Listen to this PodcastMore 60-Second Earth
-
The Best Science Writing Online 2012
Showcasing more than fifty of the most provocative, original, and significant online essays from 2011, The Best Science Writing Online 2012 will change the way...
Read More »
On July 5, 1977, a group of scientists and engineers opened the Solar Energy Research Institute in the Colorado foothills of the Rocky Mountains. By 1980, the outfit had a budget of $100 million dedicated to research and development of photovoltaics and solar thermal power. They also strove to educate the public about solar power and energy efficiency.
Such sunny dreams faded during the Reagan administration but the scientific outfit rebounded in the early 1990s, now called the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Its mandate expanded to everything from algae-based biofuels to harnessing the thermal energy in hot rocks.
Now NREL is turning 35, and such sources remain a small fraction of the U.S. energy supply, despite precipitous drops in the cost of renewable technologies like wind and solar. More than 80 percent of U.S. energy still comes from burning coal, oil and, more and more, natural gas.
In addition, recent government efforts to boost the future of solar manufacturing in the U.S. have ended in bankruptcy, from Solyndra to, more recently, Abound Solar. So there’s plenty more work to be done to make renewable energy a reality. To avoid catastrophic climate change, let's hope it doesn't take another 35 years.
—David Biello
[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]
See what we're tweeting about
13 Comments
Add Comment35 years of renewable energy? The author fails to name any renewable energy product produced by the Solar Energy Research Institute or the now called National Renewable Energy Laboratory. A quick vist to the NEL website found that in the past 4 years they have consumed $1.7 billion of the taxpayer's money and produced nothing! The toll for its ten years of existance is a staggering $2.8 billion with the only claim is that they have "Educated the public about Renewable Energy." Their list of "Technological Accomplishments is nothing mor than a wish list. Not a single practical marketable product. Talk about waste in government. The Department of Energy should be defunded immediately.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThose scientists who are sharp - and unethical - enough to know where major funding comes from, for their grants and salaries, have jumped on the politically motivated AGW scare. They've used the money to carry out pet projects under the name of research into alternate energy sources.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBut more and more of us are discovering that mankind is NOT responsible for the production of 97% of the CO2 in the atmosphere. Our bit is 3% or less! Mother Nature provides the rest. And, no matter what we humans do, we cannot stop it from occurring on Mother Nature's schedule. Just to make it interesting, the claim that CO2 is the responsible factor for Global Warming is rapidly falling out of favour with actual scientists who do this kind of research, no matter how popular it is with politicians who use CO2 caused global warming as an excuse to attach 'carbon' taxes to anything they can.
But don't have a conniption.... natural global warming is occurring at a fairly slow pace and is unlikely to cause any kind of a sudden problem for us. As the planet warms up to its expected high of about 55C, we'll adapt as it slowly happens.
The real benefit of finding alternate sources of energy are in replacing our dwindling present energy resources and in reducing the production of the high levels of pollution that we presently 'enjoy'.
The need for much more solid research is self evident. That scientists have gotten into bed with corrupt politicians, thus becoming as corrupt as any pol, is creating difficulties for real scientists to get funding for legitimate research that, while critically necessary, is not politically sexy.
Too bad that we, as a nation, cannot stop politicians from spreading their particularly virulent form of corruption. It will cost us dearly one day.
Thirty five years of failure and wasted money. And the author wants more?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOnly in government will 35 years of failure be rewarded with even more funding in the future.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt mentioned that "Now NREL is turning 35, and such sources remain a small fraction of the U.S. energy supply, despite precipitous drops in the cost of renewable technologies like wind and solar."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIs there anything wrong with the price and supply-demand relationship? Or is it possible for the renewable energy industries taking off after the cost drop?
The reason renewables have not taken off despite the drop in price is that even at giveaway prices, they still are not viable. The energy levels are simply too diffuse or restricted. I was in the industry in the early 1980s. After seven years I concluded that this would always b the case. I got out of the industry & have been promoting nuclear ever since. Just imagine how advanced nuclear technology would be by now if the same effort had been put into it that has been wasted on alternative energy.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhere did all the right wingers come from in this comment section?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGovernment is not the best spender, not by a longshot- but early critical research that the corporations can't do (too early to see payoff, etc) is one of the things a modern industrial government is for.
And simply saying we're not creating climate change doesn't cut it- especially at a Science Magazine blog.
Its quite the opposite. We're making quite a mess, and our children are going to pay for it dearly.
Oil and Coal cronies, industry shills, and poorly informed, anti good science Fox news fans, please find another site- we don't need your nonsense here.
So, according to you, only liberals can have an opinion, especially in regard to science? Talk about bigoted, closed mindedness. I guess its easier for liberals to believe each others lies than to face the possiblity that theories have to be actually proved to be accepted science until ten, they are just an opinion. And by the way, current scientific evidence holds that "global warming" is being caused by the sun, not CO2, which does not create heat.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe government has spent billions in the past 35 years, but can not claim any, any advancement in renewable energy sources. It is a good thing we weren't waiting around for the government to invent the telephone, the automobile, the airplane, radio, television, the transistor, integrated circuitry, private computers, etc. It took private industry to do that. Our government's singular claim to fame is wasteful spending, period.
Yeah, government only gave us Silicon Valley, healthcare, education, roads for those automobiles and safety rules, and all the satellite and transatlantic cable research and machines that made all this internet, GPS, and Skype possible. To set the stage to make demand for all this technology. When's the last time GM built a public bridge - or bailed itself out? Never?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisP.S. read about why there was any - any - demand for Silicon Valley tech (military) before replying.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisLet's not loose sight of the facts. It is private industry that builds our highways and bridges. If we were dependent on the government to do anything other than pay for it, these things would have cost billions each and would never have been built. That is exactly what is happening with the NEL and the useless Department of Energy.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe main effect of the USA failing to invest in renewable energies is that China will become the major technological power in the world shortly.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEvidence or opinnion?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this