Greatest superpower of solar + batteries is that it allows countries to lower their generating capacity, because of the way energy is used over a typical day. A lot during the day. A little bit during the night. With traditional generating capacity a lot of it is just for peak use. So basically when people get home and cook food, etc. Solar + Batteries is simply perfect together. And not just can solar + battery cater for all usage scenarios with less total generating capacity, but solar and battery can be used AT HOME. Freeing national grids of even more peak demand.
Hello Mr Naam, It would be fantastic if your conference could be subtitled in other langages. I am french and here the nuclear lobby has worked so well that so many people do not have the keys to understand the need in solar systems or wind systems. Things will be far too long to change over here. Could you manage to get this conference subtitled in french please? Thank you a lot for your work.
I do my calcs on the cost per kWh of solar power amortized over 35 years (including solar degradation), a common industry product life number which brings the cost down under $0.04/kWh (under $0.03 with incentives in most places) for residential scale, installed solar.
Thanks putting up this presentation. Razem delivers a good talk on the matter with polish and ease. On reflection I wish he'd spoken about the various means of storing energy aside from chemical batteries. I think I caught a glimpse of air pressure on a graph but nothing like it was discussed. My understanding is that compressed air is potentially cheaper and pumped hydro dams are already much cheaper. Anyway, I thought this was well thought out and well delivered.
we won't be towing a bath filled with water or a pressurized air cylinder behind our cars to power them, so my best guess stays with energy storage in batteries as the main focal point. just what we do with that stored energy when that car is parked at our driveway/garage or our work?
Is it efficient distributing solar power from South Africa to another country with fewer kilowatt hours per square meter, would it lose too much energy along the way?
I'd love to see and electron and synthetic hydrocarbon economy. Excess power, especially when it's under 1c/kWh, could be used to generate liquid fuels. Methanol for example, could be used in fuel cells to generate power and heat, shifting summer excess energy to winter need.
Kouki Nope, though batteries would be a very important part of the electron economy. Methanol is for long-term and infinitely scalable every storage. Eventually even the most remote areas will run microgrids, and depending on the climate, they may benefit most from a ready supply of methanol. Engineering a methanol production device designed to work in the 1-10kW range would permit home generation of this liquid energy. With essentially unlimited energy on tap, the bottleneck may shift to, in say the example of ships or international airliners, the cost or weight of energy storage. Methanol could fill that gap until batteries are high enough in energy density and low enough in cost.
I tend to agree. Do not forget straight up methane synthesizing or ammonia. But at present is is at least 2.5x more expensive as just solar (due to the conversion steps making it 40% efficient). Also methanol (like ammonia) is toxic.
For sure. It would only make sense when the energy is almost free, and we could store and transport the methanol the way we do other toxic substances today. Perhaps there's another chemical conversion -- adding inefficiency, but that doesn't matter -- that can covert the synthetic fuels into something less toxic, even something that could be consumed. It's a silly thought, but life-sustaining 'fuels' derived from renewable energy, skipping the whole plant-stage, would be kinda cool.
Wikus Van De Merwe But you're still BURNING methanol. We need to use the heat energy from the sun as well as the light component rather than burning any fuel. We should also consider reducing the energy needed and insulate against cold or heat as required.
IF the USA doesn't change it's stance it WILL be left behind. Remember, it's not just about electrical power, it's about POLITICAL power. If Africa has cheap (virtually free) power, it can increase manufacturing, service and agriculture at a similar rate. With that comes power. Same for India, same for every country in the sun belt.
It’s excellent what you say I love it. It’s a very important information, that you say, that means, no one can stop the changeover to sustainability. That means for me -> Forget about climate change, because the cost of alternative energy will do it, because it drops dramatically so that you must pay more for dirty, fossil energy then for the new modern clean energy. Then no one will pay more for dirty fossil, if he can have cheaper and clean energy. Or in other words, who will buy a car, that is not “state of the art”? Maybe a Museum will have it, or Jay Leno’s garage. Now, you see, the climate change will drop to lower level automatically, also for the “naysayers” (also Trump will have an electric car, American made).
Watch on utube, Solarized walk assist device - camper build Also, Solarized walk assist device Two styles of Solarized transportation. They can also supply home power etc.
Does it make sense to make an argument against Nuclear based on Price over budget? Isn't that just about proper planning and control? I understand the argument when placed in a South African environment, due to high corruption and all the risk it carries, but overall I do not think it is a very sound argument. I do believe that renewable energies are a good way for the future, to cover our current energy needs, but to actually carry on as a civilization we will need a LOT more power than this, which can only be brought by nuclear fusion realistically. Whilst this might not seem like an issue in the short run, having access to virtually unlimited energy would really allow us to go a step further in our development.
I wonder how many times this has to fail before people wake up. Never mind the answer is always in the the next rainbows and unicorns development , not demonstrable today, but coming real soon/imminent/just over the horizon. Energyweinde Lures KO!?
I think he nails it on the head in his conclusion 33:45 (czcams.com/video/fwSkQa1tNmE/video.html) I'm all up for renewables , but I feel like with more R & D in Nuclear both forms of energy could more than meets future energy needs.
modern strength storage technology could be very costly, so electricity needs to be generated while people need it. solar is value aggressive, solar + garage is not (but), and we can't manage while the solar panels produce strength.
It is a bit surprising that there was not a single reference to Generation IV (specially Molten Salt Technology) Nuclear... And what about the exponential growth of electricity demand that would be normal to come from the «postulated» massive switch from internal combustion engines in cars (and trucks...) to all electric engines...
Hmmm our German gouvernment decided to give everybody who builds a solar panel on his house gets x thousand euros for free. Maybe a solution for south-africa too? I mean a state gets the cheapes and biggest amount of credit. These will be payed back after an economic growth. And the customer takes a small amount of credit to start building it on his house. I guess every bank will finance this. It will be a good long term investment for them.
The rosy outlook for 100% renewable energy needs a reality check. Naam fails to consider the environmental cost to produce silicon for solar panels. For example, read www.adbusters.org/article/revolution-or-collapse/. There is also simple arithmetic which Naam ignores, when one considers the amount of rare materials to chemically synthesize the panels. Similar arguments apply to preparation of wind turbines in quantity to meet world needs. These needs are independent of the facts that neither power source can meet the need 24/7.
@@metaphorpritam Wind turbines are the complete embodiment of fossil fuels, without fossil fuel there would not be a single wind turbine. See vaclavsmil.com/wp-content/uploads/15.WINDTURBINE.pdf
The energy revolution is happening but why not embrace revolutionary technology that supersedes wind, solar etc and does not have their respective environmental issues. I came across a game changing technology by an energy company called H2IL that could be the ultimate energy and hydrogen supply. It has the wow factor.
Ramez Naam mentions the 2.42 cents/Kwh generated in Dubai as the cheapest price of electrical energy "using any technology" at (10:46). But isn't hydroelectric power considerably cheaper? I've found a reference to 0.85 cents/Kwh: www.wvic.com/content/facts_about_hydropower.cfm This apparent discrepancy does affect the presenter's credibility.
Energy is going to get cheaper and cheaper as Renewable Energy Disrupts. A lot more will change, than you think. (i.e.. you probably already bought your last car).
Hey dude, just so that you know... Sun is barely over the horizon for some 4-5 hours per day in the winter. Except in the north of the country, where it is below the horizon for about two months straight. Of course, it is exactly the opposite in the summer, but we'd like the energy most when it is dark.. and cold!
I am against all subsidies. But if the market wanted alternative energy like it claims it does, there would be no need for subsidies. Government is pushing for this technology, not to save the world, but to further plunder your wallets.
Ticket Attorney If you Really took notice of the video you would know that at one point he did, via the graph, remove the subsidies and Renewables were still cheaper
Well fossil fuels have historically benefited relatively few people in many places around the world. Oil and natural gas may yet remain important chemical feed stocks. So I would push back the date at which it becomes economically nonviable just due to that. I do not think countries which currently rely on fossil fuels should oppose clean energy. I think they should retool towards knowledge and information economies.
My friend in Germany (wind, solar, coal) is paying over 100€ per month for electricity. In Slovenia (hydro, nuclear, coal) I pay about 40€. Fuck renewables.
Yeah.. fuck this precious, blue, beautiful planet that has given us life and consciousness, even though there is no way for any of us to reach a similar place in the universe, indefinitely as far as we know. What an amazing comment.
If you put pros and cons of wind and solar on the balance sheet, you 'll come to the conclusion that it's simply not worth it. If we really care about the planet we would reforest all the deserts and stop cutting down trees, ban free range pastry. Burning fossil fuels has objectively very small impact on global climate - it's only an excuse for environmental taxes.
The singularityU doesnt take into account that sustainability and efficiency are a direct threat to the market system. That is why we have planned obsolescence and waste in all design. Wake up to this common knowledge and factor it into your discussion.
Planned obsolescence is not universally applicable to every industry sector. Sure, it is definitely widely used, but it is not an assumed factor in every market.
Ryan Turner what u say does not address fact that the current market system requires endless waste and inefficiency for maximizing profits. We are nothing but consumers to this system. Without waste and endless consumption the system fails and everything falls apart. If u induce efficiency or sustainability in any design, it threatens our current market system. We have a market system that allows patents on life, seed, efficiency, and even sustainability, these patents exist to maximize profits. If u try to base anything off sustainability and efficiency, or even call it free or open source, it is not even allowed to flourish in this market system. Why do u think GM scrapped the electric car in 2001? It was called the EVOne and they realized it would kill thier profits. Why do u think we continue to sell bottle water for more than gasoline In plastic bottles? If it is insane to do why do we do it? Why does this market ststem allow monopolies like verizon, att, monsantos, ect.... Why does this market system push for globalization and not localization? If it is unsustainable and leading to our slow demise then why? Because the market system rewards only wasteful, inefficient unsustainable design with endless profits and control. Why do we have corporations destroying the amazon rainforest? Those are the lungs of our planet, our market system encourages and allows this to happen not us. Any sane intelligent civilization would not destroy its planets lungs. The market system then tells u to change if u want sustainability and efficiency lol, u to recycle more and eat less meat, have less.kids, like that will fix our ecosystem long term lol. How bout we demand corporations do the right thing? Oww yeah because asking corporations to do that is an insane thought in our market system. Why do u think corporations buy off and own our governments?Our entire market system is insane and obsolete, if u continue to defend insanity then dont be surprised when all life systems die off in the future. Dont act like we failed cause we didn't join the singularityU lol. We failed because we failed to understand the insanity the market system we submit to really is. Every technology this guy is saying is available now but cannot happen cause corporations can't figure out how to maximize profits and control if they allow the world to have these things. The future is open source, the future that includes all life is efficient and sustainable in design. Systems of equilibrium. I call for an open source renewable revolution. If patents are in the way of this happening then that is what singularityU should be discussing. There is no future, no change today, we are in the year 2017 and there is a push for clean coal and pipelines, Thoughts? Of course we cant afford this change, we can only afford endless wars. Simply put, a viable future is not profitable, and thus a contradiction to the current market system. We need to evolve now, this is the first time in known human history that we have a world wide communication network, amd tech that can liberate humanity. Agaig, the only thing stopping us from evolving into a stage one civilization is the current market system. Period
Ryan Turner also the entire preface to the singularityU is profiting on the transition to true liberation. To me that is insane, to a guy who hangs out with Silicon Valley executives, this idea sounds like a big pussy waiting to get fucked. Exploiting humanity for monopolies will not be a viable future. It will be more of the same.
mads max - I agree that our current system encourages waste and exploitation. You won't find a friend of the status quo in me. I simply wanted to point out that planned obsolescence is not a product development effort that is practiced in 100% of all market products. Of course sustainable development and manufacturing should be the goal, but it isn't. Greed and fear are powerful motivators, probably more so than survival. It's totally fucked, but that's our reality. Hopefully our generation can change that, but who knows.
Ryan Turner fair enough..... But the fact that planned obsolescence is in econ 101, still is one of many issues the singularityU fails to indulge. I am saying we could base just about everything on public block chains, and make everything open source now. It seems the actual focus is always based around our current economics as the ultimate mediation. Creating in the current market structure is the ultimate contradiction to what a sustainable future can be. It is all about exploitation, control, war And profits. With public block chains no monopolies, private institutions, banking cartels, fiat currency, federal reserve, boarders, interest rates, governments, private media, or militaries exist. The real problem is and always was certain greedy family cartels that own and created all of these current institutions, monopolies, banking cartels, governments, ect.... If the singularityU u rolls with these types of cronies, and also creates in the subscribed privatized institutions, then i say the singularityU is full of shit and just wants to aid in the development of new forms of control over the masses, before people wake the fuck up and demand what i am talking about. The singularityU promotes exploitation of humanity to create for free, so the world can be controlled by the same few insane greedy physcopath families. Selling u the hopes to become the next billionaire fuck wad. People want to do the right thing for the sake of it, it is hard for Silicon Valley wanks not to exploit that while snagging up all the rights to anything innovated. Yeah cool future bro. Sounds like more of the same, with a different flavor. Our collective hypnosis to who and what rules us, will lead us to a future of hunger games, not Star Trek.
Great lecture... however, solar energy uses light lux and not sun heat (C or F)... 20 C is the ideal temperature for a solar cell to produce electricity... that is why solar will work better in Germany than more "hotter" places...
Yes but whilst it might work at "optimal" more often, you get a lot less solar exposure in Germany than you get in Dubai for example, which more than compensates for operating in non-optimal range of temperatures. (assuming that what you said is actually correct, did not bother checking, if it is written in the youtube comments it must be true)
What about 'solar' that heats up salt and then uses heat to produce electricity though turbines? This also resolves the power production through the night as the salt retains the heat.
HAT HAT The infographic for average sun in South Africa Vs. Germany was measuring kilawatt hours per square meter. This is the unit for irradiance, not temperature. I.E. Africa experiences more power from the sun than Germany does. Am I wrong?
Going to get cheaper? No frackin way. As you scale up solar or wind production, you will run up against resource limits, and the price will skyrocket. We simply don't have the natural resources to make a completely new renewable grid. Not enough cobalt, copper, lead, rare earths, and dozens of other minerals.
We get hurricane force winds pretty much every winter here on the west coast. It's a shame we can't figure out how to harness and store the energy. I suppose you could use the wind to lift a huge weight in order to rig a transmission of sorts for generating electrons on demand. If you don't need energy, then stop the weight.
LCOE do not cover costs associated with grid regulation, esspecialy costs of backup power generation from other (natural gas) plants when wind and solar does not generate.
its not the cheapest, its simply wrong. The cheapest source of power is water power, from dams and such the price difference is so big there really is no comparison between the two. not only is water power cheaper its also lets you produce power at night AND if you have excess power coming inn you can use the water reserves as power banks and pump water in to the reserves.
Lord RW And the cost of the infrastructure building reservoirs? Also, take a look at pictures of the reservoirs in California and Vegas where the droughts mean is almost no water left.
And hydro-power is more than welcome in this equation. We're shooting for a polyglot power model where the inputs for the grid could come from solar, wind, hydro, or whatever makes sense for the location and its available natural resources.
Another issue no one talks about is overpopulation... Well...we already hv 7.5 billion ppl on the planet! most scientists agree ~2 billion is the carrying cap of humans... with respect to all other sentient beings. We are way over carrying capacity.... besides latest ipcc report says we only hv 10 yrs to stop runaway climate chaos! Meaning if we all dont change our lifestyles everyones kids are fkd! You know I already decided Not to hv kids! Having one kid is a lifetime of carbon emissions! And if your kids have kids that multiple generations... So 2 billion is a cap considering all earths species, with regard to habitat and space needed for survival. For example wolves need about 100acres of land each, for hunting/survival. On avg they generally run 20-35miles per day!! And thats just one animal... with habitat destruction, human sprawl and hunting/trapping, animals have less and less areas to survive. Thats why most are going extinct today. Very last white male rhino died last yr! Many shark species are considered extinct today cuz of shark fin soup fishing. N America used to hv about 60million buffalo... now we have like 31,000. We shot them all to destroy native americans' main food source! There are pics of stacked piles of buffalo bones 2 stories high... humans destroy everything!!! Everything! Not even exaggerating! N america used to look like yellowstone nat park.... all of it!! Moose, big horn sheep, elk, deer, wolves, buffalo, bald eagles, all kinds of hawks, bears everywhere, mtn lions, honey badgers, river otters, wolverines, etc etc. Why do u think thousands of ppl travel to yellowstone every yr. Cuz thats one of the last few places u can see animals living in the wild and not in a fuking tiny cage at the zoo!!! 7.5 billion humans on the planet! 7.5billion... estimated less than 10k chimpanzees!! Seriously we dont need any more human babies... Watch "Sir David Attenborough on Overpopulation" on CZcams czcams.com/video/JRPmLWYbUqA/video.html
I am not sure why he keeps referring to South Africa. The facts are that while we are well placed for renewables, our government had turned away and has sold their soul to the Russians and nuclear. Bribes are bigger than the power of the voters or logic
Cities Skylines getting in real life? And what about the components required for solar panel manufacturing? Minerals still being mined by slave children in Africa and other forgotten parts of the world? Not so "clean" energy as one would expect.
At around 18 minutes did he just recommend a nuclear reactor in Japan? You mean where the earthquake and tsunami absolutely screwed their nuclear reactor?
Very smooth salesman for wind/solar, is Mr. Naam! But, as for most salesmen, it's what he leaves out, or craftily slips quickly by, that exposes his misdirection & lack of energy knowledge. For instance, his slide on "Wind Power Cost" is impressive, but hides the flat portion at the end and fails to note that nuclear power has long been cheaper, remains so, and has far higher reliability and far lower environmental impacts. A 'good' salesman never mentions better competition. ;] Naam displays his lack of engineering/science knowledge as well in his wind slide claiming "The technology Keeps Getting Better". If he were giving accurate evaluation of wind, he'd know about things like the "Betz Limit" and the massive resource consumption & pollution from wind-power deployments. And, he'd not hide the fact that the most common wind outputs (darker blue) are getting very little better, simply because of fundamental scientific facts, like wind being subject to climate and climate change as well as low conversion efficiency, as expressed partly by the Betz Limit for prop-generators. For comparison, nuclear power operates fully about 90% of every year, even through hurricanes, polar vortices, ettc. Wind is barely delivering 20% of the power its machinery is built for, thus wasting about 80% of its materials and production, as Germany has already demonstrated and this simple simulation shows: czcams.com/video/zc7rRPrA7rg/video.html In other words, the slides Naan moves quickest through are the most damaging to his sales effort. His solar slides similarly misrepresent science & engineering facts -- the most humorous is the attempt to display how much solar energy is available in Calif. -- a bit more than 1/2 each day, apparently regardless of season. and his attempt to mislead by suggesting wind in Calif. compensates for darkness, etc. -- all simply displaying ignorance of how Calif. 'renewables' actually work, and forgetting their dependence on fracking, leaking & burning gas for backing them up most of the time every day. If anyone wants to see the graphic & data facts for Calif. 'renewables' that can't be included here, examine section 2.2 of sworn testimony from real scientists/engineers here: www.cgnp.org/CGNP_Direct_Testimony_01-27-17.pdf But, apart from Naam's willing misdirections, why is Singularity U. so easy to fool? The planet does not benefit from selling. It benefits from thinking. If we don't attend to facts our descendants will have every right to spit on our graves, if those can be found. -- Dr. A. Cannara 650 400 3071
Nuclear power stations are insured by the tax payer for zero premium. In Germany a study showed that if Nuclear power stations had to get their own insurance from the private sector the price of electriy would go from maybe 25cents a KWH to $3.34 a KWH. Fukashima cost 200 to 250 Billion dollars, the Tepco power company didn't pay for that. Nuclear is only cheap because of a MASSIVE hidden subsidy.
many years after the disaster I visited Chernobyl myself. if such a thing would happen in mid Florida, Disney World would not be safe for people for hundreds of years...
Socrates was right in this case. Making judgements about the intentions and character of another person says more about the person judging rather than the one judged. Calling an Angellist Investor a smooth salesman.By such standards any investor and trader at Wall Street must appear like the devil himself. Of course he may have overlooked something because of some inherent evolutionary inherited bias, extant in our brain but I do perceive a genuine interest on his part for his subject. And if that is the case only a brain damaged person would fail to perceive that we are facing a serious problem. The threat is felt as real if you really digested the information it is inevitable that your response though not entirely bereft of personal goals will be that of a concerned citizen. He does seem to have digested the facts and as such I am not inclined to see him as a mere salesman. Perhaps that only shows my naiveness in the Socratian sense, especially in this age of distrust in any humanistic ideologies and altruism and the Belief in selfish genomes!
He never talks about war or the effect of war on energy production or production of energy in full scale war ! Portability hidding energy and other military issues ! Peace energy solar and wind is nice but war is !
Drino Man what would you propose to replace them? These ships carry all of the world's goods around to be sold. Now you can say "switch to local stuff" but that won't exactly work. A lot of the resources required for technology comes from all over the world. All of those minerals and other natural resources that we use to create things are not everywhere. So if you remove these huge ships, what will replace them?
Not literally, just saying we need to upgrade ancient vehicles. There are solid-state battery tech that could replace the large amount of energy that these sort of ships/planes would need. I'm going to predict that once solid state lithium batteries get cheap enough, with 3X the storage density as lithium fully electric shipping container ship and jets will be possible! Combined with more energy efficient panels or maybe a combination of fiberglass/solar panel material that we can wrap them in, could give us the edge to make flight and ocean travel via electric propulsion more sustainable.
"As of 2010 there were more than one billion motor vehicles in use in the world excluding off-road vehicles and heavy construction equipment." - Wikipedia "1.2 Billion Vehicles On World's Roads Now, 2 Billion By 2035" - Green Car Reports "1.28 billion cars on the road in 2015" - OICA (Organisation Internationale des Constructeurs d’Automobiles, in English: International Organization of Motor Vehicle Manufacturers) Most of those cars do not contribute directly to worldwide economies, all of the oil tankers and shipping ships do. Replacing fuel burning cars with electric and using renewable energy to charge them would be more useful than hobbling the economies of nearly every country on the planet.
what u say does not address fact that the current market system requires endless waste and inefficiency for maximizing profits. We are nothing but consumers to this system. Without waste and endless consumption the system fails and everything falls apart. If u induce efficiency or sustainability in any design, it threatens our current market system. We have a market system that allows patents on life, seed, efficiency, and even sustainability, these patents exist to maximize profits. If u try to base anything off sustainability and efficiency, or even call it free or open source, it is not even allowed to flourish in this market system. Why do u think GM scrapped the electric car in 2001? It was called the EVOne and they realized it would kill thier profits. Why do u think we continue to sell bottle water for more than gasoline In plastic bottles? If it is insane to do why do we do it? Why does this market ststem allow monopolies like verizon, att, monsantos, ect.... Why does this market system push for globalization and not localization? If it is unsustainable and leading to our slow demise then why? Because the market system rewards only wasteful, inefficient unsustainable design with endless profits and control. Why do we have corporations destroying the amazon rainforest? Those are the lungs of our planet, our market system encourages and allows this to happen not us. Any sane intelligent civilization would not destroy its planets lungs. The market system then tells u to change if u want sustainability and efficiency lol, u to recycle more and eat less meat, have less.kids, like that will fix our ecosystem long term lol. How bout we demand corporations do the right thing? Oww yeah because asking corporations to do that is an insane thought in our market system. Why do u think corporations buy off and own our governments?Our entire market system is insane and obsolete, if u continue to defend insanity then dont be surprised when all life systems die off in the future. Dont act like we failed cause we didn't join the singularityU lol. We failed because we failed to understand the insanity the market system we submit to really is. Every technology this guy is saying is available now but cannot happen cause corporations can't figure out how to maximize profits and control if they allow the world to have these things. The future is open source, the future that includes all life is efficient and sustainable in design. Systems of equilibrium. I call for an open source renewable revolution. If patents are in the way of this happening then that is what singularityU should be discussing. There is no future, no change today, we are in the year 2017 and there is a push for clean coal and pipelines, Thoughts? Of course we cant afford this change, we can only afford endless wars. Simply put, a viable future is not profitable, and thus a contradiction to the current market system. We need to evolve now, this is the first time in known human history that we have a world wide communication network, amd tech that can liberate humanity. Agaig, the only thing stopping us from evolving into a stage one civilization is the current market system. Period
Nuclear generated energy could be the way forward. Both wind and solar devastate the natural environment. As for cost per kW: Germany pays 50% more (in 2019) for its electricity since introducing 'green energy' than its neighbour France (which went the nuclear route) . India is building 30+ Thorium nuclear reactors over the next several years,
15:10: That's absolute bullshit: SA has 235 TWh power production, i.e. 27'000 MW demand. Even in the best case 4 times more PV peak power, i.e. 100 GW, would need to be installed just to compensate day and night.
Look into desalination. It's not thin air, but you can indeed pull water out of the ocean. This is an energy intensive process, so you will need cheap electricity. The lack of water is an energy problem. And most of Africa is not lacking water, only the arid north, the Sahel, and the horn region.
Was going to say the same thing. And countries like Israel have and are continuing to scale desalination in unprecedented ways (www.scientificamerican.com/article/israel-proves-the-desalination-era-is-here/). Also, many fossil fuel resources use a lot of water for cooling purposes (www.ucsusa.org/clean-energy/energy-water-use#.Wkpv91Q-e2s). So, in essence, cheap wind and solar can both reduce water use and drive innovative practices to get more water from salty oceans. Win win!
actualy you can. the average air conditioner produces about 3/4 of a gallon of water per hour of operation. cool air and water wi win. of course i would not drink it unless treated/filtered.
In regards to peak demand for petroleum, I think that 2030 is overly optimistic because it will take decades to build out the electric vehicle fleet, but these futurist types get a pass. Electric vehicles aren’t free right now either, and that is part of my rationale as well. The other reason to be skeptical is because of the risk that climate change poses to this plan, if the predictions are correct the virtuous cycles of the energy disruption could be disrupted by the climate scramble that humans may find themselves in.
Am I the only one who is disgusted whenever someone you needs to do this while in charge of a company that if we did it would make them rich? I am not saying I think clean free-ish energy is bad, I think the world needs it, but when some asshole on stage is telling groups of people I feel dissociated like watching any corporate presentation it is all about money, it's not about morality, it's not about common niceness and making the world a better place. Never look at it if it is best for everyone but look at it as who stands to gain the most out of this. Also is it even good for the planet to connect the whole world with light? We used to be able to see the cosmos before light pollution. Sorry but I can't stand when I feel like someone is trying to scam me and this motherfucker gives off that vibe. Before anyone assumes my political alignment I have given up on politics and deciding how to rule over people, I hate Bernie, I hate Trump, and I hate the rest of them.
Seriously!? Who gives a shit why it's happening as long as it's happening? Sounds like you have a problem with people making money off this, who cares? That is the only way it is going to happen. Try not to cut your nose off to spite your face. I would love to invest in this, and plan to, for both ecological, moral, and financial reasons. I drive an electric car because of the brutality of oil companies and global warming. Similar reasons I went vegan. Im so sick of whiny faux activists who seem fearful of their cause becoming popular. That is what we want! If it prevents you from feeling special and elitist so be it!
I never said I was intelligent, I was just giving my 2 cents on the matter, also I would never insult your intelligence on a matter as I find it crude, best to debunk an argument than to insult a person. Also you may be right, I just want to advocate don't blindly trust people, even those who seem to be looking out for the best for everyone, even me. I was relatively angry at the time when I wrote my original comment but I still stand by it, anyone in power will most likely abuse said power.
Sorry but that logic is not sound, if they sacrifice employees by the day to build the things that benefit the rest of us who cares right? I am just saying be skeptical of anyone proposing change and try to enforce their morals on you. Also go ahead and invest, you seem to have the money for it. Even though a lot of the things you do make you feel better that won't apply to everyone's tastes, and their financial status, not everyone can afford to make the world cleaner. Also I heard the vegan lifestyle can have very negative health implications. I never said I was an activist, I am just some lonely guy who is tired of seeing people get screwed over by those in power and wealth, but at the same time the only thing I can personally do that I feel is effective is try to get my ideas out there. Although I can see that politically I am very weird as I no longer trust any of them like I used to, and I can be very jarring in my approach. I may never affect the world but I at least got 2 people riled enough to respond to me so that's something I guess. I honestly don't know why I left my original comment at the time because I have learned it is best just to let people stay in their happy bubbles or they get pissy, although these recent comments contradict myself a bit I hope you get my point.
NexusARC Fair enough, I just think that when good things go mainstream, they will also be picked up by companies who are not so good, but the movement is still a good thing and it is a good sign. Bad people doing good things are still doing good things. I do get where you are coming from, those bad people may not deserve those rewards, but those already suffering deserve a dying world even less. So, we want to support these positive changes. As for the vegan diet, it is important to educate yourself enough to make sure your nutrition is right, main two things, make sure you get your omega 3s and properly balance them with omega 6, and get your b12. You do those things u will be fine. My brain fog has cleared up and my health and weight have improved drastically. Obviously you can't just take my word for it, but look up dr gregor on omega 3s. Sorry, didn't intend for this to become about my diet, though animal agriculture is the largest contributor to global warming.
Robert So that's why (regulations) EVERY country except perhaps America is moving away from coal and into renewables? Errrr ........ No! It's because renewables are now cheaper due to the innovation and scaling up of the products. This will be proven when the deregulation of the coal industry in America does nothing to save the jobs of the workers long-term. As has been stated in another answer, if money had been spent to retrain these workers in Industries related to renewables they would have a long-term future with better pay and much healthier, safer environment.
@ 0:17 I hate when liberals make everything a moral issue. Energy is not a moral issue. Lying and cheating are moral issues. Infidelity to your spouse is a moral issue. Energy is just energy. There is no sin in using energy or in what kind of energy you use or don't use. There is unfairness and inequality in the world that is not caused by moral issues. I refuse to be preached to about less developed countries lacking energy and it somehow being attributed to you and me as our moral issue. It's an economic and governmental issue, not a moral issue. Why are these countries so incapable of forming effective governments, governments effective enough to provide the rule of law so that investors will invest in their economy and improve its infrastructure?
dlwatib Give it 10 years. When these underdeveloped countries have made the transition to renewables, have an abundance of almost free energy, have used that energy to vastly improve their standard of living, education, agriculture and Industry to overtake your country will you still feel the same?
I live in south africa. That will never happen. The government is taking over coal mines and pushing coal and in nuclear deals to line their own pockets. The government here will always be about that and never truly care about bettering the lives of their fellow man even though they say they want to - for votes. SA will be the next Zimbabwe and by the time change happens will be too late
The entire section on batteries was BS. Costs have gone down, that's true, but the tech has not improved and availability issues are arising already due to the scarcity of the elements used in their making. Furthermore, prices aren't 5-10x higher than they need to be to make large scale storage possible, they're 50-100x too expensive. 2 years after this talk and we're no closer to using LI-ION batteries for storage. And we never will. Unless some revolutionary new batteries come along, you can kiss your solar dreams goodbye. And they won't, not in the next decades. The promises of the batteries developed by Goodenough and others were just that. Promises. Nothing materialized of them. They're not on the market. Not even close. Maybe in 10-20 years, and then another 10-20 years for the tech to mature and reach market saturation. In conclusion, renewables will remain a fringe source of energy for the next few decades, and possibly forever, because the issue of storage is a lot more complicated than tech enthusiasts would like to believe. The ONLY solution we have if we want to prevent further global warming is nuclear. And solar/wind are nothing but a distraction of attention and money.
So it looks to me like the future is coming, whether the oil industry wants it or not. Good news for everyone!
But they don't care and they don't get punished. They take their revenues and go one. The rest of the world has to clean up their mess.
The stone age didn't end for a lack of stone...now that is a profound statement, especially coming from a Saudi oil minister ))
guess it's a wind wind situation
nah, never stop, the future is bright, sun
Hammer time!
This ain't reddit. You can't air your puns here.
Relax. In the end, it's all just water under the bridge.
fuckme
I just finished reading the Nexus trilogy. I knew I knew that guy from somewhere. Great Author, great presentation.
Thanks for a great gig. Got a big charge of optimism and hope for a bright future!)
Thanks for such an insightful presentation.
Greatest superpower of solar + batteries is that it allows countries to lower their generating capacity, because of the way energy is used over a typical day. A lot during the day. A little bit during the night. With traditional generating capacity a lot of it is just for peak use. So basically when people get home and cook food, etc. Solar + Batteries is simply perfect together.
And not just can solar + battery cater for all usage scenarios with less total generating capacity, but solar and battery can be used AT HOME. Freeing national grids of even more peak demand.
damn that was one long and extremely informative video! Loved it!
where do i buy your 30 cents a watt panels 80 cents to $1 are real numbers for a private individual.
Amazing lecture!
is this the channel where the original videos are posted?
Hello Mr Naam,
It would be fantastic if your conference could be subtitled in other langages.
I am french and here the nuclear lobby has worked so well that so many people do not have the keys to understand the need in solar systems or wind systems. Things will be far too long to change over here.
Could you manage to get this conference subtitled in french please?
Thank you a lot for your work.
Can't wait.
I do my calcs on the cost per kWh of solar power amortized over 35 years (including solar degradation), a common industry product life number which brings the cost down under $0.04/kWh (under $0.03 with incentives in most places) for residential scale, installed solar.
8:25 thanks camera guy
this gives me hope...
Thanks putting up this presentation. Razem delivers a good talk on the matter with polish and ease. On reflection I wish he'd spoken about the various means of storing energy aside from chemical batteries. I think I caught a glimpse of air pressure on a graph but nothing like it was discussed. My understanding is that compressed air is potentially cheaper and pumped hydro dams are already much cheaper. Anyway, I thought this was well thought out and well delivered.
Well, he's been talking/writing, etc. about this for over 10 years. I'm certain it helps. ;-)
we won't be towing a bath filled with water or a pressurized air cylinder behind our cars to power them, so my best guess stays with energy storage in batteries as the main focal point. just what we do with that stored energy when that car is parked at our driveway/garage or our work?
Ramez is an excellent speaker.
Is it efficient distributing solar power from South Africa to another country with fewer kilowatt hours per square meter, would it lose too much energy along the way?
Fantastic lecture! Thank you for sharing.
Muhammad Safeer Rizvi
This is where most of the ideas came from!
m.czcams.com/video/2b3ttqYDwF0/video.html
I'd love to see and electron and synthetic hydrocarbon economy. Excess power, especially when it's under 1c/kWh, could be used to generate liquid fuels. Methanol for example, could be used in fuel cells to generate power and heat, shifting summer excess energy to winter need.
Your basicly suggesting a huge ass battery right?
Kouki Nope, though batteries would be a very important part of the electron economy. Methanol is for long-term and infinitely scalable every storage. Eventually even the most remote areas will run microgrids, and depending on the climate, they may benefit most from a ready supply of methanol. Engineering a methanol production device designed to work in the 1-10kW range would permit home generation of this liquid energy. With essentially unlimited energy on tap, the bottleneck may shift to, in say the example of ships or international airliners, the cost or weight of energy storage. Methanol could fill that gap until batteries are high enough in energy density and low enough in cost.
I tend to agree. Do not forget straight up methane synthesizing or ammonia. But at present is is at least 2.5x more expensive as just solar (due to the conversion steps making it 40% efficient). Also methanol (like ammonia) is toxic.
For sure. It would only make sense when the energy is almost free, and we could store and transport the methanol the way we do other toxic substances today. Perhaps there's another chemical conversion -- adding inefficiency, but that doesn't matter -- that can covert the synthetic fuels into something less toxic, even something that could be consumed. It's a silly thought, but life-sustaining 'fuels' derived from renewable energy, skipping the whole plant-stage, would be kinda cool.
Wikus Van De Merwe
But you're still BURNING methanol.
We need to use the heat energy from the sun as well as the light component rather than burning any fuel. We should also consider reducing the energy needed and insulate against cold or heat as required.
Have you met the ANC?
Awesome
And Trump thinks coal will see a revival. Ridiculous.
Or he's doesn't want the coal sector to fail so that a bunch of people lose their jobs all at once.
DeadFishFactory Ya, that's it. That's what he cares about.
Have them mine something else?
DeadFishFactory if he cared about them than he would focus on job retraining not stalling the demise of coal
IF the USA doesn't change it's stance it WILL be left behind.
Remember, it's not just about electrical power, it's about POLITICAL power.
If Africa has cheap (virtually free) power, it can increase manufacturing, service and agriculture at a similar rate. With that comes power.
Same for India, same for every country in the sun belt.
It’s excellent what you say I love it. It’s a very important information, that you say, that means, no one can stop the changeover to sustainability. That means for me -> Forget about climate change, because the cost of alternative energy will do it, because it drops dramatically so that you must pay more for dirty, fossil energy then for the new modern clean energy. Then no one will pay more for dirty fossil, if he can have cheaper and clean energy. Or in other words, who will buy a car, that is not “state of the art”? Maybe a Museum will have it, or Jay Leno’s garage. Now, you see, the climate change will drop to lower level automatically, also for the “naysayers” (also Trump will have an electric car, American made).
true
This video has been on the front page 2 times but still has 100k views. Super weird
Very good
ENEL is an Italian company, not Spanish.
is there link to power point of this talk?
All the graphs are on his website, just search for Ramez Naam.
You have predicted 500k EV sold in the year of 2020, we have sold 1 million during the 6 first months of 2018! :)
anyone know where I can gain access to the powerpoint?
The graphs are on his website, search for Ramez Naam.
Watch on utube, Solarized walk assist device - camper build
Also, Solarized walk assist device
Two styles of Solarized transportation.
They can also supply home power etc.
Does it make sense to make an argument against Nuclear based on Price over budget? Isn't that just about proper planning and control? I understand the argument when placed in a South African environment, due to high corruption and all the risk it carries, but overall I do not think it is a very sound argument.
I do believe that renewable energies are a good way for the future, to cover our current energy needs, but to actually carry on as a civilization we will need a LOT more power than this, which can only be brought by nuclear fusion realistically. Whilst this might not seem like an issue in the short run, having access to virtually unlimited energy would really allow us to go a step further in our development.
I wonder how many times this has to fail before people wake up. Never mind the answer is always in the the next rainbows and unicorns development , not demonstrable today, but coming real soon/imminent/just over the horizon. Energyweinde Lures KO!?
I think he nails it on the head in his conclusion 33:45 (czcams.com/video/fwSkQa1tNmE/video.html)
I'm all up for renewables , but I feel like with more R & D in Nuclear both forms of energy could more than meets future energy needs.
modern strength storage technology could be very costly, so electricity needs to be generated while people need it. solar is value aggressive, solar + garage is not (but), and we can't manage while the solar panels produce strength.
expert image clipping
Ah! The "could be more expensive" argument!
No evidence, just uninformed opinion.
sources?
No, I mean I actually want to access the sources for this video to write a paper on climate change.
It is a bit surprising that there was not a single reference to Generation IV (specially Molten Salt Technology) Nuclear... And what about the exponential growth of electricity demand that would be normal to come from the «postulated» massive switch from internal combustion engines in cars (and trucks...) to all electric engines...
MSRs!!
Hmmm our German gouvernment decided to give everybody who builds a solar panel on his house gets x thousand euros for free. Maybe a solution for south-africa too?
I mean a state gets the cheapes and biggest amount of credit. These will be payed back after an economic growth. And the customer takes a small amount of credit to start building it on his house. I guess every bank will finance this. It will be a good long term investment for them.
One of your own, Elon Musk is quickly changing the world. God bless him!
dong energy ^_^
Long term Nuclear is still better but it's good to see that solar isn't a complete waste
"Shake ya money"
The fact that people dont want solar or wind to replace oil and coal confuses the fuck outa me
amazingman63 big companies don't get as much money out of people
it has to do really with storage. thats why
The rosy outlook for 100% renewable energy needs a reality check. Naam fails to consider the environmental cost to produce silicon for solar panels. For example, read www.adbusters.org/article/revolution-or-collapse/. There is also simple arithmetic which Naam ignores, when one considers the amount of rare materials to chemically synthesize the panels. Similar arguments apply to preparation of wind turbines in quantity to meet world needs. These needs are independent of the facts that neither power source can meet the need 24/7.
LOL....So Graphene made from carbon is a rare material....LOL...Keep drinking the kool-aid.
@@metaphorpritam Wind turbines are the complete embodiment of fossil fuels, without fossil fuel there would not be a single wind turbine. See vaclavsmil.com/wp-content/uploads/15.WINDTURBINE.pdf
Why don't they put solar panels into the fans of wind powered towers?
Chicago Estate Liquidation Surface area limitation + the rotation problem.
just put them in the empty spaces between them...
The energy revolution is happening but why not embrace revolutionary technology that supersedes wind, solar etc and does not have their respective environmental issues. I came across a game changing technology by an energy company called H2IL that could be the ultimate energy and hydrogen supply. It has the wow factor.
Planetary health vs money...
Yeah, I think Solar has always been cheaper - it just costs money.
Going overbudget = money going into people's pockets...
my natural gas has always been free
Ron Swanson now has his own law
AltE store 290 watt panels @.68 cents per watt mono
Screw the sun....Meet the governing party
LEST DO THISSS
Ramez Naam mentions the 2.42 cents/Kwh generated in Dubai as the cheapest price of electrical energy "using any technology" at (10:46). But isn't hydroelectric power considerably cheaper? I've found a reference to 0.85 cents/Kwh: www.wvic.com/content/facts_about_hydropower.cfm
This apparent discrepancy does affect the presenter's credibility.
Redox flow batteries
jy weet nix
This talk should have gotten a standing ovation....
Energy is going to get cheaper and cheaper as Renewable Energy Disrupts. A lot more will change, than you think. (i.e.. you probably already bought your last car).
Hey dude, just so that you know... Sun is barely over the horizon for some 4-5 hours per day in the winter. Except in the north of the country, where it is below the horizon for about two months straight. Of course, it is exactly the opposite in the summer, but we'd like the energy most when it is dark.. and cold!
This is why the combination of production and storage of energy is the most important to watch.
Is he taking into account the countless government subsidies in (failed) companies like Solindra?
I am against all subsidies. But if the market wanted alternative energy like it claims it does, there would be no need for subsidies. Government is pushing for this technology, not to save the world, but to further plunder your wallets.
Ticket Attorney
If you Really took notice of the video you would know that at one point he did, via the graph, remove the subsidies and Renewables were still cheaper
Well fossil fuels have historically benefited relatively few people in many places around the world. Oil and natural gas may yet remain important chemical feed stocks. So I would push back the date at which it becomes economically nonviable just due to that. I do not think countries which currently rely on fossil fuels should oppose clean energy. I think they should retool towards knowledge and information economies.
Well, China currently produces more than 25% of all solar panels, but that share is growing fast.
My friend in Germany (wind, solar, coal) is paying over 100€ per month for electricity. In Slovenia (hydro, nuclear, coal) I pay about 40€. Fuck renewables.
Yeah.. fuck this precious, blue, beautiful planet that has given us life
and consciousness, even though there is no way for any of us to reach a
similar place in the universe, indefinitely as far as we know. What an
amazing comment.
If you put pros and cons of wind and solar on the balance sheet, you 'll come to the conclusion that it's simply not worth it. If we really care about the planet we would reforest all the deserts and stop cutting down trees, ban free range pastry. Burning fossil fuels has objectively very small impact on global climate - it's only an excuse for environmental taxes.
"Burning fossil fuels has objectively very small impact on global climate." Citation needed.
InvisibleOne
You don't REALLY know do you?
I did it with the help of Avasva solutions.
The singularityU doesnt take into account that sustainability and efficiency are a direct threat to the market system. That is why we have planned obsolescence and waste in all design. Wake up to this common knowledge and factor it into your discussion.
Planned obsolescence is not universally applicable to every industry sector. Sure, it is definitely widely used, but it is not an assumed factor in every market.
Ryan Turner what u say does not address fact that the current market system requires endless waste and inefficiency for maximizing profits. We are nothing but consumers to this system. Without waste and endless consumption the system fails and everything falls apart. If u induce efficiency or sustainability in any design, it threatens our current market system. We have a market system that allows patents on life, seed, efficiency, and even sustainability, these patents exist to maximize profits. If u try to base anything off sustainability and efficiency, or even call it free or open source, it is not even allowed to flourish in this market system. Why do u think GM scrapped the electric car in 2001? It was called the EVOne and they realized it would kill thier profits. Why do u think we continue to sell bottle water for more than gasoline In plastic bottles? If it is insane to do why do we do it? Why does this market ststem allow monopolies like verizon, att, monsantos, ect.... Why does this market system push for globalization and not localization? If it is unsustainable and leading to our slow demise then why? Because the market system rewards only wasteful, inefficient unsustainable design with endless profits and control. Why do we have corporations destroying the amazon rainforest? Those are the lungs of our planet, our market system encourages and allows this to happen not us. Any sane intelligent civilization would not destroy its planets lungs. The market system then tells u to change if u want sustainability and efficiency lol, u to recycle more and eat less meat, have less.kids, like that will fix our ecosystem long term lol. How bout we demand corporations do the right thing? Oww yeah because asking corporations to do that is an insane thought in our market system. Why do u think corporations buy off and own our governments?Our entire market system is insane and obsolete, if u continue to defend insanity then dont be surprised when all life systems die off in the future. Dont act like we failed cause we didn't join the singularityU lol. We failed because we failed to understand the insanity the market system we submit to really is. Every technology this guy is saying is available now but cannot happen cause corporations can't figure out how to maximize profits and control if they allow the world to have these things. The future is open source, the future that includes all life is efficient and sustainable in design. Systems of equilibrium. I call for an open source renewable revolution. If patents are in the way of this happening then that is what singularityU should be discussing. There is no future, no change today, we are in the year 2017 and there is a push for clean coal and pipelines, Thoughts? Of course we cant afford this change, we can only afford endless wars. Simply put, a viable future is not profitable, and thus a contradiction to the current market system. We need to evolve now, this is the first time in known human history that we have a world wide communication network, amd tech that can liberate humanity. Agaig, the only thing stopping us from evolving into a stage one civilization is the current market system. Period
Ryan Turner also the entire preface to the singularityU is profiting on the transition to true liberation. To me that is insane, to a guy who hangs out with Silicon Valley executives, this idea sounds like a big pussy waiting to get fucked. Exploiting humanity for monopolies will not be a viable future. It will be more of the same.
mads max - I agree that our current system encourages waste and exploitation. You won't find a friend of the status quo in me. I simply wanted to point out that planned obsolescence is not a product development effort that is practiced in 100% of all market products. Of course sustainable development and manufacturing should be the goal, but it isn't. Greed and fear are powerful motivators, probably more so than survival. It's totally fucked, but that's our reality. Hopefully our generation can change that, but who knows.
Ryan Turner fair enough..... But the fact that planned obsolescence is in econ 101, still is one of many issues the singularityU fails to indulge. I am saying we could base just about everything on public block chains, and make everything open source now. It seems the actual focus is always based around our current economics as the ultimate mediation. Creating in the current market structure is the ultimate contradiction to what a sustainable future can be. It is all about exploitation, control, war And profits. With public block chains no monopolies, private institutions, banking cartels, fiat currency, federal reserve, boarders, interest rates, governments, private media, or militaries exist. The real problem is and always was certain greedy family cartels that own and created all of these current institutions, monopolies, banking cartels, governments, ect.... If the singularityU u rolls with these types of cronies, and also creates in the subscribed privatized institutions, then i say the singularityU is full of shit and just wants to aid in the development of new forms of control over the masses, before people wake the fuck up and demand what i am talking about. The singularityU promotes exploitation of humanity to create for free, so the world can be controlled by the same few insane greedy physcopath families. Selling u the hopes to become the next billionaire fuck wad. People want to do the right thing for the sake of it, it is hard for Silicon Valley wanks not to exploit that while snagging up all the rights to anything innovated. Yeah cool future bro. Sounds like more of the same, with a different flavor. Our collective hypnosis to who and what rules us, will lead us to a future of hunger games, not Star Trek.
Great lecture... however, solar energy uses light lux and not sun heat (C or F)... 20 C is the ideal temperature for a solar cell to produce electricity... that is why solar will work better in Germany than more "hotter" places...
HAT HAT depends on the panel (ones with tubes instead of panel uses heat)
Yes but whilst it might work at "optimal" more often, you get a lot less solar exposure in Germany than you get in Dubai for example, which more than compensates for operating in non-optimal range of temperatures. (assuming that what you said is actually correct, did not bother checking, if it is written in the youtube comments it must be true)
What about 'solar' that heats up salt and then uses heat to produce electricity though turbines? This also resolves the power production through the night as the salt retains the heat.
HAT HAT The infographic for average sun in South Africa Vs. Germany was measuring kilawatt hours per square meter. This is the unit for irradiance, not temperature. I.E. Africa experiences more power from the sun than Germany does. Am I wrong?
Lawrence Atkinson
Dubai just announced plans for the world's largest solar thermal plant ("the kind that heats up salt")
7min, Not totally Subsidy free, The government supplied the cables out to sea at a large cost.
The 78 people disliking must be Donald Trumph followers...
Going to get cheaper? No frackin way. As you scale up solar or wind production, you will run up against resource limits, and the price will skyrocket. We simply don't have the natural resources to make a completely new renewable grid. Not enough cobalt, copper, lead, rare earths, and dozens of other minerals.
Start digging in Afghanistan and North Korea, maybe change, wealth, education and eventually government too.
Once one ressource becomes too expensive there will be an alternative found...
@@meamzcs That is a pretty techno optimistic view, so we don't have to worry about anything!
We get hurricane force winds pretty much every winter here on the west coast. It's a shame we can't figure out how to harness and store the energy. I suppose you could use the wind to lift a huge weight in order to rig a transmission of sorts for generating electrons on demand. If you don't need energy, then stop the weight.
LCOE for solar that low is unrealistic. offer it for that price and people will line up....
LCOE do not cover costs associated with grid regulation, esspecialy costs of backup power generation from other (natural gas) plants when wind and solar does not generate.
its not the cheapest, its simply wrong. The cheapest source of power is water power, from dams and such the price difference is so big there really is no comparison between the two. not only is water power cheaper its also lets you produce power at night AND if you have excess power coming inn you can use the water reserves as power banks and pump water in to the reserves.
Lord RW
And the cost of the infrastructure building reservoirs?
Also, take a look at pictures of the reservoirs in California and Vegas where the droughts mean is almost no water left.
And hydro-power is more than welcome in this equation. We're shooting for a polyglot power model where the inputs for the grid could come from solar, wind, hydro, or whatever makes sense for the location and its available natural resources.
Another issue no one talks about is overpopulation...
Well...we already hv 7.5 billion ppl on the planet! most scientists agree ~2 billion is the carrying cap of humans... with respect to all other sentient beings. We are way over carrying capacity.... besides latest ipcc report says we only hv 10 yrs to stop runaway climate chaos! Meaning if we all dont change our lifestyles everyones kids are fkd! You know I already decided Not to hv kids! Having one kid is a lifetime of carbon emissions! And if your kids have kids that multiple generations...
So 2 billion is a cap considering all earths species, with regard to habitat and space needed for survival. For example wolves need about 100acres of land each, for hunting/survival. On avg they generally run 20-35miles per day!! And thats just one animal... with habitat destruction, human sprawl and hunting/trapping, animals have less and less areas to survive. Thats why most are going extinct today.
Very last white male rhino died last yr! Many shark species are considered extinct today cuz of shark fin soup fishing. N America used to hv about 60million buffalo... now we have like 31,000. We shot them all to destroy native americans' main food source! There are pics of stacked piles of buffalo bones 2 stories high... humans destroy everything!!! Everything! Not even exaggerating! N america used to look like yellowstone nat park.... all of it!! Moose, big horn sheep, elk, deer, wolves, buffalo, bald eagles, all kinds of hawks, bears everywhere, mtn lions, honey badgers, river otters, wolverines, etc etc. Why do u think thousands of ppl travel to yellowstone every yr. Cuz thats one of the last few places u can see animals living in the wild and not in a fuking tiny cage at the zoo!!! 7.5 billion humans on the planet! 7.5billion... estimated less than 10k chimpanzees!! Seriously we dont need any more human babies...
Watch "Sir David Attenborough on Overpopulation" on CZcams
czcams.com/video/JRPmLWYbUqA/video.html
So How does help the consumer friend?
How many birds die from wind power? Including those from endangered species?
I am not sure why he keeps referring to South Africa. The facts are that while we are well placed for renewables, our government had turned away and has sold their soul to the Russians and nuclear. Bribes are bigger than the power of the voters or logic
Where do you think this presentation was recorded ?
Cities Skylines getting in real life?
And what about the components required for solar panel manufacturing? Minerals still being mined by slave children in Africa and other forgotten parts of the world? Not so "clean" energy as one would expect.
Good topic, but he was rather sloppy with his numbers and charts.....
At around 18 minutes did he just recommend a nuclear reactor in Japan? You mean where the earthquake and tsunami absolutely screwed their nuclear reactor?
That was a moronically designed nuclear power station. Pretty much the PT cruizer of Nuclear Power Stations.
Also he specifically said: option. As in: nuclear should not even be a needed option in South Afica.
Very smooth salesman for wind/solar, is Mr. Naam! But, as for most salesmen, it's what he leaves out, or craftily slips quickly by, that exposes his misdirection & lack of energy knowledge.
For instance, his slide on "Wind Power Cost" is impressive, but hides the flat portion at the end and fails to note that nuclear power has long been cheaper, remains so, and has far higher reliability and far lower environmental impacts. A 'good' salesman never mentions better competition. ;]
Naam displays his lack of engineering/science knowledge as well in his wind slide claiming "The technology Keeps Getting Better". If he were giving accurate evaluation of wind, he'd know about things like the "Betz Limit" and the massive resource consumption & pollution from wind-power deployments. And, he'd not hide the fact that the most common wind outputs (darker blue) are getting very little better, simply because of fundamental scientific facts, like wind being subject to climate and climate change as well as low conversion efficiency, as expressed partly by the Betz Limit for prop-generators. For comparison, nuclear power operates fully about 90% of every year, even through hurricanes, polar vortices, ettc. Wind is barely delivering 20% of the power its machinery is built for, thus wasting about 80% of its materials and production, as Germany has already demonstrated and this simple simulation shows: czcams.com/video/zc7rRPrA7rg/video.html
In other words, the slides Naan moves quickest through are the most damaging to his sales effort.
His solar slides similarly misrepresent science & engineering facts -- the most humorous is the attempt to display how much solar energy is available in Calif. -- a bit more than 1/2 each day, apparently regardless of season. and his attempt to mislead by suggesting wind in Calif. compensates for darkness, etc. -- all simply displaying ignorance of how Calif. 'renewables' actually work, and forgetting their dependence on fracking, leaking & burning gas for backing them up most of the time every day.
If anyone wants to see the graphic & data facts for Calif. 'renewables' that can't be included here, examine section 2.2 of sworn testimony from real scientists/engineers here:
www.cgnp.org/CGNP_Direct_Testimony_01-27-17.pdf
But, apart from Naam's willing misdirections, why is Singularity U. so easy to fool? The planet does not benefit from selling. It benefits from thinking. If we don't attend to facts our descendants will have every right to spit on our graves, if those can be found.
--
Dr. A. Cannara
650 400 3071
Nuclear power stations are insured by the tax payer for zero premium. In Germany a study showed that if Nuclear power stations had to get their own insurance from the private sector the price of electriy would go from maybe 25cents a KWH to $3.34 a KWH. Fukashima cost 200 to 250 Billion dollars, the Tepco power company didn't pay for that. Nuclear is only cheap because of a MASSIVE hidden subsidy.
Exactly, if they are so cheap how many have been built in the US since the 70s?
many years after the disaster I visited Chernobyl myself. if such a thing would happen in mid Florida, Disney World would not be safe for people for hundreds of years...
Socrates was right in this case. Making judgements about the intentions and character of another person says more about the person judging rather than the one judged. Calling an Angellist Investor a smooth salesman.By such standards any investor and trader at Wall Street must appear like the devil himself. Of course he may have overlooked something because of some inherent evolutionary inherited bias, extant in our brain but I do perceive a genuine interest on his part for his subject. And if that is the case only a brain damaged person would fail to perceive that we are facing a serious problem. The threat is felt as real if you really digested the information it is inevitable that your response though not entirely bereft of personal goals will be that of a concerned citizen. He does seem to have digested the facts and as such I am not inclined to see him as a mere salesman. Perhaps that only shows my naiveness in the Socratian sense, especially in this age of distrust in any humanistic ideologies and altruism and the Belief in selfish genomes!
bill gates liked
It doesn't cost this much though. It is still prohibitively expensive to install on your home.
Audience looks depressed as fuck. Cheer up people you're about to get awesome cheap energy
He never talks about war or the effect of war on energy production or production of energy in full scale war ! Portability hidding energy and other military issues ! Peace energy solar and wind is nice but war is !
we need to get rid of oil tankers or 17 shipping ships that are equivalent to 500M cars. All the cars in the world. #noMoreShippingShips
Drino Man #nomoreshipshippingshipships
Drino Man what would you propose to replace them? These ships carry all of the world's goods around to be sold. Now you can say "switch to local stuff" but that won't exactly work. A lot of the resources required for technology comes from all over the world. All of those minerals and other natural resources that we use to create things are not everywhere. So if you remove these huge ships, what will replace them?
Not literally, just saying we need to upgrade ancient vehicles. There are solid-state battery tech that could replace the large amount of energy that these sort of ships/planes would need. I'm going to predict that once solid state lithium batteries get cheap enough, with 3X the storage density as lithium fully electric shipping container ship and jets will be possible! Combined with more energy efficient panels or maybe a combination of fiberglass/solar panel material that we can wrap them in, could give us the edge to make flight and ocean travel via electric propulsion more sustainable.
Pretty sure those big ships use electric motors anyways (just with diesel engines powering them)
"As of 2010 there were more than one billion motor vehicles in use in the world excluding off-road vehicles and heavy construction equipment." - Wikipedia
"1.2 Billion Vehicles On World's Roads Now, 2 Billion By 2035" - Green Car Reports
"1.28 billion cars on the road in 2015" - OICA (Organisation Internationale des Constructeurs d’Automobiles, in English: International Organization of Motor Vehicle Manufacturers)
Most of those cars do not contribute directly to worldwide economies, all of the oil tankers and shipping ships do. Replacing fuel burning cars with electric and using renewable energy to charge them would be more useful than hobbling the economies of nearly every country on the planet.
what u say does not address fact that the current market system requires endless waste and inefficiency for maximizing profits. We are nothing but consumers to this system. Without waste and endless consumption the system fails and everything falls apart. If u induce efficiency or sustainability in any design, it threatens our current market system. We have a market system that allows patents on life, seed, efficiency, and even sustainability, these patents exist to maximize profits. If u try to base anything off sustainability and efficiency, or even call it free or open source, it is not even allowed to flourish in this market system. Why do u think GM scrapped the electric car in 2001? It was called the EVOne and they realized it would kill thier profits. Why do u think we continue to sell bottle water for more than gasoline In plastic bottles? If it is insane to do why do we do it? Why does this market ststem allow monopolies like verizon, att, monsantos, ect.... Why does this market system push for globalization and not localization? If it is unsustainable and leading to our slow demise then why? Because the market system rewards only wasteful, inefficient unsustainable design with endless profits and control. Why do we have corporations destroying the amazon rainforest? Those are the lungs of our planet, our market system encourages and allows this to happen not us. Any sane intelligent civilization would not destroy its planets lungs. The market system then tells u to change if u want sustainability and efficiency lol, u to recycle more and eat less meat, have less.kids, like that will fix our ecosystem long term lol. How bout we demand corporations do the right thing? Oww yeah because asking corporations to do that is an insane thought in our market system. Why do u think corporations buy off and own our governments?Our entire market system is insane and obsolete, if u continue to defend insanity then dont be surprised when all life systems die off in the future. Dont act like we failed cause we didn't join the singularityU lol. We failed because we failed to understand the insanity the market system we submit to really is. Every technology this guy is saying is available now but cannot happen cause corporations can't figure out how to maximize profits and control if they allow the world to have these things. The future is open source, the future that includes all life is efficient and sustainable in design. Systems of equilibrium. I call for an open source renewable revolution. If patents are in the way of this happening then that is what singularityU should be discussing. There is no future, no change today, we are in the year 2017 and there is a push for clean coal and pipelines, Thoughts? Of course we cant afford this change, we can only afford endless wars. Simply put, a viable future is not profitable, and thus a contradiction to the current market system. We need to evolve now, this is the first time in known human history that we have a world wide communication network, amd tech that can liberate humanity. Agaig, the only thing stopping us from evolving into a stage one civilization is the current market system. Period
Nuclear generated energy could be the way forward. Both wind and solar devastate the natural environment. As for cost per kW: Germany pays 50% more (in 2019) for its electricity since introducing 'green energy' than its neighbour France (which went the nuclear route) . India is building 30+ Thorium nuclear reactors over the next several years,
Great speaker, horrible audience
15:10: That's absolute bullshit: SA has 235 TWh power production, i.e. 27'000 MW demand. Even in the best case 4 times more PV peak power, i.e. 100 GW, would need to be installed just to compensate day and night.
The problem in Africa isn't energy, it's water. You can't really pull water out of thin air with electricity...
QuickMix
No, but you can make Wells and pump it.
Look into desalination. It's not thin air, but you can indeed pull water out of the ocean. This is an energy intensive process, so you will need cheap electricity. The lack of water is an energy problem. And most of Africa is not lacking water, only the arid north, the Sahel, and the horn region.
Was going to say the same thing. And countries like Israel have and are continuing to scale desalination in unprecedented ways (www.scientificamerican.com/article/israel-proves-the-desalination-era-is-here/). Also, many fossil fuel resources use a lot of water for cooling purposes (www.ucsusa.org/clean-energy/energy-water-use#.Wkpv91Q-e2s). So, in essence, cheap wind and solar can both reduce water use and drive innovative practices to get more water from salty oceans. Win win!
actualy you can. the average air conditioner produces about 3/4 of a gallon of water per hour of operation. cool air and water wi win. of course i would not drink it unless treated/filtered.
In regards to peak demand for petroleum, I think that 2030 is overly optimistic because it will take decades to build out the electric vehicle fleet, but these futurist types get a pass. Electric vehicles aren’t free right now either, and that is part of my rationale as well. The other reason to be skeptical is because of the risk that climate change poses to this plan, if the predictions are correct the virtuous cycles of the energy disruption could be disrupted by the climate scramble that humans may find themselves in.
11:00 wrong. Cheapest for of electricity is still oil based in kuwait for under 1 cent per kWh
Javier Salcedo
Have you not noticed that all the Arab Arab countries are transitioning to renewable energy and zero emission cities?
Your bill is still high, energy is not driving costs down, government is driving them. Come to Canada.
SHILL
say "virtuous" again...
Am I the only one who is disgusted whenever someone you needs to do this while in charge of a company that if we did it would make them rich? I am not saying I think clean free-ish energy is bad, I think the world needs it, but when some asshole on stage is telling groups of people I feel dissociated like watching any corporate presentation it is all about money, it's not about morality, it's not about common niceness and making the world a better place.
Never look at it if it is best for everyone but look at it as who stands to gain the most out of this. Also is it even good for the planet to connect the whole world with light? We used to be able to see the cosmos before light pollution. Sorry but I can't stand when I feel like someone is trying to scam me and this motherfucker gives off that vibe. Before anyone assumes my political alignment I have given up on politics and deciding how to rule over people, I hate Bernie, I hate Trump, and I hate the rest of them.
Seriously!? Who gives a shit why it's happening as long as it's happening? Sounds like you have a problem with people making money off this, who cares? That is the only way it is going to happen. Try not to cut your nose off to spite your face. I would love to invest in this, and plan to, for both ecological, moral, and financial reasons. I drive an electric car because of the brutality of oil companies and global warming. Similar reasons I went vegan. Im so sick of whiny faux activists who seem fearful of their cause becoming popular. That is what we want! If it prevents you from feeling special and elitist so be it!
I never said I was intelligent, I was just giving my 2 cents on the matter, also I would never insult your intelligence on a matter as I find it crude, best to debunk an argument than to insult a person. Also you may be right, I just want to advocate don't blindly trust people, even those who seem to be looking out for the best for everyone, even me. I was relatively angry at the time when I wrote my original comment but I still stand by it, anyone in power will most likely abuse said power.
Sorry but that logic is not sound, if they sacrifice employees by the day to build the things that benefit the rest of us who cares right? I am just saying be skeptical of anyone proposing change and try to enforce their morals on you. Also go ahead and invest, you seem to have the money for it.
Even though a lot of the things you do make you feel better that won't apply to everyone's tastes, and their financial status, not everyone can afford to make the world cleaner. Also I heard the vegan lifestyle can have very negative health implications. I never said I was an activist, I am just some lonely guy who is tired of seeing people get screwed over by those in power and wealth, but at the same time the only thing I can personally do that I feel is effective is try to get my ideas out there. Although I can see that politically I am very weird as I no longer trust any of them like I used to, and I can be very jarring in my approach.
I may never affect the world but I at least got 2 people riled enough to respond to me so that's something I guess. I honestly don't know why I left my original comment at the time because I have learned it is best just to let people stay in their happy bubbles or they get pissy, although these recent comments contradict myself a bit I hope you get my point.
NexusARC Fair enough, I just think that when good things go mainstream, they will also be picked up by companies who are not so good, but the movement is still a good thing and it is a good sign. Bad people doing good things are still doing good things. I do get where you are coming from, those bad people may not deserve those rewards, but those already suffering deserve a dying world even less. So, we want to support these positive changes. As for the vegan diet, it is important to educate yourself enough to make sure your nutrition is right, main two things, make sure you get your omega 3s and properly balance them with omega 6, and get your b12. You do those things u will be fine. My brain fog has cleared up and my health and weight have improved drastically. Obviously you can't just take my word for it, but look up dr gregor on omega 3s. Sorry, didn't intend for this to become about my diet, though animal agriculture is the largest contributor to global warming.
Robert
So that's why (regulations) EVERY country except perhaps America is moving away from coal and into renewables?
Errrr ........ No!
It's because renewables are now cheaper due to the innovation and scaling up of the products. This will be proven when the deregulation of the coal industry in America does nothing to save the jobs of the workers long-term.
As has been stated in another answer, if money had been spent to retrain these workers in Industries related to renewables they would have a long-term future with better pay and much healthier, safer environment.
wind energy is complete garbage. its not exponential.
@ 0:17 I hate when liberals make everything a moral issue. Energy is not a moral issue. Lying and cheating are moral issues. Infidelity to your spouse is a moral issue. Energy is just energy. There is no sin in using energy or in what kind of energy you use or don't use. There is unfairness and inequality in the world that is not caused by moral issues. I refuse to be preached to about less developed countries lacking energy and it somehow being attributed to you and me as our moral issue. It's an economic and governmental issue, not a moral issue. Why are these countries so incapable of forming effective governments, governments effective enough to provide the rule of law so that investors will invest in their economy and improve its infrastructure?
dlwatib
Give it 10 years.
When these underdeveloped countries have made the transition to renewables, have an abundance of almost free energy, have used that energy to vastly improve their standard of living, education, agriculture and Industry to overtake your country will you still feel the same?
I live in south africa. That will never happen. The government is taking over coal mines and pushing coal and in nuclear deals to line their own pockets. The government here will always be about that and never truly care about bettering the lives of their fellow man even though they say they want to - for votes. SA will be the next Zimbabwe and by the time change happens will be too late
The entire section on batteries was BS. Costs have gone down, that's true, but the tech has not improved and availability issues are arising already due to the scarcity of the elements used in their making. Furthermore, prices aren't 5-10x higher than they need to be to make large scale storage possible, they're 50-100x too expensive. 2 years after this talk and we're no closer to using LI-ION batteries for storage. And we never will. Unless some revolutionary new batteries come along, you can kiss your solar dreams goodbye. And they won't, not in the next decades. The promises of the batteries developed by Goodenough and others were just that. Promises. Nothing materialized of them. They're not on the market. Not even close. Maybe in 10-20 years, and then another 10-20 years for the tech to mature and reach market saturation.
In conclusion, renewables will remain a fringe source of energy for the next few decades, and possibly forever, because the issue of storage is a lot more complicated than tech enthusiasts would like to believe. The ONLY solution we have if we want to prevent further global warming is nuclear. And solar/wind are nothing but a distraction of attention and money.