Not as sexy as a war for higher oil prices.
OK way sexier. Just needs some foundation, lipstick, padding in the right areas, some squeezing and tweezing in others.
http://www.scribemedia.org/2007/12/12/algae-biofuel-valcent-vertigro/
I also read an uncited source that said there's enough sunlight in 1 hour to power the world for a year.
Comments ... #
Insolation and solar power aside, wind power looks far more promising as does hydro power which is Canada's main source of power. As does biomass of all kinds.
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:MagLev_Wind_Power_GeneratorI'm going to beg to differ on the old supply-side capital notion (that's the 80s Reaganomic sales pitch, not reality). It's demand that drives things (and possibly the political and economic manipulation of).
Fractional reserve lending looks for possible revenue streams and a quick ROI. There's a lot of money to invest that is not in the hands of "capitalists," that is held in fiduciary institutions of common folks. A compelling decentralized renewable source of power would open up lending opportunities on the producer as well as consumer side (JP Morgan allegedly wanted everyone to have a generator at his/her house, but Edison's idea of centralized power production won out.). A pension fund or even a venture capital fund would have no qualms shaking up the existing power infrastructure. There seems to be more than a handful of great ideas, both large and small, centralized and decentralized worth pursuing.
I'm optimistic one or more of these will pop the power status quo in more ways than one, but the change is almost inevitable.
While we're on the subject:
"The cheapest, most reliable source of new energy is saved energy." Peter Turnbull, PG&ESidebar: Pete, formerly of Toledo, is a proponent of cool roofing and its effectiveness for heat island mitigation.
(He’s also a wizard with a fly rod).
Currently saved energy in the form of oil and coal was all from the sun, maybe a few years before I was born.
I think rooftop gardens, if not rooftop solar and turbines make sense.
Insolution of effective energy [not your eyesight variety] in Toledo is far above "sucky", in fact it's above 80% of Tuscon's.
posted by robertbrundage on Dec 15, 2007 at 03:47:53 pm #
Insolation values for Toledo are fairly sucky, due the number of cloudy, overcast and foggy days we have. The cost of solar power panels and accompanying equipment would have to come down quite a bit before it will become common for a homeowner to freely choose solar as a power option.
Still, that doesn't mean that you can't make use of economies of scale. Entire neighborhoods and city sectors can have accompanying solar facilities built (dropping transmission losses to almost zero) for them, making use of what sunlight they can for the enormous square meterage they can have.
But that means CAPITAL, and the capitalists around here have far better things to do than make investments to supply better energy choices for Toledoans.
posted by GuestZero on Dec 13, 2007 at 07:46:25 pm #