Thanks for presenting this info.

"This talk was given at a local TEDx event..." in the description, sure would be nice to mention the year this talk was given as well as the place (though the uploader was pretty vague about the place as well). Play at 1.25x playback speed. ;) MUCH better.

Great presentation Dr. Galepeau

Oh and on a cost comparison, make sure all illness and deaths from fuel production are included. How many deaths have been caused by solar? Also how many spills and catastrophes has solar caused compared to fossil fuels?

*Thorium Molten Salt Reactors* and Nuclear fusion need help from innovator like David Galipeau. Solar Energy has limitations: *Dilute : need large area* * *Seasonal variations - Need fossil power backup* * *Intermittent on hourly basis - need battery/pumped hydro backup* * *Location specific*

@arun3151997

5 жыл бұрын

Achal H P this comment didn’t age well

4 жыл бұрын

Completely agreed, 3 years later and still nobody talking about this

If you put all fossil fuel electricity producer together, how much land would that cover, oh and include all the refineries and mines, hmmm I wonder.

We need to take advantage of this information and solar technology. We need to make fossil fuel a thing of the past within the next 100 years.

@ftbsecret

7 жыл бұрын

won't be a 100 years, optimists bet on 10 years, more conservative ppl guess for 2050 I mean electric cars will boom the next decade, solar and wind already are dropping below conventional energy sources. When storage in the next 5-20 years drops below coal cost all new constructions will be renewables because of economic reasons. fossil fuels will drop to prices of the extraction costs before they are left in the ground as worthless, and it will happen in our lifetime :-)

No one could predict the AT&T monopoly breakup would lead to cell phones. No one can predict how great life will be when all monopolies are broken up. This argument falls on deaf ears because most are afraid of living their lives without centralized control by monopoly. The worldwide political paradigm of a coercive elite running everyone's life has failed for millennia as seen by the existence of war and poverty worldwide. But the state (govt.) teaches us to fear self-governance, non-coercive community cooperation, and a voluntary society. We are taught from kindergarten-college that law (violent control) is order and without that monopoly, life would be chaotic. Experience teaches us the opposite. The private sector has no monopoly on violence granted to it as the public sector does, but it produces all the wealth while the public sector consumes it. Everything the public sector controls is failing, e.g., the infrastructure. Why? The public sector is not controlled by the public. Democracy has failed. The private sector is controlled by the public. A company cannot survive without support from consumers unless it is bailed out by money taken by force (taxes). This is NOT capitalism, the free market. It is fascism, the govt. intervention to benefit itself and private interest against the public interest. And it leads to social chaos.

This guy is a trip.. He talks wired too. Haha

Pudt Id on yo roowf

No talk of how we store all this energy for when we don't have sun. How much environmental damage will huge arrays of batteries do and how efficient will they be? Can we get enough storage to handle the load in low sun times. I think the answer at least for now is no. We can use solar to reduce the load but it cannot replace the current grid system. Same goes for wind. There are limits to how far you transmit even high voltage power so we have to keep some other form of energy like fossil or nuclear powered up on the grid and have therefore only partially mitigated the problem. New safer forms of nuclear along with renewables is the best option.

@Brainbuster

7 жыл бұрын

Your questions are stupid. Batteries.

@michaelweaver2627

7 жыл бұрын

Before you call questions stupid you should actually understand what your talking about. Batteries with today's technology are not very practical. All the batteries existing today of any type could only meet a very small fraction of full grid needs for a day. Why do you think large backup systems are diesel not battery? The battery is a short term catch until the diesel kicks in because the batteries drain rapidly. If you want some local panels for your own use then great you can probably use a battery if your load is modest, you can afford the initial cost, the replacement cost and the maintenance. Most materials in batteries are also non environmentally friendly and the mining of them is also not good thing for the earth.

@deaneconomou

7 жыл бұрын

Come to Australia where the largest power station is on the roofs of our houses. We still need the grid at night but once batteries get to the price of a fridge the case for centralized generation is weakened - about 5 years on current trends. Distribution costs a fortune and is less and less needed.

@michaelweaver2627

7 жыл бұрын

Some areas are good for solar and I am all for using solar when it makes sense however it does not make sense in a lot of places without a backup grid system. If you need the grid then then it has to stay powered up to some level all the time. In northern climates it is unlikely that solar can provide enough power to reliably heat homes through the winter months. It would also be difficult for solar to meet industrial needs and the needs in high density high demand areas like cities. What will happen when transportation goes electric? The demand for electricity will increase tremendously over the next 50 years and the engineers I am hearing say it cannot be met with solar. Batteries today have limited capacity and lifetimes. Batteries also have environmental costs associated with their construction as do solar panels and they would be needed in quantities that are orders of magnitude more then today. If solar works for you then great enjoy it but it just doesn't replace the capacity and reliability of the big power generators and the grid. Nuclear is a comprehensive carbon neutral solution and the next generation plants are far safer and produce less waste. The generation in the development stage are even more promising in safety, produce very limited waste and even burn old waste so I think it is time we drop the poisoned power rhetoric and embrace nuclear as the most practical solution to stop global warming.

@ftbsecret

7 жыл бұрын

You forget how nucleair is much more expencive, the construction of nucleair plants will not drop as they are complex buildings. the EIA has the cost of building such a plant as abour 3 times the price of solar/wind. www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/assumptions/pdf/table_8.2.pdf Wind and solar keep dropping in price and increasing in reliability, did you know that compared of the 2000 wind mills that were 25% reliable new 140 meter windmills have a 60% productivity rate? (means from 6 hours a day now they get 18 hours a day of their production) I read about some floating windmils that will jump in production and reliability again. Storage is only some years away from taking over, already storage is economical for peak/low energy storage, with curent trents its only 2-3 years away until solar/wind + storage is cheaper as the conventional powerplants (Nucleair due to its high cost already is no option any investor will put money toward) rameznaam.com/2015/10/14/how-cheap-can-energy-storage-get/

I wonder why this gentleman has not told us that today China is the world leader in solar power ?

@davemanmartin

6 жыл бұрын

Because it's from 2014 or 2015

Please don't give a talk wearing Crocs!

@jeffholman2364

5 жыл бұрын

Explained at (0.36) minutes.

So many assumptions, most of them wrong, and this guy calls himself an engineer!