And at the end of the day, that electricity probably came from the burning of a "fossil" fuel. And if it did somehow come from wind or solar - those are not at all 100% efficient, nor anything nearly reliable.
And at the end of the day, that electricity probably came from the burning of a "fossil" fuel. And if it did somehow come from wind or solar - those are not at all 100% efficient, nor anything nearly reliable.
I’m not married to the idea that we must stop burning oil, natural gas, and coal yesterday. Even Elon Musk doesn't think that.When we’re talking about solar and wind power, “efficiency” is a flawed concept. We’d like to turn vast amounts of solar energy into electric power available when and where we want it. Viewed from that overall perspective, our “efficiency” of converting solar energy into electric power is basically zero because we have hardly any of the earth covered with solar panels. ‘Way more solar panels would be valuable, but no one is putting them on my roof, or yours, for free.
The question isn’t “efficiency,” it’s bang for the buck. The learning curve and economies of scale are changing the bang for the buck equation in favor of solar and batteries. And in favor of “more than enough” solar panels, allowing the use of fewer stationary batteries. And less or even no fossil fuel consumption.
Efficiency becomes crucial at “the tip of the spear,” - ie, where the rubber hits the road. There, efficiency plays into lower requirements everywhere up the supply chain.