TED Conversations

Jah Kable

Thinker ready to be unleashed upon the world,

This conversation is closed.

Why are the alternate power sources not being implemented on a world-wide scale? There is a tipping point and we must be close by now!!!

Solar panels
Wind Turbines
Hydro-Elecric

We all see the signs of the world changing. Ice caps disappearing, mega storms, tempature rise, ect.
Yet we are more concerned with royal babies, wars, and profits.
We will have none of that if this planet stops supporting life as we know it.
This is a back burner issue always used for politics but never solved by politics.
Turn the heat up on this, the Earth is!

Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Aug 18 2013: COST SHOULD NOT MATTER WHEN IT COMES TO SAVING NATURAL RESOURCES! hence why i put profits in the description. Tired of hearing cost effective. Sorry to anyone who didn't say anything about it but I'm tired of hearing things people say everyday. Stop thinking like that. That's why were f***ed now. Everything is falling apart right in front of us and we're still concerned with money. Is there any hope to think people want to change or is everyone happier sitting back and only worrying about the tiny domain they occupy at any given moment?
    • Aug 18 2013: Because those in roles of leadership control the reigns on cost. They still are making lots of money from destructive means of energy. When those methods become important, they will make them "available" for the public. Because they will profit. RIght now, most of the methods make the consumer more in control of their energy and less restricted by the government. That is a threat to big money.

      As an aside, hydro-electric, while beneficial, is not always the best. The damage it does to the local area and fish runs needs to be considered. Look at the dam project in China and the destruction it caused on the area. Not always a win win so to speak.
      • thumb
        Aug 18 2013: Yeah they are harmful now because of the dam design that they are so infatuated with. I have a design for a hydro electric power plant that doesn't dam the river but would ALWAYS produce energy with a much smaller effect on the ecosystem, theoretically of course. I can't be sure until its built and it won't be built unless I fund it which is not possible for me at this time.
    • Aug 18 2013: Okay, where are you going to come up with the money and how? Your childish whining means nothing in the context of reality. Cost does matter in the real world. Thus, you can either scream at the ocean tides to obey your will or learn to surf and thereby go where you need to go.
      • thumb
        Aug 18 2013: Cost does not matter. If we have the resources we can build them and put them into action and reap the benefits now. I'm guessing I'm childish because I believe we should put the cost aside and worry more about the resources that WON'T come back. When the resources are gone, they are gone, there's always more money and unlimited ways to get it from people. This is not like the ocean. Money is not something you NEED to create things. You need water to surf, you don't need money to build. All you need is materials and people to build them, and the fact that you believe without money we can not create is crazy. People volunteer all the time. I would volunteer in a solar panel plant to save the world. Would you or do you NEED money more than a clean atmosphere and plants to convert CO2. It's as simple as this, If I had the money to spend to solar panel the world, I would. The simple fact is you don't NEED money, people WANT money, but that is not a NEED. Call me whatever but I would do all I can to help people on a wide scale. :D
        • Aug 22 2013: You will also need guns and prisons, and mass graves. Look at what happened in every country that tried to do things without that icky-poo old money. China got the Cultural Revolution. Cambodia got Pol Pot's Year Zero. Let us not forget North Korea. If you want to dispose of money, it will have to be done at gunpoint. Who you going to murder first? If you want to live in the real world instead of a childish fantasy in which merely demanding something makes it true, you'll have to deal with real-world things like money, even if your little feelings just aren't up to the task.
      • thumb
        Aug 18 2013: I have to make money before i start to save the world... will never be a thought i believe in.
        • Aug 28 2013: That's like refusing to believe you need oxygen.
    • Aug 21 2013: Of course cost matters.
      What do you think finances the energy infrastructure, goodwill?

      Say I have x money to set up an electric infrastructure in my country. I can use it to produce y power using wind, or I could use it to produce 20y power with natural gas (those numbers are actually a best case scenario).
      If I only produce a single y amount of power (because money doesn't grow on trees and I only have so much funding), then electricity is going to be a lot more expensive in my country. As energy costs affect the price of anything and everything, everything in my country is going to get more expensive, at no real economic benefit to anyone, other then may people in other countries which will have an easier time competing (they have 20y power for x money, they have cheap electricity, which leads to cheaper everything).
      Never mind when that y power isn't enough to support the growing energy needs of a nation, but 20y does just fine...

      This is why developing countries never go green by the way. That single y as opposed to 20y means that some of their population won't have access to electricity period, never mind the detriment it has on developing any sort of industry.
      • thumb
        Aug 22 2013: http://www.residentialsolarpanels.org/
        Invest now and save later AND saving the environment. The average home could be essentially zero cost for the price of a cheap college. After 10 years of todays solar panels they would be free due to savings and after that you would just be getting paid for having the panels. Win for you Win for the environment. Everyone could do that especially if the industry pulled back on the prices of the technology. Give it 5 years and the price will go from 15k to 6k to fully power an average home. That's all with no pollution as well. I'll say it again. the price doesn't matter... because if you give it some time it's more than worth it price wise and pollution wise. We just want to do things the easy way and we, actually, our kids will pay the price for our greed, laziness, and short mindedness.
        • Aug 22 2013: There is a big difference between powering a home and providing electricity for a modern, industrial nation.

          My problem with solar and wind is for mass electric production, not private use. If you want to instal some on your own home, go right ahead. It'll take a few years to pay for itself, but seeing as you're not looking to make a profit, who cares?

          This also goes to show you why people looking to make money by selling electricity (as in, any power company not owned by a government) won't touch solar with a ten foot pole. Five years just to break even on your investment is shall we say, less than stellar.
          The numbers may be a bit more favorable with economy of scale, but its still pretty awful.

          As I've said, the world doesn't run on good will. If it doesn't make economic sense, it won't get done, except maybe by a small number of idealists who don't mind loosing money. As for the rest of us, we'll be burning fossil fuels for some time yet.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.