How Will Shifting to Renewable Energy Affect Our Lives?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Vals509
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Choice Energy
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the potential impacts of shifting to renewable energy sources, such as solar, wind, and nuclear power, on everyday life and the economy. Participants explore various aspects including environmental effects, economic implications, and the viability of different energy technologies.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that replacing coal plants with renewable energy sources may not significantly change daily life, aside from potentially higher costs and cleaner air.
  • Others argue that the transition could stimulate the economy through construction and research and development activities.
  • Concerns are raised about the environmental impact of producing photovoltaic (PV) panels, particularly regarding the electricity required for silicon production and pollution associated with it.
  • One participant questions the long-term viability of solar PV as a sustainable energy source, citing the energy cost of production versus the energy generated.
  • Another participant challenges the notion that solar PV is less viable due to its production process, suggesting that solar and nuclear energy can complement each other in the energy mix.
  • There is a discussion about the pollution trade-offs involved in electric vehicles, comparing the emissions from tailpipes to those from coal-fired power plants.
  • Some participants highlight the need to consider the overall pollution impact of energy sources, including manufacturing processes.
  • Questions are raised about the necessity of silicon in PV technology, with references to alternative solar technologies.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with no clear consensus on the overall impact of renewable energy sources. Disagreements exist regarding the environmental benefits of solar PV, the economic implications of transitioning to renewable energy, and the feasibility of different energy technologies.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge various assumptions regarding the production processes of renewable energy technologies and the economic factors influencing their adoption. The discussion reflects uncertainty about the long-term sustainability of solar PV and the overall effectiveness of renewable energy in reducing pollution.

Vals509
Messages
52
Reaction score
1
we all know that coal fired plants are becoming more and more unpopular with people and know we are looking towards renewable sources of energy like solar and wind and also nuclear energy. but in the near/distant future when the changes do occur,
how will these changes affect our lives??
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
I'm not sure what you mean. Are you asking how our lives would change if we replaced our coal plants with nuclear plants or other types of non-polluting power plants? Other than the power costing slightly more and the air being somwehat cleaner, there wouldn't be much change. You wouldn't notice the difference in your everyday life.
 
The biggest change I can see is to the economy. There will be a lot of construction as well as R&D for a long time, which will be quite stimulating.
 
And while all of that R&D is happening, expect the price of that particurlar alternative energy source to be more expensive than its non-alternative counterparts (coal, nat. gas, etc.)
 
It's not clear if solar PV power will result in cleaner air or are a viable energy source.

It takes a lot of electricity to produce the silicon that is used in photo voltiac panels.
Most silicon is produced in China where pollution laws are lax and a large coal fired plants without controls are being constructed every week.

Maybe someday there will be a break through and the amount of electricity used to build a panel will be substiantlly less than that obtained from their use, but so far PV do not appear to be a long term solution.
 
Xnn said:
It's not clear if solar PV power will result in cleaner air or are a viable energy source. It takes a lot of electricity to produce the silicon that is used in photo voltiac panels.

The price at which a panel is sold is more than the price of the energy used to produce and assemble the components of the panel (otherwise the company could not continue manufacturing), and ordinary people would not invest in purchasing the panel unless its final price is less than that of the electricity it will create (over the expected average lifetime of the panel). This is the disproof by economics of your argument.

I take it you haven't actually done your research, and the honest reason for your a priori bias against solar PV is your stated profession as a nuclear engineer? (So the bias also extends to solar thermal and solar hot water heaters, which are obviously comparatively trivial to construct, as well as other "renewables" such as wind? Doesn't it occur to you that solar and fission are both part of the solution and not mutually exclusive, for example that one is well matched with peak load whilst the other so suited to base load?)
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure I understand where you're going cesiumfrog; I took Xnn's quote to mean that since a great amount of electricity is required to produce the silicon, then that electricity has to come from somewhere. Xnn then stated that electricity in China is produced in a way that also produces a large amount of pollution. I took Xnn's statement to mean that when considering the overall pollution impact of something, you have to also consider the pollution from manufacturing. Similar to the argument against electric cars (so you move the pollution from the tailpipe to the coal factory, which is truly cleaner??)
Did I get that right, Xnn?
 
If we move the tailpipe to the coal factory, then the transportation sector will automatically share in the improvements of the regulations that are coming to be imposed on the electricity sector. It's not like putting an individual fission reactor in each car would be an efficient option. Also, a large number of electric car batteries would allow better utilisation of solar and wind power (since those are not on-demand sources). This isn't the place to repeat anti-progressive FUD.
 
I don't consider asking a question to be FUD, 'anti-progressive' or not.
 
  • #10

Similar threads

How is power limited from renewable sources
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
"Storing" energy when it is not being used?
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
What Are the Implications of Indian Point's Closure for NYC's Energy Future?
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Why the fascination with intermittent renewable energy sources?
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
8K
Three mile Island Power Plant to be Shut Down
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
5K
Do personal PV panels make sense considering the grid "cleanliness"?
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Questions about the state of nuclear power in the U.S.
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Theoretical question about a new Energy and implications of using it
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
5K
How much energy is stored in compressed air?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
8K
Is a 100% Renewable Grid with Super Power Possible by 2030?
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K