HackerTube

A reality check on renewables - David MacKay

TED-EdRecommended by 3 HN commenters across 4 months, 2017–2021
YouTube
talk · general · evergreen · 2017–2021 on HN

David MacKay's TEDxWarwick talk uses basic arithmetic to show how much land and energy renewables would need to power a country like the UK. It explains the limits of sustainable options and why they should still be pursued.

Cited in energy debates for its back-of-envelope scale of the transition and the land and storage limits of wind and solar.

8 comments from Hacker News

@kinjba12020-08 · in “Air pollution is worse than we thought”

No energy source [that we've discovered so far] is perfect. All have downsides. Sadly, living in denial of that fact is more popular than ever, but that's a separate topic. Here are a couple TED talks showing the downside of renewable energy - such as the enormous land usage and reliable energy storage needed to compete with nuclear or fossil. Why renewables can’t save the planet link A reality check on renewables ▶ this video

Recommends View on HN
@neilwilson2019-03 · in “Australia has enough solar, wind storage in pipeline to go 100% renewables”

Not everywhere in the world has the land area to do wind and solar. In fact pretty much everywhere other than Russia, Australia, Canada, the US and Brazil. There the energy density per head of population is too high for renewables. Good video by the late David Mackay on that point here. ▶ this video

Recommends View on HN
@CuriousSkeptic2019-01 · in “Study tracks dramatic retreat of Canadian glaciers”

On that topic, I found this ted talk on the feasibility of various renewable energy sources quite eye opening ▶ this video

Recommends View on HN
@CuriousSkeptic2018-12 · in “As oil and gas exports surge, West Texas becomes the world’s “extraction colony””

Well, a bunch of countries have more or less agreed on aiming for no more than 1.5 degrees warmer. IPCC made a report on what that would entail stating basically that even with an overnight abolishment it cannot be reached. But that if we assume it feasible to use afforestation and other techniques to extract CO2 from the atmosphere in the future we might have chance to reach that target for 2100 given we stop using fossil fuels by 2030. Given the scale of the transition necessary, overnight or 11-years is more or less the same time frame Edit: Great TED-talk on the scale of what’s needed ▶ this video

Recommends View on HN
@kinjba112021-05 · in ““Energy in the Future”: a time capsule of energy concerns from 1953”

Briefly: solar and wind energy requires sun or wind and tons of space relative to fossil/nuclear. Not every place has those. "A reality check on renewables" ▶ this video

Up next