View Single Post
Old 11-27-2014, 11:12 AM   #28 (permalink)
IamIan
Master EcoModder
 
IamIan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: RI
Posts: 692
Thanks: 371
Thanked 227 Times in 140 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nigel_S View Post
I think they were looking at using 100% RE
It would actually be significantly more difficult to be 100% fossil fuel.

Can you imagine how extremely difficult it would be to run communication and GPS satellites from fossil fuels ?... having to send supplies of O2 and fossil fuels into orbit for that on board fossil fuel to burn ... Or the light energy for all of our food sources (and wood we use to build with) .. to all come from fossil fuel light bulbs instead of RE solar ... RE is easier and cheaper to get to 100%.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nigel_S View Post
which would indeed be very difficult today but we don't need to replace our Nuclear plants with RE so 100% isn't necessary.
I agree 100% RE isn't necessary.

Remember they went beyond the claim about what would be 'difficult' today ... they claimed any RE option can't be viable (financially) vs coal 40 years from now ... and that is just incorrect .. Real world data over-rules opinions .. even the opinions of those with a PHD.
__________________
Life Long Energy Efficiency Enthusiast
2000 Honda Insight - LiFePO4 PHEV - Solar
2020 Inmotion V11 PEV ~30miles/kwh
  Reply With Quote