What does it take to make Renewable Energy Economically viable?
by: viablerenewablesWorkable energy resource requirements, Independent of being Renewable:
1)Energy available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and 365 days a year.
2)At retail level directly compete with energy resources for today’s activity – if not, sellable spin-off benefits to subsidize the cost.
3)Transportable
4)Technology available.
5)No more environmentally harmful than competing energy resources.
6)Supplies close enough to consumer that distribution losses due to capacity doesn’t become an issue.
7)Politicians that back any solution be able to explain it to their constituents.
The area below the question wasn’t answering the question, but the breath of the question.
I’ve heard you are brilliantly creative. Economically there is at least 1 item more disastrous than investing in renewable energy infrastructure, not having a replacement for fossil fuel. I don’t wish to taint your creativity with my solution. The governments have tryed thinking small with little addition to supply. I’ve gone the opposite route to change the economics of Renewable Energy.
Please be as creative as the person was that during WW II came up with running the exhaust through aircraft feul tanks to mitigate possibily of explosition when shot.
What does it take to make Renewable Energy Economically viable?
2009-12-28 21:06:54
Renewable Energy World
Effectively promotes all aspects of renewable energy technology in the worldwide marketplace...GET FREE NOW!
Click here to Subscribe Free
VIEW ALL FREE MAGAZINES
- Renewable Energy Sources For Domestic Use July 30th, 2010
- Renewable Sources of Energy – Save Money, Power and Your Planet July 29th, 2010
- Powerful Job Market Created by Green Energy Types July 28th, 2010
- Solar Energy From Solar Cells – Alternative of Renewable Energy July 27th, 2010
- Why Might a Renewable Energy Program Be Right For You? July 24th, 2010
Tags: Creativity, Economics, Investing, Possibily, Retail Level
Re-Ren
To answer your primary question, it just needs to be less expensive than fossil fuels…oil in particular.
1. Very few “direct” renewable sources are available non-stop. A few would be tidal power, geothermal power and hydroelectric power. There are many “indirect” sources, such as biofuels (ethanol, biodiesel, methane) which are the process of extracting energy from materials.
2. Nothing is really practical (at this point) to compete. Oil is still too cheap.
3. Storage either in liquid fuel form or conversion to electricity offers the two easiest ways to move large amounts of energy.
4. There’s many viable technologies available today, but they are under continuous refinement to make them better, more efficient, less costy, and ultimately, more competitive
5. This one is always fun. Wind and hydroelectric don’t pollute, but one is blamed for killing migratory birds and the other is hated for destroying habitats surrounding rivers. Both offer the most promise as the next best source of energy compared to fossil fuels.
6. Well, this depends on whether the consumer is in an energy rich or energy poor area. If you live in an area where there’s ample sun, good wind, and/or rivers you can dam up, then you’re living close to where you can produce it. If you can’t produce enough energy from the sources immediately available to you, then you will either need to conserve more or import it.
7. Politicians are likely only going to back solutions that prove to be overwhelmingly beneficial to their constituents. You will get corn belt pols that back ethanol for the obvious positive economic impact that it will have on their areas. Likewise, wind in areas that it could prove beneficial.
There is no one magic bullet for every energy need, that needs to be understood. Some sources will win over others, based on the application and its availability. But until oil gets more expensive (like over $100 per barrel) then most alternative sources just simply can’t economically compete with today’s renewable harnessing technology.
Paris
The short answer is that renewable energy must meet a need and compete cost-wise with other sources of energy (or their preceived future costs). The real cost advantages of renewable energy can be complex. For example, if corn is grown to make ethanol fuel the field is lost to the production of edible corn. Whereas, the farmer could lease out his borders to wind turbines (perhaps $2,000 per month per turbine) and still raise corn.
The “economics” has to be viewed from several viewpoints; farmer, energy company, and consumer. Windpower depends on availabilty of fairly steady wind and siting is a big factor. Nuclear power plants must run near full capacity to be economical (because of fixed costs and amortization) and likely will not be shut down during a strong wind. Storage of energy may become more important such as using a reservoir and pump/turbines to store water (energy of height) during low demand and recovering the energy during peak load demands. Economics affect the overall grid operation. Solar heat panels have been in use on rooftops for many years and new thin-foil photovoltaic cells that could “shingle” a roof are on the way. Economics also involve local and distant use. Government incentives to research, build or use renewable energy sources may prove an important economic stimulus to kick-start the needed infrastructures. Economics also includes the replacement of poluting energy sources with cleaner sources of energy in terms of health and possibly global warming.