Quote:
Originally Posted by redpoint5
Yeah, but the grid isn't intertied that way, with the capability to divert power from any 1 region to any other region. Not only that, but sometimes weather events such as an Eastern snowstorm take out half the generating capacity of the country. That means we'd need the other half of the country to have more than double the normal output capacity, which is economically and environmentally wasteful... and that all assumes the other half of the country would somehow have the ideal weather conditions to not only provide power for itself, but also the other non-producing half.
How much overproduction would need to be provisioned and distributed around the country to maintain our current level of grid uptime, and how much would that cost in terms of both money, and land use?
Finally, transporting power long distances involves massive losses.
Yes, but that energy isn't produced at a steady average; it's produced with vast swings in output, coupled with vast swings in energy demand. Production and demand must perfectly match, which is why depending on the weather to match demand is economically improbable for now.
We'll never run out of anything. The problem isn't running out; the problem is scarcity of crucial resources causing prices to rise to economically harmful levels.
|
Things are what they are.You can engineer for anything.Connecting the grid is a matter of decision.The nuts and bolts of it just follows the work order.Weather variability is just something we have to design for.I'm given to understand that with the present state-of-the-art in power conditioning,variability in power output can be electronically manipulated in which to achieve a steady output. It's a 'different' energy landscape of course.
As to cost,I'll follow Donald Rumsfeld's lead and tell you that those numbers just get in the way.If we're talking about an existential threat to the entire planet then economics becomes meaningless.Money is just a construct.It has no wealth.It is not wealth.It's just a medium of exchange.
When Pearl Harbor was bombed we didn't gnash our teeth and run around protesting the cost of a world war.We just hunkered down and got to the business of it.
As to running out of things,I'm just parroting what Lomberg published.He's held in high regard for his economic and statistical prowess,and I thought his predictions would be germane to the conversation.