It should be clear to all that the human species is in the midst of a great change in energy sources. This has happened before.
It started with wood which was readily available in most parts of the world. Though bulky, wood provided modest heat and light for thousands of years, but gradually depleted forests forced a change, and coal was the next choice. This material was less bulky that wood, and certain varieties, such as anthracite, had high enough heat potential to facilitate metallurgical processes. However, the vast majority of this resource can be classed as “thermal” coal and this has been used today for the generation of electricity. Its future in this use will be limited since it has been found that it is failing to be cost effective. A recent study indicated that it would be cheaper to discontinue using an existing coal plant in favor of building out new solar and wind generation. Here we did not run out of the resource, but it could no longer measure up to the competition. This leaves us with nuclear, methane, crude oil derivatives, and renewables.
Other alternatives, such as hydroelectric, are expensive and limited since many of the best sites for dams are taken. Further, this resource could hardly be expanded to cover increasing need for electricity. Some possible exceptions will be covered later.
Nuclear, or more specifically Uranium fission, is expensive and dangerous. The fuel is radioactive and the byproducts especially so. These byproducts, the result of splitting of Uranium, contaminate the fuel, necessitating replacement from time to time. Little known is the fact that 95% of the Uranium is still in the “spent” fuel, but it is discarded. Reprocessing the fuel has proven difficult, dangerous, and expensive, and is no longer practiced. This old fuel will be a hazard for a century or more and has to be stored carefully.
The disaster rate for nuclear is low, but the amount of damage resulting from the disasters we have had has been large. Chernobyl has resulted in the old plant becoming an ongoing liability, and a vast area of prime farm land has been contaminated and made unfit for habitation and agriculture for generations to come. Fukushima Daiichi resulted in massive economic losses and contamination of a huge agricultural area which Japan could hardly afford to lose. The catastrophe at Three Mile Island resulted in the loss of a plant which never actually generated any electricity. The cause was a single valve which was accidentally left closed in a rushed checkout. The money invested in the plant was lost. All in all, conventional nuclear has proven itself to be non-viable.
Nuclear fusion may show promise, but it has been the dream for decades and will probably continue to be a mere promise into the immediate future. The major projects, the tokamak under construction now and the National Ignition Facility in Berkeley, CA have yet to get near to break even, despite some deceptive advertising. They both would be hugely expensive and both must use a fuel which does not exist naturally on Earth, Tritium. This element can be produced by conventional (Uranium) reactors or mined from the regiolith on the moon. Both of these sources will be expensive with additional risks. Last, in neither project has it been demonstrated how high energy neutrons, the result of this type of fusion, can be harvested to produce electricity without destroying the mechanism which produced them. It is estimated that the replacement costs for the tokamak would be $200 million every few years. This is not “electricity too cheap to meter” as was once claimed. Both of these are mere “science projects” and not the solution to our problems.
This leaves methane and oil. Both of them have proven themselves and are cost effective, but both are contaminating the atmosphere and could end Earth as a suitable habitation for the human species.
In California methane (called natural gas) is currently used for space and water heaters as well as cooking. Alternatives exist but have yet to prove themselves competitive. An additional use for methane in this state is for generation of electricity, and this use is gradually being replaced by wind, solar, and battery storage. California hopes to replace this use of methane within the decade. Other important uses of this fuel, among others, are production of portland cement for concrete and for production of Nitrogen fertilizer by the Haber process. To be frank, methane will probably have a continued use, but at far lesser levels than at present.
Crude oil is the source for many different products, but the greatest is for propelling vehicles, and this consumes 70% of what we pump up. This usage is already diminishing as more and more electric vehicles go on the road, and the future seems certain here. Other uses may be more essential. Crude oil is used to make solvents, lubricants, plastics, some medicines, heating oil, and many other products. Most of these might be difficult to replace from other sources. Like methane, crude oil will have continued utility, but nowhere near current levels.
If the reader has endured this article to this point, the good news starts here. Alternative sources are proving themselves: wind, solar and storage are in various states of technical perfection but yet are highly competitive in the market place.
Wind power has been in use for centuries. The current state of wind turbines is highly perfected, and in California large installations are found at Altamont Pass in the North and near Palm Springs in the South. Improvements in the technology are still being made, and the current cost effectiveness is being gradually increased.
Solar is much improved over what was available only five years ago, but more progress is being made. Methods to increase solar panel efficiency are under way, and an effort is being made to find domestic sources for the rare materials used in their fabrication. Already cost effective, the future promises much with this product.
Both wind and solar suffer from the same restriction: the wind does not always blow, and the sun does not shine at night. Both these problems are being solved by storage of surplus electricity, mostly by batteries. Battery technology had stagnated for many years until the need for new ideas stimulated the interest and talents of many brilliant people. Many designs in use now require Lithium and other exotics, but efforts are under way to develop alternatives. Sodium, an element as common as salt, is currently under consideration, as well as several other possibilities. Considering the size of the potential market, a huge effort is underway to turn an already profitable product into a hugely profitable one. The future looks bright.
After considering the existing situation, there are two other methods of electrical generation which deserve a look: submerged turbines and alternative methods of nuclear fusion.
The U. N. building in New York city is off the grid and has been for many years. This structure gets all its electricity from the East River, using specially designs of turbines submerged in the center of the river. The constant flow guarantees their electrical supply, and the turbines have proven themselves to be reliable and cost effective. This method is available now, and the Mississippi river beckons.
The use of Deuterium and Tritium as fusion fuels (the same materials as in a hydrogen bomb) is obviated by alternative designs which would use Boron11 and Hydrogen. Both these elements are readily available and not particularly dangerous. The Boron was once used as a cleanser, and Hydrogen is the most common element in the universe. The process, pursued by almost half a dozen research teams, would produce no dangerous end products, does not produce neutrons, and would be simple and compact. One team has routinely been fusing Tritium for test purposes for ten years and has reached temperatures of 3.5 Billion degrees fahrenheit with a device called the Dense Plasma Focus. There is promise here, but we shall see.
The above two methods of electrical generation, as well as the wind, solar, battery triad hold no interest for modern power companies. In most cases they are regulated by the states, but allowed a percentage of invested capital as their profit. They are not compensated in proportion to the electricity they generate, but according to the amount they spend to generate it. Therefore, they have no vested interest in cheaply produced electricity. This is a situation which will have to be dealt with when the time comes.
As stated above, we are in a time of transition. We will be better off in the end, but the process will be difficult, painful, and vexing. We are human beings. We have risen from cave dwellers squatting next to a fire to masters of the planet. We are up to this.