Green energy ???

Attached piece just looks at the amount of rare earth minerals required to move towards more renewables. It ignores C02 intensity & water usage but the sheer scale of raw ore required should give people an idea of why I don’t think the age of oil & natural gas is over by an stretch.
Among the material realities of green energy:
Building wind turbines and solar panels to generate electricity, as well as batteries to fuel electric vehicles, requires,
on average, more than 10 times the quantity of materials, compared with building machines using hydrocarbons
to deliver the same amount of energy to society.
A single electric car contains more cobalt than 1,000 smartphone batteries; the blades on a single wind turbine
have more plastic than 5 million smartphones; and a solar array that can power one data center uses more glass
than 50 million phones.
Replacing hydrocarbons with green machines under current plans—never mind aspirations for far greater expansion—
will vastly increase the mining of various critical minerals around the world. For example, a single electric
car battery weighing 1,000 pounds requires extracting and processing some 500,000 pounds of materials. Averaged
over a battery’s life, each mile of driving an electric car “consumes” five pounds of earth. Using an internal
combustion engine consumes about 0.2 pounds of liquids per mile.
Oil, natural gas, and coal are needed to produce the concrete, steel, plastics, and purified minerals used to build
green machines. The energy equivalent of 100 barrels of oil is used in the processes to fabricate a single battery
that can store the equivalent of one barrel of oil.
By 2050, with current plans, the quantity of worn-out solar panels—much of it non-recyclable — will constitute double
the tonnage of all today’s global plastic waste, along with over 3 million tons per year of unrecyclable plastics
from worn-out wind turbine blades. By 2030, more than 10 million tons per year of batteries will become garbage.


mines-minerals-green-energy-reality-checkMM.PDF

Green energy is a facade. There will be a new energy source coming soon that will make oil and gas almost obsolete for use as a "fuel or heating source". This will be the greatest revolution in over 100 yrs. It will be much more friendly than any current source we have. Lets deal with this fake pandemic first, baby steps .

Energy can niether be created or destroyed only transformed.... every power conversion method leaves a footprint

Bogger said:

Energy can niether be created or destroyed only transformed.... every power conversion method leaves a footprint

Click to expand...

Wise words!

BILTIT said:

Green energy is a facade. There will be a new energy source coming soon that will make oil and gas almost obsolete for use as a "fuel or heating source". This will be the greatest revolution in over 100 yrs. It will be much more friendly than any current source we have. Lets deal with this fake pandemic first, baby steps .

Click to expand...

Care to enlighten us?

Ever here of the zero point energy field? It has to do with that. Tesla was using it in the 30-40s. Alot of his stuff is going to make a comeback. Guess who was friends and collegues with Nikola Tesla?? A Mr. Trump (john), The presidents uncle.

And the conclusion is that it’s physically impossible - NEXT

Was surprised that the hydrogen thing gain more traction. I know some city busses use8it and for dabbled after purchasing Ballard. May it takes more effort than is put out?

Cold fusion and/or water(h20) will be the next fuel/power systems

tejay said:

And the conclusion is that it’s physically impossible - NEXT

Click to expand...

You sure about that? Or are you just finding the info they want you to find?

Dont believe most of what you find on the internet, especially with google.

Google censors searchs.

Patience, it will come.

So much delusional thinking when it comes to the so called green energy. All the crap that doesn't make it green is under the carpet.

You guys ever hear of LENR (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions)? I've been following this since about 2011. This was debuted in the E-CAT project that used a LENR reactor to transform nickel and hydrogen into copper. The byproduct was a significant amount of energy and non-radioactive copper. At one point, they did start pre-selling small 1kw generators largely targeted at residential users. I also understand that the US government made a significant investment in these units with the plan to network them in a sea can to produce a much larger generator. It looks like the E-CAtT project itself is dead over a legal battle over the intellectual property and some other corporate shenanigans.

I see France is now building a $20 billion reactor which I assume is using this technology.

S.W.A.T. said:

Was surprised that the hydrogen thing gain more traction. I know some city busses use8it and for dabbled after purchasing Ballard. May it takes more effort than is put out?

Click to expand...

Basically. It acts as a very inefficient battery, round trip efficiency of hydrogen is around 50% if electricity is used to produce the hydrogen and the hydrogen is then converted back to electricity at a later time. Hydrogen can be produced easily from methane (natural gas) but if that's the case it's just as easy to burn the natural gas for whatever use it is needed for in the first place.

Where lithium ion batteries are 90-95% efficient in round trip efficiency.

whoDEANie said:

You guys ever hear of LENR (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions)? I've been following this since about 2011. This was debuted in the E-CAT project that used a LENR reactor to transform nickel and hydrogen into copper. The byproduct was a significant amount of energy and non-radioactive copper. At one point, they did start pre-selling small 1kw generators largely targeted at residential users. I also understand that the US government made a significant investment in these units with the plan to network them in a sea can to produce a much larger generator. It looks like the E-CAtT project itself is dead over a legal battle over the intellectual property and some other corporate shenanigans.

I see France is now building a $20 billion reactor which I assume is using this technology.

Click to expand...

My understanding is that this was basically a hoax and got shut down once it was proven the technology was a farce.

I came across this a while ago. Basically uses a high speed disk shot into a small fuel pellet to trigger a small nuclear fusion reaction. If this could be done over and over again it could produce an appreciable amount of energy, in some ways similar to the repeated burning of an air fuel mixture in an internal combustion engine.

Still a long way out before commercial operation would be viable though.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1RsHQCMRTw

ABMax24 said:

Basically. It acts as a very inefficient battery, round trip efficiency of hydrogen is around 50% if electricity is used to produce the hydrogen and the hydrogen is then converted back to electricity at a later time. Hydrogen can be produced easily from methane (natural gas) but if that's the case it's just as easy to burn the natural gas for whatever use it is needed for in the first place.

Where lithium ion batteries are 90-95% efficient in round trip efficiency.

Click to expand...

What efficient system is used to charge the lithium ion and what is that real carbon footprint?? lol
Have never seen a REAL energy transfer system that is efficient when you dig out the REAL truth.

I see TC Energy is promoting 1000MW pumped hydro storage project in Ontario. CBC article was shooting it down because TC Energy is an evil oil and gas pipeline company. Can't win with these libtards.

Also France is building the ITER fusion reactor https://www.iter.org/

Stg2Suby said:

I see TC Energy is promoting 1000MW pumped hydro storage project in Ontario. CBC article was shooting it down because TC Energy is an evil oil and gas pipeline company. Can't win with these libtards.

Also France is building the ITER fusion reactor https://www.iter.org/

Click to expand...

France has been building it for 30 years now, and they are planning on at least 5 more years before they turn it on for initial testing. 15 more years before they do any real planned attempts at generating power.

Yes the timeline for the ITER thing is moving at a snails pace. I do think nuclear good ol' nuclear fission and hopefully fusion one day is the practical answer to green energy baseload that nobody really seems to acknowledge

Bunch of rotten thieves getting rich, pulling the wool over eyes of the leaf lickers knowing they have delusional thinking.

Stg2Suby said:

Yes the timeline for the ITER thing is moving at a snails pace. I do think nuclear good ol' nuclear fission and hopefully fusion one day is the practical answer to green energy baseload that nobody really seems to acknowledge

Click to expand...

Agreed, it's still the only answer we have in hand. And yet a little bit of fear and lack of national resolve to implement _the_ green solution keeps it on the bench.