Storing solar, wind, and water energy underground could replace burning fuel
kurzweilai.net
kurzweilai.net
Once you look at the cost of coal in terms of lost life and health, it makes no sense not to start transitioning to this immediately. Our economy would be improved by a tax on coal and/or carbon to internalize the externalities. The only reason not to is to kowtow to entrenched interests that have been freeloading off of human health.
There's a lot of hand-waving about thermal energy storage. Using electricity to make low-grade heat and storing the heat is insanely inefficient if you want to get electricity back out. E = (T1-T0) / T0. That's mostly used for solar hot water storage for nighttime heading.[4]
If this is so great, and he's at Stanford, why is Stanford building their second natural gas power plant on campus?
[1] https://web.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Articles/I/Wash... [2] http://web.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Articles/I/15-11... [3] http://web.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Articles/I/Combi... [4] https://www.rehau.com/international-en/building-solutions/re...
[1] http://web.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Articles/I/WWS-5...
[2] http://arstechnica.com/science/2015/11/managing-a-100-percen...
(But your information on methane is interesting. I somehow didn't realize it was the biggest component in natural gas; I guess I had assumed it was a more complex hydrocarbon and not considered it further.)
For all the hate that hydrocarbons get they are probably the main reason most of us aren't still living a very primitive existence.
It's like half a joke..
My point is not the amount of money. It's the crooked rhetoric in use.