- Reaction score
- 4,292
- Points
- 1,160
Some real engineers should weigh-in, but, as I understand it, from some limited reading in the past few days, the Texas power grid/system is poorly designed and has an unacceptably low RAMD (Reliability, Availablity, Maintainability, Durability) profile. Most, likely not all, North American and European power systems, including Canada's, are better designed ... or so I've read and so I hope.
There is nothing inherently wrong with 'renewables' as parts of a system IF one understands that they, by their very nature, are unreliable and, therefore, the system must be able to operate, reliably and at peak capacity, without them.
There are, I think, some real engineering challenges to "going green" and still powering a modern society, including:
1. Developing a reasonably compact, cheap, long-lasting battery to store renewable power;
2. Developing recyclable solar panels and windmill blades; and
3. Safely disposing of spent nuclear fuel.
But we built the pyramids and the Great Wall of China and went to the moon with less engineering skill and knowledge than we have now, so none of those challenges, is, in my opinion, beyond the wit of modern men and women.
Coal, oil and gas are finite, non-renewable (not quickly renewable) resources. So is uranium, for that matter, but its "energy density" is so high that we have thousands if not millions of years' worth of proven reserves here in Canada, alone. We should not want to dam up too many more rivers, should we, just to power our big-screen TVs? That indicates that 'renewables' should be part of our 21st-century power grids/systems, but they will be, for the foreseeable future (into the 22nd century?) an adjunct component, not the backbone.
There is nothing inherently wrong with 'renewables' as parts of a system IF one understands that they, by their very nature, are unreliable and, therefore, the system must be able to operate, reliably and at peak capacity, without them.
There are, I think, some real engineering challenges to "going green" and still powering a modern society, including:
1. Developing a reasonably compact, cheap, long-lasting battery to store renewable power;
2. Developing recyclable solar panels and windmill blades; and
3. Safely disposing of spent nuclear fuel.
But we built the pyramids and the Great Wall of China and went to the moon with less engineering skill and knowledge than we have now, so none of those challenges, is, in my opinion, beyond the wit of modern men and women.
Coal, oil and gas are finite, non-renewable (not quickly renewable) resources. So is uranium, for that matter, but its "energy density" is so high that we have thousands if not millions of years' worth of proven reserves here in Canada, alone. We should not want to dam up too many more rivers, should we, just to power our big-screen TVs? That indicates that 'renewables' should be part of our 21st-century power grids/systems, but they will be, for the foreseeable future (into the 22nd century?) an adjunct component, not the backbone.