phil henshaw wrote: > The consensus response to global warming relies on reducing the > impacts of economic growth by improving the efficiency of economic > growth! So we need a lot more clean power, and we need it fast. Time to spend some money on figuring out how to do it! Without efficiency gains, it's estimated 10 TW are needed globally by 2025. [1] The ITER/DEMO fusion reactor only promises net 1.5 GW by 2045 [2], and the largest hydroelectric facilities (Three Gorges Dam in China) are at about 22 GW [3]. There's not enough high-grade silicon for dozens of square miles of conventional photovoltaic solar [4]. Meanwhile, China builds a new coal fired planed every week [5] and apparently can keep doing that for 100 years [6].
Seems to me any cost imbalance of solar, etc. is easily fixable by taxing the hell out of CO2 energy emissions while subsidizing the development of new solar, fusion, carbon sequestration technology (etc). [1] http://t8web.lanl.gov/people/rajan/Gupta_energy_for_all_2007.pdf [2] http://fire.pppl.gov/isfnt7_maisonnier.pdf [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Gorges_Dam [4] http://www.ft.com/cms/s/e50784ea-78cb-11db-8743-0000779e2340.html [5] http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/1223/p01s04-sten.html [6] http://www.technologyreview.com/printer_friendly_article.aspx?id=17963 ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
