Politicians, who do not understand what they are doing, are likely to pursue policy options that are costly and accomplish little. There are better ways but it is unclear whether the policy makers will listen as many of them seem to have made up their minds to pursue bad paths forward.
Should you buy an EV? Should you install solar PV? Details matter a lot as to whether your decision leads to actual environmental improvements – or not. Should you buy carbon offsets? A better solution is to invest in direct solutions, even helping your neighbors become efficient energy consumers, to buy or install solar PV or an EV, depending on where you live.
Link to a nice article on EV charging technology and options.
Simple calculations illustrate how much energy fossil fuels provided, globally, and what has to be done to achieve “net zero” CO2 emissions by 2050. Few people have any idea of the scope involved – literally adding a large nuclear power plant every 2 days for the next 30 years.
Most EVs with a useful range of 200 miles or more are sold primarily as higher priced luxury vehicles. EVs priced in the US$20,000 to $30,000 range are typically less than 125 miles in range.
Among a decline in electricity sales in the United States, electric utilities “need a new source of load growth” and “electrification of the transportation sector” is a huge opportunity. To that end, they are pushing for more EVs, even though the effect on greenhouse gas reductions may be mixed for now (due to use of fossil fuel-based generation).
Most of the widely hyped drone delivery scenarios are not economically realistic and probably will not happen any time soon. But there are some targeted applications that should make sense to pursue.
Batteries are likely to be an important component of grid-level energy systems. Solar PV and Wind are both intermittent power sources, plus their peak outputs do not necessarily align with peak demand. Energy storage is a key requirement of “renewable” energy systems for the future.
