Climate Change and the World's Future Fuel Choice


| 10/17/2011 7:59:27 AM


Tags: World's increasing demand for electricity, conventional vs renewable sources, acid rain, Richard Hilderman,

Electrical consumption in both the United States and the world has doubled since 1980 and it is also expected to double again by 2030. Needless to say, to meet this demand we will need to create new electrical generating power plants. The cost to build these new plants is estimated at 14 trillion dollars (Daniel Yergin, The Quest, p. 396). 

Before we start creating these new power plants we must decide what will be the fuel of choice for these new plants. The fuel choice boils down to continue using fossil fuel and nuclear power or converting to non-carbon base renewable sources such as wind, solar, hydroelectric or geothermal. This is a critical issue because these new plants can operate for 60 to 70 years. Thus, once they are built we will be stuck using that fuel for a long time! 

 

Renewable Electricity Sources 

 

Shouldn’t we consider making a major shift from fossil fuel to non-carbon based renewable energy sources?  Currently the United States generates 45 percent of its electricity from coal-fired plants, 23 percent from natural gas, 20 percent from nuclear, 7 percent from hydropower, 2 percent from wind and 1 percent from oil. (U.S. Energy Information Administration, International Energy Statistics, 2009). The United States has significant resources in wind, solar and geothermal to meet all of its electrical needs several times over (see my posting entitled The Cost of Climate Change). 

jon flatley
2/13/2012 3:09:11 PM

These are quality posts in this blog, however it's been awhile since the last one. I'd like to see more frequency as they are informative and well written!


kevin haendiges
1/10/2012 4:40:32 AM

Cap and trade is a sham whose only purpose is to make renewables competitive by making their competition unfairly expensive by comparison. It's a weaselly way to promote renewables at best, and one that the general public will never accept. Renewables, for the time being, are not a viable option until breakthroughs that make them competitive in a fair market are found. None of them currently show any sign of even making a reasonable profit, especially when the cost of converting the entire energy infrastructure is cnsidered. Instead of focusing on pipe dreams of energy sources that are decades from producing realistic energy at reasonable cost our money, especially taxpayer monies, would be much better spent finding ways to use existing fuels more efficiently and cleanly. Cleaner use of fossil fuels will be more likely than renewables for at least the foreseeable future. One day wind and solar may replace coal and NG, but don't bet on it happening within your lifetime.


robert johnson
12/7/2011 12:33:52 PM

a global increase over a century is the definition of climate, it's not weather. Weather is from day to day. The temperature and CO2 has been stable through the Holocene period actually on a downward trend until man came along. Recent increases are caused by man's polluting of the atmosphere. It is now warmer than the medieval warm period. CO2 is higher than hundreds of thousands years ago.


t brandt
12/6/2011 12:03:57 AM

That's weather. The climate has remained unchanged. The temps today are the same as they were 300 yrs ago. In between there, we had The Little Ice Age. We're just warming back up after that. If you go back 7000 yrs to the Holocene Optimum, we had temps 6deg higher than now. We've been generally cooling off since then and we're ultimately headed for another glaciated Ice Age.


robert johnson
12/5/2011 11:17:17 PM

the temperature has increased 1.4 F over the last century


john & virginia ledoux
11/11/2011 10:25:17 PM

What climate change?





mother earth news fair

MOTHER EARTH NEWS FAIR

Oct. 21-22, 2017
Topeka, KS.

More than 150 workshops, great deals from more than 200 exhibitors, off-stage demos, inspirational keynotes, and great food!

LEARN MORE