.
Geo Thermal, Wave tidal are some other renewables that could help.
Love getting ads from the oil industry before the video even starts. LOL!
Omg
I respect the idea of solar, wind energy but it will never replace what we have unless we choose to go back to the stone age. Wind and solar, with proper storage systems can help cover for peak loads and some blackouts due to whatever reason. If you convert the entire desert and all office buildings, which are usually flat, into solar collectors then maybe solar and wind can really make a difference. The NIMBYs are a problem, they don't want windmills in Mathas Vinyad and solar arrays in the 'pristine' desert! Can't mess up the view! Now if we tap the volcanos for heat, like Yellowstone, make steam and electricity, that is an endless supply. Same with Hawaii. Iceland does it.
Boy am I glad to see PBS tackling this subject. This is exactly the right question. Will the weather become so bad that renewables may be compromised?
Alternately I hope you will cover what happens to farming if the weather becomes so erratic. About 12,000 years ago people began to settle down in small villages. This was because the weather had finally stabilized enough, after the last ice age, to allow crops to grow with regularity. This was the dawn of our civilization as we know it.
What happens when that certainty goes away? How do we feed Earth's population or is it even now a foregone conclusion that it will collapse?
As to power....The people and entities talking about mega-grid are the existing utility companies and power plant owners. They still want to be the owners of the generation and delivery of power so they get their cut of profits. We may have to let these companies go under and be disrupted.
Decentralized power is the way to go. Instead of spending money on the mega grid let's get every homeowner and landowner able to produce their own power and store it in their own batteries that can share back to the grid. Much cheaper for govts to subsidize this than to build out grids and more secure overall.
Then localize community power with solar and wind farms with large battery storage.
This model gets rid of most of the need to build a bigger grid.
We might not even need to change the existing grid much at all if enough individual households can produce and store their own power needs. Existing grid power could be used for those who do not own property....apartments, etc.
Finally if we can get robo-taxis actually working and cheaper than car ownership then a large percentage of parking lots in cities can be reclaimed and used for solar panels and green spaces with trees to absorb CO2.
I also encourage PBS to review the work of Tony Seba and to get Tony Seba involved in at least one of your shows as a guest or expert co-commentator. His think tank (ReThinkX) has done the math and calculations on how to go to completely renewable energy and how it can be done for much less money than we think.
That would work in theory, but the fossil fuel industry is still extremely rich and powerful. They can buy politicians, the can pay for publicity in media, they can manipulate people so that they can have local referendums that can block new powerline that would help transfer energy from the producers to the users. The fossil industry is a formidable ennemy.
Would biogas like methane collecteted at landfil /water treatment be an option for times when wind solar and hydro are not enough?
those gases are already collected in many (if not most) municipalities. usually it's processed used to fuel the trash vehicles as CNG (compressed natural gas)
The distributed grid should be underground, which is already the case in places with high wind, like Boulder, CO, and new developments since 2000. Underground utilities are not nearly as susceptible to the effects of weather and climate change as energy distributed above ground on power poles.
Yes. The regenerative grid theory would imply that more energy could routinely be made, and stored than used.
Start with a strategy to win, from the outset.
Tony Seba and RethinkX have shown it is very possible to run everything on wind, solar and batteries.
You mean private households or heavy industry?
I am not sure heavy industry can run fully on wind and solar
@@pirminp7090 Everything can. Look up RethinkX energy reports. The reports show even hydro and nuclear will become stranded assets.
@@pirminp7090 That's a good question. Perhaps, how about seeing the work of Stanford University professor Mark Z. Jacobson on RUclips? The answer appears to be that heavy industry can run fully on wind and solar.
@@incontroversyistherekindne6683 Happy to see it happen. Just wondering what a realisitc timeframe might be. And also costs of it
@@incontroversyistherekindne6683 I have now looked him up. The videos are a bit out of date but we are still not closer to the goals he proposes. And sometimes saying just build this thing 20more times isnt reasonable if the materials for it arent there in this quantity
2:00 The mix is actually somewhat greener than what that chart implies. At least 30% of energy, at the point of use, is as electricity. Electricity generation from fossil fuels and nuclear wastes most of the thermal energy, although it is counted as part of total primary energy. Electricity from wind and solar is not counted with those losses. So more of the whole energy mix is carbon-free than what that chart implies.
Move the US Capitol to the central US for one and build more rail everywhere, including rural areas. That would solve some of yhe grid problem. Provide a lot fewer distractions to politicians as well.
Get rid of private ownership of passenger/freight rail and its monopolies. This brings back electrical deman and reduces the need for electric vehicles while also providing equity.
Rail is preferable over roadways because rails allows more water to percolate in as well.
The train companies can be privately owned but have a lot more competition. Allow private ownership of rail cars as well, and build in with rail the let's trains travel similarly to two lane roads with pull out lanes so less rail tie ups.
Good show & terrific comments. After 40 years in the electric power industry, I think we're moving into the future better than we think. Developments in process now for generation, transmission, and distribution exceed a lot of the status-quo capability that people analyzing this now have to assume. It will be possible to break our dependence on inefficient, expensive, & heavily subsidized fossil fuels. 27 years until 2050 - compare a 27 year-old car to what you're driving now!
I definitely miss the Razor crest.
If we all work together we can figure it out
Prof. Mark Jacobson is on the money 😊
The more companies and household HAVE own Solar or wind energy, the less electric have to be transferred.
Similar to our situation in / near Chiang Mai North Thailand : there are only 3 ? main transmitting lines from south with nearest a coal plant and too huge dams.
When I look just around my area 500 meter, it raised from 4 settlements to over 200 now.
I just can imagine how much the need over this transit lines raised = I make more solar energy (electric) too feed our own needs and export also - what here works fine as the hydro plant can keep more water in the basin and release in the night.
The Electric from maybe sometime 3 KW is gone nearby very fast - maybe another 15 households use it. And just most sun mean also most heat = most solar output. We area lucky.
But I see this problem in Thailand also - and on the hills where would be some wind I don't see any wind-power yet.
The other way to deal with it is changing our life - like is was naturally as a farmer or construction : we have to use the energy when it is available, and at the other times just shut down PC, TV and whatever and take a nap.
What is also scary is the pollution the production of this infrastructure will cause is added carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. The metal to be mined and processed uses so much diesel and coal. I am all for the change, we need to do something decades ago, but I don't think we'll ever be rid of the fossil fuel industry. Plastics are the most useful fossil fuel product we have. I don't see any way we could have our modern society without plastics. Some people are alive because of stints and other implants that are plastics. I'm not trying to prove any point, I really am so sad that the nay sayers and leaders paid by lobbyists delayed action for so long, it feels like it's close to too late and the solution might be push over the tipping point if we aren't careful. Thank you for another great video and furthering awareness on this prudent issue.
120% renewables works out to be the cheapest scenario if you can monetize the seasonal excess
Most cost effective methods on energy consumption:
1) Energy efficiency - behaviour
2) Energy efficiency - insulation, planting trees (cooling),
3) Energy efficiency - active transport and public transport reduces the heat island effect
4) Energy efficiency - reduce consumption / waste
5) Energy efficiency - cease flying, especially gadgets such as power tools and kitchen gadgets that are rarely used
6) Energy efficiency - reduce or eliminate meat, fish and dairy
A large part of the problem is waiting for someone else to fix the problem when it is costing people money, emissions and quality of life having to work more hours for unnecessary consumption and use of energy.
what we need is good battery so we can store loads of excess so we can use it at night and when the weather is bad, that would not put a pressure on grid, what we also need are biogas plants - we could get rid of a lot of animal waste and either use it as a biogas or make an electricity and heat out of it, we could go biogas cars as well as electric, we do have loads of gas cars in Poland, it's cheaper to drive then fuel
A megagrid is insanely inefficient with current transmission technologies. The energy lost in transmission is just too high. You need superconductors to get around that problem which is currently too expensive to be practical. A breakthrough here could make a megagrid possible, but barring that no megagrid is going to help let alone be worth the expense.
Distributed grids are also somewhat misrepresented here. For residential uses, they can provide most or all of the energy needed. It's commercial and industrial demand that outstrips the supply. So we need to break the problem into solvable pieces. A distributed grid for residential would ease the burden on other sources powering commercial and industrial demands.
And as for nuclear, the new micro-nuclear power is a promising way to provide industrial power supply without needing thousands of miles of inefficient and vulnerable transmission lines.
Look up ultra-high voltage transmission with solid-state DC-DC conversion: very low losses. Also, China is already using them (one country can see into the future, one country cannot).
I still feel these discussions don't include multi-unit dwellings and especially those of lower means when it's US-centric. There simply is no way for me to charge in my area unless I find one of the handful of local public charging spaces, and they happen to free. I won't be buying an EV anytime soon for this very reason. Until there are literally charging units on each side of every block, in each neighborhood of a city, it won't be a future that that includes people like me.
I expect the energy transition will be effected by the general disruption of the world economy. Volatility and extremes destroy existing productive capacity and will end growth by disrupting long term investment. There will be less there to transform
Storage & batteries are the biggest part of the solution, new transmission lines are a red herring
Fact is, the Sun is ALWAYS shining. With satellites reflecting microwave to collectors on the ground, and with the contiguous grid running 3000 miles east to west, we extend the amount of time we can collect sunlight.
The Mongolin Rim inAZ is so windy many hours of the day. I do not understand why we do not wind energy in this area. We have to continue to do this and store as much as we can. With EV cars drawing on our grid is going to cause problems. More businesses need to go Solar. Like Senior housing. We struggle to pay our power bills every year. It goes up and up to a point we just cannot afford to pay our bills. I wish they would give us Solar energy for Sernior Housing.
In Germany, for instance, practically all powerlines are underground. So no fires from that.
I thought it was always sunny in Philadelphia
Show up in California and make Matt and his co-workers drinks based on the vibe of their favorite player characters.
When it comes to cooking, electric and induction is more efficient in terms of heat transfer, and doesn't heat up your room forcing your AC to work harder like gas does.
Electric stoves definitely heat up your house. We’ve used them for 40 years.
Now induction cooktops heat your house up a lot less. Much less waste heat with induction cooking.
@@solarwind907 it is true electric heats up your house, but it is still alot less than gas and more slowly, because more of the heat reaches your food. You are definitely right about induction
@@linuxman7777 agreed
We should still be focusing on creating and storing energy where it is needed without the use of transmission lines
and add battery capacity at homes/cars
There is efficiency in scale though, and being interconnected keeps locations on when their supplier goes down
They talk about this quite a bit about halfway through...
District heating with steam, microgrids, geothermal, macrogrids, offshore wind, some nuclear and hydro, and plenty of wind and solar.
Let indigenous folks decide where to put the nuclear and hydro
Due to the nature of AC power, all power production must be synchronized which is why the grid tied inverters will not operate without an already operational grid as it determines it's state information from the current state of power provided by the grid. Depending on distributed energy production requires being able to break the grid at strategic points thereby islanding the grid. There will still be neighborhoods that will loose power till issues have been addressed but critical functions such as hospitals, the refrigeration at supermarkets, the pumps and compressors of the water and gas systems and the pumps of gas stations may and in theory are more resilient (in practice they are not currently resilient due to uneven adherence to design principles), a resilient grid is not about a grid that will not fail but of not letting one domino topple another. Of course the ultimate in islanding is to have each residence and corporate consumer able to be self sufficient at least for limited periods of time but this means each residence's power production being able to meet their peak demands or at the very least to be able to scale down their peak demand to within their own power production. Modernizing the grid means better management and regulation and need not be to the scale of every residence and business being self sufficient, it may simply be better adherence to existing design principles and regulations if all we wanted is to improve the reliability from where we are now.
As to reaching net zero, well we can technically do that, but practically even if we do, it will be well after much of the consequences of not being net zero will already have occurred and much will already be irreversible without extreme costs and risks. We have to be prepared for the consequences as well as try to slow down the progression to those consequences, we can not hope to avert the consequences completely.
You're conflating nuclear and renewables a bit too much (though it's made clear at the end that they're not the same) - but beyond that, a great video with no discernible ideological bias. Good work! :-)
Isn't Vermont also getting its energy almost entirely from hydropower?
It’s a fact that there is a housing shortage. New developments should be designed with microgrid technology.
Will people still be able to live on the coast with sea level rise? Will there be enough water to maintain the Southwest? Is it time to mix it up in middle America and breathe life back into rural American towns? Let’s just be thoughtful about resources, planning and resilience to current/future.
Hold on a minute! Why don’t we have walkable spaces and public transit ??
I need to invest in battery, copper and wire companies!!!
i think we all should take in the factor of the solar storms that the sun throws out on us that can cause some black outs on us
The German Town of Feldheim is a great example of a town that made their own grid. DW has a couple videos on the topic.
sorry, if you fact check DW Documentaries you will find that they are filled with incorrect information . once they proved themselves to Not Be a Trusted Source for scientific knowledge it (for me) invalidates any valid climate related information they may intersperse with their, at best , half truths.
Well I work for a roofing company that 80% of the are large warehouses and factories and we install solar attractive membrane and outfitted with solar panels......
So just think about how many flat roofs do you see every day malls stores apartment and office buildings!!!
If the government everywhere around the world made it mandatory or at least offer them all the free power the said building needs and any excess energy goes into the cities grip...
I guarantee from the smallest towns too the largest cities in the world would produce more energy for their own needs and then we wouldn't need any "MEGAGRID".
With sufficient storage? Shame pumped hydro works best with water and mountains.
Did they really so video of a wind turbine casting a shadow over PV panels @ 12:14?
What about a grid with international links? The sun is always shining _somewhere…_ 🤔
That's just intensifying the issue of transmission. Too much loss.
Plus it won’t run out .
The thought of local energy development is exciting!
How about nuclear?
SMRs FTW.
@@artboymoy SMRs are just a dog whistle to try and trick phobic people into not being irrationally afraid, and a lack of support from capital due to government over regulation. Full sized plants end up being cheaper on a watt for watt basis because of decreased overhead costs and greater power output.
Nuclear mnemonic: "new-clear"
We will not reach that goal by 2050 but we will increase our renewable energy output which is really all that matters. These goals are there to encourage the right behaviours, if legislation continues to encourage renewable energy then we are going in the right direction.