Draft:Solutions summary 1: Difference between revisions
(Removed the links wikitext for now, but i rly need to find a way to make it compatible with Levels) |
(Removed pipes from wikilinks that dont work with <pre />) |
||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
Energy storage, especially | Energy storage, especially | ||
Sodium-ion batteries | Sodium-ion batteries | ||
Reason: Because lithium-ion is | Reason: Because lithium-ion is too mineral-intensive to scale up. | ||
To be used for mid-range electric vehicles and smoothing out the day-night cycle of solar panels. | To be used for mid-range electric vehicles and smoothing out the day-night cycle of solar panels. | ||
They don't even have to be as energy dense as lithium-ion. | They don't even have to be as energy dense as lithium-ion. | ||
Energy sources - some combination of | Energy sources - some combination of | ||
Solar panels without scarce minerals | Solar panels without scarce minerals | ||
Reason: Most of today's solar panels on the market are | Reason: Most of today's solar panels on the market are too mineral-intensive to scale up. | ||
To be installed on as many | To be installed on as many rooftops as possible. | ||
This could provide enough "general-purpose" electricity for homes, buildings and EVs, but not enough for heating in cold parts of the world. | This could provide enough "general-purpose" electricity for homes, buildings and EVs, but not enough for heating in cold parts of the world. | ||
Wind turbines | Wind turbines | ||
Mostly for producing hydrogen gas | Mostly for producing hydrogen gas | ||
Can later be burned for heating buildings and in | Can later be burned for heating buildings and in combustion vehicles | ||
Fuel cell vehicles are too platinum/palladium-intensive to scale up, but hydrogen production | Fuel cell vehicles are too platinum/palladium-intensive to scale up, but hydrogen production is not. | ||
During local windy seasons, can also be used for electricity directly. | During local windy seasons, can also be used for electricity directly. | ||
Thorium power | Thorium power | ||
Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
Individual action: Frugalism | Individual action: Frugalism | ||
Collective action: Fight against planned obsolescence | Collective action: Fight against planned obsolescence | ||
Yes, these actions would have the most impact - see :File:energy-demand-pie1.png | Yes, these actions would have the most impact - see this pie chart :File:energy-demand-pie1.png. | ||
Note that climate change isn't the ''only'' major environmental problem. There's also habitat loss. The most effective way to stop this is via food: | Note that climate change isn't the ''only'' major environmental problem. There's also habitat loss. The most effective way to stop this is via food: |
Revision as of 01:47, 24 December 2023
Most of the world's energy today comes from fossil fuels. To change this, the following tech is needed: Energy storage, especially Sodium-ion batteries Reason: Because lithium-ion is too mineral-intensive to scale up. To be used for mid-range electric vehicles and smoothing out the day-night cycle of solar panels. They don't even have to be as energy dense as lithium-ion. Energy sources - some combination of Solar panels without scarce minerals Reason: Most of today's solar panels on the market are too mineral-intensive to scale up. To be installed on as many rooftops as possible. This could provide enough "general-purpose" electricity for homes, buildings and EVs, but not enough for heating in cold parts of the world. Wind turbines Mostly for producing hydrogen gas Can later be burned for heating buildings and in combustion vehicles Fuel cell vehicles are too platinum/palladium-intensive to scale up, but hydrogen production is not. During local windy seasons, can also be used for electricity directly. Thorium power Note that other forms of nuclear are not viable to scale up Conventional nuclear power uses too much uranium-235 (too scarce) Uranium-238 breeder reactors have too many weapons proliferation concerns Nuclear fusion probably won't be viable soon enough, even though it'll ultimately be the best option in the distant future. Until the above tech is ready, developed countries must reduce energy demand - most effectively by... Driving less Individual action: Walk, bike, or use public transit. Collective action: Making neighborhoods more walkabile and improving public transit. Buying less new "stuff" Individual action: Frugalism Collective action: Fight against planned obsolescence Yes, these actions would have the most impact - see this pie chart :File:energy-demand-pie1.png. Note that climate change isn't the ''only'' major environmental problem. There's also habitat loss. The most effective way to stop this is via food: Reason: Because agriculture uses more land than any other human activity. Stop food waste (both personal ''and'' business food waste) Make food more plant-based (both personal choices ''and'' systemic changes make a difference here) Yes, these actions make the biggest difference, both for the environment and for ending global hunger.