Energy transition: The land use conundrum

[rangerrebew]

Energy transition: The land use conundrum
Posted on August 31, 2022 by curryja | 75 Comments
by Judith Curry

Does our future hold a plethora of wind turbines, solar farms, and transmission lines covering an ever-growing fraction of the planet’s surface as energy demand increases?  The output of farmland and forests being burned to provide power?


The amount of land required for renewable energy is an issue of growing concern that has received surprisingly little attention.  The current global energy system exists on a relatively small land footprint (only 0.4 percent of ice-free land), which is two orders of magnitude less than the area utilized by agriculture. Plans for an entirely renewable energy system for the globe will very substantially increase the amount of land use for energy production, particularly with growing energy consumption and the widespread electrification of heating, transportation and industry.

The land footprint of energy systems displaces natural ecosystems, leads to land degradation, and creates trade-offs for food production, urban development, and conservation. In densely populated countries such as Japan, Bangladesh, Lebanon, South Korea, India, Netherlands, Belgium, Bahrain and Israel, there simply isn’t sufficient land to support a majority of the energy supply coming from renewables.  Emerging economies face larger challenges with more dynamic land use in the face of urbanization, industrialization and agriculture.

https://judithcurry.com/2022/08/31/energy-transition-the-land-use-conundrum/#more-29025

[Fishrrman]

Green food will eventually be found to be more important than green power.
And that will spell the end of green power.

But there will be a lot of suffering first.

[Dexter1989]

There's a whole lot of mostly uninhabitable land where you could put solar panels.

[roamer_1]

There's a whole lot of mostly uninhabitable land where you could put solar panels.

No, there's really not.

[Dexter1989]

No, there's really not.

There are a lot of ways to get creative with it. You could have them all over the tops and sides of large buildings. I've seen them used as shade for parking and stuff like that. Also the technology is still growing so the places it can be implemented will expand.

[roamer_1]

There are a lot of ways to get creative with it. You could have them all over the tops and sides of large buildings. I've seen them used as shade for parking and stuff like that. Also the technology is still growing so the places it can be implemented will expand.

All that is alright - I am thoroughly in favor of expanding solar capability in a distributed fashion - every roof being a good example.

But that is different from your original claim. 'Uninhabited' lands was that claim. The problem with intermittent or passive systems is line loss, or alternatively, large enough batteries to store the energy and be able to discharge it fast enough to compensate for the line loss.

Uninhabited means long lines to deliver the power to the grid, and the line loss eliminates any sort of profitable viability.

Not to mention that those of us who live in those 'uninhabited' lands don't want your damn solar fields and windmills ****ing up the scenery.

[Dexter1989]

All that is alright - I am thoroughly in favor of expanding solar capability in a distributed fashion - every roof being a good example.

But that is different from your original claim. 'Uninhabited' lands was that claim. The problem with intermittent or passive systems is line loss, or alternatively, large enough batteries to store the energy and be able to discharge it fast enough to compensate for the line loss.

Uninhabited means long lines to deliver the power to the grid, and the line loss eliminates any sort of profitable viability.

Not to mention that those of us who live in those 'uninhabited' lands don't want your damn solar fields and windmills ****ing up the scenery.

I'm pretty confident that energy storage and transportation issues will be vastly improved upon in the decades to come.

[roamer_1]

I'm pretty confident that energy storage and transportation issues will be vastly improved upon in the decades to come.

Me too. Doesn't change a damn thing. Short line delivery is always going to be better. And that is the very hallmark of a distributed system. And more so, That distributed system would be far less susceptible to damage or total failure - Imagine a hurricane taking out a solar farm vs a hurricane taking out a distributed system. The whole farm could be wiped out pretty easily, but solar built into every house - That's a whole different thing. Sure, some would be wiped out... But many would have the benefit of power localized to individual homes that would continue to function in the weeks necessary to get things back to normal.

No, a distributed system is certainly the direction to go.

[Dexter1989]

Me too. Doesn't change a damn thing. Short line delivery is always going to be better. And that is the very hallmark of a distributed system. And more so, That distributed system would be far less susceptible to damage or total failure - Imagine a hurricane taking out a solar farm vs a hurricane taking out a distributed system. The whole farm could be wiped out pretty easily, but solar built into every house - That's a whole different thing. Sure, some would be wiped out... But many would have the benefit of power localized to individual homes that would continue to function in the weeks necessary to get things back to normal.

No, a distributed system is certainly the direction to go.

Maybe we will end up doing both.

[roamer_1]

Maybe we will end up doing both.

I sure hope not.