TED Conversations

kelly crespo

This conversation is closed.

Does a catastrophic event need to occur, for people to demand cleaner energy?

We are facing a silent killer, using non-renuable resources are slowing destroying our home however the initiatives are moving to slow. We can think of it as high blood pressure, people only pay attention to it after they have been to the hospital. What will it take to wake up?


Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Mar 5 2013: are you daft? you know how many countless billions have been put into clean energy?? just because you don't see a hydrogen powered car in your driveway doesn't mean we're not doing anything about it
    • thumb
      Mar 6 2013: Hi Charles,
      I understand that there are many project around the world for clean energy. However as I stated before "initiatives are moving to slow".
      Let me give you a simple example, petroleum has been used in the world a little over a century and we have learned to increase its potential to run our world.
      In the other hand the sun has been one of the essential source of power since human started farming. Several centuries have passed and our conventional solar panel only obtain about 15 - 30 percent of usable energy. Does it really seem like we are researching efficiently?

      The world uses roughly 15 Terawatts annually, and the available of solar energy that we can obtain from the sun (70% of the energy, due to photons bouncing of the atmosphere and several other factors.) is around 90 - 100 Terawatts.

      This is only one of the renewable energy that can be used.
      I see a movement towards change but I do not think it is moving fast enough, and that is why I asked if we really need to get to the point of an event to occur, for the issue to become more important.
      ( If you saw the U.S. debates last yea, the environment was really not one of the main points and it is treated as theoretic subject government wise.)

      I comprehend that Americans are one of the biggest polluters, but it can also be seen that as the other nations increase at a fast rate so is their pollution, and catching up in number to U.S. This is alarming because the environment is expected to be affected by more countries becoming industrialized.
      • Mar 6 2013: Combustion engines have been used for a long time and are quite efficient. It is a hard resource to replace. It is also hard to fund these types of programs especially in the current economic climate. Research is very costly and right now the fund are hard to find. There are also issues with initial costs to consumers of said product. Increasing efficiency of solar power is difficult. In order to increase the efficiency I would think we would need to find a better compound to absord the energy, but is also cost effective. That is a very hard thing. We have to be careful not to over simplify such an issue. Sometimes progress can be really slow until there is something that allows for a boom. It is really hard to put a value on how fast this is moving because combustion engines are a completely different animal. I will say greed is a big issue in this as well. Big oil has the money and resources. Without being an expert on clean energy and the science behind said energy it is hard to make a judgement.

        Yes it was a side note in the debates because one very big issue that was hammered on was the economy. Most of the green energy companies, which we invested billions in accross the board, have either failed or on the verge of failure. With so many suffering and asking the government to do more without raising taxes it is even more difficult to justify. Not to say its not a worthy cause but its definitely a hard sell.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.