I see no satisfactory solution until fuel cells become economically viable around 2010.
Rob, fuel cells do not represent a new source of energy, just a new way to convert fuel to electricity -- i.e., a new way to deliver energy. In fact today, virtually all of the fuel converted to electricity by fuel cells begins as fossil fuel. Solar and wind (and hydro) exist as viable alternatives to traditional fossil-fuel-based electricity. Many people seem to not realize that the cost of electricity is largely tied to the cost of natural gas, since that's the fuel used by many (most?) electric power plants.
I found this .pdf article useful:
humboldt1.com
Our country would benefit by focussing on developing renewable energy technologies now, rather than stretching our own oils supplies thin and waiting until the problem is even more obvious from a national security standpoint. As it is, we're likely to fight more energy wars, for as long as we can, to protect our access to affordable oil. Germany and Japan are both growing their solar energy markets faster than the US, which uses 25% of the world's energy on 4% of the population. We'll get there (to a sustainable energy future), but it appears we're destined to take the hardest route by waiting as long as possible before we start enabling the technology to move forward.
I'm long APWR. The two largest producers of solar cells, as of the past year, are no longer BP Solarex and Siemens -- they're two Japanese companies which grew production capacity by ~65% last year. Some theorize that the US will only understand the direction of energy production when other countries pull ahead in production efficiency due to cheaper alternative energy. The costs of fossil fuel reliance will by then be evident. |
