• humanspiral@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    22 days ago

    Overall premise is true. AMOC theory is weak, but the pure disinformation part:

    The green energy attack is dated fossil fuel disinformation. Vanadium has always been BS. Cobalt and Nickel are no longer needed for best battery storage technology. Lithium can be replaced with Sodium that is already in commercial large scale battery production.

    The only element in their list that is essential is copper. At 1B tonnes reserves, that would be enough to make 12B EV sized motors with battery connection wiring. Recycling is a source of copper.

    One alternative to expanding electrical grid (which tends to use aluminum more than copper), and battery sizes, is H2 electrolysis and fuel cells. These typically use platinum group metals, but abundant magnesium and relatively abundant nickel catalysts have near commercial ready performance. H2 can also be cleanly synthesized from CH4 to produce graphite (also in OP scarce list) as a byproduct.

    Disinformation about energy transition aside, very serious CO2 impacts from permafrost thaw and forest fires from existing locked in global warming can overwhelm the elimination of FFs.

    • eleitl@lemm.eeM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      21 days ago

      The problem is that electricity is not substituting a large subset of total primary energy consumption. Like high-temperature industrial processes and reduction and synthetic equivalents for the materials and chemical industry. As they currently exist renewables are not autopoietic (self-building and self-sustainig) but merely extenders or multipliers of fossil energy sources. We currently lack the technology to change that and are unlikely to be able to as the time window to do that is closing. So that is the unhappy part.

      • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        21 days ago

        In part, you are describing US policy to maximize oil dependence and rapid development expansion instigated by war and sanctions.

        Like high-temperature industrial processes and reduction and synthetic equivalents for the materials and chemical industry.

        It is true that this is slow, and slower in US, than China and EU plans. The catalyst for that is a carbon tax, and high renewables penetration such that green H2/electrochemistry is done from surpluses most days when every day renewables meet all electricity needs.

        renewables are not autopoietic (self-building and self-sustainig) but merely extenders or multipliers of fossil energy sources. We currently lack the technology to change that and are unlikely to be able to as the time window to do that is closing.

        The largest Chinese solar cell manufacturer has several 100% solar powered manufacturing facilities. Mining equipment is possible to electrify/H2 power. Medium heavy machinery is involved in solar and wind deployment projects, and I have seen “solar installing robots”. It is unfair to put highly automated renewables production and deployments on a different standard than fossil fuel extraction.