How much land does it take to power the world?
Vložit
- čas přidán 15. 03. 2021
- Explore the sustainability of fossil fuels, nuclear power, and renewable energy and how much space each of these power sources use.
--
No matter how we make electricity, it takes up space. Coal requires mines, and plants to convert it into electricity. Nuclear power takes uranium mines, facilities to refine it, a reactor, and a place to store the spent fuel safely. Renewable energy needs wind turbines or solar panels. So how much space would it take to power the whole world? Explore the sustainability of different power sources.
Directed by Lisa LaBracio.
Animation and art direction by Kevin Herrmann, AIM Creative Studios.
In partnership with Bill Gates, inspired by his book "How To Avoid A Climate Disaster": bit.ly/PlanForZero
Support Our Non-Profit Mission
----------------------------------------------
Support us on Patreon: bit.ly/TEDEdPatreon
Check out our merch: bit.ly/TEDEDShop
----------------------------------------------
Connect With Us
----------------------------------------------
Sign up for our newsletter: bit.ly/TEDEdNewsletter
Follow us on Facebook: bit.ly/TEDEdFacebook
Find us on Twitter: bit.ly/TEDEdTwitter
Peep us on Instagram: bit.ly/TEDEdInstagram
----------------------------------------------
Keep Learning
----------------------------------------------
View full lesson: ed.ted.com/lessons/how-much-l...
Dig deeper with additional resources:
Animator's website: aimcreativestudios.com/
Music: / aim-music
----------------------------------------------
Thank you so much to our patrons for your support! Without you this video would not be possible! Marc Bilodeau, Karen Goepen-Wee, Filip Dabrowski, Barbara Smalley, Megan Douglas, Chris, Tim Leistikow, Renhe Ji, Ka-Hei Law, Leora Allen, Mark Morris, Misaki Sato, EdoKun , Boytsov Ilya, SookKwan Loong, Bev Millar, Lex Azevedo, Noa Shore, Kyle Nguyen, Michael Aquilina, MJ Tan Mingjie, Dawn Jordan, Prasanth Mathialagan, Samuel Doerle, David Rosario, Siamak H, Manav parmar, David Lucsanyi, Anthony Kudolo, Ryohky Araya, Eduardo Briceño, Christophe Dessalles, Heather Slater, Yuh Saito, Fabian Amels, Sandra Tersluisen, Zhexi Shan, Bárbara Nazaré, Josh Engel, Andrea Feliz, Victor E Karhel, Sydney Evans, Latora Slydell, Noel Situ, emily lam, Sid, Jordan Tang, Kent Logan, Alexandra Panzer and Declan Manning.
This is the fifth of a seven part series, so stay tuned for more! If you want to get a head start on learning more about this exciting and urgent topic, check out Bill Gates' new book "How To Avoid A Climate Disaster." In it, Gates sets out a wide-ranging, practical, and accessible plan for how the world can get to zero greenhouse gas emissions in time to avoid a climate catastrophe. Check it out: bit.ly/PlanForZero
@@devathmad691 Lol why?
@@SparePlayss he wants to get noticed i guess
Russia and other country that live bay Oil and Gas sell dont give you chance to do that!
Russia general come one day in that country to make dile about help military goverment...
Stop Russia world terror: Help military goverments (Sirya, Libia) and terrarist group (Taliban), blow up ✈plains✈ (Polish president), poison peaple (England) and wars Libia, Sirya, Ukraine, Gergia...
We install solar panels on roofs of our home .
You didn't seem to address the issue raised in Gates book: That renewables alone without nuclear can't provide reliable power, without massive and likely implausible advances in battery technology.
It bears the question: Do we really NEED Delaware?
wtf is delaware anyway
MrGleboPedo Delaware? I barely know her.
@Sloppy Potato it's actually the very first state of the US. (The first one to get it's statehood)
@@MrGleboPedo it's the state that our current president is from
Dela-where
I disagree that nuclear needs to be made safer, statistically it's extremely safe. It's only the public perception of the issue that leads to statements like "nuclear needs to be made safer."
i agree it is really safe to use, but the waste caused by it is really hard to deal with . czcams.com/video/R7WPEYGr1Vs/video.html
only 10% of the worldwide electricity production comes from nuclear plants. if you want to expand that percentage, the amount of waste and the potential of a nuclear accident naturally rises. almost all of the current reactors are in wealthy countries that can invest in safety. for widespread use the dangers have to be minimized, otherwise the risk isnt worth the gain.
@@crusaderlynx2878 The waste issue is only complicated in the US because of political issues. Yucca Mountain is technologically sound, but politically unworkable. There are laws, particularly the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, that prevent us from looking at anything other than Yucca Mountain until YM is full, so we legally can't do anything but twiddle our thumbs until congress fixes the legal problems. Other nations (France, Finland, Sweden, etc) have no political roadblocks and store their waste just fine.
@@Istaki0 My safety comment is based on normalized mortality rates, deaths per megawatt, in order to adjust for scaling needs. Nuclear power is extremely safe, regulation is much tighter on nuclear reactors than on other power plant types so you would save lives by replacing coal and natural gas plants with nuclear reactors to say nothing of the carbon footprint benefits. You are correct in the placement of reactors but in an idealized situation where we are addressing global electricity needs we can probably assume that the richer countries are footing the bill.
Access to stable, reliable power also saves lives. Electricity allows for water purification and refrigeration for medicine, both of which dramatically increase quality of life and reduce mortality. Building a nuclear reactor in an area that currently has no access to stable power would probably save lives on net, and if it's replacing fossil fuels it will save even more.
Risk=Probability x Severity. Nuclear accidents may not occur often (probability), but it only takes one to contaminate the environment for hundreds of years (severity). Check Japan 2011, even today they're nowhere near in controlling the situation (current estimate is for 2050). Entire cities reduced to ghost towns and they're considering throwing the radioactive waste (that continues to pile up) to the ocean because it's too much. The risk is very high. It definitely needs to be made safer.
We just need to find enough screaming children.
laughing children work best
I like these comments
Have you tried Xbox live?
Have you tries fortnite kids when they lose?
I dont like these comments
TED-Ed always know how to make everyday,a goodday
Definitely
Yeah good night here
@@rinuvarghese8448 good night
*good day
Because this is actually Demon of reason's voice.
In Algeria we have 2 millions Km² of deserts and most of it is neither used nor populated, if only we had reasonable and honorable politicians and ministers :'(
The desert is what keeps the Amazon fertilized. So we need the desert land to stay the same more or less
@@Joel-ee4yh so you're saying that people have to suffer poverty and corruption in order to keep the amazon fertilized ?
@@youcef6129 I did not say that and I don't know how u came to that conclusion. We can use some parts of the desert, but not all. The desert is vital to the Amazon because of the top soil that the winds carry to the Amazon. The rainforest thrives on this, and as you already know, the Amazon rainforest is vital to the entire planet. We're already cutting down billions of trees every year and if we've to reach net 0 carbon emissions we need to protect the existing rainforests and plant more trees. Many scientists earlier proposed terraforming the existing deserted but this is counterproductive as it would kill off the Amazon. As I mentioned earlier, I'm not against development of any kind in Algeria, I'm just saying that it's impractical to utilize large portions of deserts for human use. However small areas can be utilized, no problems with that. I apologize if my earlier comment seem unsympathetic and insensitive to you, I only meant well.
There are some problems with deserts though. While it may seem a good idea to install solar panels in a place in which the sun is strong and clouds are rare, there are actually a few caveats.
The first is that solar panels don't work well in very hot places which is usually the case in deserts, keeping the temperatures around 20°C helps their performance and reduces the cost of cooling systems. This is why floating technology for the panels is popping up in some places, the water below keeps the panels cool and its reflection increases the amount of incident light on the panels.
Second is the amount of dust and sand in a desert. Solar panels in such a dusty place would have to be cleaned very often - you could say you would make more jobs for cleaners, but the cost of energy will be higher - and duststorms might damage some equipment even though they are made to last in those conditions.
@@Joel-ee4yh yeah it makes sense what you said, but the algerian desert is large enough to have all kinds of activities and still preserve the current state of amazon
i'm really sorry i misunderstood you
Why do i recognize this voice...
Edit : oh its the voice of the demon of reason
the world needs more demon of reason
Nuclear energy needs to be appreciated more
Tell that to the residents of Fukushima or Pripyat.
@@Sam-ey1nn Fukushima and Chernobyl are more complicated than just a natural/man-made disasters - In Fukushima, they knew the land history, they just took a chance that they would have another plant to replace it, before any such disaster happened....they were wrong. Chernobyl was due to a lack of understanding on what they were dealing with..... complete ignorance on the part of the plant's team leader.
@@Sam-ey1nn tell that to the habitants of the planet that have to suffer from climate change. We have to priorise our combats
Thorium nuclear energy is best.
@@174b9 On a personal level, yes. Financially, no.
I love how ted-ed always take the neutral side and showing only facts rather than their preferences
Really I feel a bias towards non Amish ...
@Natalia Heras Terol you and me I guess
Hardly. They literally said we can't rely on fossil fuels like coal due to greenhouse gasses. The coal plant I work at is one of the largest in the US and has something around 98% clean emissions from its towers. Coal can most definitely be clean and reliable if the proper measures are taken, and regulations put in place. But not everywhere that has coal plants will regulate like the US does.
At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you ever close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read any of it. I award you no life points and may God have mercy on your soul.
@@theravensniffer what plant
Last time I was this early, the dinos weren't even fossilised
Last time *I* was this early Earth hadn’t even formed yet
Last time I was this early- oh wait, I’m not early
Last time I was this early I pulled
Last time I was this early the Bang wasn't Big.
@@resugram_YT be more specific please 🤣🤣🤣
Fact: Fossil fuels kill the most people and Nuclear Energy the least.
Edit: Even in per watt of electricity
So how does solar/wind energy kill people?
*_Kurzgesagt intensifies_*
@@gettingshotsomeonesgonnapa8635 during construction or installation (falling from roof), in mines, in factories etc. But it is unsignificant compared to fossils
@@alexisdev9979 hmm, makes sense.
The people that die from fossil fuels will eventually become that very thing.
Nuclear Fusion be like: You dare to oppose me mortal?
There has been no fusion reactor that produces more energy than it uses: *bonjour*
“The saddest aspect of life right now is that science gathers knowledge faster than society gathers wisdom.”
― Isaac Asimov
🙌
true statement. like the bombs.
Have you also calculated the space needed to gather the materials for solar and wind power?
P.S. Nuclear doesn't have a safety problem, they have a management issue, the safety of the powerplant comes mostly from how well the powerplant has been maintained, which requires oversight in case of companies, and caution in case of governments.
There are so many externalities not factored into renewables it's getting embarrassing!
Exactly my thoughts. They accounted mining for coal and nuclear but they didn't for solar. And what about their inevitable decommissioning? That's also another problem that has to deal with uniquely. They even failed to include hydroelectric, the only one that has had its chance to properly prove and cement itself as an alternative. I don't mind them missing out on geothermal considering that is the most dependent on location.
I'm not against any of them besides fossil fuels, and even then I am understanding and well aware of its incredibly useful strengths. I don't hate it I just know that its use has be reduced in order to lower the geological load. It's like salt, to much and it's bad, but to little and there's something missing. I am for a combination and moderation of multiple solutions.
if u dig deeper and see more reports u will find coal pow plants have highest rate rate even more than nuclear
nuclear just has more long lasting deadly effects making it headline material
With enough nuclear power plants and actually competent people, we can become at least 50x more efficient than solar, wind, and natural fuel.
Yeah, nuclear is the way to go
I agree, especially because when you think about it all the other ones are just roundabout ways of accessing nuclear fuel, With the most obvious being solar
Yeah, but how do you deal with nuclear waste?
@@vighneshchavan9226 very deep boreholes. Tens of kilometers deep and way below the ground water level. Maybe beyond the boilingpoint ( that in the crust that water wouldnt reach it ) of water so it cant trickle down.
Top it off with a few kilometers of cement and you are good to go.
@Kurt E. Clothier yeah, I kinda agree but where does the sunlight come from?
Ted ed never gets boring!
@Sloppy Potato who are you?
@Sloppy Potato I'm finding it hard to.
Lmao, this comment thread
I think it’s important to note that nuclear energy only takes up the amount of space it does for the amount of energy it produces because we only use uranium as nuclear fuel, which is highly inefficient compared to what other nuclear fuel options, like thorium has to offer - which uses only about 1/5 the land that our current uranium-235 reactors use
And in case you were wondering, the ONLY reason for why we don’t already use thorium to produce energy instead of uranium is because the radioactive byproduct that is made from the fission of thorium cannot be used to make nuclear bombs due to it being a more stable element
these animations are always so amazing
The nuclear argument, while logical, is limited because the general population and local govt freak out over it, making it almost impossible to roll it out on a national or even state level
Yeah, when someone mentions nuclear power they'll tend to think of Chernobly and such
Except for France.
Which is great for countries that can use that fear for their gain, china gets their uranium from australia which is scared of nuclear, australia exports all the energy they could be using overseas as uranium so china can use it, China gets clean energy, Australia ends up using fossil fuels and intermittent renewables.
Well, when something has the potential to turn an entire area into unusable wasteland, it's probably right to freak out about it. Sure, fossil fuel power kill probably more people on average per kilowatt, but they won't make an entire city lose its economic value... Completely.
@@EgnachHelton "turn and entire city into an unusable wasteland" only a single accident has ever done that and it was chernobyl. Your brain doesnt care how safe modern reactors are, it cares about what seems more scary. This is why you dont freak out over fossil fuels like coal or oil having the potential and actively launching dangerous particles straight into the air you breathe
Ted is recently uploading quite a few power supply related videos, and the timing is perfect when I'm studying Energy systems which deals with such topics!
Why didn't you factor in mining and recycling/disposal of renewable energy? Is the impact so small that it doesn't change the equation or did you just forget?
Neither did he mention hydropower?
@@klb9672Also he said 'up to' a certain power/area density. What's the average?
And is the space requirements of coal mines being offset by relatively low space footprint oil rigs? What drives the space requirements for fossil fuels and nuclear, exactly? You definitely don't need as many nuclear plants as coal plants to generate the electricity, so why is fossil fuel more space efficient?
@@kylejohnson6775 well ,after all it's an overview video,and he said will be a series so your questions shall be answered. Possibly!
The materials needed to build solar and wind are among the most common on earth and the "waste" of solar panels and wind turbines is the materials they are made of. Already today there are recycliong technologies that can save pritty much 100% of the materials to be reused, they just need to be scaled up as solar, wind and battery tech gorws in usage
@@lucadellasciucca967 They are common and recyclable, but it still takes energy and land for the recycling processing facilities, the mines to get the materials, transportation of the literal tons of material to the manufacturing facilities, and the finished products to their installation destination, and the end-of-life product to the recycling facility, and then the recycled raw material to the production facility again etc.
Also, not everything that can be recycled is being recycled, because some of the new raw material is so cheap they don't bother. And things like the epoxy component of the GFRP/CFRP in wind turbines can't be recycled
(glass fiber reinforced composite/carbon fiber reinforced composite, for anyone who doesn't know)
Let's just build a dyson sphere already so that we can access almost unlimited energy from the circumference of the sun
Yeah...How long will it take to make one, a century?
@@nusrataysha8500 perhaps once we start automated space mining, factories, robots, etc. Kinda like a von neumann probe style
Ok thanks I don't know much about the dyson sphere
@@nusrataysha8500 me too but basically it's like a harvester for solar energy since only a little percent of solar exposure energy gets to the earth. Although we could run with that amount today but if we want to colonize the whole solar system and expand further we might need the sun's energy.
Colonization of the solar system? We haven't even gone to mars yet.I definitely won't be alive to see it.But not gonna lie When I first heard about it I thought it was pretty good.Taking your word in to account unless something radical happens,It would take more then two centurys at minimum.So I am not looking forward to it.I am looking forward to landing on mars though
Nuclear is literally 3.5 deaths every 14 years in the most pessimistic approach, *how much safer do you want it to be sir?* Travelling wave reactors can use our current uranium waste and some msrs in development can use no need to be refined thorium which due to high temps can be used for heating, desalinization, etc. Want to see the us powered on renewables? look at california! I never quite found the whole idea of blackouts because theres not enough wind or sun as fun.
Tfw when one Nuclear power plant worker has .5 of the body dead and .5 alive
@@azertykeys9011 Id like to meet the half person ngl
Nuclear plants in India at least, have caused damage to people in other ways apart from death. Radiation poisoning/poisoning from nuclear waste/uranium mining may not *kill* a person, but it does cause a lot of mild to serious health issues to people. You can't measure everything by how many people they kill. Safety is of the utmost importance.
@@jananias2985 [citation needed]
Electrical engineer here. It does not seem that you are taking dispatchability into your cost and land-use calculations. If the sun doesn't shine and the wind doesn't blow at the right times (which happens very frequently), you must have backup generation or storage to maintain grid stability. Backup generation is, much of the time, a fossil fuel and storage is extremely expensive and/or very land intensive. In my opinion this puts nuclear clearly ahead of the rest.
Amazing video.. perspectives on this topic has to be discussed in government offices today and Ted does a great job of bringing these things to people's attention.
Dude this is beautifully animated and the music inspired by nature ♡
Climate change is alarming these days when natural catastrophe become harder and harder every year, therefore, this topic is definitely helpful for everyone, and me. I am really into this series because it helps me understand renewable sources of energy we are using and the problems along with it, not all the approaches are perfect, even wind and solar energy. I'm looking forward the next videos, love it 😊
What catastrophes are you talking about? Category 3+ hurricanes have been declining ever since the 1930s.
Ted-Ed informative and helpful as always. Thank you ❤️
Such a wonderful animation. Great job!
the problem with the radioactive waste can easily be solved if we use thorioum instead of uranium.
Or we just use the nuclear waste as fuel for reactor designs that aren't decades old.
@@vakusdrake3224 I am not sure if I understand,please give me some details.
@@videakias3000 look for Gen4 or rapid neutrons reactors. It's not thorium that enables less waste, it's a different design (more complicated and expensive)
@@videakias3000 The traveling wave reactors reactors Bill Gates is invested in would run on nuclear waste, be smaller, cheaper and more modular and *can't* melt down.
There's a lot of good videos on this on youtube, Gates had a TED talk on it a few years ago and there's been more progress since then.
@@vakusdrake3224 there are many videos?okay,what should I type to watch them?
Hi ted-ed
This series is nice to watch..
Will create awarness.
Awaiting for next video..
Thanks..🙏👍
Hey! I'm from Brazil, and I'd love if you could make a video about our local folklore, like Curupira, the headless mule and boitatá. There are lots of stories to choose from, and I personally love all of them!
Hydroelectricity is great. Increased research into fusion would also be a good idea.
I love the animations, music, and everything else :)
Thanks for my continuing education on some fascinating topics. I've learned more from Ted and Ed and the Weird History channels than I've ever learned in school. And my education has been considerable. ❤ you guys
Great video, visualisation really helps in understanding the sheer volume of resources required
I love how Ted-Ed gives us good and clear information in a short period of time. 🙏
You didn't mention tidal or hydroelectric power. Unlike most other renewables, they're fairly reliable - things like wind and solar depend on the weather, and it's not always going to be windy or sunny, but the tide's always going to move in and out!
Very interesting. Thanks, TED-Ed!
Such a great video! :D I think its important with mixed use, like solar on roofs, so that it uses the space thats already there :)
i love the music used recently!!
I am a Japanese audience.
This presentation is very interest!
I eager to watch this movie every day and study English by watching it !
英語むずかしい😅
Dan Dan Kokoro Hikareteku
頑張ってね〜
Excellent! Love the way you deliver the information!
Nice animation, as always!
I hate how Ted Ed teaches me more than school does
I love how Ted ed teaches me even more.
i love the music used in this video
i always do love a good ted-ed video
as an electrical engineering student, i really appreciate videos like this!!!
Nuclear energy is the solution we are too cowardice to accept.
If you are willing to spend money on safety and waste disposal, yes. of course, nuclear fusion would eliminate these concerns. renewables and hydro power have the advantage that they arent expensive and can be used almost everywhere to some extent, especially in places were it isnt cost effective to build a big power plant.
@Clanky Aura I think thats what he was saying "ofcourse, nuclear fusion would eliminate these concerns."
THORIUMMMMMMM
Battery tech is the solution
This video was a perfect summary of the fourth chapter of "How To Avoid A Climate Disaster"
you got all covered
great job TED Ed
I am halfway through the book "How To Avoid A Climate Disaster" by Bill Gates
this book really changed the way I pursue climate change (I was thinking..just stop factories and we are good.. but I was wrong)... it worth reading at least once. and I am sure that.. the book will change your way of seeing climate change too :)
As always, nice and informative video, keep it up.
Does the calculation take into account 1) mines for coal 2) underground waste storage for nuclear? 3) batteries for solar/wind?
It does include the everything but the batteries
If he includes what he says about the requirements in the beginning in his calcalations.
I really like how finally one of the best CZcams channel is focusing on major issues good luck for the future guys
the greedy one always trying to find an efficient way to produce energy. The wise one doing it also with consumption reduction...
Whoever made this animation needs a raise asap
Beautiful animation and really professional narration.
Finally!! I'm this early on a ted-ed video 😌
If given the choice I'd rather have a nuclear power plant built in my city over a fossil fuel plant. It will give me cancer if it malfunctions but the latter wouldn't need to malfunction to give me cancer.
The diffrence is in the technology used to convert energy to electricity. Solar, wind, fossil fuels are like, all set, not much else to develope mate. But nuclear, it can grow, and it is growing, to the point I'd say it's not even dangerous anymore. I'm not a scientist or anything, but I heard they found thorium which is a lot safer than uranium, hope we'll see more actual clean and accesible electricity in the future.
True, also if nuclear waste is properly disposed of, at least my drinking water won't kill me or the air.
@@gyrozeppeli00 Yeah thorium (from sea salt) is super interesting! Its unfortunate that the science to produce electricity with it isnt available yet
@@gyrozeppeli00 I'd say solar power also has room to grow. Right now it can only "capture" a small amount of the actual energy of the sun, and although it's a pretty cheap and renewable resource, we need a lot of them in order to make a significant amount of energy. Hopefully we can change that as scientists develop more efficient ways of capturing the sun's power though.
I have two questions:
1. In the area that which technology need to produce 10 watts, was considered all the areas related to the system (like nuclear waste material and coal storage areas) or just the power plant itself?
2. If nuclear and coal are basic the same principle (boiling water), why not invest in geothermic power plants technologies?
(Sorry in advance for grammar mistakes)
Was studying Energy Sources for physics when this came up; pretty cool.
Lucky you to get just what you need at the right time. Great job on the study. Here's for a successful future
@@stevenlsantoso3288 Lol. Much appreciated, man.
As the great Thomas Edison once said “Pass the salt please”
Inspiring 😔
This was so deep 😔😔😔
What it meant?
@@anonymousdude2550 pass the salt means pass energy around i guess maybe his referring to passing around the energy all around the usa
@@samuraiboi2735 ohh ok thanks
I'm really loving these videos about sustainable energy and development ...keep going TED 👍
The old narrator hasnt been heard in a while🤔.... but still great work keep up the good work!🙂
This channel so good to learn from. : )
*"The real wealth of the Nation lies in the resources of the earth"* --Rachel Carson
We know it but we don't realize it sometimes
Most of the times
Where are you from
Or chose to ignore said fact...
@@shobhnasharma3602 india ofcource why?
@@harshvardhan4766 oh hii
“Necessity is the mother of invention.”
― Plato
Good video. Really loved it
Great video! ❤️
And that's why it's imperative to evaluate things from all sides. TBH the first two minutes are a good argument for fossil fuels supporters.
Wait 'til you get into carbon capture tech... many countries have lots of coal resources that by greens' ideas would be laid to rest while becoming reliant on others for power. The politics of that is... stinky at best.
An almost honest conversation. Where's the part about needing batteries in order for solar/wind to replace nuclear/fossil fuels?
or fossil gas. But yes we need to talk about backup :)
It’s slightly mentioned in the end that those are the advancements needed from those. Plus it’s a mini series so hopefully more of that is talked about in a future part
They talk a lot more about batteries in their battery video in this series. I think they covered batteries extensively there. Might be a future video linking batteries and renewable energies tightly.
why this video is soooo soothing :,D
Amazing as always ❤️
Answer: Everyone in a city puts Tesla solar panels on their house. Problem solved, you're welcome.
Not everyone lives in a house. Apartments have hundreds of people who need electricity but only a large house or 3's worth of roof. And they need electricity at night too, so you need space to build all the batteries or hydrogen storage tanks or whatever it is you use to store the solar power
Wow ...the frog again.. 🐸
We need Tidal and Hydroelectric in there too!
Thank you so much!
What about hydroelectric power?
I am storing energy released by dead animals in my phone 📱 with the help of charger
Oh u r right I am just charging my phone
“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.”
― Arthur C. Clarke
That doesn't apply here at ALL. why id you post this here? Just s random quote.
You didn't mention the space and resources consumed by the batteries that renewables require, so I assume you didn't account for it. Another thing people too often ignore is the waste generated by retired renewable power stations.
I read Solar requires 350x-450x more land than natural gas while Wind is about 450x- 550x more land than nuclear. Also Solar requires 16x more material in the form of cement, steal and glass than Nuclear, it also produces far more waste in the form of E-waste which is toxic stuff that is not necessarily fully contained unlike nuclear and speaking on the new breeder reactors very little waste produced. Not to mention the rare minerals required for wind and some components of solar
I hate how people like you are like "oh yeah solar and wind power systems can't be sustainable because they need raw resources unlike nuclear power plants that can just be summoned from the air". Its not the amount of concrete or land use that's paramount here, but rather the carbon dioxide emissions and costs related to these power sources, with wind and solar having similar emissions but significantly lower costs.
This guy is the same guy who voiced the demon of reason
That's what I was thinking!
It's kind of weird that you do not include mines also for solar panels and wind turbines. We do not build them with air. Also, please, take into account that we will need backup associated with intermittent sources of energy (with the mines, factories to build this backup).
I think, it is required to think in term of system (a system based on renew and batteries or a system based on fossils) to make good comparisons.
That all for the precisions I would have loved to see. Thanks very much for your videos that are brillant in general :)
Good as always u never make me down man love your vids
Great video!
Remember when ted ed sweared
You guys asking it here's the source : czcams.com/video/TNokBgtSUvQ/video.html
He swears at 0:17 ~ 0:18
WHAT WHEN
I know nothing of such an event. Send evidence.
we need to take into consideration that renewable energy can also affect the world because solar power can absorb to much heat if to many are built and wind turbines can reduce winds causing weather changes and hydroelectricity can destroy certain environments
Anyone please help me the last part: ... of cement -> ... part, I can't listen that part. Thank you.
As someone from The Bahamas, I love how he used Grand Bahama as a reference!
The emphasis on safety in the case of nuclear can be very misleading. Nuclear power is probably THE safest and most efficient in the long run....just a handful of big incidents caused by a very irresponsible few have spoiled it's image.
Which 'irresponsible few' should we blame for Fukushima Daiichi? If it's top-level regulators and government officials, how can we ever trust it won't happen again?
@@jofisher8466 If a 9.0 magnitude earthquake followed by a 130ft tsunami hits your shore, a reactor meltdown would be the least of your concerns. The seawater literally swept over the building and flooded the reactor if the earthquake wasnt enough, and despite that there was a grand total of 1 death and 20 injuries associated with the incident
THE RICH STAY RICH BY SPENDING LIKE THE POOR AND INVESTING WITHOUT STOPPING THEN THE POOR STAY POOR BY SPENDING LIKE THE RICH YET NOT INVESTING LIKE THE RICH.
Thanks for introducting me to Mr Jackson Williams.
My first investment with Mr Jackson Williams gave me profit of over $44,000 Us dollars
Natural, there’s a lot of math involved in cryto trading,
but this is often presented in forms of daunting technical charts, indicators, patterns.
Trading systems allow you to limit the factor of emotional influence on decision-making,
The frog is now a recurring character in the TedEd universe
Informational
Alright this is the third time I see that frog. And now I propose two options for TED-ED.
Either you make it the official mascot.
Or the community will make it a meme.
Choose wisely!!!
The space problem for solar cells can be partially solved if you increase the efficiency, today's cells turn 20% of the solar energy into electricity. There are cells that reach up to 40%, but they are not cheap.
By the way, are we going to build the mini reactors that have been talked about for so many years?
What about covering the great sahara ( the great desert ) with solar panels ?
I mean it’s literally a desert and it has no use and we can just turn it into something useful and a power source
The best video in a very long time
Can i request for a story pls... Like a folk tale or even horror......every person in ur channel has a nice voice for story telling... So one story pls
2:29 - the cow's doing some tractor tipping!
how do you have time to come up with these ideas and animate these videos, i wonder how far in advance you make these videos
A Lot of Space for Solar is the Roofs of Buildings they already exist
Yes.