Nuclear energy may sound…

Nuclear energy may sound good but imagine the costs of maintaining the storage of radioactive waste for thousands of years. Would we want to be paying the costs for the electricity use of (selfish) civilizations from 1000 BC? The Earth appears stable but actually moves a fair amount over thousands of years. What happens if the containers are breached?

Fossil fuels have served us well but there is no denying it, they wreak havoc on our environment and will eventually run out. They should be used as a stepping stone only. Please reference Global Warming's Terrifying New Math By Bill McKibben. It states that if we want to hit the 2 degree Celsius global warming target, we need to limit our carbon dioxide emissions to 565 gigatons (between now and 2050). The problem, is the amount of carbon already contained in the proven coal, oil, and gas reserves of fossil-fuel companies and countries is 2,795 gigatons. That's approximately 5 times the limit which clearly indicates that we can't wait until all the reserves are used up. We have to put pressure on them to leave most of it in the ground, but with the current business model, they will extract it all. With this in mind, it should be clear that any further investment in a fossil-fuel economy is reckless and extremely risky.

I would like to see a much higher percentage of renewables in the next 10 years, in the order of 70-90%. This will will gradually remove the demand for non-renewables. Ultimately, 100% renewables will need to be the mix in the next 25 years. I would propose taking aggressive advantage of rooftop solar. It generates electricity right where it is consumed reducing infrastructure costs, produces energy during the day when consumption is highest, has no added real estate cost, and allows citizens to be empowered and participate in the generation process and not just complain.

In term of electricity and home heating, a better direction would be the example of Drake Landing Solar Community in Alberta. They use a community solar system designed to store abundant solar energy underground during the summer months and distribute the energy to each home for space heating needs during winter months. They also use solar panels for electricity. With no consumables, and zero emissions, their only cost is maintenance.

The rest of nature uses the sun as an energy source, why can't humans?

Time of use pricing is a good step, but real-time pricing would be the ultimate goal. Yes, this means the cost will be high on a cloudy day with no wind. But it is akin to trying to start a campfire in a rainstorm. People should be encouraged to consume when the conditions are right.

As a final note, I would like to see tiered pricing brought back (ie. the price goes up after a tier). This means electricity will cover the necessities for all people at a low cost. If someone chooses to be wasteful or extravagant with their electricity consumption, then they can do so at the next tier at a higher cost (I would suggest double the price). Also, there should be lower fixed costs so that people who use tiny amounts of electricity will not be penalized.

[Original Comment ID: 206413]