Submitted 1 day ago by Tekkip20@lemmy.world to [deleted]
I thought with the explosion of electric power and windmills and the electric vehicle boom, fossil fuels would not be required…
Yet, a lot of countries still generate coal and other fossil fuels, is it because there is still filthy amounts of profit there to be made? Maybe they are just so used to it they don’t wanna swap to another resource?
I thought with Solar panels being massively produced, it would sell like hot cakes and you’re literally having the power of the sun in your hand.
Most if not all power used is generated almost instantly as needed. So when you look at solar (which is a great renewable) you run into the fact that it only generates power while the sun is out, and a specific amount of power. This causes the problem of, how do you generate power at night and what do you do on rainy days or if a cloud covers the panels. You can substitute this with other renewable energy sources: wind, hydro, and nuclear, but wind has similar issues as solar and hydro and nuclear have huge upfront costs and take years to build. So this is where coal and natural gas come in. Coal has the downside of being really bad for the environment but can start up within 10ish minutes of being needed. Gas is better for emissions (not great), but takes more time to startup. A lot of companies use a mix of things along with buying and selling power with other companies (similar to a stock market). There are thoughts of trying to store power or looking at small scale nuclear plants.
Source: I work for a large power company
That’s where batteries and other storage systems come into play.
Yeah, people are working on it.
The EIA estimates that there’s about 30 GW of battery capacity in the U.S., mostly in storage systems that are designed to store about 1-4 hours worth.
That’s in comparison to 1,200 GW of generation capacity, or 400 times as much as there is storage.
It’s coming along, but the orders of magnitude difference between real-time supply and demand and our capacity for shifting some of the power just a few hours isn’t quite ready for load balancing across a whole 24 hour day, much less for days-long weather patterns or even seasonality across the year. We’re probably gonna need to see another few years of exponential growth before it starts actually making a big impact to generation activity.
Ya! And there is a lot of research and investment into them. The problem is they lose capacity over time from being powered and drained (think phone batteries and other lithium batteries). From what I know hydro batteries are actually really big with power companies. Basically pumping a bunch of water uphill when you have excess power, then using the reservoir like a hydro plant when you need power. They are really inefficient, but work surprisingly well at storing a lot of power
They were still more expensive than fossil power on standby last time I looked.
I don’t think the average person truly understands exactly how much of the stuff they use every single day is a byproduct of the petroleum industry.
The obvious ones are oils as lubricants and fuel to burn for vehicles, but it goes soooooooooc much further than that.
Here are some quick examples of things many people do not realize use petroleum byproducts in one way or another.
So while we very well may be able to stop using traditional fuel to run vehicles in the future we still have to find alternatives for a lot of other things. The industry is not going anywhere anytime soon.
Thing is, a lot of these aren’t that bad? Making an oxygen mask feels really different to just setting fire to the fossil fuel to shift a 3-ton vanity pickup truck half a mile to Starbucks. And lots of the others can readily be replaced. Clothes, for example: rayon from bamboo can replace a lot of polyester and nylon
Yeah we have stuff that can outright replace a lot of these things but for mist there is nothing else we have that can take over.
We are heavily dependent on oil even as we try to shift away from fuel as out primary means of transportation.
Money, They cornered the market and then they started yielding the profits from it to exert political influence. That’s why molten Salt Thorium Reactors were abandoned by american scientists in the 60s. With nuclear power it would mean the end of for profit energy consumption. That plus the surveillance network of the billionaire class is what’s fueling all of the political tensions and far-right (See Fascism) around the world. Denmark is already capable of producing over 140% of its daily energy usage through wind alone. The guardian wrote an article about it in 2015. Wind is still less than 1% of all global energy production. Alberta gets 300 days of sun a year, but have been brainwashed by big oil to invent and reflexively disavow any information otherwise. Then the fossil fuel industry and tech industry launched the Brexit disinformation campaign to weaken the EU that same year. With the advent of China as well as Copenhagen Atomics producing working prototype reactors capable of producing staggeringly vast amounts of energy with less than 1000x the nuclear waste of traditional light water reactors, the change is inevitable. That’s what all of this is for them the war in Ukraine, Trump, Italy, Romania. It’s the fossil fuel industry. With the advent of nuclear power, the obviousness of the effects of climate change and advanced battery technology, the only way they can ensure a continuous demand is war. There are no electric tanks. Russia is a petro state, Saudi Arabia is a petro state, trump is trying to turn the US into an authoritarian petro state. It’s oil, they are the reason for all of this bullshit. Coal power plants are the most dangerous form of energy production, they kill approximately 1,000,000 people a year. We’ve had the technology to move away from them for over 70 years. That’s 70,000,000 dead people. That is more people than died in the entire second world war and we aren’t even talking about it because we’d rather just fall into arguing about transgenderism online than actually stopping them. It all goes back to fossil fuels.
Renewable power is increasing, yes, but power demand is also increasing. Most of the power to run those electric engines is still being generated by coal. Solar panels are actually kinda energy-intensive to produce, too, and most of that energy is also coming from coal.
Swapping entirely to renewable energy is cool and all but not as easy as “just use a bunch of solar panels???” The issue is that most renewables are some mix of a: unreliable, and b: geographical.
Wind isn’t going to be blowing 24/7 in most places, so wind is unreliable. The sun isn’t always shining in most places, so solar power is unreliable. Hydro is amazing if you have it, but it isn’t the kind of thing you can just build anywhere. Geothermal is also great if you have it, but again isn’t the kind of thing you can just build.
Meanwhile, the power grid requires reliability. It’s incredibly important.
Also, like other people have said: coal/gas are cheap and ubiquitous. Both of those words might as well be synonyms for ‘more money’. Realistically, that’s the primary reason.
cheap and easy.
It’s many thousands of years of solar power , concentated in to a storable, portable and fairly accessible and transmutable form.
Countries don’t “generate” coal and oil, they suck it out of the ground. It was generated by thousands to millions of years of life and accumulated geological processes.
cheap and easy.
My Gen X ass is obligated to respond “like your mom?”
Fossil fuels are actually older than the dinosaurs. Oil and gas form from ancient algae type organisms. Coal is from ancient tree type organisms.
I say type because they only resemble those, and aren’t closely related.
Because it is still the least expensive power source
Not accounting for externalities, but yes
I think you’re under estimated how much fossil fuel are used and the electricity production from solar and wind farm.
It’s definitely possible to replace all fossil fuel by electricity, but it’s a massive shift involving multiple nuclear power plants (or the green equivalent which is even more expensive/complicated) , not a few windfarm and solar panel over the parking lot. And today there is no political will to do such massive investment, let alone the NIMBY
I don’t have the to write up a full explanation bc I am at the grocery store but this video covers it well Why Capitalism Loves Fossil Fuels
I recently set up some solar panels. Turned them on very close to noon. Well, look at that! So much power! Four hours later, i was getting 10 percent of that number.
I know that solar power levels change throughout the day. But when it’s put into concrete terms like “I can run my refrigerator on this … oh, only for 2 hours a day” it helped me really understand.
So to answer your question - we use fossil fuels in the grid to as a disposable battery to handle changes in demand and times when renewables aren’t available.
As for EVs - many train routes aren’t electrified. EV trucks are impractical for long-haul, and the infrastructure is nowhere to be seen. Even in EV friendly areas, it’s hard to find a charger that is easy to reach with a heavy-haul truck. That’s before we talk about whether there’s trucks to drive, and the cost of the truck. For individuals, an EV is simply beyond the finances of many people. Road trips are an edge case, but some people travel a lot for work and can’t afford to stop every 3 hrs for 30-60 min, if the charger is available, and twice as often in winter.
Also there are a lot of nation states that have little to no natural resources other than oil. So if there is ever a day that oil how’s bust. Those nations will be irrelevant and their whole economy and purchase power on imports goes back 200 years.
There was a quote that is sometimes attributed to Sheikh Rashid but most likely not a real quote but it speaks the truth about those petostates.
“My grandfather rode a camel, my father rode a camel, I drive a Mercedes, my son drives a Land Rover, his son will drive a Land Rover, but his son will ride a camel”
At least here (germany) its lobbyism and stability
the only way that fossils can compete to “basically free energy after setup” is that there is a law or something that raises the prices of renewables to that of fossils so that fossils can compete
also coal gets taxmoney to make it cheaper
fossil energy plants also cant like be put on or off at any time. They often need a day on start or something so if one turns them off they are off for a while.
so they are used as a “baseline” while renewables can be put on or down depending on need (or run extra low to increase energy prices but psssss as they are not allowed to do so)
planes need oil, as do ships.
Ships can use sail.
Also, we don’t really need this much consumption.
You know how many ships are needed to transport the thousands of components in the vast supply chain of computer chips? its a lot
If shiping slows down, computer chips become more expensive. And the whole world relies on them for everything. That includes you.
i really doubt sail powered ships are as fast as oil powered ones
I think you’re under estimated how much fossil fuel are used and the electricity production from solar and wind farm.
It’s definitely possible to replace all fossil fuel by electricity, but it’s a massive shift involving multiple nuclear power plants (or the green equivalent which is even more expensive/complicated) , not a few windfarm and solar panel over the parking lot. And today there is no political will to do such massive investment, let alone the NIMBY
I thought with the explosion of electric power
I thought with Solar panels being massively produced
When you are young and you have your first real job and your first good paycheck, you may feel rich. But there’s still a lot more money making the rounds in the world.
Not all of it is in your hands.
The world is so much bigger than you think.
You’re trying to move something with the inertia of an entire planet’s economy, which represents an incredible, almost incomprehensible amount of effort. Inertia becomes an incredibly powerful force that inherently maintains the status quo when you’re talking about huge systems with vast complexity. Yes, there are real challenges (which can be overcome) and yes there is real opposition from entrenched interests who stand to profit (or lose) significantly. But most people underestimate the amount that sheer inertia plays not just in this situation, but in all sorts of different situations, especially when you’re talking about global issues or societal progress. Human minds and values cannot be changed with the snap of a finger. Individuals perhaps can, but as a civilization it often takes decades, or even centuries when the change is massive enough, even when technology itself moves much faster than that.
Greed.
Brkdncr@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Established supply chain, workforce knowledge. Energy density. Ease of use.
Asafum@feddit.nl 1 day ago
Energy density and entrenched profit structures are big ones for sure. :/