The History Channel -- Sketchy Coverage of EnergyThe History Channel ran a very interesting show on energy last night, featuring a couple of college professors who took the audience through everything from the basic concept of Conservation of Energy, through to applications in astrophysics; at a certain level, it was really very well done.
I noticed, however, that while the show mentioned the fact that the Earth receives 8.2 million quads (quadrillion BTUs of energy) each year – many thousands of times the consumption of even the most energy-hungry population imaginable, it declined to discuss the practical consequences of this. Instead, in a Q&A session about the future of renewable energy, one of the professors took on an (admittedly interesting) question about harvesting the energy of neutrinos. He pointed out that we struggle even to detect the little buggers; we’re certainly a long way off from even thinking about how to capture and use their energy. The show went on to talk briefly about the practicality of renewables, but in a very unfavorable – and, I think unfair -- light. For example, the show incorrectly pointed out that geothermal is unworkable, because this form of energy is available primarily at the interface points between tectonics plates. This is simply false. "Are you proposing to put caps on geysers? How practical is that?" the voice-over asked, displaying a shot of Old Faithful. Holy cow. I hope Paul Thomsen of Ormat, whom I interviewed for my book’s chapter on geothermal wasn’t watching; he would have had a coronary. As I freely admit, we live in a world of Tough Realities with respect to renewable energy. But my point here is that we have a huge gap in understanding of the subject, and we don’t seem to be trying too hard to plug it. It’s disappointing, to say the least. Craig Shields, editor of 2GreenEnergy.com and author, Renewable Energy -- Facts and Fantasties (2010).
Bioenergy,
Geothermal Energy,
Green Power,
Hydropower,
Hydrogen - Fuel Cells,
Ocean Energy,
Solar Energy,
Wind Power,
Energy Efficiency
The information and views expressed in this blog post are solely those of the author and not necessarily those of RenewableEnergyWorld.com or the companies that advertise on this Web site and other publications. This blog was posted directly by the author and was not reviewed for accuracy, spelling or grammar.
7 Reader Comments
|
Craig Shields
|

Share















1 of 7
The simple misconception about geothermal goes back to the industry. I find it discouraging that some of the industries like geothermal, hydro and biomass don't have sophisticated marketing efforts. Wind and solar are way out front (of course there's plenty of misconceptions about them too -- but they are fighting those well). People always talk about "wind and solar, wind and solar," but fail to recognize the myriad other renewables that are already cost-competitive.
They need to show people how reliably this stuff works -- otherwise, we'll just keep getting nonsense reports like the one you just mentioned.