- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
The energy transformation - that means a conversion from the current oil based HC supply to "alternative sources" - need several technological breakthroughs to become truly viable. And as was pointed out in several other posts, they need the force of economics, or a very strong will, to push them forward.
The main technical problem is storage of energy - if you produce energy from solar or wind - how do you store it so that you can use it at a later time? Conventional power plants operate 24/7 to provide power to a grid and have smaller "boost" facilities to ramp up during peak demand times. If you are using wind or solar - where do you "store" the clean power for those times when you cannot generate (such as a calm night?) Right now you "use it or lose it" superconductor rings?, giant capacitors? conversion into a chemically usable form? Something is needed.
The other big problem is distribution - how do you move the energy around. You lose it if you have to move it long distances and the best places to generate are normally far from the places you need it most. Using liquid fuels (like ethanol) preserves the existing distribution networks (gas stations). Storing exotic materials - like hydrogen - in a form that is concentrated and safe still is not a viable technology.
It would be nice to see the government step in and pay to ramp up some of these technlogies. The problem is that many would fail or be dead ends. Someone would also end the end figure out how to make a ton of money and there would be cries of "corruption" when someone took advantage and bet the right horse. Big problems take big solutions and trying to spread the effort by small tax breaks on your roof top solar panels is not going to get us out of this hole.
