The Year in Energy

[Bevo Incognito]

From Technology Review, a survey of what happened in the world of alternative energy over the past year. Interesting:

The Link

 

[Perham1]

I have a fundamental problem with shoddy journalism that brings us this grossly distorted reporting:

It was supposed to mark the ascendance of the electric car....

No. I doubt that any serious observer of either energy or the automotive industry was hailing the ascendance of the electric car. It is far too early in the manufacturing/technological life cycle of the electric car to be talking about ascendance.

Ascendance/ascendancy means "domination". Anybody who seriously thought that electric cars would dominate during 2011 is, frankly, an idiot. Would electric cars get a toe in the water? Sure. Would electric cars, with their warts and all, begin to establish themselves as an option among the early adopters? Yes. But that electric cars would reach ascendance? Sorry.

 

[Monahorns]

I think the article is fair. It notes both the failures and successes. The blurb about electric cars compares actual sales to sales forecasts. They came way under forecast. They didn't even mention algae based fuels which I think has one of the best chances going forward. If succesful I think the need for electric cars will fall away pretty fast.

 

[mcbrett]

Mona-

Re: Algae vs electrons I disagree. Any process that involves a controlled explosion, sound and hear loss will never be as efficient as electrons quietly moving a motor with less friction and heat losses. The comparisons do not compare- electric motors are vastly superior to internal combustion. The challenge for EVs is of course the battery, but not the motor or process itself.

Double the capacity of today's batteries and you have something that makes EVs not just economic, but vastly superior whether you put it in a boat or a large SUV. EVs are inevitable in my view.

Fuels' only strength is their density of BTUs, which is good for aviation and will be for awhile.

I hope both succeed, but I really hope batteries continue to advance quickly so I can buy an electric Ford SUV (which they have in prototype!)

 

[ShinerTX]

An article with the title of "the Year in energy" which does not discuss the amazing success of U.S. Shale Plays is really pretty silly. This has been a global game changer of a greater scale than anything discussed in the attachment.

 

[mcbrett]

Shiner- I think the shale plays are exciting to people in the nat gas industry. It is however a product that has been around for over 100 years, and while the techniques to procure it improve- the basic product and usage are the same. It's not as exciting for many people looking to create new industries and who read the MIT Tech Review- such as myself who happens to subscribe to that magazine. It's an engineering mag for people who love new technology.

It's usually pretty fair about the commercial likelihood of new technologies- and if it were to have a slant it's that it likes to promote projects that originated out of MIT labs. An economic synthetic fuel is a game changer, as are economic electron storage (batteries, compressed air etc) and solar panels. If you go to the Quackenbush board there's a separate thread on new PV panels that produce electrons at the same cost of those produced by coal and gas. What makes that a game changer is why the US military wants it so bad- there is no need to ship fuels, electrons etc over long distances. Localized generation incorporating electric motors is the future as it's inherent efficiencies can not be beat by fossil fuels. Before you offer the knee jerk "it's not cheap" or "if it were so great why don't I see it at Home Depot" go read the article. Cool, game changing events don't take place overnight- but they are definitely in process right now.