As another commentator points out, transportation of electricity and vehicles themselves are the major problems. Farmers that grow biofuels could conceivably shift to another crop, and many of the crops used for biofuels are routinely farmed for other uses (e.g., corn is animal feed and biofuel feed). In that regard, I disagree with the the argument that the entire infrastructure would have to be rebuilt.
the problem of getting electricity to cars is removed if we have better public transportation, though developing that infrastructure and reconfiguring the existing system (e.g., car-centric) is a much bigger problem. Regardless, you can still use solar for other uses (houses, industry) while you convert transportation slowly (and painfully, as we’ve really painted ourselves into a corner).
I do* like your take on alternate land uses for quarries (and mines! don’t forget those). Not all mines are close to cities, but some are. There’s a few really good example of mines installing solar panels on their reclaimed tailings storage facilities., or old mines being used for pumped hydro batteries.
The energy issue is multifaceted, and while it’s easy to say ‘just do nuclear’ ‘just do solar’ ‘just do hydro’, one size doesn’t fit all. However, the one thing that DOES fit, is how we have to start thinking about how to repurpose what we have already (e.g., windows as you point out) to suit our objectives of green energy.
I do agree, if we remove the problem then there’s no need for the solution. If we didn’t have to worry the sudden expansion of electric vehicles and large data centers. But would we not be exchanging one problem for another? A lot of cities were not built with future public transportation in mind so building railways and bus routes then changing how people travel might be just as hard as getting electricity from rural areas.
I also agree that the farmers would plant another crop. But covering the land with solar panels is just impractical. The reason these farms are located where they are is because turning it into biofuel crops is easy, inexpensive, and the land probably isn’t worth doing anything else with. Turning it into food crops would depend on climate and demand.
Either way, as a society, we have several immediate problems and you’re right there isn’t one way to solve them. I just felt that tiny patches of land spread out all over the world would generate enough power and get it to where it needs to be for everyone to have electric cars just seemed like a silly idea when there’s much simpler and faster ways to get power where it’s needed the most.
Especially since I’m an electrical engineer that works for a company that specializes in energy management, building controls, and engineering sustainablility into buildings. So I’m actively working on these things that are theory to most of the people here.
As another commentator points out, transportation of electricity and vehicles themselves are the major problems. Farmers that grow biofuels could conceivably shift to another crop, and many of the crops used for biofuels are routinely farmed for other uses (e.g., corn is animal feed and biofuel feed). In that regard, I disagree with the the argument that the entire infrastructure would have to be rebuilt.
the problem of getting electricity to cars is removed if we have better public transportation, though developing that infrastructure and reconfiguring the existing system (e.g., car-centric) is a much bigger problem. Regardless, you can still use solar for other uses (houses, industry) while you convert transportation slowly (and painfully, as we’ve really painted ourselves into a corner).
I do* like your take on alternate land uses for quarries (and mines! don’t forget those). Not all mines are close to cities, but some are. There’s a few really good example of mines installing solar panels on their reclaimed tailings storage facilities., or old mines being used for pumped hydro batteries.
The energy issue is multifaceted, and while it’s easy to say ‘just do nuclear’ ‘just do solar’ ‘just do hydro’, one size doesn’t fit all. However, the one thing that DOES fit, is how we have to start thinking about how to repurpose what we have already (e.g., windows as you point out) to suit our objectives of green energy.
I do agree, if we remove the problem then there’s no need for the solution. If we didn’t have to worry the sudden expansion of electric vehicles and large data centers. But would we not be exchanging one problem for another? A lot of cities were not built with future public transportation in mind so building railways and bus routes then changing how people travel might be just as hard as getting electricity from rural areas.
I also agree that the farmers would plant another crop. But covering the land with solar panels is just impractical. The reason these farms are located where they are is because turning it into biofuel crops is easy, inexpensive, and the land probably isn’t worth doing anything else with. Turning it into food crops would depend on climate and demand.
Either way, as a society, we have several immediate problems and you’re right there isn’t one way to solve them. I just felt that tiny patches of land spread out all over the world would generate enough power and get it to where it needs to be for everyone to have electric cars just seemed like a silly idea when there’s much simpler and faster ways to get power where it’s needed the most.
Especially since I’m an electrical engineer that works for a company that specializes in energy management, building controls, and engineering sustainablility into buildings. So I’m actively working on these things that are theory to most of the people here.