This review evaluates and ranks 12 combinations of electric power and fuel sources from among 9 electric power sources, 2 liquid fuel sources, and 3 vehicle technologies, with respect to their ability to address climate, air pollution, and energy problems simultaneously. The review also evaluates the impacts of each on water supply, land use, wildlife, resource availability, thermal pollution, water chemical pollution, nuclear proliferation, and undernutrition.What technology comes in first? Wind energy comes in first place, and Ethanol come in last. Carbon sequestered coal and nuclear tie for "next to last" place. I'm not sure where biodiesel would come into play here. I'd guess better than CCS Coal. I'm also not sure where non-carbon-sequestered coal would come in, but I'd guess it would show up dead last. The article is not without its critics, and you can check out some interesting counterpunches in the comments at TreeHugger.com.
Here's another article by Jacobson (and Masters) that appears in the journal Science. It is a little older, but a bit easier to understand, and can be summed up in this opening quote:
the cost of wind energy is now less than that of coal.I'm going to get this information spread around as best I can. Would love feedback, too.
Posts
The 'natural economy' can't compete with capitalism in the short-run unless everyone agrees to move against their immediate economic interests. But just like in the Simpson's movie, it only takes one Homer to dome us all. In what parallel universe does this play out well for the natural economy and, ultimately, our survival? What does that universe look like? Someone show me and I'll drink the koolaid.
ReplyDeleteMongo