first assign
I'm putting Kenny and Spencer's response here as a test.
Kenneth P. Callahan
20 January 2017
Prediction 1: The International Energy Agency (IEA) recently modeled several scenarios in which, as part of a worldwide response to the risks of climate change, global energy-related CO2 emissions are cut to less than half of 2011 levels by 2050. IEA assumed that emissions reductions would be implemented at least cost, but in perhaps the most interesting scenario, growth of nuclear power is constrained by non-economic factors.vi In that scenario, global demand for electricity rises by 79% between 2011 and 2050, and wind, hydro, and solar supply 66% of global generation in 2050, with solar alone supplying 27%. If expansion of hydroelectric facilities were to be limited for environmental reasons, as is already the case in the United States and many other nations,vii solar energy would need to play an even greater role in global electricity supply to enable significant CO2 reductions.
Counter Argument: The idea that the world can switch to renewable energy instantly is not really applicable. Capitalist ideas will keep people from being able to progress at any decent rate. As long as there is money to be made and uneven distribution of wealth globally it will not occur.
https://www.worldenergy.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/World-Energy-Scenarios_Composing-energy-futures-to-2050_Full-report.pdf
On page 141 of this report, there are two graphs that represent the distribution of types of energy and how they will change over time. Both show a majority of nonrenewable energy, with a very slight increase in renewable energy.
On page 141 of this report, there are two graphs that represent the distribution of types of energy and how they will change over time. Both show a majority of nonrenewable energy, with a very slight increase in renewable energy.
Spencer Knickerbocker
Solar Power at Marlboro College
1/23/17
“As discussed in Appendix C, batteries that could provide economical, large-scale electricity storage are currently unavailable for widespread deployment and may not be available in the near future” p.6
I found this part of the text intriguing and I wanted to look further into the viability of individual electricity in the future. Since, according to the text, the ability to have economical wide-spread storage seems unlikely to be available I think the next step is looking into the potential of individual storage. With a quick search on Google, it becomes apparent that solar electricity storage is the largest problem that renewable energy advocates are faced with. The issue with batteries, no matter what size, is that they have a limited lifespan and a limited amount of cycles to be recharged and used.
Costs for photovoltaic cells and charging units are falling and technology is advancing, but there are no big breakthroughs on the horizon. A company that I have long followed in solar energy pursuit is Tesla because one of their primary goals is making solar electricity for homes an economically viable option. I have also been intrigued, because of personal pursuits in understanding solar electricity, that they have long been working on non-grid tied storage solutions for individual homes.
At the individual level many homeowners wishing to have their photovoltaic cells produce energy off-grid have had to resort to using storage systems that primarily use deep-cycle batteries to store the electricity. Deep cycle batteries are bulky and have a lifespan of about ten years. Tesla has introduced a product call the Powerwall, a sleek wall-mounted battery that is capable of storing enough electricity to operate a two bedroom home.
Without going into too many details about what the product entails, it is refreshing to know that Tesla’s chairman, CEO, and product architect Elon Musk has promised not to start any copyright infringement lawsuits against anyone using the same technology. Openness to innovation and sharing information about design and function are likely going to be the tools that allow for great innovation to continue to occur.
Daniel Medeiros
Prediction: "as long as solar technologies that rely on scarce materials are used only to a limited extent there are no visable obstacles to increasing the scale of solar generation dramatically."
In order to determine whether or not this is true we must examine the materials typically used in solar panels. Traditionally, both ilium and gallium are used in solar panels--both of these are rare Earth metals and one common critique of solar power is that it is not sustainable to use them. However, more recently there have been increases of the use of common metals such as copper and zinc in the place of these, and this seems to be becoming the trend. Therefore, it seems likely that the scarcity of materials will not be a significant issue for solar power in the future.
In addition, another major development (in terms of the materials used for solar panels) is that of Perovskites. This material--made from led--is used to enhance the efficiency of solar panels and the reduce the necessary thickness. While the toxicity of lead is certainly an issue here, it also seems that this material is reducing the amount of resources needed to construct a solar panel in general.
One of the main materials used in solar panels is silicon. There are some environmental concerns about silicon, specifically because the dust produced while silicon is being cut and processed is a health hazard and because silicon processors are usually cleaned with sulfur hexafluoride, which is a greenhouse gas. It would, of course, be best if some alternate substance could be used to clean the processors, and these issues may over time present some issue. However, if proper precautions are taken and modification tot he process are made, it seems likely that these issues may be overcome.
Finally, there have been major developments in recent years in using photosynthetic plants to produce solar power. Scientists from Cambridge University working with a Swiss Designer were able to power a radio and light-bulbs using moss, and it has been found by the same Cambridge scientists that bio-films can transmit electrons without external chemical mediators.
Overall, while there is still work to be done, I would say that the prediction is correct and that materials are unlikely to present any obstacle in the growth of solar power.
Ben Rybisky
Prediction: "For the more than one billion people in the developing world who lack access to a reliable electric grid, the cost of small-scale PV generation is often outweighed by the very high value of access to electricity for lighting and charging mobile telephone and radio batteries. In addition, in some developing nations it may be economic to use solar generation to reduce reliance on imported oil, particularly if that oil must be moved by truck to remote generator sites" (3).
Response and research: This is, for the most part, correct. Looking at
this link brings up some interesting ideas about that island I talked about earlier in class, and relating to this prediction. The island of T'au in American Samoa is living, breathing proof that solar is not only a viable option, but that it is an option that is significantly cheaper than fossil fuels. In the link posted above, it's mentioned that the island used to produce all of their electricity with diesel generators. That alone emits a significant amount of carbon and other noxious greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, while using up more of the world's oil reserves. Not to mention the mere fact that all of the fuel needs to be imported . . . on ships that burn diesel fuel. Since one generator burned 300 gallons of diesel per day, that equates to much more when combined with the diesel used to get it to the island.
I don't know enough about the emissions of the specific generators used on T'au to definitively say how much they polluted, or even how to find that fact out. I also don't know the relative efficiency of diesel engines aboard ocean liners, but if
this one (used for ocean liners) is any indication, I can say with relative certainty that they burn a huge amount of fuel just to get the fuel they need for their electricity, which is now powered entirely by the sun.
Looking at other applications of solar in the developing world, I found
this, which seems to be a pretty complete list of the countries who provide a significant amount of solar power relative to their total electricity consumption, ranked from worst to best. When compared with
this, it seems pretty accurate, however it should be noted that what's important in these percentages and rankings is amount of power generated by a country from the sun, compared to their whole relative power. Say, if a country had a demand for 100,000 megawatts of power, and generated 1,000 megawatts from solar, 1% of their total power is generated by solar. That isn't terribly impressive when compared to T'au, which most likely has a significantly lower energy demand, but generates
all of that power from the sun.
Hailey Mount:
Prediction:
The article mentioned the price current drop in module and inverter costs, but also warned that this drop is unstable. In addition. Parts, labor, and material costs remain higher than that of its competitor, coal. I looked into cheaper alternatives.
Research:
One possible upcoming solution for high costs in solar energy is changing the materials used. Specifically, a newer form of solar cell made with "perovskite" is growing in research. Perovskite is a less expensive material that functions equally well as the traditional parts and materials. While only 3.9% of solar research was on perovskite in 2009, that number has jumped to 22.1% in 2016. A marketable version is intended to be available in the marketplace sometime 2017. Current solar arrays, on average, cost about 75 cents per watt (according to one source), but with cheap material and labor costs, coupled with the current drop in module prices, could cost (supposedly) 10-15 cents per watt. The U.S Department of Energy has estimated that solar power will need a minimum of 50 cents/watt to compete with coal and fossil fuels, and if perovskite could work equally as well as current materials solar power could expect a rise in use. Perovskite, however, does have it's drawbacks. In particular, perovskite is very prove to degeneration. Wet and moist climates lead to rapid degeneration of the material and thus the solar cells. Predictions for the future of solar array costs are, as the article mentioned, at an unstable, but competitive drop.
