A Sunny Future For Waterfalls? Cynicism aside, this thought exercise (exacerbated by the book Solar Revolution
[Back to top] [Back to top] I also left energy efficiency measures out of the picture because it alone won't put a dent into the world's increasing energy needs (though it certainly does help in general by reducing our carbon footprint individually). And although wind, geothermal, hydrogen fuel-cell, and solar are often discussed, they take a back seat to the above-mentioned means of procuring energy. The proof? Look at our government's subsidies for dirty energy compared to truly renewable energy (by the way, you have to look very closely beyond the chart because the renewable energy and coal line items are grossly misrepresented; not surprising since such information is easily distorted by special interests). So as much as we'd like to leave politics out of our lives, it's pretty obvious that it directly influences not only our lives but of those around the world as well. Indeed, we're all in this together - for better or worse!
[Back to top]
Unlike the ways of harnessing energy in the past, PV is a truly clean energy in comparison. With PVs, the pollutants are only coming from the processes of the manufacture and treatment of silicon plus pollutants from the production of metals for electrical contact and conduction as well as the usual cost of product delivery. Compare that to the amount of mining, drilling, refining, infrastructure, etc. to procure fossil fuels and then the gases released after use! Likewise, you could look at displacement, silt-buildup, and river ecosystem disruption from hydroelectricity. Moreover, there's the practically unsolvable problem of radioactive waste and constant maintenance for nuclear fission power. Indeed, the list goes on and on. Meanwhile in terms of operation, solar cells require the minimal use of moving parts (energy is all in the quantum physics of the silicon and doped impurities) and detrimental chemical reactions, and it's always collecting the sun's radiation (even under cloud cover) during the day when residential use is minimal. Moreover, solar cells have the ability of being scalable in much the same way computer chips have advanced under Moore's Law (i.e. the transistor density doubles almost every 2 years) in the first silicon revolution. There are even more promising advances in cost-effective photovoltaic manufacturing regarding thin film PV as the San Jose company Nanosolar has demonstrated. When it comes to retrofitting solar technology to existing infrastructure, there are existing programs that can send excess energy generation (from solar or wind in residences) back to the power grid. Under this paradigm, imagine if every home and office building had some form of solar energy collection on their rooftops or window awnings? Or if every street light or pole was accompanied by a collector or concentrator? Or if terrestrial rail tracks were lined with them? Or if parking garages had solar panel canopies to charge parked vehicles? There could even be solar-powered plug-in electric vehicles or hydrogen fuel-cell plug-in hybrids (once they figure out how to get cheaply extract hydrogen from a source other than natural gas, a fossil fuel). Indeed, the possibilities are limitless. While there are naysayers (mostly from monopolizable energy proponents), the adoption of solar proliferation is delayed due to the need for energy storage (to smooth out intermittencies in solar energy and for nocturnal use), cost to mass produce and deploy, and most importantly, politics. The first two factors can be mitigated with investment and concentrated effort. However, it's the last factor where all of us could do our part through our vote. Given these factors, the solar route is the most sensible choice if we are to continue our energy-intensive, industrialized ways. You'd be hard pressed to come up with an alternative that even comes close to its viability. In fact, Bradford's book If this indeed is true, this is good news for our environment and our waterfalls since we'd see fewer dams, less pollution, less CO2 emissions, etc. Only then can we start talking about decommissioning (and taking down) dams, restoring native ecosystems, slowing down water diversion, desalinizing sea water, etc. Sure there are still other issues to worry about like loss of biodiversity, overpopulation, etc., but at least the energy issue would take significant steps in the right direction for the first time since the advent of human civilization.
[Back to top] But with the critical election in November, US citizens have an opportunity to attempt to reverse the damage Republicans have done (especially in the last eight years under the Bush Administration) and vote in an administration that will accelerate us away from monopolizable forms of energy (i.e. fossil fuels, nuclear, hydro, and even food-competing bio-fuels). Besides, we are already feeling the consequences of our failure to oust Bush from power four years ago what with the climate getting more unstable, the economy entering another Great Depression, our crumbling infrastructure, the rise of terrorism, etc., etc. Can we really afford to fall for the misinformation, empty promises, criminal activities, and outright lies by Republicans John McCain and Sarah Palin while their proponents continue in their ways at the expense of the rest of the world? Like Bradford says in Solar Revolution Have a comment about this feature? Click on the following link... [Back to top] [Go to previous article: "Badwater: Killer Water Bottles"] [Go to next article: "Waterfalls 101"] [Go to the Featured Articles Page] [Return from "A Sunny Future For Waterfalls?" to the World of Waterfalls Home Page]
|
by Travis Bradford) yields some surprising conclusions and a real sense of optimism. Why? Read on to find out!
