A new study
by researchers from the University of Delaware and Delaware Technical Community
College has shown that alternative energy is a viable, efficient source for
power that can be done at costs rivaling our current source of fossil fuels and
nuclear power. This can be done by a “combination of wind and solar power and
sophisticated energy storage systems [that] could keep a power grid fully
supplied between 90 and 99.9 percent of the time.” Researchers used computer
simulations to project the cost and efficiency of these energies without
allowing for improved renewable technologies and still found that the approach
would challenge that of our current power grid while greatly reducing
environmental impacts. The cost was also configured without allowing for any
subsidies from state or federal government, which would be a refreshing
difference from the oil industry. The study determined that the “cost-minimum”
would provide power 90 percent of the time and 99.9 percent, “while not the cost-minimum,
is lower in cost than today’s total cost of electricity.”
Looking at
this article from a sociological perspective, the author does a good job of
making his claims while also addressing the claims of those who have mobilized
in counter-action. Those who oppose alternative energy sources often claim that
they are not reliable or efficient enough to warrant widespread usage- a claim
that this particular study has shown to be untrue. The process of making a
switch to alternative, sustainable energy sources is very much a global social
problem because our current power sources are threatening everyone, everywhere
and are a threat to society and the world as we know it. I really enjoyed this article because it
serves as a bit of a debunking motif against the general consensus (at least in
America) that oil is the most viable source and that alternative energies are
unreliable.
9:17pm 1/27/13
Jessie White
No comments:
Post a Comment