Radulescu1999
Radulescu1999 t1_jaq5yy1 wrote
Reply to comment by cryptosupercar in Electric world that kicks out fossil fuels will cost less than combustion economy. 30TW of wind and solar PV will take 0.2% of earth's surface. by DisasterousGiraffe
>The current petroleum product mix being consumed is 130,000 TWh of coal, oil, and gas. It’s growing at a rate of 1000 TWh per year.
>
>Where does he get 30 TWh?
"Normally the consumption is given in TWh, which is an energy unit. One TW corresponds to 8,760 TWh per year."
130,000TWh/8760TWh = 14.84TW
30TW > 14.84 TW
Radulescu1999 t1_jaq4k6a wrote
Reply to comment by 6thReplacementMonkey in Electric world that kicks out fossil fuels will cost less than combustion economy. 30TW of wind and solar PV will take 0.2% of earth's surface. by DisasterousGiraffe
>It has always been cheaper overall to switch to renewables.
If that was true, China would already be 100% renewable. They are not.
Radulescu1999 t1_jarya84 wrote
Reply to comment by 6thReplacementMonkey in Electric world that kicks out fossil fuels will cost less than combustion economy. 30TW of wind and solar PV will take 0.2% of earth's surface. by DisasterousGiraffe
Renewables wouldn’t have worked decades ago. Battery capacity was terrible, and wind and solar was extremely inefficient.
Though I agree that we still should have invested more into renewables (the US), an overall switch to renewables wouldn’t have been possible (as in 100%).
Though if we invested more into nuclear, hydropower, and geothermal (for specific areas), and invested in solar/wind (for their development/research), that would have been most ideal.