Goldstone Guy
Well-known member
Ok. Well we could start by building a lot of onshore wind turbines which is the cheapest form of electricity generation available according to all the sources I've seen. Here's an example which says the cost in 2022 (and remember renewables are getting better and cheaper all the time) was 52% lower than the cheapest fossil fuel generation: https://www.irena.org/Publications/...weighted,cheapest fossil fuel-fired solutions.Fantastic idea. Moving forward, how do we replace the 80% of energy needs that fossil fuels provide, in a timely and cost realistic way?
You might (with some justification) say that that source is from the International Renewable Energy Agency and of course they're going to publish data supporting renewable energy. However whenever I look, no fossil fuel agencies/companies seem to publish any information on the cost of renewables vs fossil fuels. Now I wonder why that is? How many wind turbines could we build/erect in the next 5-10 years? I don't know, quite a lot if we really tried. The cost of solar is dropping rapidly each year and is now about level with fossil fuels as far as I can see. It should be going up over any available space (public buildings, car parks etc). Of course all the fossil fuel supporters will say yes but what do we do when there's no wind? Well since the energy is cheaper to produce in the first place we use the saved money to invest in energy storage.
Another thing that can be easily done is to reduce the amount of meat and dairy we consume and fly less. Perhaps meat 1-2 times per week and one holiday abroad per year would be a start. Probably most people won't be prepared to do that, but then hearing them say how sad it is that Canada/Australia/wherever are having big forest fires doesn't really wash with me.